PDF Download

[1]CHEN Miaomiao,LIU Guimin,LIU Dexi,et al.Effect of Different Plantations on Soil Physicochemical Properties in Coastal Saline Land of the Yellow River Delta[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2017,24(06):41-44.

Copy

Effect of Different Plantations on Soil Physicochemical Properties in Coastal Saline Land of the Yellow River Delta

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 24 Number of periods: 2017 06 Page number: 41-44 Column: Public date: 2017-11-24

Title:: Effect of Different Plantations on Soil Physicochemical Properties in Coastal Saline Land of the Yellow River Delta

Author(s):: CHEN Miaomiao¹, LIU Guimin², LIU Dexi², YANG Qingshan², DU Zhenyu², WEI Haixia², WANG Xia², ZHOU Jian², LI Cunhua¹; 1. College of Forestry, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai’an, Shandong 271018, China;
2. Shandong Academy of Forestry, Ji’nan 250014, China

Keywords:: plantations; coastal saline; soil physiochemical properties; Yellow River Delta

CLC:: S714.2

DOI:: -

Abstract:: In order to study the effects of different plantations on soil physicochemical properties in coastal saline of the Yellow River delta, the soil physicochemical properties of four different plantations and the control of the unplanted land were analyzed by the method of soil sampling and laboratory measurement. The results showed that:(1) the four different plantations could improve the soil physicochemical properties of coastal saline land of the Yellow River delta; compared to the control, the average soil bulk density, soil salinity and soil pH in plantations decreased by 4.8%, 44.4%, 2.5%, respectively, while the total porosity, capillary porosity increased by 6.0%, 4.7%, respectively; (2) the effect of every plantation on cation exchange performance and exchangeable sodium percentage was different, the exchangeable sodium percentages of different plantations decreased in the order:Tamarix chinensis(27.4%) > Pyrusbetulifolia(23.3%) > CK(19.5%) > Fraxinus chinensis(16.0%) > Salix psammophila ‘YanliuYihao’(13.3%).

References:: [1] Karlen D L, Ditzler C A, Andrews S S. Soil quality:Why and how[J]. Geoderma, 2003,114:145-156.
[2] 李庆梅,侯龙鱼,刘艳,等.黄河三角洲盐碱地不同利用方式土壤理化性质[J].中国生态农业学报,2009,17(6):1132-1136.
[3] 黄建成,陈国栋,李鹏.宁夏引黄灌区土壤盐渍化现状与改良[J].水土保持研究,2008,15(6):256-258.
[4] Qadir M, Schubert S, Ghafoor A, et al. Amelioration strategies for sodic soils:A review[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2001,12(4):357-386.
[5] 吴海云,张宁,吴金凤,等.盐碱地土壤改良思路[J].天津农林科技,2013(2):41-43.
[6] 鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[7] 肖克飚.宁夏银北地区耐盐植物改良盐碱土机理及试验研究[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2013.
[8] 安东.不同土壤改良剂对银川平原北部盐碱土水分性质和土壤结构的影响[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2009.
[9] 王合云,李红丽,董智,等.滨海盐碱地不同造林树种林地土壤盐碱化特征[J].土壤学报,2015,52(3):706-712.
[10] 阎鹏,徐世良.山东土壤[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1994.
[11] 董海凤,杜振宇,刘春生,等.黄河三角洲长期人工刺槐林对土壤化学性质的影响[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(3):55-60.
[12] 张平.不同造林树种对盐碱地土壤理化性质的影响[D].山东泰安:山东农业大学,2014.
[13] 王丽琴.滨海盐碱地不同造林模式对土壤理化性质及水盐运动的影响[D].山东泰安:山东农业大学,2014.
[14] 夏江宝,许景伟,李传荣,等.黄河三角洲盐碱地道路防护林对土壤的改良效应[J].水土保持学报,2012,25(6):72-91.
[15] 张立宾.盐生植物的耐盐能力及其对滨海盐碱土的改良效果研究[D].山东泰安:山东农业大学,2005.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01