YU Yajun,REN Shanshan,GUO Likai,et al.Study on Soil Water-Holding Capacity Between Two Types of Reclamation Agroforestry Land on a Coal Waste Pile[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2016,23(02):44-48.
两种利用类型煤矸山复垦重构土壤贮水特性研究
- Title:
- Study on Soil Water-Holding Capacity Between Two Types of Reclamation Agroforestry Land on a Coal Waste Pile
- 分类号:
- S152.7
- 摘要:
- 土壤贮水能力是复垦地植被恢复和生态重建的基础。因此开展煤矸山复垦重构土壤贮水能力研究对于指导煤矸山植被复垦具有重要意义。以长治王庄煤矸山复垦6 a的林地（SL）和草地（GL）为对象，分析了2种利用类型煤矸山复垦重构土壤1 m土层贮水状况。结果表明：（1）复垦林地（SL）和复垦草地（GL）土壤容重分别较普通林草地（CK）高12.7%和19.0%（p > 0.01）。两种复垦地土壤容重的剖面变化有别于普通农地，并且其差异主要体现在60 cm以上土层。（2）SL样地和GL样地土壤总孔隙度分别较CK样地低20.5%和30.9%，非毛管孔隙度分别较CK低80.0%和74.9%，而土壤毛管孔隙度分别较CK样地高14.1%和2.4%，因此，两种复垦地土壤饱和贮水量和非毛管贮水量明显低于普通农地，但毛管贮水量高于普通农地。（3）SL样地和GL样地1 m土层土壤平均含水量和总贮水量分别较CK样地高7.8%，12.3%和23.5%，34.9%，但两种复垦地与普通农地1 m土层含水量和贮水量的差异在60—100 cm最大。
- Abstract:
- Soil water-holding capacity is a basic condition on vegetation recovery and ecological reconstruction reclamation in reconstructed soil. Therefore, it is very important for choice of the vegetation types by studying soil water-holding capacity between different types of reclamation agroforestry lands. The soil water-holding capacities within 100 cm soil layer of shrub land after six years of reclamation (SL) and grassland after six years of reclamation (GL) were studied on a coal waste pile in Wang village, Changzhi City, Shanxi Province. The results showed that: (1) the mean soil bulk densities of reclamation shrub land (SL) and reclamation grass land (GL) within 100 cm soil layer increased by 12.7% and 19.0% compared to CK, respectively, the profile propertes within 100 cm soil layer of SL and GL were different from those of the CK, and the differences were mainly reflected in above 60 cm soil layer; (2) soil total porosities in SL and GL decreased by 20.5% and 30.9% compare to CK, respectively, and non-capillary porosities decreased by 20.5% and 30.9%, respectively, but capillary porosities increased by 14.1% and 2.4%, respectively, therefore, soil saturated water contents and non-capillary water storage in SL and GL were lower than those in CK, but capillary water storage was higher; (3) the mean soil water contents and soil water storage in SL and GL within 100 cm soil layer increased by 7.8%, 12.3% and 23.5%, 34.9% compare to CK, respectively, but it was different in different soil layers, and it was mainly reflected in 60—100 cm soil layer.
参考文献/References:
[1] 韦朝阳,张立城,何书金,等.我国煤矿区生态环境现状及综合对策[J].地理学报,1997,52(4):300-307.
[2] 苏光全,何书金,郭焕成.矿区废弃土地资源适宜性评价[J].地理科学进展,1998,17(4):39-46.
[3] 王孝本,林玉利.煤矿矸石山生态系统的演替[J].国土与自然资源研究,2000(1):44-45.
[4] 胡振琪,张光灿,魏忠义,等.煤矸石山的植物种群生长及其对土壤理化特性的影响[J].中国矿业大学学报,2003,32(5):492-499.
[5] 高宝山,高国雄,朱首军.煤矸山沙障小气候效应调查研究[J].陕西师范大学学报:自然科学版,1999,27(S1):159-163.
[6] 胡振琪.半干旱地区煤矸石山绿化技术研究[J].煤炭学报,1995,20(3):322-327.
[7] 彭少麟.恢复生态学与植被重建[J].生态科学,1996,15(2):26-31.
[8] 卞正富.国内外煤矿区土地复垦研究综述[J].中国土地科学,2000,14(1):6-11.
[9] 郭小娟,贾萍,刘霞.煤矸石山环境问题及其治理的研究[J].山西农业大学学报,1998,18(2):139-141.
[10] 胡振琪,魏忠义,秦萍.矿山复垦土壤重构的概念与方法[J].土壤,2005,37(1):8-12.
[11] 武冬梅,张建红,吕珊兰,等.山西矿区矸石山复垦种植施肥措施[J].自然资源学报,1998,13(4):333-336.
[12] 中国科学院南京土壤研究所.土壤理化分析[M].上海:上海科学技术出版社,1983:62-126.
[13] 高茂盛,廖允成,李侠,等.不同覆盖方式对渭北旱作苹果园土壤贮水的影响[J].中国农业科学,2010,43(10):2080-2087.
[14] 鲁向晖,隋艳艳,王飞,等.秸秆覆盖对旱地玉米休闲田土壤水分状况影响研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2008,22(3):156-159.
[15] 刘贤赵,宋孝玉.陕西渭北旱源苹果种植分区土壤水分特征研究[J].干旱区地理,2004,27(3):320-326.
[16] 焦晓燕,王立革,卢朝东,等.采煤塌陷地复垦方式对土壤理化特性影响研究[J].水土保持学报,2009,23(4):123-125.
相似文献/References:
[1]亢晨宇,贺泽好,于亚军.复垦不同年限煤矸山土壤重金属污染状况评价[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(05):343.
KANG Chenyu,HE Zehao,YU Yajun.Evaluation on Heavy Metal Contents of Soil in Coal Waste Pile After Reclamation[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2017,24(02):343.
[2]张小玲,于亚军.不同复垦年限煤矸山土壤微生物功能菌变化及其影响因素[J].水土保持研究,2018,25(04):116.
ZHANG Xiaoling,YU Yajun.Soil Functional Microbes and the Influence Factors on Coal Waste Pile in Different Reclamation Years[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2018,25(02):116.
备注/Memo
收稿日期:2015-08-21;改回日期:2015-10-12。
基金项目:国家自然科学基金青年项目“煤矿塌陷区重构土壤性质演化及植被恢复的限制因子研究”（41301304）
作者简介:于亚军(1978-),男,甘肃灵台人,副教授,博士,主要从事区域环境与生态恢复方面的教学与科研工作。E-mail:yuyajun0211@126.com