[1]罗雅曦,刘任涛.宁夏风沙区不同人工固沙灌丛林土壤质量评价[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(05):60-67.
 LUO Yaxi,LIU Rentao.Evaluation on Soil Quality of Different Sand-Binding Shrub Plantations Within Straw Checkerboard in the Desertified Area of Ningxia[J].,2019,26(05):60-67.
点击复制

宁夏风沙区不同人工固沙灌丛林土壤质量评价()
分享到:

《水土保持研究》[ISSN:1005-3409/CN:61-1272/P]

卷:
26卷
期数:
2019年05期
页码:
60-67
栏目:
出版日期:
2019-09-06

文章信息/Info

Title:
Evaluation on Soil Quality of Different Sand-Binding Shrub Plantations Within Straw Checkerboard in the Desertified Area of Ningxia
作者:
罗雅曦12 刘任涛2
1. 宁夏大学 农学院, 银川 750021;
2. 宁夏大学 西北退化生态系统恢复与重建教育部重点实验室, 银川 750021
Author(s):
LUO Yaxi12 LIU Rentao2
1. College of Agriculture, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, China;
2. Key Laboratory for Restoration and Reconstruction of Degraded Ecosystem in Northwestern China, ministry of Education, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, China
关键词:
沙漠化造林固沙土壤理化性质土壤质量评价草方格
Keywords:
desertificationsand-binding revegetationsoil physical and chemical propertiessoil quality evaluationstraw checkerboard
分类号:
S812.2
摘要:
在宁夏盐池风沙区选取油蒿(Artemisia ordosica)、花棒(Hedysarum scoparium)、沙拐枣(Calligonum mongolicum)、柠条(Caragana korshinskii)4种草方格人工固沙灌丛林地为研究样地,以周围流动沙地为对照,研究了4种固沙模式下土壤理化性质变化特征,采用土壤质量综合指数探讨了不同人工灌丛固沙措施对土壤质量的影响。结果表明:(1)与流动沙地相比,土壤粗砂含量表现为油蒿林地显著提高,花棒、柠条和沙拐枣林地无显著变化。土壤细砂含量表现为沙拐枣林地显著提高,而油蒿、柠条和花棒林地无显著变化。土壤极细砂含量表现为沙拐枣林地显著降低,而油蒿、柠条和花棒林地无显著变化。土壤黏粉粒含量表现为油蒿林地显著增大,而花棒和沙拐枣林地显著减小,柠条林地则无显著变化。(2)从流动沙地到固沙林地,土壤容重表现为沙拐枣林地显著增大,而油蒿林地显著减小,花棒和柠条林地则无显著变化。土壤pH表现为沙拐枣林地显著增大,而油蒿、花棒和柠条林地无显著变化。土壤含水量、电导率、有机碳、全氮和碳氮比均表现为油蒿林地显著提高,而花棒、沙拐枣和柠条林地间以上5项指标均无显著变化。(3)土壤质量综合指数表现为油蒿林地(3.15) > 流动沙地(-0.03) > 柠条林地(-0.56) > 花棒林地(-1.05) > 沙拐枣林地(-1.54)。研究表明,流动沙地扎设草方格营造油蒿林能在短期内提高风沙土壤综合质量,而其他造林方式固沙效果有限。
Abstract:
In the desertified area of Yanchi, Ningxia, we selected four types of sand-binding shrub plantations within straw checkerboard of A.ordosica, H.scoparium, C.mongolicum and C.korshinskii as study sites, with the adjacent mobile sand land as control sites. An investigation on the changes of soil physical and chemical properties, and the soil comprehensive quality index was carried out in the revegetated sites under four types of sand-binding modes. The present study was to probe into the effect of sand-binding plantations within straw checkboard in terms of shrub species on soil quality during the revegetation process. The results showed that:(1) it was found that the soil coarse sand content increased significantly in the sites after revegetation by A.ordosica, whereas there were no significant differences between the soils in H.scoparium, C.korshinskii, C.mongolicum plantations and mobile sand land; the soil fine sand content increased significantly in the sites after revegetation by C.mongolicum, whereas there were no significant differences between the soils in A.ordosica, C.korshinskii, H.scoparium plantations and mobile sand land; the soil very fine sand content decreased significantly in the sites after revegetation by C.mongolicum, whereas there were no significant differences between the soils in A.ordosica, C.korshinskii and H.scoparium plantations and mobile sand land; compared with the mobile sand land, the soil clay and silt contents increased significantly in the sites revegetated by A.ordosica, and decreased significantly in the sites revegetated by H.scoparium and C.mongolicum, whereas there were no significant differences between the soils in C.korshinskii plantations and mobiles and land; (2) the soil bulk density increased significantly in the sites after revegetation by C.mongolicum, and decreased significantly in the sites after revegetation by A.ordosica, whereas there were no significant differences between the soils in H.scoparium, C.korshinskii plantations, and the mobile sand land; soil pH increased significantly in the sites after revegetation by C.mongolicum, whereas there were no significant differences between the soils in A.ordosica, H.scoparium, C.korshinskii plantations and the mobile sand land; the soil water content, electrical conductivity, organic carbon, total nitrogen and ratio of carbon to nitrogen increased significantly in the sites after revegetation by A.ordosica, whereas there were no significant differences between the soils in H.scoparium, C.mongolicum, C.korshinskii plantations and the mobile sand land; (3) the soil quality comprehensive index followed the order:A.ordosica (3.15) > mobile sand land (-0.03) > C.korshinskii (-0.56) > H.scoparium (-1.05) > C.mongolicum (-1.54), suggesting that soil quality was improved in the sites after revegetation by A.ordosica. It was concluded that the construction of A.ordosica plantations within straw checkerboard could improve desertified soil quality in a short time, whereas there were limited effects of other three types of sand-binding shrub plantations within straw checkerboard in the desertified area of Yanchi, Ningxia.

参考文献/References:

[1] 沈海花,朱言坤,赵霞,等.中国草地资源的现状分析[J].科学通报,2016,61(2):139-154.
[2] 赵士洞,赖鹏飞,商界环保协会(香港)译.千年生态系统评估报告集(二)[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2007:4-13.
[3] 阎欣,安慧.宁夏荒漠草原沙漠化过程中土壤粒径分形特征[J].应用生态学报,2017,28(10):3243-3250.
[4] 张立欣,段玉玺,王博,等.库布齐沙漠不同人工固沙灌丛林土壤微生物量与土壤养分特征[J].应用生态学报,2017,28(12):3871-3880.
[5] 罗永清,赵学勇,李美霞.植物根系分泌物生态效应及其影响因素研究综述[J].应用生态学报,2012,23(12):3496-3504.
[6] Wezel A, Rajot J L, Herbrig C. Influence of shrubs on soil characteristics and their function in Sahelian agroecosystems in semi-arid Niger[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 2000,44(4):383-398.
[7] 于洋,王海燕,丁国栋,等.华北落叶松人工林土壤微生物数量特征及其与土壤性质的关系[J].东北林业大学学报,2011,39(3):76-80.
[8] 曹成有,朱丽辉,富瑶,等.科尔沁沙质草地沙漠化过程中土壤生物活性的变化[J].生态学杂志,2007,26(5):622-627.
[9] 赵娜,孟平,张劲松,等.华北低丘山地不同退耕年限刺槐人工林土壤质量评价[J].应用生态学报,2014,25(2):351-358.
[10] 王改玲,王青杵.晋北黄土丘陵区不同人工植被对土壤质量的影响[J].生态学杂志,2014,33(6):1487-1491.
[11] 陈璟,杨宁.衡阳紫色土丘陵坡地植被恢复过程中土壤质量评价[J].草地学报,2018,26(1):160-167.
[12] 秦耀东.土壤物理学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2003:63.
[13] 杨文斌.低覆盖度治沙-原理、模式与效果[M].北京:科学出版社,2016:176-197.
[14] 赵明月,赵文武,刘源鑫.不同尺度下土壤粒径分布特征及其影响因子:以黄土丘陵沟壑区为例[J].生态学报,2015,35(14):4625-4632.
[15] 夏江宝,张淑勇,王荣荣,等.贝壳堤岛3种植被类型的土壤颗粒分形及水分生态特征[J].生态学报,2013,33(21):7013-7022.
[16] 高国雄.毛乌素沙地东南缘人工植被结构与生态功能研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2007.
[17] 李裕元,邵明安,陈洪松,等.水蚀风蚀交错带植被恢复对土壤物理性质的影响[J].生态学报,2010,30(16):4306-4316.
[18] 郑纪勇,邵明安,张兴昌.黄土区坡面表层土壤容重和饱和导水率空间变异特征[J].水土保持学报,2004,18(3):53-56.
[19] 尹辉.我国西南典型喀斯特峰丛洼地土壤理化特征研究[D].北京:中国地质科学院,2012.
[20] 张晓娜,蒙仲举,杨振奇.不同封育措施下希拉穆仁荒漠草原土壤质量评价[J].土壤通报,2018,49(4):788-793.
[21] 李从娟,李彦,马健.古尔班通古特沙漠土壤化学性质空间异质性的尺度特征[J].土壤学报,2011,48(2):302-310.
[22] Su Y Z, Zhang T H, Li Y L, et al. Changes in soil properties after establishment of Artemisia halodendron and Caragana microphylla on shifting sand dunes in semiarid Horqin Sandy Land, northern China[J]. Environmental Management, 2005,36(2):272-281.
[23] 马学喜,李生宇,靳正忠.流沙地表层土壤化学性质对免灌造林的响应:以古尔班通古特沙漠明渠防护林为例[J].水土保持通报,2015,35(4):206-212.
[24] 王艳莉,刘立超,高艳红,等.基于较大降水事件的人工固沙植被区植物水分来源分析[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(4):1053-1060.
[25] 蔡文涛,李贺祎,来利明,等.鄂尔多斯高原弃耕农田恢复过程中土壤物理性质和生物结皮的变化[J].应用生态学报,2017,28(3):829-837.
[26] Huxman T E, Snyder K A, Tissue D, et al. Precipitation pulses and carbon fluxes in semiarid and arid ecosystems[J]. Oecologia, 2004,141(2):254-268.
[27] 曹成有,蒋德明,阿拉木萨,等.小叶锦鸡儿人工固沙区植被恢复生态过程的研究[J].应用生态学报,2000,11(3):349-354.
[28] 赵哈林,刘任涛,周瑞莲,等.科尔沁沙地灌丛的"虫岛"效应及其形成机理[J].生态学杂志,2012,31(12):2990-2995.
[29] 莫保儒,蔡国军,杨磊,等.半干旱黄土区成熟柠条林地土壤水分利用及平衡特征[J].生态学报,2013,33(13):4011-4020.
[30] 解婷婷,苏培玺,周紫鹃,等.荒漠绿洲过渡带沙拐枣种群结构及动态特征[J].生态学报,2014,34(15):4272-4279.
[31] 石亚飞,张志山,黄磊,等.古尔班通古特沙漠半固定沙丘植物群落物种组成和种群结构[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(4):1024-1030.
[32] 鲍乾,杨瑞,李万红,等.喀斯特高原峡谷区不同恢复模式的土壤生态效应[J].水土保持学报,2017,31(3):154-161.
[33] 杜满义,封焕英,张连金,等.华北石质山区不同植被恢复类型土壤碳、氮特征[J].生态学杂志,2018,37(6):1849-1855.
[34] 喻阳华,王璐,钟欣平,等.贵州喀斯特山区不同海拔花椒人工林土壤质量评价[J].生态学报,2018,38(21):7850-7858.

相似文献/References:

[1]胡春元,桂呈森,闫琳,等.沙漠化本质原因分析及防治策略探讨[J].水土保持研究,2002,9(03):130.
 HU Chunyuan,GUI Chengsen,YAN Lin,et al.Discussion on the Causes of Desertification Process and Countermeasures[J].,2002,9(05):130.
[2]苏志珠,董光荣.中国土地沙漠化研究现状及问题讨论[J].水土保持研究,2002,9(03):133.
 SU Zhizhu,DONG Guangrong.Discussion on the Present Situation of Land Desertification in China[J].,2002,9(05):133.
[3]朱志玲,曹萍.宁夏土地资源可持续利用研究[J].水土保持研究,2002,9(03):194.
 ZHU Zhiling,CAO Ping.Study on Sustainable Use of Soil Resources in Ningxia Province[J].,2002,9(05):194.
[4]李新坡.现代沙漠化的影响因素及研究意义浅析[J].水土保持研究,2003,10(03):140.
 LI Xin-po.Analysis of Factors to Desertification and It’s Significance[J].,2003,10(05):140.
[5]刘新平,张铜会,赵哈林,等.干旱半干旱区沙漠化土地水分动态研究进展[J].水土保持研究,2005,12(01):63.
 LIU Xin-ping,ZHANG Tong-hui,ZHAO Ha-lin,et al.Research Advances on Moisture Dynamic of Desertified Lands in Arid and Semi-arid Regions[J].,2005,12(05):63.
[6]邸利,傅志蛾,孙鹏举.古浪县沙化土地监测及治理对策研究[J].水土保持研究,2005,12(05):172.
 DI Li,FU Zhi-e,SUN Peng-ju.The Research of Investigation,Monitoring and Control Measures on Desertification in Gulang County[J].,2005,12(05):172.
[7]郭坚,王涛,薛娴,等.毛乌素沙地荒漠化现状及分布特征[J].水土保持研究,2006,13(03):198.
 GUO Jian,WANG Tao,XUE Xian,et al.The Status and Distribution of Desertification in Maowusu Sandy Land[J].,2006,13(05):198.
[8]齐善忠,罗芳,王涛.人为因素在沙漠化过程中作用程度的定量化研究[J].水土保持研究,2006,13(04):4.
 QI Shan-zhong,LUO Fang,WANG Tao.Quantitative Analysis on Impacts by Man-made Factors During the Process of Sandy Desertification[J].,2006,13(05):4.
[9]万勤琴,朴起亨,丁国栋,等.呼伦贝尔沙地草场沙漠化成因分析[J].水土保持研究,2007,14(04):263.
 WAN Qin-qin,PU Qi-heng,DING Guo-dong,et al.Analysis on the Reason of Sandy Desertification in Hulunber Steppe[J].,2007,14(05):263.
[10]张力小.中国北方农牧交错带农牧业选择适宜性分析——以科尔沁沙地为例[J].水土保持研究,2007,14(05):46.
 ZHANG Li-xiao.Study on Suitability for Transition between Cultivation and Pastoralism in Agro-pastoral Interweaving Belt of Northern China——A Case of Kerqin Sandy Land[J].,2007,14(05):46.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2018-11-19;改回日期:2018-11-28。
基金项目:国家自然科学基金(41661054,41867005);宁夏高等学校科学研究项目(NGY2018007);宁夏自然科学基金重点项目(2018AAC02004);自治区科技基础条件建设计划创新平台专项资金项目(2018DPC05021);宁夏高等学校西部一流学科建设(生态学)项目(NXYLXK2017B06)
作者简介:罗雅曦(1989-),女,四川内江人,在读硕士研究生,主要从事恢复生态学相关研究。E-mail:ndluol@126.com
通讯作者:刘任涛(1980-),男,河南邓州人,副研究员,主要从事恢复生态学相关研究与教学工作。E-mail:nxuliu2012@126.com
更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01