首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      

四面山不同林地类型土壤特性及其水源涵养功能
引用本文:孙艳红,张洪江,杜士才,李根平.四面山不同林地类型土壤特性及其水源涵养功能[J].水土保持学报,2009,23(5).
作者姓名:孙艳红  张洪江  杜士才  李根平
作者单位:1. 北京林业大学水土保持学院,北京,100083;延庆县水土保持工作站,北京,102100
2. 北京林业大学水土保持学院,北京,100083
3. 重庆市林业局,重庆,401147
基金项目:国家自然科学基金,国家科技支持专题
摘    要:通过对四面山不同林地类型土壤特性及水源涵养功能进行研究.结果表明:(1)在0-60 cm土层,杉木×马尾松混交林、木荷×石砾混交林和杉木×马尾松×木荷混交林的土壤容重分别为1.10 g/cm~2,1.03 g/cm~3,1.24 g/cm~3.(2)3种林地的土壤总孔隙度、毛管孔隙度、非毛管孔隙度均随深度的增加而减低.在0-60 cm土层,杉木×马尾松混交林、木荷×石砾混交林和杉木×马尾松×木荷混交林的土壤总孔隙度分别为42.32%,48.87%和39.82.而三者的土壤毛管孔隙度分别为33.53%,38.22%和33.97%,土壤非毛管孔隙度分别为8.79%,10.65%和5.86%.(3)木荷×石砾混交林饱和蓄水量最大,为2 932.4 t/hm~2;杉木×马尾松混交林.为2 539.2 t/hm~2;杉木×马尾松×木荷混交林最差,为2 389.6 t/hm~2.术荷×石砾混交林土壤贮蓄水分和调节水分的潜在能力比杉木×马尾松×木荷混交林高122.7%.(4)木荷×石砾混交林枯落物的总蓄积量最大为246.94 t/hm~2.而杉木×马尾松×木荷混交林林枯落物的总蓄积量最小为64.47 t/hm~2.枯落物最大持水率相差较大.变动范围为229%~327.5%之间.枯落物的最大持水量依次为:木荷×石砾混交林(254.28 t/hm~2)>杉木×马尾松混交林(191.72 t/hm~2)>杉木×马尾松×木荷混交林(60.35 t/hm~2).

关 键 词:林地类型  土壤孔隙度  枯落物  水源涵养

Soil Characteristics and Water Conservation Function of Different Forest Types in Simian Mountains
SUN Yan-hong,ZHANG Hong-jiang,DU Shi-cai,LI Gen-ping.Soil Characteristics and Water Conservation Function of Different Forest Types in Simian Mountains[J].Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,2009,23(5).
Authors:SUN Yan-hong  ZHANG Hong-jiang  DU Shi-cai  LI Gen-ping
Abstract:The soil properties and water conservation function of different forest types were conducted in Simian mountain ,the results show as the fllows:(l)ln the layer of 0-60 cm, the soil bulk density of Cunning-hamia lanceolata × Pinus massoniana , Schima superba × Lithocarpus glaber, Cunninghamia lanceolata × Pinus massoniana × Schima superba of mixed forest was 1. 10 g/cm~3, 1. 03 g/cm~3, 1. 24 g/cm~3. (2) With the increment of soil depth, soil total porosity, capillary porosity, non-capillary porosity decreased gradually. In the layer of 0 - 60 cm, the soil total porosity of Cunninghamia lanceolata × Pinus massoniana , Schima superba × Lithocarpus glaber, Cunninghamia lanceolata × Pinus massoniana × Schima superba of mixed forest was 42. 32%, 48. 87% and 39. 82, while the three soil capillary porosity was 33. 53%, 38. 22% and 33. 97%, the three soil non-capillary porosity was 8. 79%, 10. 65% and 5. 86%. (3)The saturation holding capacity of Schima superba ×Lithocarpus glaber was 2 932. 4 t/hm~2, 2 539. 2 t/hm~2 in Cunninghamia lanceolata X Pinus massoniana , and 2 389. 6 t/hm~2 in Cunninghamia lanceolata × Pinus massoniana X Schima superba ; The saturation holding capacity of Schima superba × Lithocarpus glaber was high 122. 7%. Than that of Cunninghamia lanceolata × Pinus massoniana X Schima superba. (4)The litter total storage capacity of Schima superba × Lithocarpus glaber was 246. 94 t/hm~2, 64. 47 t/hm~2 in Cunninghamia lanceolata × Pinus massoni-ana × Schima superb. The weight-based ratio of water holding capacity of litter varied significantly,ranging from 229% to 327. 5% . The order of the maximum water capacity was; Schima superba × Lithocarpus glaber(254. 28 t/hm~2)>Cunninghamia lanceolata × Pinusmassoniana{191. 72 t/hm~2)>Cunninghamia lanceolata X Pinus massoniana × Schima superba (60. 35 t/hm~2).
Keywords:forest types  soil porosity  litter  water conservation
本文献已被 万方数据 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号