不同土壤电导率测量方法对土壤盐渍化表征的影响
|
摘要
为比较目前常用的室外便捷式土壤电导率测试仪和室内实验室常用方法之间的差异,本文以黄河三角洲典型县域土壤样品为研究对象,选用了HH2/WET土壤三参数速测仪和室内DDS-308A电导仪测定的电导率数据进行了传统统计学方法以及空间统计方法多方面的比较。结果表明,两种方法所测得的电导率数据存在较大误差,速测结果比室内测量结果高出一个数量级。两类数据作差,误差能够集中在一定范围内,说明误差具有稳定性。在测量数据的准确性方面,DDS-308A电导仪室内的测定数据较为精准。但从空间表达预测方面来看,HH2/WET速测仪测定的数据预测结果既能体现研究区土壤盐分整体分布趋势,又能刻画细节部分,所以利用速测仪测量土壤盐分更具有优势。由于两类数据存在显著的正相关关系,因而可以根据两者关系构建方程(ECa=0.089×ECb+0.526)对速测数据进行校正后使用,这样既保证了点位精度,又能够详细刻画空间分布特征。
In order to compare the difference between the portable soil electric conductivity instrument(HH2/WET)and commonly used indoor laboratory conductivity apparatus(DDS-308 A),soil electric conductivity were measured by the two methods.Soil samples were collected from Kenli County of the Yellow River Delta Area.Comprehensive comparative evaluations were carried out through descriptive statistical analysis,precision and expression of spatial distribution using Kriging method.The results showed that the measurements value of HH2/WET were an order of magnitude higher than indoor measurements.The result of subtraction between the two experimental data as the measurement error could be concentrated in a certain range,which indicating the stability of the measurement error.In the aspect of numerical accuracy,laboratory measurement(DDS-308 A)was more accurate than the portable instrument(HH2/WET).While in the aspect of the spatial expression which including overall distribution trend and the details,measurement result used by portable instrument(HH2/WET)was better than laboratory measurement(DDS-308 A).There was significant correlation between two methods and portable instrument,so we could use the HH2/WET data after rectification through laboratory measurement data and formula(ECa=0.089×ECb+0.526).It could ensure the numerical accuracy and also describe the chrematistic of spatial distribution in detail.
In order to compare the difference between the portable soil electric conductivity instrument(HH2/WET)and commonly used indoor laboratory conductivity apparatus(DDS-308 A),soil electric conductivity were measured by the two methods.Soil samples were collected from Kenli County of the Yellow River Delta Area.Comprehensive comparative evaluations were carried out through descriptive statistical analysis,precision and expression of spatial distribution using Kriging method.The results showed that the measurements value of HH2/WET were an order of magnitude higher than indoor measurements.The result of subtraction between the two experimental data as the measurement error could be concentrated in a certain range,which indicating the stability of the measurement error.In the aspect of numerical accuracy,laboratory measurement(DDS-308 A)was more accurate than the portable instrument(HH2/WET).While in the aspect of the spatial expression which including overall distribution trend and the details,measurement result used by portable instrument(HH2/WET)was better than laboratory measurement(DDS-308 A).There was significant correlation between two methods and portable instrument,so we could use the HH2/WET data after rectification through laboratory measurement data and formula(ECa=0.089×ECb+0.526).It could ensure the numerical accuracy and also describe the chrematistic of spatial distribution in detail.
引文
[1]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].3版.北京:中国农业出版社,2000,1-329
[2]LIU Guangming,YANG Jingsong,YAO Rongjiang.Electrical Conductivity in Soil Extracts:Chemical Factors and Their Intensity[J].Pedosphere,2006,16(1):100-107
[3]迟春明,王志春.松嫩平原盐碱土饱和浸提液与土水比1:5浸提液间化学参数的换算关系[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(1):172-176
[4]何文寿,刘阳春,何进宇.宁夏不同类型盐渍化土壤水溶盐含量与其电导率的关系[J].干旱地区农业研究,2010,28(1):111-116
[5]郭新送,宋付朋,鞠正山,等.不同水土比土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆电导率的比较研究[J].土壤,2015,47(4):812-818
[6]姚荣江,杨劲松,刘广明,等.EM38在黄河三角洲地区土壤盐渍化快速检测中的应用研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2008,26(1):67-73
[7]夏英辉,熊黑钢.土壤中盐分含量对EM38大地电导仪测量精度的影响分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2013,(10):164-167
[8]邓凯,丁建丽,杨爱霞,等.基于电磁感应技术的土壤剖面盐分空间分布建模研究[J].生态学报,2016,36(20):6387-6396
[9]Kinal J,Stoneman G L,Williams M R.Calibrating and using anEM31electromagnetic induction meter to estimate and map soilsalinity in the jarrah and karri forests of south-western Australia[J].Forest Ecology and Management,2006,233(10):78-84
[10]Corwin D L,Lesch S M.Apparent soil electrical conductivity measurements in agriculture[J].Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,2004,46(1):11-43
[11]LI Xiaoming,YANG Jingsong,LIU Meixian,et al.SpatioTemporal Changes of Soil Salinity in Arid Areas of South Xinjiang Using Electromagnetic Induction[J].Journal of Integrative Agriculture,2012,11(8):1365-1376
[12]李晓明,杨劲松,刘梅先,等.基于电磁感应的典型干旱区土壤盐分空间异质性[J].农业工程学报,2010,(12):97-101
[13]刘广明,吴亚坤,杨劲松,等.基于电磁感应技术的区域三维土壤盐分空间变异研究[J].农业机械学报,2013,(7):78-82
[14]王维真,小林哲夫.利用TDR对土壤含水量及土壤溶液电导率的同步连续测量[J].冰川冻土,2008,30(3):488-493
[15]沈丽艳,马春龙.基于数据融合的土壤电导率测量方法[J].长春工业大学学报(自然科学版),2012,33(2):151-154
[16]王春裕,武志杰,王汝镛,等.近代黄河三角洲的滨海盐渍土及其开发利用[J].土壤通报,2001,32(S1):1-2
[17]刘敏,王亮亮,蔡秋鹏.FDR和TDR测定几种典型土壤含水量的对比分析[J].水利信息化,2016,32(6):32-36
[18]张晓光,王志刚,宋祥云,等.采样点数量对黄河三角洲垦利县土壤盐分空间变异的影响[J].资源科学,2016,38(12):2375-2382
[19]刘艳芳,宋玉玲,郭龙,等.结合高光谱信息的土壤有机碳密度地统计模型[J].农业工程学报,2017,33(2):184-191
[2]LIU Guangming,YANG Jingsong,YAO Rongjiang.Electrical Conductivity in Soil Extracts:Chemical Factors and Their Intensity[J].Pedosphere,2006,16(1):100-107
[3]迟春明,王志春.松嫩平原盐碱土饱和浸提液与土水比1:5浸提液间化学参数的换算关系[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(1):172-176
[4]何文寿,刘阳春,何进宇.宁夏不同类型盐渍化土壤水溶盐含量与其电导率的关系[J].干旱地区农业研究,2010,28(1):111-116
[5]郭新送,宋付朋,鞠正山,等.不同水土比土壤浸提液与饱和泥浆电导率的比较研究[J].土壤,2015,47(4):812-818
[6]姚荣江,杨劲松,刘广明,等.EM38在黄河三角洲地区土壤盐渍化快速检测中的应用研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2008,26(1):67-73
[7]夏英辉,熊黑钢.土壤中盐分含量对EM38大地电导仪测量精度的影响分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2013,(10):164-167
[8]邓凯,丁建丽,杨爱霞,等.基于电磁感应技术的土壤剖面盐分空间分布建模研究[J].生态学报,2016,36(20):6387-6396
[9]Kinal J,Stoneman G L,Williams M R.Calibrating and using anEM31electromagnetic induction meter to estimate and map soilsalinity in the jarrah and karri forests of south-western Australia[J].Forest Ecology and Management,2006,233(10):78-84
[10]Corwin D L,Lesch S M.Apparent soil electrical conductivity measurements in agriculture[J].Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,2004,46(1):11-43
[11]LI Xiaoming,YANG Jingsong,LIU Meixian,et al.SpatioTemporal Changes of Soil Salinity in Arid Areas of South Xinjiang Using Electromagnetic Induction[J].Journal of Integrative Agriculture,2012,11(8):1365-1376
[12]李晓明,杨劲松,刘梅先,等.基于电磁感应的典型干旱区土壤盐分空间异质性[J].农业工程学报,2010,(12):97-101
[13]刘广明,吴亚坤,杨劲松,等.基于电磁感应技术的区域三维土壤盐分空间变异研究[J].农业机械学报,2013,(7):78-82
[14]王维真,小林哲夫.利用TDR对土壤含水量及土壤溶液电导率的同步连续测量[J].冰川冻土,2008,30(3):488-493
[15]沈丽艳,马春龙.基于数据融合的土壤电导率测量方法[J].长春工业大学学报(自然科学版),2012,33(2):151-154
[16]王春裕,武志杰,王汝镛,等.近代黄河三角洲的滨海盐渍土及其开发利用[J].土壤通报,2001,32(S1):1-2
[17]刘敏,王亮亮,蔡秋鹏.FDR和TDR测定几种典型土壤含水量的对比分析[J].水利信息化,2016,32(6):32-36
[18]张晓光,王志刚,宋祥云,等.采样点数量对黄河三角洲垦利县土壤盐分空间变异的影响[J].资源科学,2016,38(12):2375-2382
[19]刘艳芳,宋玉玲,郭龙,等.结合高光谱信息的土壤有机碳密度地统计模型[J].农业工程学报,2017,33(2):184-191
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |