冀北山区6种人工林的林地水源涵养能力
|
摘要
通过野外调查取样和室内实验分析,对丰宁满族自治县京冀水源保护林项目工程区内6种林分的林地水源涵养能力进行研究。结果表明:杨树纯林的枯落物层最大持水量和有效拦蓄量最大(5. 31t/hm~2、4.25t/hm~2),侧柏×山杏混交林的最小(1. 93t/hm~2、1. 57t/hm~2)。油松×山杏混交林的土壤层最大持水量和有效持水量最大(936. 66 t/hm~2,165. 32 t/hm~2),杨树纯林的最小(782. 84 t/hm~2,63. 25 t/hm~2)。6种林分中油松×山杏混交林的林地持水量最大,杨树纯林的最小。油松×山杏混交林的林地水源涵养能力最强,当地造林时可作为优选配置。
We studied the water conservation capacity of 6 stands in the construction area of Beijing Hebei ecological water conservation forest project in Manchu Autonomous County of Fengning through investigation and laboratory analysis. The results show that: For maximum water-holding capacity and effective holding-capacity of litter,pure Populus forest is the largest(5. 31 t/hm~2,4. 25 t/hm~2),Platycladus orientalis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest is the smallest(1. 93 t/hm~2,1. 57 t/hm~2). The soil of Pinus tabuliformis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest has the largest water-holding capacity and available water capacity( 936. 66 t/hm~2,165. 32 t/hm~2),and the pure Poplar forest has the smallest(782. 84 t/hm~2,63. 25 t/hm~2). In 6 stands,Pinus tabuliformis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest's capacity for water-holding is the best,pure Poplar forest's is the worst.Water conservation capacity of Pinus tabuliformis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest is the strongest,which can use as a priority allocation in local afforestation.
We studied the water conservation capacity of 6 stands in the construction area of Beijing Hebei ecological water conservation forest project in Manchu Autonomous County of Fengning through investigation and laboratory analysis. The results show that: For maximum water-holding capacity and effective holding-capacity of litter,pure Populus forest is the largest(5. 31 t/hm~2,4. 25 t/hm~2),Platycladus orientalis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest is the smallest(1. 93 t/hm~2,1. 57 t/hm~2). The soil of Pinus tabuliformis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest has the largest water-holding capacity and available water capacity( 936. 66 t/hm~2,165. 32 t/hm~2),and the pure Poplar forest has the smallest(782. 84 t/hm~2,63. 25 t/hm~2). In 6 stands,Pinus tabuliformis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest's capacity for water-holding is the best,pure Poplar forest's is the worst.Water conservation capacity of Pinus tabuliformis × Armeniaca sibirica mixed forest is the strongest,which can use as a priority allocation in local afforestation.
引文
[1]柳晓娜,贾国栋,余新晓.不同密度杨树人工林的林地涵养水源功能研究[J].环境科学与技术,2017,40(10):8-13.
[2]孙浩,刘晓勇,何齐发,等.修河上游流域4种森林类型的水源涵养功能评价[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(4):337-341,348.
[3]陈严武,史正涛,曾建军,等.水源地不同林分水源涵养功能评价[J].干旱区资源与环境,2015,29(2):67-74.
[4]吴迪,辛学兵,赵明扬,等.北京九龙山不同林分枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].林业科学研究,2014,27(3):417-422.
[5]田超,杨新兵,李军,等.冀北山地阴坡枯落物层和土壤层水文效应研究[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(2):97-103.
[6]陈波,孟成生,赵耀新,等.冀北山地不同海拔华北落叶松人工林枯落物和土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(3):216-221.
[7]冯楷斌,张暘暘,郭敬丽,等.冀北山地不同类型白桦林枯落物及土壤持水性能研究[J].林业资源管理,2016(2):74-80.
[8]陈波,杨新兵,赵心苗,等.冀北山地6种天然纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(2):196-202.
[9]胡静霞,杨新兵,朱辰光,等.冀西北地区4种纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(4):304-310.
[10]张建军.水土保持监测指标的观测方法[M].北京:中国林业出版社,2013:48-51.
[11]赵陟峰,郭建斌,赵廷宁,等.土桥沟流域不同林分枯落物的水文特性[J].西北林学院学报,2008,23(6):14-17.
[12]王会京,王红霞,谢宇光.太行山不同林型枯落物持水性及生态水文效应研究[J].水土保持研究,2016,23(6):135-139,144.
[13]张祎,李鹏,刘晓君,等.黄土丘陵区不同植被类型枯落物持水效能研究[J].水土保持研究,2016,23(5):100-105.
[14]陈继东,周长亮,李惠丽.接坝地区9种典型林分类型枯落物层和土壤层水文效应[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(6):216-221,226.
[15]吴强,楚聪颖,张鹏,等.滦河上游7种典型林分类型水土保持功能[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(5):40-44.
[16]云琦,王玉杰.缙云山典型林分森林土壤持水与入渗特性[J].北京林业大学学报,2006,28(3):102-108.
[17]王则宇,蒙仲举,崔向新,等.希拉穆仁天然草地不同群落土壤入渗特征[J].水土保持学报,2017,31(3):112-117.
[2]孙浩,刘晓勇,何齐发,等.修河上游流域4种森林类型的水源涵养功能评价[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(4):337-341,348.
[3]陈严武,史正涛,曾建军,等.水源地不同林分水源涵养功能评价[J].干旱区资源与环境,2015,29(2):67-74.
[4]吴迪,辛学兵,赵明扬,等.北京九龙山不同林分枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].林业科学研究,2014,27(3):417-422.
[5]田超,杨新兵,李军,等.冀北山地阴坡枯落物层和土壤层水文效应研究[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(2):97-103.
[6]陈波,孟成生,赵耀新,等.冀北山地不同海拔华北落叶松人工林枯落物和土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(3):216-221.
[7]冯楷斌,张暘暘,郭敬丽,等.冀北山地不同类型白桦林枯落物及土壤持水性能研究[J].林业资源管理,2016(2):74-80.
[8]陈波,杨新兵,赵心苗,等.冀北山地6种天然纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(2):196-202.
[9]胡静霞,杨新兵,朱辰光,等.冀西北地区4种纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(4):304-310.
[10]张建军.水土保持监测指标的观测方法[M].北京:中国林业出版社,2013:48-51.
[11]赵陟峰,郭建斌,赵廷宁,等.土桥沟流域不同林分枯落物的水文特性[J].西北林学院学报,2008,23(6):14-17.
[12]王会京,王红霞,谢宇光.太行山不同林型枯落物持水性及生态水文效应研究[J].水土保持研究,2016,23(6):135-139,144.
[13]张祎,李鹏,刘晓君,等.黄土丘陵区不同植被类型枯落物持水效能研究[J].水土保持研究,2016,23(5):100-105.
[14]陈继东,周长亮,李惠丽.接坝地区9种典型林分类型枯落物层和土壤层水文效应[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(6):216-221,226.
[15]吴强,楚聪颖,张鹏,等.滦河上游7种典型林分类型水土保持功能[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(5):40-44.
[16]云琦,王玉杰.缙云山典型林分森林土壤持水与入渗特性[J].北京林业大学学报,2006,28(3):102-108.
[17]王则宇,蒙仲举,崔向新,等.希拉穆仁天然草地不同群落土壤入渗特征[J].水土保持学报,2017,31(3):112-117.