乌兰布和沙漠绿洲农田不同土地利用方式地表风蚀特征研究
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Wind Erosion Characteristics of Oasis Farmland Surfaces Under Different Land Uses in Ulan Buh Desert
  • 作者:徐涛 ; 蒙仲举 ; 党晓宏 ; 包斯琴
  • 英文作者:XU Tao;MENG Zhongju;DANG Xiaohong;BAO Siqin;Desert Science and Engineering College, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University;
  • 关键词:土壤风蚀 ; 土地利用方式 ; 风蚀 ; 防治与控制
  • 英文关键词:Soil wind erosion;;Land use types;;Prevention and control
  • 中文刊名:TURA
  • 英文刊名:Soils
  • 机构:内蒙古农业大学沙漠治理学院;
  • 出版日期:2018-06-15
  • 出版单位:土壤
  • 年:2018
  • 期:v.50;No.295
  • 基金:内蒙古农业大学优秀青年基金项目(2014XYQ-8)资助
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:TURA201803023
  • 页数:7
  • CN:03
  • ISSN:32-1118/P
  • 分类号:174-180
摘要
土壤风蚀是干旱地区绿洲农田开发的一个突出生态问题,如何针对不同的立地单元采取保护性措施是人们长久以来关注的重点。本文选择乌兰布和沙漠绿洲农田流沙地、沙质耕地、黏质耕地、撂荒耕地及留茬地5种典型土地利用方式,对其风速特征、地表蚀积量进行野外原位测定,并分析了不同下垫面的地表粗糙度和沉积土壤粒径特征。结果表明:研究区土壤颗粒组成以细砂含量占主导地位,粉粒、中砂与粗砂含量相对较低。与对照相比,各土地利用方式均能有效增加地表粗糙度,表现为:留茬地(0.32 cm)>撂荒耕地(0.29 cm)>沙质耕地(0.25 cm)>黏质耕地(0.19cm)>流沙地(0.02 cm)。土壤风蚀深度整体表现为流沙地>沙质耕地>撂荒耕地>黏质耕地>留茬地,5种利用方式下,留茬地风蚀程度最轻,风蚀深度仅为0.04 cm/d,分别较流沙地、沙质耕地、黏质耕地及撂荒耕地降低了99.03%、96.83%、94.29%与90.24%。因而,留茬地具有较好的防风蚀效益,是一种值得推广的土壤风蚀防治措施。
        Soil wind erosion is a prominent ecological problem in the sustainability of oasis farmland in arid areas, therefore, how to take reasonable protective measures against different farmland units is a key concern in arid areas for a long time. In this paper, five typical land use types of shifting sandy land(SSL), sandy arable land(SAL), clayey arable land(CAL), abandoned grassland(AGL) and stubble land(SL) of oasis in Ulan Buh desert were selected, wind speed, surface erosion and deposition, surface roughness and soil particle size distributions(PSDs) were analyzed. The results showed that fine sand was dominant in soil PSDs of all land use types, and the contents of clay sand and coarse sand were relatively low. Compared with SSL, other land use types effectively increased surface roughness, which were in an order of SL(0.32 cm) > AGL(0.29 cm) > SAL(0.25 cm) > CAL(0.19 cm)> SSL(0.02 cm). The depths of soil erosion were in an order of SSL> SAL> CAL> SL. SL was the slightest in wind erosion degree with a wind erosion depth only of 0.04 cm/d, decreased by 99.03%, 96.83%, 94.29% and 90.24% compared with those of SSL, SAL, CAL and AGL, respectively. Thus, stubble land is an effective measure in preventing and controlling soil wind erosion due to its significant wind-intercepting efficiency.
引文
[1]董智.乌兰布和沙漠绿洲农田沙害及其控制机理研究[D].北京林业大学,2004
    [2]樊自立,马英杰,艾力西尔·库尔班,等.试论中国荒漠区人工绿洲生态系统的形成演变和可持续发展[J].中国沙漠,2004(1):12–18
    [3]郝玉光.乌兰布和沙漠东北部绿洲化过程生态效应研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2007
    [4]赵哈林,黄学文,何宗颖.科尔沁地区农田沙漠化演变的研究[J].土壤学报,1996,33(3):242–248
    [5]Ravi S,Zobeck T M,Over T M,et al.On the effect of moisture bonding forces in air-dry soils on threshold friction velocity of wind erosion[J].Sedimentology,2006,53(3):597–609
    [6]刘芳,郝玉光,辛智鸣,等.乌兰布和沙区不同下垫面的土壤风蚀特征[J].林业科学,2017,53(3):128–137
    [7]孙悦超,麻硕士,陈智.保护性耕作农田和柠条带状配置草地防风蚀效果的风洞测试[J].农业工程学报,2017,33(11):140–146
    [8]张春来,邹学勇,董光荣,等.植被对土壤风蚀影响的风洞实验研究[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(3):31–33
    [9]邹学勇,张春来,程宏,等.土壤风蚀模型中的影响因子分类与表达[J].地球科学进展,2014,29(8):875–889
    [10]董治宝,李振山.风成沙粒度特征对其风蚀可蚀性的影响[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报,1998,4(4):1–6
    [11]南岭,杜灵通,展秀丽.土壤风蚀可蚀性研究进展[J].土壤,2014,46(2):204–211.
    [12]张春来,邹学勇,董光荣,等.耕作土壤表面的空气动力学粗糙度及其对土壤风蚀的影响[J].中国沙漠,2002,22(5):66–68
    [13]杨会民,王静爱,邹学勇,等.风水复合侵蚀研究进展与展望[J].中国沙漠,2016(4):962–971
    [14]Wasson R J,Nanninga P M.Estimating wind transport of sand on vegetated surface.Earth Surface Processes and Landforms,1986,11(4):505
    [15]张文颖,张恩和,景锐,等.河西绿洲灌区春小麦留茬免耕的防风蚀效应研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2009,17(2):244–249
    [16]丛培飞,尹光华,谷健,等.留茬和秸秆覆盖对农田土壤风蚀量的影响[J].生态学杂志,2014,33(8):2060-2064
    [17]张华,李锋瑞,张铜会,等.春季裸露沙质农田土壤风蚀量动态与变异特征[J].水土保持学报,2002,16(1):29-32,79
    [18]高永,虞毅,汪季.一种可以分层采取土壤样品的取土器:中国,CN201926567U[P].2011-08-10
    [19]朱朝云,丁国栋,杨明远.风沙物理学[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1992:204–257
    [20]Cattle S R,Mctainsh G H,Elias S.Eolian dust deposition rates,particle-sizes and contributions to soils along a transect in semi-arid New South Wales,Australia[J].Sedimentology,2009,56:765–783
    [21]宋涛.分流对冲与多级扩容组合式自动集沙仪及其内流场特性研究[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2016
    [22]魏林源,刘立超,唐卫东,等.民勤绿洲农田荒漠化对土壤性质和作物产量的影响[J].中国农学通报,2013,29(32):315–320
    [23]苏永中,王芳,张智慧,等.河西走廊中段边缘绿洲农田土壤性状与团聚体特征[J].中国农业科学,2007,40(4):741–748
    [24]杨明元.对地表粗糙度测定的分析与研究[J].中国沙漠,1996,16(4):383–387
    [25]董治宝,王涛,屈建军.风沙物理学学科建设的若干问题[J].中国沙漠,2002,22(3):4–8
    [26]张继义,王娟,赵哈林.沙地植被恢复过程土壤颗粒组成变化及其空间变异特征[J].水土保持学报,2009,23(3):153–157
    [27]陈新闯,郭建英,董智,等.乌兰布和沙漠沿黄段不同土地利用方式对土壤分形特征的影响[J].干旱区资源与环境,2015,29(11):169–173
    [28]Tyler S W,Wheatcrafu S W.Application of fractal mathematics to soil water retention estimation[J].Soil Science of American Journal,1989,53:987–996
    [29]张素,熊东红,校亮,等.冲沟不同部位土壤机械组成及抗冲性差异[J].土壤,2016,48(6):1270–1276
    [30]Colazo J C,Buschiazzo D E.Soil dry aggregate stability and wind erodible fraction in a semiarid environment of Argentina[J].Geoderma,2010,159(1):228–236
    [31]丁延龙,高永,蒙仲举,等.希拉穆仁荒漠草原风蚀地表颗粒粒度特征[J].土壤,2016,48(4):803–812
    [32]海春兴,周心澄,李晓佳.河北坝上不同土地利用方式下土壤表层水分变化对风蚀的影响[J].水土保持学报,2005,19(2):29–32
    [33]Sharratt B S,Feng G.Friction velocity and aerodynamic roughness of conventional and under cutter tillage within the Columbia Plat-eau USA,Journal of Soil and Tillage Research,2009,105:236–241
    [34]王升堂,赵延治,邹学勇,等.北京郊区不同土地利用方式起沙起尘的特征研究[J].地理科学,2005,25(5):601–605
    [35]胡霞,刘连友,严平,等.不同地表状况对土壤风蚀的影响——以内蒙古太仆寺旗为例[J].水土保持研究,2006,4(13):118–119
    [36]Fryrear D W.Soil cover and wind erosion[J].Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers,1985,28(3):781–784
    [37]黄高宝,于爱忠,郭清毅,等.甘肃河西冬小麦保护性耕作对土壤风蚀影响的风洞试验研究[J].土壤学报,2007,44(6):968–973

© 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