南方典型红壤区不同水保措施下坡面产流产沙及稀土迁移特征
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Characteristics of Slope Runoff and Sediment Yield and REEs Migrations Under Different Soil and Water Conservation Measures in a Typical Red Soil Region of Southern China
  • 作者:张青青 ; 陈志强 ; 陈志彪 ; 马倩怡
  • 英文作者:ZHANG Qingqing;CHEN Zhiqiang;CHEN Zhibiao;MA Qianyi;College of Geographical Sciences,Fujian Normal University;Key Laboratory for Subtropical Mountain Ecology,Ministry of Science and Technology and Fujian Province;Institute of Geography,Fujian Normal University;
  • 关键词:南方典型红壤区 ; 长汀县 ; 水保措施 ; 减水减沙 ; 稀土迁移
  • 英文关键词:typical red soil region of Southern China;;Changting County;;soil and water conservation measures;;runoff and sediment reduction;;rare earth migration
  • 中文刊名:TRQS
  • 英文刊名:Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
  • 机构:福建师范大学地理科学学院;湿润亚热带山地生态国家重点实验室培育基地;福建师范大学地理研究所;
  • 出版日期:2018-02-15
  • 出版单位:水土保持学报
  • 年:2018
  • 期:v.32;No.154
  • 基金:福建省自然科学基金项目“南方稀土矿区芒萁的生态化学计量特征及其稀土迁移阻控效应”(2017J01462)
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:TRQS201801008
  • 页数:9
  • CN:01
  • ISSN:61-1362/TV
  • 分类号:49-56+61
摘要
以南方典型红壤区福建省长汀县水土保持科教园5种水土保持措施为研究对象,采集坡面产流产沙及稀土迁移数据,以期揭示南方红壤区水保措施的减水减沙效益及对稀土迁移的阻控效应。结果表明:(1)全坡面种草、封禁、低效马尾松施肥、乔灌草混交、人工补植马尾松5种水土保持措施的年均减流率和年均减沙率分别为65.41%,69.29%,63.42%,86.19%,72.59%和91.87%,84.21%,81.54%,94.13%,81.75%。(2)各降雨量下,5种水土保持措施径流和泥沙的稀土迁移强度分别比对照小区低85.13%,94.86%,66.89%,95.46%,93.10%和89.92%,80.38%,70.18%,93.38%,92.73%;且中雨时,各水保措施下径流和泥沙的稀土迁移强度最高。(3)除全坡面种草措施外,其余4种水土保持措施下径流的轻稀土迁移强度比重稀土迁移强度低55.68%,40.38%,85.76%,85.94%;而5种水土保持措施下泥沙的重稀土迁移强度则比轻稀土迁移强度低82.29%,81.25%,78.38%,75.35%,77.05%。综上,5种水土保持措施均有较好的减水减沙效益和稀土阻控效应,其中乔灌草混交措施的效果最佳。研究结果为充分发挥水保措施在生态修复和稀土迁移中的作用提供科学依据和实证支撑。
        Five kinds of soil and water conservation measures in a typical red soil region in Changting County of Fujian Province were studied,the data of slope runoff,sediment yield and rare earth elements(REEs)migration were collected to reveal the benefits soil and water conservation measures on runoff and sediment reduction and rare earth migration resistance.The results showed that:(1)The average annual runoff reduction rates and the average annual sediment reduction rates of five kinds of soil and water conservation measures(the whole slope coverd by grass,closed forest,low-effect masson pine fertilization,mixture of trees with shrubs and herb,enrichment planting masson pine)were 65.41%,69.29%,63.42%,86.19%,72.59% and 91.87%,84.21%,81.54%,94.13%,and 81.75%,respectively.(2)Under the rainfall,the REEs migration intensity of runoff and sediment were 85.13%,94.86%,66.89%,95.46%,93.10% and89.92%,80.38%,70.18%,93.38%,and 92.73%lower than those in control plot under five kinds of soil and water conservation measures,respectively,of which,the peak occurred in moderate rain.(3)The LREE migration intensity of runoff were 55.68%,40.38%,85.76% and 85.94%lower than HREE migration intensity under five kinds of soil and water conservation measures except the whole slope covered by grass,and the HREE migration intensity of sediment were 82.29%,81.25%,78.38%,75.35%and 77.05%lowerthan LREE migration intensity under five kinds of soil and water conservation measures.In summary,five kinds of soil and water conservation measures have markedly benefits of runoff and sediment reduction and REE resistance,especially for of the mixture of trees with shrubs and herb.The results provide scientific basis and empirical support for making the best use the role of soil and water conservation measures applying in ecological restoration and rare earth migration.
引文
[1]水利部.中国水土流失防止与生态安全,南方红壤区卷[M].北京:科学出版社,2010.
    [2]梁音,张斌,潘贤章,等.南方红壤丘陵区水土流失现状与综合治理对策[J].中国水土保持科学,2008,6(1):22-27.
    [3]梁音,张桃林,史德明.南方红壤丘陵区土壤侵蚀评价∥红壤生态系统研究[M].第3集.北京:中国农业科技出版社,1995:50-56.
    [4]丁士明,梁涛,张自立,等.稀土对土壤的生态效应研究进展[J].土壤,2004,36(2):157-163.
    [5]杨胜奇.稀土在金属表面处理工艺中的应用技术(1):稀土的概念和基本情况[J].材料保护,2008,41(4):76-77.
    [6]陈祖义,朱旭东.稀土元素的骨蓄积性、毒性及其对人群健康的潜在危害[J].生态与农村环境学报,2008,24(1):88-91.
    [7]Gao Z Q,Zhou Q X.Contamination from rare earth ore strip mining and its impacts on resources and eco-environment[J].Chinese Journal of Ecology,2011,12(12):2915-2922.
    [8]李小飞.稀土采矿治理土地壤和蔬菜稀土元素含量及其健康风险评价[D].福州:福建师范大学,2013.
    [9]金姝兰,黄益宗,王斐,等.江西典型钨矿开采对周边环境稀土元素含量的影响[J].环境科学学报,2016,3(14):1328-1335.
    [10]Chua H.Bio-accumulation of environmental residues of rare earth elements in aquatic flora eichhornia crassipes,(Mart.)Solms in Guangdong Province of China[J].Science of The Total Environment,1998,214(1/3):79-85.
    [11]朱冰冰,李占斌,李鹏,等.草本植被覆盖对坡面降雨径流侵蚀影响的试验研究[J].土壤学报,2010,47(3):401-407.
    [12]周毅,魏天兴,解建强,等.黄土高原不同林地类型水土保持效益分析[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(3):12-16.
    [13]李钢,梁音,曹龙熹.次生马尾松林下植被恢复措施的水土保持效益[J].中国水土保持科学,2012,10(6):25-31.
    [14]李桂静,崔明,周金星,等.南方红壤区林下土壤侵蚀控制措施水土保持效益研究[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(5):1-5.
    [15]徐新创,张学珍,戴尔阜,等.1961—2010年中国降水强度变化趋势及其对降水量影响分析[J].地理研究,2014,33(7):1335-1347.
    [16]General administration of quality supervision,inspection and quarantine of china.GB 15774-2008Calculation method of benefit in soil and water conservation[S].Beijing:China Standards Press,2008.
    [17]唐涛,郝明德,单凤霞.人工降雨条件下秸秆覆盖减少水土流失的效应研究[J].水土保持研究,2008,15(1):9-11.
    [18]梁娟珠.不同植被措施下红壤坡面径流变化特征[J].水土保持通报,2015,35(6):159-163.
    [19]章俊霞,李小军,左长清.南方红壤入渗影响因素研究[J].中国水土保持,2008(6):27-29.
    [20]张成梁,程冬兵,刘士余.红壤坡地果园植草的水土保持效应[J].草地学报,2006,14(4):365-269.
    [21]文亦芾,毕玉芬,董亚芳.金沙江流域退耕还草地水土保持效益分析研究[J].土壤,2006,38(4):489-493.
    [22]郑本暖,杨玉盛,谢锦升,等.亚热带红壤严重退化生态系统封禁管理后生物多样性的恢复[J].水土保持研究,2002,9(4):57-60.
    [23]黄少燕.红壤侵蚀退化地不同生态恢复措施对土壤养分影响研究[J].水土保持研究,2009,16(3):38-42.
    [24]汪丽娜,穆兴民,张晓萍,等.黄河流域粗泥沙集中来源区径流及输沙特征分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2008,22(10):60-65.
    [25]王升,王全九,董文财,等.黄土坡面不同植被覆盖度下产流产沙与养分流失规律[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(4):23-27.
    [26]Liang T,Wang L,Hu Y,et al.Influence of slope and rainfall intensity on the rare earth elements and phosphorous loss from soil with surface runoff[J].Journal of Basic Science&Engineering,2010,18(5):741-749.
    [27]陈学兄.基于遥感与GIS的中国水土流失定量评价[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2013.
    [28]扶卿华,喻丰华,余顺超,等.基于MODIS植被指数的广西区植被覆盖度动态分析[J].数字技术与应用,2010(7):171-172.
    [29]刘宇,吕一河,傅伯杰.景观格局-土壤侵蚀研究中景观指数的意义解释及局限性[J].生态学报,2011,31(1):267-275.
    [30]李小飞,陈志彪,陈志强.南方稀土采矿恢复地土壤稀土元素含量及植物吸收特征[J].生态学杂志,2013,32(8):2126-2132.
    [31]Migaszewski Z M,Ga?uszka A,Do?gowska S,et al.Assessing the impact of Serwis mine tailings site on farmers’wells using element and isotope signatures(Holy Cross Mountains,South-central Poland)[J].Environmental Earth Sciences,2015,74(1):629-647.
    [32]韩卓汝.海南岛北部潮间带沉积物稀土元素富集规律及其生态效应研究[D].福建海口:海南师范大学,2013.
    [33]冉勇,刘铮.稀土元素在土壤和氧化物表面的吸附和解吸研究[J].环境科学学报,1993,13(3):288-294.
    [34]池汝安,田君,罗仙平,等.风化壳淋积型稀土矿的基础研究[J].有色金属科学与工程,2012,3(4):1-13.
    [35]刘羿,彭子成,韦刚健,等.海南岛近岸滨珊瑚稀土元素的年际变化与海平面等因素的相关性探讨[J].热带海洋学报,2009,28(2):55-61.
    [36]金姝兰,黄益宗.稀土元素对农田生态系统的影响研究进展[J].生态学报,2013,33(16):4836-4845.
    [37]黄圣彪,王子健,彭安.稀土元素在土壤中吸持和迁移的研究[J].农业环境保护,2002,21(3):269-271.
    [38]温小军.赣南稀土矿区土壤环境特征及稀土金属地球化学行为研究[D].昆明:云南大学,2012.
    [39]魏复盛,刘延良.我国土壤中稀土元素背景值特征[J].环境科学,1991,12(5):78-82.
    [40]李小飞,陈志彪,张永贺,等.稀土矿区土壤和蔬菜稀土元素含量及其健康风险评价[J].环境科学学报,2013,33(3):835-843.
    [41]朱为方,徐素琴,邵萍萍,等.赣南稀土区生物效应研究:稀土日允许摄入量[J].中国环境科学,1997,17(1):63-66.

© 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