不同造林模式下火烧迹地的土壤修复效果及植物多样性变化
|
摘要
以威海仙姑顶中度火烧迹地人工更新后的麻栎-樱花-刺槐混交林(MYC)、麻栎-黑松-五角枫混交林(MHW)、麻栎-黑松-黄栌混交林(MHH)和麻栎-黑松-臭椿混交林(MHC)为研究对象,对4种不同造林模式进行土壤的定量分析和物种多样性调查,以自然更新林地(CK)作为对照,对比分析不同造林模式对火烧迹地土壤修复效果以及林下植被更新状况。结果表明:(1)MHH在0—40 cm土层内土壤容重最小,土壤通气性能最佳,土壤持水状况最好,MHC次之,MYC最差,但均与CK存在显著差异(P<0.05);(2)MHH在0—40 cm土层内土壤有机碳、碳氮比(C/N)、全磷、全钾、速效钾含量均为最高,MHC在0—40 cm土层内全氮、速效磷含量最高,MYC和MHW的土壤有机碳、碳氮比(C/N)、全磷、全钾与CK无显著差异(P>0.05);(3)MHH的Margalef指数、Shannon-Wiener指数、Simpson指数以及Pielou指数均处于较高水平;(4)综合分析后得出,MHH对中度火烧迹地土壤修复效果最佳,林下植被更新速度最快,MHC次之。MYC和MHW对火烧迹地土壤物理性质改良明显,但在土壤养分和林下植物更新方面并无明显作用。
Taking Quercus acutissima-Cerasus-Robinia pseudoacacia mixed forest(MYC), Quercus acutissima-Pinus thunbergii-Acer mono mixed forest(MHW), Quercus acutissima-Pinus thunbergii-Cotinus coggygria mixed forest(MHH), and Quercus acutissima-Pinus thunbergii-Ailanthus altissima mixed forest(MHC) grown in the burned area of Weihai as research object, soil properties and species diversity were surveyed under four different afforestation patterns with naturally updated woodland(CK) as the control. The effects of different afforestation modes on soil remediation and the status of subforest vegetation renewal were analyzed. The results showed that:(1) MHH had the lowest soil bulk density in 0—40 cm soil layer, the best soil aeration performance, and the best soil water retention. MHC was the second and MYC the worst. All of these three were different significantly from CK(P < 0.05);(2) The soil organic carbon, carbon nitrogen ratio(C/N), total phosphorus, total potassium and available potassium contents in MHH were the highest in 0—40 cm soil layer. MHC had the highest total nitrogen and available phosphorus contents in 0—40 cm soil layer. There was no significant difference in soil organic carbon, carbon/nitrogen ratio(C/N), total phosphorus, total potassium and CK between MYC and MHW(P < 0.05).(3) MHH's Margalef index, Shannon-Wiener index, Simpson index and Pielou index were relatively higher;(4) After comprehensive analysis, it could be concluded that MHH had the best soil remediation effect on moderately burned land, and the regeneration rate of understory vegetation was the fastest, followed by MHC. MYC and MHW could improve soil physical properties obviously, but had no obvious effect on soil nutrients and understory plant regeneration.
Taking Quercus acutissima-Cerasus-Robinia pseudoacacia mixed forest(MYC), Quercus acutissima-Pinus thunbergii-Acer mono mixed forest(MHW), Quercus acutissima-Pinus thunbergii-Cotinus coggygria mixed forest(MHH), and Quercus acutissima-Pinus thunbergii-Ailanthus altissima mixed forest(MHC) grown in the burned area of Weihai as research object, soil properties and species diversity were surveyed under four different afforestation patterns with naturally updated woodland(CK) as the control. The effects of different afforestation modes on soil remediation and the status of subforest vegetation renewal were analyzed. The results showed that:(1) MHH had the lowest soil bulk density in 0—40 cm soil layer, the best soil aeration performance, and the best soil water retention. MHC was the second and MYC the worst. All of these three were different significantly from CK(P < 0.05);(2) The soil organic carbon, carbon nitrogen ratio(C/N), total phosphorus, total potassium and available potassium contents in MHH were the highest in 0—40 cm soil layer. MHC had the highest total nitrogen and available phosphorus contents in 0—40 cm soil layer. There was no significant difference in soil organic carbon, carbon/nitrogen ratio(C/N), total phosphorus, total potassium and CK between MYC and MHW(P < 0.05).(3) MHH's Margalef index, Shannon-Wiener index, Simpson index and Pielou index were relatively higher;(4) After comprehensive analysis, it could be concluded that MHH had the best soil remediation effect on moderately burned land, and the regeneration rate of understory vegetation was the fastest, followed by MHC. MYC and MHW could improve soil physical properties obviously, but had no obvious effect on soil nutrients and understory plant regeneration.
引文
[1] 赵志霞,李正才,周君刚,等.火烧对中国北亚热带天然马尾松林土壤有机碳的影响[J].生态学杂志,2016,35(1):135-140.
[2] 邹梦玲,辛颖,赵雨森.大兴安岭火烧迹地植被恢复对碳储量的影响[J].水土保持学报,2013,27(5):133-137,143.
[3] Heydari M,Rostamy A,Najafi F,et al.Effect of fire severity on physical and biochemical soil properties in Zagros oak (Quercus brantii Lindl.) forests in Iran [J].Journal of Forest Research,2017,28(1):95-104.
[4] April L,Robert C,Brett R,et al.Fire effects on cation exchange capacity of California forest and woodland soils [J].Geoderma,2017,286:125-130.
[5] 韩杰,应凌霄,李贵祥,等.云南松混交林火烧迹地更新早期草本层物种多样性的空间格局[J].植物生态学报,2016,40(3):200-211.
[6] 李红运,辛颖,赵雨森.火烧迹地不同恢复方式土壤有机碳分布特征[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(9):2747-2753.
[7] 王绪高,李秀珍,孔繁花,等.大兴安岭北坡火烧迹地自然与人工干预下的植被恢复模式初探[J].生态学杂志,2003,22(5):30-34.
[8] 李媛,程积民,魏琳,等.云雾山典型草原火烧不同恢复年限土壤化学性质变化[J].生态学报,2013,33(7):2131-2138.
[9] 曾思齐,甘静静,肖化顺,等.木荷次生林林木更新与土壤特征的相关性[J].生态学报,2014,34(15):4242-4250.
[10] 朱喜,何志斌,杜军,等.林下植被组成和功能研究进展[J].世界林业研究,2014,27(5):24-30.
[11] 李锡杰.威海里口山火烧迹地植被恢复技术研究[D].山东泰安:山东农业大学,2016.
[12] 王鼎,周梅,赵鹏武,等.不同更新方式对兴安落叶松林火烧迹地物种组成及多样性的影响[J].生态环境学报,2017,26(4):570-575.
[13] 鲍士旦.土壤农化分析 [M].3版.北京:中国农业出版社,2013:3-35,56-58.
[14] 王月海,许景伟,韩友吉,等.黄河三角洲5个耐盐树种苗木根系形态结构特征[J].水土保持研究,2014,21(1):261-266.
[15] 周志文,潘剑君,居为民,等.神农架不同坡位3种林型土壤碳氮比分布特征[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(4):210-217.
[16] 杜满义,范少辉,漆良华,等.不同类型毛竹林土壤碳、氮特征及其耦合关系[J].水土保持学报,2010,24(4):198-202.
[17] 钟娇娇,陈杰,陈倩,等.秦岭山地天然次生林群落MRT数量分类、CCA排序及多样性垂直格局[J].生态学报,2018,38(1):1-8.
[18] 王合云,郭建英,李红丽,等.短花针茅荒漠草原不同退化程度的植被特征[J].中国草地学报,2015,37(3):74-79.
[19] 黄团冲,贺康宁,王先棒,等.北川河流域森林冠层结构对林下植被多样性的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2018,16(4):106-114.
[20] 韩雪成,赵雨森,辛颖,等.大兴安岭北部火烧迹地兴安落叶松人工林土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(4):183-188.
[21] 李炳怡,刘冠宏,李伟克,等.不同火强度对河北平泉油松林土壤有机碳及土壤养分影响[J].生态科学,2018,37(4):35-44.
[22] 孔健健,张亨宇,荆爽.大兴安岭火后演替初期森林土壤磷的动态变化特征[J].生态学杂志,2017,36(6):1515-1523.
[23] 白淑玉.黄栌林地表植物覆盖对土壤质量影响的研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2009.
[24] 邵水仙,董智,李红丽,等.不同造林模式对退化石灰岩山地土壤理化性质及水文效应的影响[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(1):263-267.
[25] 韩风林,布仁仓,常禹,等.大兴安岭白桦-兴安落叶松林火烧迹地林下植被群落恢复过程的动态分析[J].生态学杂志,2015,34(2):312-318.
[26] 王岩,李玉灵,石娟华,等.不同植被恢复模式对铁尾矿物种多样性及土壤理化性质的影响[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(3):112-117,183.
[2] 邹梦玲,辛颖,赵雨森.大兴安岭火烧迹地植被恢复对碳储量的影响[J].水土保持学报,2013,27(5):133-137,143.
[3] Heydari M,Rostamy A,Najafi F,et al.Effect of fire severity on physical and biochemical soil properties in Zagros oak (Quercus brantii Lindl.) forests in Iran [J].Journal of Forest Research,2017,28(1):95-104.
[4] April L,Robert C,Brett R,et al.Fire effects on cation exchange capacity of California forest and woodland soils [J].Geoderma,2017,286:125-130.
[5] 韩杰,应凌霄,李贵祥,等.云南松混交林火烧迹地更新早期草本层物种多样性的空间格局[J].植物生态学报,2016,40(3):200-211.
[6] 李红运,辛颖,赵雨森.火烧迹地不同恢复方式土壤有机碳分布特征[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(9):2747-2753.
[7] 王绪高,李秀珍,孔繁花,等.大兴安岭北坡火烧迹地自然与人工干预下的植被恢复模式初探[J].生态学杂志,2003,22(5):30-34.
[8] 李媛,程积民,魏琳,等.云雾山典型草原火烧不同恢复年限土壤化学性质变化[J].生态学报,2013,33(7):2131-2138.
[9] 曾思齐,甘静静,肖化顺,等.木荷次生林林木更新与土壤特征的相关性[J].生态学报,2014,34(15):4242-4250.
[10] 朱喜,何志斌,杜军,等.林下植被组成和功能研究进展[J].世界林业研究,2014,27(5):24-30.
[11] 李锡杰.威海里口山火烧迹地植被恢复技术研究[D].山东泰安:山东农业大学,2016.
[12] 王鼎,周梅,赵鹏武,等.不同更新方式对兴安落叶松林火烧迹地物种组成及多样性的影响[J].生态环境学报,2017,26(4):570-575.
[13] 鲍士旦.土壤农化分析 [M].3版.北京:中国农业出版社,2013:3-35,56-58.
[14] 王月海,许景伟,韩友吉,等.黄河三角洲5个耐盐树种苗木根系形态结构特征[J].水土保持研究,2014,21(1):261-266.
[15] 周志文,潘剑君,居为民,等.神农架不同坡位3种林型土壤碳氮比分布特征[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(4):210-217.
[16] 杜满义,范少辉,漆良华,等.不同类型毛竹林土壤碳、氮特征及其耦合关系[J].水土保持学报,2010,24(4):198-202.
[17] 钟娇娇,陈杰,陈倩,等.秦岭山地天然次生林群落MRT数量分类、CCA排序及多样性垂直格局[J].生态学报,2018,38(1):1-8.
[18] 王合云,郭建英,李红丽,等.短花针茅荒漠草原不同退化程度的植被特征[J].中国草地学报,2015,37(3):74-79.
[19] 黄团冲,贺康宁,王先棒,等.北川河流域森林冠层结构对林下植被多样性的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2018,16(4):106-114.
[20] 韩雪成,赵雨森,辛颖,等.大兴安岭北部火烧迹地兴安落叶松人工林土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(4):183-188.
[21] 李炳怡,刘冠宏,李伟克,等.不同火强度对河北平泉油松林土壤有机碳及土壤养分影响[J].生态科学,2018,37(4):35-44.
[22] 孔健健,张亨宇,荆爽.大兴安岭火后演替初期森林土壤磷的动态变化特征[J].生态学杂志,2017,36(6):1515-1523.
[23] 白淑玉.黄栌林地表植物覆盖对土壤质量影响的研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2009.
[24] 邵水仙,董智,李红丽,等.不同造林模式对退化石灰岩山地土壤理化性质及水文效应的影响[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(1):263-267.
[25] 韩风林,布仁仓,常禹,等.大兴安岭白桦-兴安落叶松林火烧迹地林下植被群落恢复过程的动态分析[J].生态学杂志,2015,34(2):312-318.
[26] 王岩,李玉灵,石娟华,等.不同植被恢复模式对铁尾矿物种多样性及土壤理化性质的影响[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(3):112-117,183.