抚育间伐强度对大兴安岭落叶松次生林土壤肥力的影响
|
摘要
为改善大兴安岭落叶松天然次生林的生态环境,观测间伐后林地土壤肥力的变化情况,探讨最有利于林地土壤改良的间伐强度。在大兴安岭设置间伐强度分别为9.43%、16.75%、29.00%、40.01%、53.09%、67.25%的实验样地和未间伐的对照样地,样地分别栽植兴安落叶松Larix gmelinii、兴安樟子松Pinus sylvestris、红皮云杉Picea koraiensis Nakai、西伯利亚红松Pinus sibirica促进林分更新。选取能够反映土壤肥力的化学性质指标和物理性质指标共13项,利用改进层次分析法和熵权法相结合的方法确定指标权重,同时运用灰色关联法,对各间伐样地的土壤肥力进行综合评价。结果表明:土壤有效磷(0.222)、有机质(0.145)在所有评价指标中所占权重偏高,灰色关联度(间伐强度)由大到小排序为0.73(40.01%)> 0.70(29%)> 0.65(16.75%)> 0.64(9.43%)> 0.63(53.09%)> 0.60(0)> 0.55(67.25%)。说明土壤有效磷、有机质是土壤肥力的重要影响因素,间伐强度40.01%的改造样地土壤肥力最佳,间伐强度9.43%～53.09%的落叶松次生林土壤肥力优于对照样地。适当的间伐强度能够改善林地内的土壤肥力,为大兴安岭落叶松次生林的改造提供参考。
In order to improve the ecological environment of Larix gmelinii natural secondary forest in the forest zone of Daxingan mountains, the changes of soil fertility in the woodland after thinning were observed, and the thinning intensity that is most conducive to soil improvement in the forest land were explored. The experimental plots of thinning intensity were 9.43%, 16.75%, 29.00%, 40.01%,53.09%, 67.25% respectively, and the unthinned control plots were set. And Larix gmelinii, Pinus sylvestris, Picea koraiensis Nakai and Pinus sibirica were cultivated there so as to promote the forest stand renewal. By selecting a total of 13 chemical and physical indexes which can re?ect the soil fertility, using the improved analytic hierarchy process and the entropy weight method to determine the index weights, and adopting the grey correlation method, the soil fertility of different thinning plots was evaluated comprehensively. The results are as follows. Soil available phosphorus(0.222) and organic matter(0.145) accounted for a higher weight in all evaluation indicators,and the order of grey correlation degree(thinning intensity) from big to small was 0.73(40.01%) > 0.70(29%) > 0.65(16.75%) > 0.64(9.43%) > 0.63(53.09%) > 0.60(0) > 0.55(67.25%). It was found that soil available phosphorus and organic matter were important factors affecting soil fertility, the soil fertility of the improved sample plot with thinning intensity of 40.01% was the best, and the soil fertility of the secondary L. gmelinii forest with thinning intensity of 9.43%-53.09% was better than that of the control sample plot.Appropriate thinning intensity can improve soil fertility in the forest land and this provides a reference for the transformation of L.gmelinii secondary forest in Daxing'an mountains.
In order to improve the ecological environment of Larix gmelinii natural secondary forest in the forest zone of Daxingan mountains, the changes of soil fertility in the woodland after thinning were observed, and the thinning intensity that is most conducive to soil improvement in the forest land were explored. The experimental plots of thinning intensity were 9.43%, 16.75%, 29.00%, 40.01%,53.09%, 67.25% respectively, and the unthinned control plots were set. And Larix gmelinii, Pinus sylvestris, Picea koraiensis Nakai and Pinus sibirica were cultivated there so as to promote the forest stand renewal. By selecting a total of 13 chemical and physical indexes which can re?ect the soil fertility, using the improved analytic hierarchy process and the entropy weight method to determine the index weights, and adopting the grey correlation method, the soil fertility of different thinning plots was evaluated comprehensively. The results are as follows. Soil available phosphorus(0.222) and organic matter(0.145) accounted for a higher weight in all evaluation indicators,and the order of grey correlation degree(thinning intensity) from big to small was 0.73(40.01%) > 0.70(29%) > 0.65(16.75%) > 0.64(9.43%) > 0.63(53.09%) > 0.60(0) > 0.55(67.25%). It was found that soil available phosphorus and organic matter were important factors affecting soil fertility, the soil fertility of the improved sample plot with thinning intensity of 40.01% was the best, and the soil fertility of the secondary L. gmelinii forest with thinning intensity of 9.43%-53.09% was better than that of the control sample plot.Appropriate thinning intensity can improve soil fertility in the forest land and this provides a reference for the transformation of L.gmelinii secondary forest in Daxing'an mountains.
引文
[1]王兵,任晓旭,胡文.中国森林生态系统服务功能及其价值评估[J].林业科学,2011,47(2):145-153.
[2]李秀彬,赵宇鸾.森林转型、农地边际化与生态恢复[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2011,21(10):91-95.
[3]白杨,欧阳志云,郑华,等.海河流域森林生态系统服务功能评估[J].生态学报,2011,31(7):2029-2039.
[4]SCHWARTZMANS,ALENCARA,ZARINH,etal.Social movements and large-scale tropical forest protection on the Amazon frontier:conservation from chaos[J].Journal of Environment&Development,2010,19(3):274-299.
[5]李芬,李文华,甄霖,等.森林生态系统补偿标准的方法探讨--以海南省为例[J].自然资源学报,2010,25(5):735-745.
[6]陆元昌,栾慎强,张守攻,等.从法正林转向近自然林:德国多功能森林经营在国家、区域和经营单位层面的实践[J].世界林业研究,2010,23(1):1-11.
[7]ALSTON L J,ANDERSSON K P.Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Forest Protection:The Transaction Costs of Redd[J].Nber Working Papers,2011,2(2):281-289.
[8]TAKAHASHI R,TODO Y.Impact of community-based forest management on forest protection:evidence from an aid-funded project in Ethiopia[J].Environmental Management,2012,50(3):396-404.
[9]王清奎.碳输入方式对森林土壤碳库和碳循环的影响研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2011,22(4):1075-1081.
[10]张忠华,胡刚,祝介东,等.喀斯特森林土壤养分的空间异质性及其对树种分布的影响[J].植物生态学报,2011,35(10):1038-1049.
[11]朱玉杰,董希斌.大兴安岭用材林不同强度采伐后土壤模糊聚类分析[J].东北林业大学学报,2014,42(10):65-71.
[12]李广会,郭素娟,邹锋,等.板栗叶片营养与土壤养分的动态变化及回归分析[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(9):41-46.
[13]纪浩.大兴安岭低质林改造后土壤肥力质量评价[D].哈尔滨:东北林业大学,2013.
[14]BALDRIAN P,KOLA?íK M,STURSOVáM,et al.Active and total microbial communities in forest soil are largely different and highly stratified during decomposition[J].Isme Journal,2012,6(2):248.
[15]DANIELSONRM,VISSERS.Effects of forests oil acidification on ectomycorrhizal and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal development[J].New Phytologist,2010,112(1):41-47.
[16]戴凌,黄志宏,文丽.长沙市不同森林类型土壤养分含量与土壤酶活性[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2014,34(6):100-105.
[17]赵朝辉,方晰,田大伦,等.间伐对杉木林林下地被物生物量及土壤理化性质的影响[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(5):102-107.
[18]李静鹏,徐明锋,苏志尧,等.不同植被恢复类型的土壤肥力质量评价[J].生态学报,2014,34(9):2297-2307.
[19]崔潇潇,高原,吕贻忠.北京市大兴区土壤肥力的空间变异[J].农业工程学报,2010,26(9):327-333.
[20]吴玉红,田霄鸿,同延安,等.基于主成分分析的土壤肥力综合指数评价[J].生态学杂志,2010,29(1):173-180.
[21]金慧,尹航,赵莹,等.长白山牛皮杜鹃种群构件及其与土壤因子的灰色关联度[J].东北林业大学学报,2017,45(9):62-65.
[22]SIRPA P,LEENA F,HANNU M,et al.Effects of forest clearcutting on the sulphur,phosphorus and base cations fluxes through podzolic soil horizons[J].Biogeochemistry,2004,69:404-424.
[23]马芳芳,贾翔,赵卫,等.间伐强度对辽东落叶松人工林土壤理化性质的影响[J].生态学杂志,2017,36(4):971-977.
[24]杨会侠.红松人工林土壤理化性质对抚育间伐的响应[J].辽宁林业科技,2017(2):5-9.
[25]毛波,董希斌,宋启亮,等.低质山杨林生态改造后土壤肥力综合评价[J].福建林业科技,2015(2):40-45.
[26]高明,朱玉杰,董希斌,等.抚育间伐对小兴安岭用材林土壤化学性质的影响[J].东北林业大学学报,2013,41(10):14-18.
[27]郑存德,程岩.有机质对不同容重土壤物理特性的调控研究[J].西南农业学报,2013,26(5):1929-1934.
[2]李秀彬,赵宇鸾.森林转型、农地边际化与生态恢复[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2011,21(10):91-95.
[3]白杨,欧阳志云,郑华,等.海河流域森林生态系统服务功能评估[J].生态学报,2011,31(7):2029-2039.
[4]SCHWARTZMANS,ALENCARA,ZARINH,etal.Social movements and large-scale tropical forest protection on the Amazon frontier:conservation from chaos[J].Journal of Environment&Development,2010,19(3):274-299.
[5]李芬,李文华,甄霖,等.森林生态系统补偿标准的方法探讨--以海南省为例[J].自然资源学报,2010,25(5):735-745.
[6]陆元昌,栾慎强,张守攻,等.从法正林转向近自然林:德国多功能森林经营在国家、区域和经营单位层面的实践[J].世界林业研究,2010,23(1):1-11.
[7]ALSTON L J,ANDERSSON K P.Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Forest Protection:The Transaction Costs of Redd[J].Nber Working Papers,2011,2(2):281-289.
[8]TAKAHASHI R,TODO Y.Impact of community-based forest management on forest protection:evidence from an aid-funded project in Ethiopia[J].Environmental Management,2012,50(3):396-404.
[9]王清奎.碳输入方式对森林土壤碳库和碳循环的影响研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2011,22(4):1075-1081.
[10]张忠华,胡刚,祝介东,等.喀斯特森林土壤养分的空间异质性及其对树种分布的影响[J].植物生态学报,2011,35(10):1038-1049.
[11]朱玉杰,董希斌.大兴安岭用材林不同强度采伐后土壤模糊聚类分析[J].东北林业大学学报,2014,42(10):65-71.
[12]李广会,郭素娟,邹锋,等.板栗叶片营养与土壤养分的动态变化及回归分析[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(9):41-46.
[13]纪浩.大兴安岭低质林改造后土壤肥力质量评价[D].哈尔滨:东北林业大学,2013.
[14]BALDRIAN P,KOLA?íK M,STURSOVáM,et al.Active and total microbial communities in forest soil are largely different and highly stratified during decomposition[J].Isme Journal,2012,6(2):248.
[15]DANIELSONRM,VISSERS.Effects of forests oil acidification on ectomycorrhizal and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal development[J].New Phytologist,2010,112(1):41-47.
[16]戴凌,黄志宏,文丽.长沙市不同森林类型土壤养分含量与土壤酶活性[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2014,34(6):100-105.
[17]赵朝辉,方晰,田大伦,等.间伐对杉木林林下地被物生物量及土壤理化性质的影响[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(5):102-107.
[18]李静鹏,徐明锋,苏志尧,等.不同植被恢复类型的土壤肥力质量评价[J].生态学报,2014,34(9):2297-2307.
[19]崔潇潇,高原,吕贻忠.北京市大兴区土壤肥力的空间变异[J].农业工程学报,2010,26(9):327-333.
[20]吴玉红,田霄鸿,同延安,等.基于主成分分析的土壤肥力综合指数评价[J].生态学杂志,2010,29(1):173-180.
[21]金慧,尹航,赵莹,等.长白山牛皮杜鹃种群构件及其与土壤因子的灰色关联度[J].东北林业大学学报,2017,45(9):62-65.
[22]SIRPA P,LEENA F,HANNU M,et al.Effects of forest clearcutting on the sulphur,phosphorus and base cations fluxes through podzolic soil horizons[J].Biogeochemistry,2004,69:404-424.
[23]马芳芳,贾翔,赵卫,等.间伐强度对辽东落叶松人工林土壤理化性质的影响[J].生态学杂志,2017,36(4):971-977.
[24]杨会侠.红松人工林土壤理化性质对抚育间伐的响应[J].辽宁林业科技,2017(2):5-9.
[25]毛波,董希斌,宋启亮,等.低质山杨林生态改造后土壤肥力综合评价[J].福建林业科技,2015(2):40-45.
[26]高明,朱玉杰,董希斌,等.抚育间伐对小兴安岭用材林土壤化学性质的影响[J].东北林业大学学报,2013,41(10):14-18.
[27]郑存德,程岩.有机质对不同容重土壤物理特性的调控研究[J].西南农业学报,2013,26(5):1929-1934.