拉萨半干旱河谷立地分类与评价
|
摘要
拉萨河谷气候干燥、降雨量小,沙化严重。为了改善当地的生态、居住和放牧环境,需要进行人工植被恢复,建设防风固沙、防止水土流失的生态防护屏障。本文在拉萨河谷选择出四块具有代表性的实验地,调查了各实验地的地形、土壤、水分和植被等情况,应用主成分分析、聚类分析,构造立地质量评价指标体系,得到下面的研究结果:
1.六级立地分类系统。根据《中国森林立地分类》,把拉萨河谷的立地分为:藏西南山地温暖半干旱灌丛草原立地区域,雅鲁藏布江中游立地区,雅鲁藏布江中游谷立地亚区,拉萨河河谷立地类型小区,下面再划分出立地类型组和具体的立地类型,共6级分类系统。
2.根据拉萨河谷不同的地形确定四个立地类型组:河滩地立地类型组、台(阶)地立地类型组、山麓坡地立地类型组、洪积扇立地类型组。
3.立地因子的主成分分析。对调查的指标做因子分析,选出其中的主导因子。河滩地筛选出3个主成分,累计方差贡献率占82.117%;台(阶)地、山麓坡地、洪积扇筛选出3个主成分,累计方差贡献率占85.801%。
4.在spss13.0中用最短距离法聚类得到河滩地、台(阶)地、山麓坡地立、洪积扇的立地类型。
5.土体构型研究(立地亚类型)。拉萨半干旱河谷土体构型可以分为五类:均质型、底型、体型、三段型和心型。均质型中的卵石滩地最差,其他的剖面土壤厚,地表植被丰富,土体构型较好。体型、三段型和心型的土体构型一般,土壤厚度差异大,需要适量客土,其中土壤薄的需要大量客土。6.结合聚类和土体构型研究的结果,分为16个立地类型:河滩地低水位中厚层粗沙质立地类型、河滩地低水位薄层粗沙质立地类型、河滩地低水位中厚层细沙质立地类型、低水位卵石滩地立地类型、河滩地低水位厚层砂壤质立地类型、河滩地中水位厚层砂壤质立地类型、河滩地高水位厚层砂壤质立地类型、山麓坡地下坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、山麓坡地中坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、山麓坡地上坡厚层粉沙土立地类型、台(阶)地下坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、台(阶)地中坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、台(阶)地上坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、洪积扇下坡厚层粗沙质立地类型、洪积扇中坡厚层粗沙质立地类型、洪积扇上坡厚层粗沙质立地类型。
7.立地质量评价。采用层次分析法,建立拉萨半干旱河谷立地质量评价指标体系,结果表明:拉萨河谷立地只有极少数评分是优和极差。大部分评分为优、良和中,占整个样地的79.7%。评分极差的卵石滩地不能造林,评价优的可以直接造林,其他的立地需要采取改善措施才能造林。
8.造林对策。针对不同立地类型的土体构型和立地质量评价结果,对立地评价为优的可以直接造林,对立地评价为良和中的需客土、使用保水剂后造林,对立地评价为差和极差的立地,需要彻底的改变立地条件才可以植树,此外还要选择抗旱、耐旱树种,以保证成活率。
The climate of Lhasa valley is dry, little rainfall, desertification seriously. In order to improve the local ecological, residential and grazing environment, we need for artificial vegetation restoration, construction sand-fixing, erosion of ecological safety net. In this paper, choosed the four representative experiments of Lhasa river valley, surveyed the experimental land topography, soil, water and vegetation, etc., by using principal component analysis, cluster analysis and AHP, we had the results as follows:
1. 6 Site Classification System. According to "China Forest Site Classification", the Lhasa Valley’s site is divided into: the Brahmaputra River established areas, the Brahmaputra River valley sub-district site, Lhasa River valley site type cell, and then divided into the following groups and specific site type site type, a total of 5 level classification system.
2. The topography of Lhasa valley determines the four different site type group: flood land group of site type, platform group of site type, slope group of site type, alluvial fan group of site type.
3. Principal component analysis of the site factors. The purpose of the analysis is to select one of the dominant factors. Flood land selected three main components, the cumulative contribution rate of variance accounted for 82.117%; platform, the slope, alluvial fans selected three main components, the cumulative contribution rate of variance accounted for 85.801%.
4. By classify analyze with the shortest distance method in spss13.0, had flood land, platform, foothills slope stand, and alluvial fan’s site type.
5. The study of soilmass structural patterns.Lhasa semi-arid valley’s soilmass structural patterns can be divided into five categories: homogeneous type, bottom type, size type,heart-shaped type and three-section type. Homogeneous type of Pebble Beach to the worst, the other thick soil profile, rich in vegetation, soil configuration is better. Size, three-section type and heart-shaped configuration of the soil is general,and it’s soil has many differences, which of thin soil needs a large number of foreign soil.
6. From the study of the clustering and soil configuration’s results,we can divide the Lhasa valley into 16 site types.The 16 site types are the basis of the site classification in Lhasa valley.
7. Site Quality Evaluation. AHP method is used to establish the site quality evaluation index system of Lhasa semi-arid valley.The results showed that: only a handful of Lhasa Valley site is excellent and poor ratings. Most’s score is the good, accounting for 79.7% of the samples. Score very poor pebble beach can not to reforest.The result of evaluating being the superior can afforest directly, the other sites need soil improvements before planting.
8. Afforestation measures. Different types of site type and site quality evaluation results need different method.Evaluation of antagonism can planting for the excellent, good ,and the opposition,the site of bad scores need for the foreign soil.
1.六级立地分类系统。根据《中国森林立地分类》,把拉萨河谷的立地分为:藏西南山地温暖半干旱灌丛草原立地区域,雅鲁藏布江中游立地区,雅鲁藏布江中游谷立地亚区,拉萨河河谷立地类型小区,下面再划分出立地类型组和具体的立地类型,共6级分类系统。
2.根据拉萨河谷不同的地形确定四个立地类型组:河滩地立地类型组、台(阶)地立地类型组、山麓坡地立地类型组、洪积扇立地类型组。
3.立地因子的主成分分析。对调查的指标做因子分析,选出其中的主导因子。河滩地筛选出3个主成分,累计方差贡献率占82.117%;台(阶)地、山麓坡地、洪积扇筛选出3个主成分,累计方差贡献率占85.801%。
4.在spss13.0中用最短距离法聚类得到河滩地、台(阶)地、山麓坡地立、洪积扇的立地类型。
5.土体构型研究(立地亚类型)。拉萨半干旱河谷土体构型可以分为五类:均质型、底型、体型、三段型和心型。均质型中的卵石滩地最差,其他的剖面土壤厚,地表植被丰富,土体构型较好。体型、三段型和心型的土体构型一般,土壤厚度差异大,需要适量客土,其中土壤薄的需要大量客土。6.结合聚类和土体构型研究的结果,分为16个立地类型:河滩地低水位中厚层粗沙质立地类型、河滩地低水位薄层粗沙质立地类型、河滩地低水位中厚层细沙质立地类型、低水位卵石滩地立地类型、河滩地低水位厚层砂壤质立地类型、河滩地中水位厚层砂壤质立地类型、河滩地高水位厚层砂壤质立地类型、山麓坡地下坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、山麓坡地中坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、山麓坡地上坡厚层粉沙土立地类型、台(阶)地下坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、台(阶)地中坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、台(阶)地上坡厚层粉沙质立地类型、洪积扇下坡厚层粗沙质立地类型、洪积扇中坡厚层粗沙质立地类型、洪积扇上坡厚层粗沙质立地类型。
7.立地质量评价。采用层次分析法,建立拉萨半干旱河谷立地质量评价指标体系,结果表明:拉萨河谷立地只有极少数评分是优和极差。大部分评分为优、良和中,占整个样地的79.7%。评分极差的卵石滩地不能造林,评价优的可以直接造林,其他的立地需要采取改善措施才能造林。
8.造林对策。针对不同立地类型的土体构型和立地质量评价结果,对立地评价为优的可以直接造林,对立地评价为良和中的需客土、使用保水剂后造林,对立地评价为差和极差的立地,需要彻底的改变立地条件才可以植树,此外还要选择抗旱、耐旱树种,以保证成活率。
The climate of Lhasa valley is dry, little rainfall, desertification seriously. In order to improve the local ecological, residential and grazing environment, we need for artificial vegetation restoration, construction sand-fixing, erosion of ecological safety net. In this paper, choosed the four representative experiments of Lhasa river valley, surveyed the experimental land topography, soil, water and vegetation, etc., by using principal component analysis, cluster analysis and AHP, we had the results as follows:
1. 6 Site Classification System. According to "China Forest Site Classification", the Lhasa Valley’s site is divided into: the Brahmaputra River established areas, the Brahmaputra River valley sub-district site, Lhasa River valley site type cell, and then divided into the following groups and specific site type site type, a total of 5 level classification system.
2. The topography of Lhasa valley determines the four different site type group: flood land group of site type, platform group of site type, slope group of site type, alluvial fan group of site type.
3. Principal component analysis of the site factors. The purpose of the analysis is to select one of the dominant factors. Flood land selected three main components, the cumulative contribution rate of variance accounted for 82.117%; platform, the slope, alluvial fans selected three main components, the cumulative contribution rate of variance accounted for 85.801%.
4. By classify analyze with the shortest distance method in spss13.0, had flood land, platform, foothills slope stand, and alluvial fan’s site type.
5. The study of soilmass structural patterns.Lhasa semi-arid valley’s soilmass structural patterns can be divided into five categories: homogeneous type, bottom type, size type,heart-shaped type and three-section type. Homogeneous type of Pebble Beach to the worst, the other thick soil profile, rich in vegetation, soil configuration is better. Size, three-section type and heart-shaped configuration of the soil is general,and it’s soil has many differences, which of thin soil needs a large number of foreign soil.
6. From the study of the clustering and soil configuration’s results,we can divide the Lhasa valley into 16 site types.The 16 site types are the basis of the site classification in Lhasa valley.
7. Site Quality Evaluation. AHP method is used to establish the site quality evaluation index system of Lhasa semi-arid valley.The results showed that: only a handful of Lhasa Valley site is excellent and poor ratings. Most’s score is the good, accounting for 79.7% of the samples. Score very poor pebble beach can not to reforest.The result of evaluating being the superior can afforest directly, the other sites need soil improvements before planting.
8. Afforestation measures. Different types of site type and site quality evaluation results need different method.Evaluation of antagonism can planting for the excellent, good ,and the opposition,the site of bad scores need for the foreign soil.
引文
[1]汪德玉.安徽省江淮之间森林立地类型的划分[J].安徽农业科学,2004,32(5):978-979
[2]沈国舫.森林培育学[M].中国林业出版社,2001:11-40
[3]《中国森林立地分类》编写组编著.中国森林立地分类[M]. 1989.11: 27-29,17-23,36,51-52
[4]余其芬,唐德瑞.基于遥感与地理信息系统的森林立地分类研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2003, 18(20): 87-90.
[5]张晓丽,游先祥.应用“3S”技术进行北京市森林立地分类和立地质量评价的研究[J].遥感学报, 1998, 2(4): 292-295.
[6]张雅梅,何瑞珍.基于RS与GIS的森林立地分类研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2005, 29(4): 147-152
[7]周洪泽,方春子.东方红林场森林立地分类及其适应性[J].东北林业大学学报, 2000,28(5): 10-14.
[8]殷有,王萌,刘明国,张东维.森林立地分类与评价研究[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(19):5765-5767
[9]滕维超,万文生,王凌晖.森林立地分类与质量评价研究进展[J].广西农业科学,2009,40(8):1110-1114
[10]杨文姬,王秀茹.国内立地质量评价研究浅析[J].水土保持研究,2004.9,11(3):289-292
[11]黄家荣,马天晓,王艳梅.基于BP网络的无林地立地质量评价模型研究[J].山地农业生物学报,2006,25(6): 479~483
[12]佘济云,陈彩虹,曾思齐等.水土保持林的立地质量综合评价研究[J].西南农业大学学报,2001.10,23(5):459-462
[13]李学敏,翟玉柱,李雅静.土体构型与土壤肥力关系的研究[J].土壤通报,2005.12,36(6):
[14]黄昌勇.土壤学[M].中国农业出版社,2000.5: 69-94
[15]李景文.森林生态学[M].中国林业出版社,1994.8: 99-134
[16]杨龙祥,王建新,周绍松.昆明烟区几个植烟土壤剖面调查分析[J].中国烟草科学,2005,(2):8-11
[17]全国土壤普查办公室编.中国土壤普查技术[M].农业出版社,1992.5: 18-40,87
[18]关树森.西藏耕地土体构型研究[M].西藏人民出版社,2007.9:1-3,104-108
[19]罗天相.红壤丘陵区茶园土壤剖面特性及改善措施[J].福建茶叶,2005,3:28-29
[20]王玉龙,李志格,张峰等.柽柳林地土壤剖面调查研究[J].内蒙古林业,2004.8:19-20
[21]中科院地理研究所编.地理集刊第13号地貌[J].科学出版社,1981:87-98
[22]中国科学院青藏高原综合科学考察队.西藏地貌[M].科学出版社,1983.1:35,42-52,54-57,60-68
[23]中国科学院青藏高原综合科学考察队.西藏自然地理[M].科学出版社,1982.6:150-158
[24]中国科学院青藏高原综合科学考察队.西藏河流与湖泊[M].科学出版社,1984.10:12-22
[25]周洪泽,方春子,王宏.东方红林场森林立地分类及其适生性[J].东北林业大学学报,2000.9,28(5):10-14
[26]高华端.贵州陡坡退耕地立地分类系统研究[J].水土保持研究,2003.12,10(4):76-79
[27]潘磊,唐万鹏,史玉虎等.长江中游(湖北段)江岸带立地分类与评价[J].湖北林业科技,2002.3,总第121期:12-17
[28]邝立刚,梁守伦,雍鹏.山西省立地类型区划——山西省立地类型划分与造林模式研究[J].山西林业科技,2008.12,4:1-4
[29]张复礼.宿松县森里立地类型的划分和评价[J].安徽林业科技,2002,2(总121期):10-11
[30]张春光,钟文玉,高颖等.通化市森林立地类型的划分与造林设计方案研究[J].吉林林业科技,2007.11,36(6):11-15
[31]袁志发,周静芋.多元统计分析[M].科学出版社,2002.10:188-201
[32]张文彤,董伟. SPSS统计分析高级教程[M].高等教育出版社,2004.9:213-232
[33]顾云春.森林立地分类与评价的立地要素原理与方法[M].科学出版社,1993.7: 37-38,40-46,111-118,122-129
[34]董文泉,周光亚,夏立显等.数量化理论及其应用[M].吉林人民出版社,1979.8:1-48
[35]路振广,曹祥华.节水灌溉工程综合评价指标体系与定性指标量化方法[J].灌溉排水, 2001.3, 20(1): 55-59,77
[36]吴祥云,孙广树,卢慧等.阜新矿区矸石废弃地立地质量的研究[J].辽宁工程技术大学学报,2006.4,25(2):301-303
[37]陶国祥.森林系统立地学研究[M].云南科技出版社,2005.5:15-31,31-33,35-39,46-49
[38]张松梅,张广军.藏南河谷地区林地资源状况及评价[J].林业资源管理, 1999, 4:37-42
[39]侯丽娜,陈东梅,彭贵华.层次分析法的改进及其在四川农业发展中的运用[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(16):7707-7711
[40]黄新仁,陶思俊,冯道明.层次分析法中判断矩阵一致性的改进方法[J].教育科学,2008: 161,170
[41]胡子义,谭水木.层次分析法的一种改进[J].许昌学院学报,2005.9,24(5):26-29
[42]樊后保,刘文飞,李燕燕等.应用层次分析法评价闽西北山地马尾松—阔叶树混交林的综合效益[J].山地学报,2009.5,27(3):257-264
[43]陈祥伟,王文波,夏祥友.小流域水源涵养林优化配置[J].应用生态学报,2007.2,18(2):267-271
[44]汪永英,陶继哲.层次分析法在森林土壤持水评价中的应用[J].森林工程,2009.1,25(1):4-7
[45]王珠娜,史玉虎,潘磊等.层次分析法在退耕还林生态效益评价指标体系建立中的应用[J].湖北林业科技,2007.3:1-4
[46]吴志芳,杨晓燕,李任波.基于DPS数据处理系统的层次分析法在评价体系中的应用[J].林业调查规划,2009.4,34(2):57-60
[47]周建兴,岂兴明,矫津毅等.Matlab从入门到精通[M].人民邮电出版社,2008.11:107-112
[48]苏金明,阮沈勇. Matlab实用教程[M].电子工业出版社,2008.2:223-227
[49]谭运德.抗旱造林配套技术简介[J].河南林业,2000,4:41
[50]周光军.抗旱保水剂造林应用技术[J].中国林业,2009,9:52
[51]黎祜琛,邱治军.树木抗旱性及抗旱造林技术研究综述[J].世界林业研究,2003.8,16(4):18-22
[52]朱万喜,徐海军,杨国防等.抗旱造林技术措施[J].吉林林业科技,2002.2,31(1):56-58
[53]魏海平.应用吸水保水剂、干水等抗旱造林新材料效果分析[J].林业实用技术,2005.7,11-12
[54]陈宝玉,武鹏程,张玉珍等.保水剂的研究开发现状及应用展望[J].河北农业大学学报,2003.5,26(增卷):242-245
[55]王海波.豫西丘陵干旱地区抗旱造林技术[J].河南林业科技,2003.12,23(4):32
[56]王楚荣,陈红跃,许炼烽.混交林的改土效益及其在防止地力衰退上的应用[J].土壤与环境,1999, 8(1): 58-60
[57]王斌瑞,罗彩霞,王克勤.国内外土壤蓄水保墒技术研究动态[J].世界林业研究,1997:37-43
[58]李燕,薛立,吴敏.树木抗旱生理及造林技术研究进展[J].山西林业科技,2005.6,2:19-22,25
[59]拉琼,张文驹,欧珠朗杰等.拉萨河谷上段江孜沙棘Hippophea gyantsensis(Rousi)Lian种群的海拔梯度性变异[J].武汉植物学研究, 2008, 26(2): 129-133
[60]GU Hui-yan, YANG Kai, LI Chun-ying etc.. Stablishment of Standardized Site Index of Needle-leaved Forest and Its Application in Evaluation of Site Quality in Daxing’an Mountains[J]. Journal of Forestry Research,2001,12(2):128-132
[61]LI Zhan,ZHOU Shi-guo,WANG Ke. A Method for Constructing Perfectly Consistent Judgement Matrix in AHP[J]. J.of Zhengzhou Univ.(Nat.Sci.Ed.), 2008.3,40(1):41-46
[62]Charles J.Everett,John H.Thorp. Site Quality Evaluation of Loblolly Pine on the South Carolina Lower Coastal Plain,USA[J]. Journal of Forestry Research, 2008, 19(3):187–192
[63]YangKai, MaYing, Gu Huiyan etc. Site Classification of the Eastern Forest Region of Daxing’an Mountains[J]. Journal of Forestry Research, 1999,10(2): 129-130
[64]ZHANG Yugui, Frank BEERNAERTZ. Interpretation and Compilation of Landsat TM Imagery for Land-use and Site Classification Mapping in the Korqin Sandy Lands, NE China[J]. Chinese Forestry Science and Technology, 2002,1(3): 6-19
[2]沈国舫.森林培育学[M].中国林业出版社,2001:11-40
[3]《中国森林立地分类》编写组编著.中国森林立地分类[M]. 1989.11: 27-29,17-23,36,51-52
[4]余其芬,唐德瑞.基于遥感与地理信息系统的森林立地分类研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2003, 18(20): 87-90.
[5]张晓丽,游先祥.应用“3S”技术进行北京市森林立地分类和立地质量评价的研究[J].遥感学报, 1998, 2(4): 292-295.
[6]张雅梅,何瑞珍.基于RS与GIS的森林立地分类研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2005, 29(4): 147-152
[7]周洪泽,方春子.东方红林场森林立地分类及其适应性[J].东北林业大学学报, 2000,28(5): 10-14.
[8]殷有,王萌,刘明国,张东维.森林立地分类与评价研究[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(19):5765-5767
[9]滕维超,万文生,王凌晖.森林立地分类与质量评价研究进展[J].广西农业科学,2009,40(8):1110-1114
[10]杨文姬,王秀茹.国内立地质量评价研究浅析[J].水土保持研究,2004.9,11(3):289-292
[11]黄家荣,马天晓,王艳梅.基于BP网络的无林地立地质量评价模型研究[J].山地农业生物学报,2006,25(6): 479~483
[12]佘济云,陈彩虹,曾思齐等.水土保持林的立地质量综合评价研究[J].西南农业大学学报,2001.10,23(5):459-462
[13]李学敏,翟玉柱,李雅静.土体构型与土壤肥力关系的研究[J].土壤通报,2005.12,36(6):
[14]黄昌勇.土壤学[M].中国农业出版社,2000.5: 69-94
[15]李景文.森林生态学[M].中国林业出版社,1994.8: 99-134
[16]杨龙祥,王建新,周绍松.昆明烟区几个植烟土壤剖面调查分析[J].中国烟草科学,2005,(2):8-11
[17]全国土壤普查办公室编.中国土壤普查技术[M].农业出版社,1992.5: 18-40,87
[18]关树森.西藏耕地土体构型研究[M].西藏人民出版社,2007.9:1-3,104-108
[19]罗天相.红壤丘陵区茶园土壤剖面特性及改善措施[J].福建茶叶,2005,3:28-29
[20]王玉龙,李志格,张峰等.柽柳林地土壤剖面调查研究[J].内蒙古林业,2004.8:19-20
[21]中科院地理研究所编.地理集刊第13号地貌[J].科学出版社,1981:87-98
[22]中国科学院青藏高原综合科学考察队.西藏地貌[M].科学出版社,1983.1:35,42-52,54-57,60-68
[23]中国科学院青藏高原综合科学考察队.西藏自然地理[M].科学出版社,1982.6:150-158
[24]中国科学院青藏高原综合科学考察队.西藏河流与湖泊[M].科学出版社,1984.10:12-22
[25]周洪泽,方春子,王宏.东方红林场森林立地分类及其适生性[J].东北林业大学学报,2000.9,28(5):10-14
[26]高华端.贵州陡坡退耕地立地分类系统研究[J].水土保持研究,2003.12,10(4):76-79
[27]潘磊,唐万鹏,史玉虎等.长江中游(湖北段)江岸带立地分类与评价[J].湖北林业科技,2002.3,总第121期:12-17
[28]邝立刚,梁守伦,雍鹏.山西省立地类型区划——山西省立地类型划分与造林模式研究[J].山西林业科技,2008.12,4:1-4
[29]张复礼.宿松县森里立地类型的划分和评价[J].安徽林业科技,2002,2(总121期):10-11
[30]张春光,钟文玉,高颖等.通化市森林立地类型的划分与造林设计方案研究[J].吉林林业科技,2007.11,36(6):11-15
[31]袁志发,周静芋.多元统计分析[M].科学出版社,2002.10:188-201
[32]张文彤,董伟. SPSS统计分析高级教程[M].高等教育出版社,2004.9:213-232
[33]顾云春.森林立地分类与评价的立地要素原理与方法[M].科学出版社,1993.7: 37-38,40-46,111-118,122-129
[34]董文泉,周光亚,夏立显等.数量化理论及其应用[M].吉林人民出版社,1979.8:1-48
[35]路振广,曹祥华.节水灌溉工程综合评价指标体系与定性指标量化方法[J].灌溉排水, 2001.3, 20(1): 55-59,77
[36]吴祥云,孙广树,卢慧等.阜新矿区矸石废弃地立地质量的研究[J].辽宁工程技术大学学报,2006.4,25(2):301-303
[37]陶国祥.森林系统立地学研究[M].云南科技出版社,2005.5:15-31,31-33,35-39,46-49
[38]张松梅,张广军.藏南河谷地区林地资源状况及评价[J].林业资源管理, 1999, 4:37-42
[39]侯丽娜,陈东梅,彭贵华.层次分析法的改进及其在四川农业发展中的运用[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(16):7707-7711
[40]黄新仁,陶思俊,冯道明.层次分析法中判断矩阵一致性的改进方法[J].教育科学,2008: 161,170
[41]胡子义,谭水木.层次分析法的一种改进[J].许昌学院学报,2005.9,24(5):26-29
[42]樊后保,刘文飞,李燕燕等.应用层次分析法评价闽西北山地马尾松—阔叶树混交林的综合效益[J].山地学报,2009.5,27(3):257-264
[43]陈祥伟,王文波,夏祥友.小流域水源涵养林优化配置[J].应用生态学报,2007.2,18(2):267-271
[44]汪永英,陶继哲.层次分析法在森林土壤持水评价中的应用[J].森林工程,2009.1,25(1):4-7
[45]王珠娜,史玉虎,潘磊等.层次分析法在退耕还林生态效益评价指标体系建立中的应用[J].湖北林业科技,2007.3:1-4
[46]吴志芳,杨晓燕,李任波.基于DPS数据处理系统的层次分析法在评价体系中的应用[J].林业调查规划,2009.4,34(2):57-60
[47]周建兴,岂兴明,矫津毅等.Matlab从入门到精通[M].人民邮电出版社,2008.11:107-112
[48]苏金明,阮沈勇. Matlab实用教程[M].电子工业出版社,2008.2:223-227
[49]谭运德.抗旱造林配套技术简介[J].河南林业,2000,4:41
[50]周光军.抗旱保水剂造林应用技术[J].中国林业,2009,9:52
[51]黎祜琛,邱治军.树木抗旱性及抗旱造林技术研究综述[J].世界林业研究,2003.8,16(4):18-22
[52]朱万喜,徐海军,杨国防等.抗旱造林技术措施[J].吉林林业科技,2002.2,31(1):56-58
[53]魏海平.应用吸水保水剂、干水等抗旱造林新材料效果分析[J].林业实用技术,2005.7,11-12
[54]陈宝玉,武鹏程,张玉珍等.保水剂的研究开发现状及应用展望[J].河北农业大学学报,2003.5,26(增卷):242-245
[55]王海波.豫西丘陵干旱地区抗旱造林技术[J].河南林业科技,2003.12,23(4):32
[56]王楚荣,陈红跃,许炼烽.混交林的改土效益及其在防止地力衰退上的应用[J].土壤与环境,1999, 8(1): 58-60
[57]王斌瑞,罗彩霞,王克勤.国内外土壤蓄水保墒技术研究动态[J].世界林业研究,1997:37-43
[58]李燕,薛立,吴敏.树木抗旱生理及造林技术研究进展[J].山西林业科技,2005.6,2:19-22,25
[59]拉琼,张文驹,欧珠朗杰等.拉萨河谷上段江孜沙棘Hippophea gyantsensis(Rousi)Lian种群的海拔梯度性变异[J].武汉植物学研究, 2008, 26(2): 129-133
[60]GU Hui-yan, YANG Kai, LI Chun-ying etc.. Stablishment of Standardized Site Index of Needle-leaved Forest and Its Application in Evaluation of Site Quality in Daxing’an Mountains[J]. Journal of Forestry Research,2001,12(2):128-132
[61]LI Zhan,ZHOU Shi-guo,WANG Ke. A Method for Constructing Perfectly Consistent Judgement Matrix in AHP[J]. J.of Zhengzhou Univ.(Nat.Sci.Ed.), 2008.3,40(1):41-46
[62]Charles J.Everett,John H.Thorp. Site Quality Evaluation of Loblolly Pine on the South Carolina Lower Coastal Plain,USA[J]. Journal of Forestry Research, 2008, 19(3):187–192
[63]YangKai, MaYing, Gu Huiyan etc. Site Classification of the Eastern Forest Region of Daxing’an Mountains[J]. Journal of Forestry Research, 1999,10(2): 129-130
[64]ZHANG Yugui, Frank BEERNAERTZ. Interpretation and Compilation of Landsat TM Imagery for Land-use and Site Classification Mapping in the Korqin Sandy Lands, NE China[J]. Chinese Forestry Science and Technology, 2002,1(3): 6-19