黄土丘陵区不同土地利用类型土壤水分动态及水土保持效应研究
|
摘要
以黄土丘陵区定西市安家沟流域内的典型植被油松(Pinus tabulaeformis)、紫花苜蓿(Medicago Sativa)、沙棘(Hippophae rhamnoides)、天然草地(Onobrychis viciacfolia)、坡耕地(Prunus armeniaca)为研究对象,根据黄土丘陵沟壑区不同土地利用类型的土壤水分循环过程,大气降水分配特点,土壤侵蚀及径流量变化,分析了不同土地利用类型对土壤水分动态及水土保持效应,结果表明:
(1)油松林地、坡耕地和苜蓿草地的平均地面径流量占同期平均降水量的比例分别为12.82%、7.17%和8.29%。天然草地和沙棘林地为3%左右。
(2)不同年份的土壤水分有效性年际间均处于难效状态,未能达到田间持水量的60%;各植被类型土壤相对含水量比较稳定,沙棘的土壤相对含水量在50%左右,高于其他植被。
(3)不同土地利用类型土壤水分均处于负平衡状态,在0~100cm土层水分亏缺量大小顺序为:坡耕地>油松林地>天然草地>沙棘林地。坡耕地的亏缺量在139.8~167.8mm之间,油松林地的亏缺量在120.5~139.32mm之间,天然草地的亏缺量在127.5~154.1mm之间,沙棘林地的亏缺量在100.5~127.5mm之间。沙棘林地对土壤水分具有更好的补偿效应。
(4)对各土地利用类型土壤侵蚀次数及效应分析表明,苜蓿草地、沙棘林地、油松林地和天然草地径流量较坡耕地分别降低了12%、66%、21%和44%,土壤侵蚀量较坡耕地分别减少了58%、95%、77%和92%。沙棘林地和天然草地能够有效地减少径流及侵蚀的产生。
(5)由于降雨分布不均匀,各月径流量和侵蚀量具有明显地不均等分布特征。径流和侵蚀主要发生在6-8月份,其土壤平均侵蚀量占总侵蚀量的89%,平均径流量占总径流量的86%。
(6)同一强度雨强下,产沙量的大小取决于土地利用类型,各土地利用类型随雨强变化,产沙量增加大小顺序为:坡耕地>苜蓿草地>油松林地>天然草地>沙棘林地。不同降雨强度下,各土地利用类型产沙量随着降雨强度的增大而增加。各土地利用类型产沙量与降雨强度呈指数函数关系。
(7)各植被类型随时间的变化,其减沙和减流功能不同。苜蓿随着时间的变化减流减沙功能逐渐减弱;沙棘林地的减流减沙功能随着树龄的增长而逐渐增强;天然草地的减流减沙功能比较稳定,年际变化不明显;而油松林地的减流率随时间的变化逐渐减小,减沙率逐渐增大。
(8)对于不同土地利用类型土壤养分流失量分析表明,林地(沙棘林地、油松林地)养分流失量高于荒地(天然荒地、撂荒地)养分流失量。各土地利用类型的养分流失量在15°坡度达到最大,在10°~20°坡度范围内先增后减。
By the long period case studied in the Losses Plateau demonstration district, combining with the investigation data analysis, and chose five types typical vegetation, such as Pinus tabulaeformis, Medicago Sativa, Hippophae rhamnoides, Onobrychis viciacfolia and Prunus armeniaca, were selected in DingXi in gully and hilly of Losses Plateau, analysis the basic of soil moisture recycle ,rainfall distribution characteristic and soil erosion of different vegetation in gully and hilly region of Losses Plateau and summarize the dynamic changes of soil moisture and soil conservation. The purpose was supplying scientific basis for ecological resume. The results showed:
(1) The ratio of ground even runoff flow occupied the even rainfall in same period was different in different land use.It was about 3%~12.82%.The natural grass and Hippophae rhamnoides were least. It was about 3%. The ratio of Pinus tabulaeformis was most.It was about 12.82%. The ratio of farmland and manual grassland were about 7.7% and 8.29%.
(2) According to the compared with the soil moisture in different years among different vegetation, the soil moisture was difficult to utilize by vegetation. The comparative soil moisture was just occupied by 60% of field capacity, and the comparative soil moisture was stable. The comparative soil moisture of Hippophae rhamnoides is highest. It is 52.6%. And The other was about 45%.
(3) Acording to the water balance of different vegetation,soil water content of the vegetation was deficiency.The depth at 0~100cm, the soil moisture of different land use was surplus and deficiency. All of quantity of water surplus and deficiency were above 100mm. Hippophae rhamnoides was least than others and the quantity of farmland was highest. The quantity of farmland was about 139~167.8mm. It was about 135.0~155.3mm of Medicago Sativa, and it was 100.5~127.5mm of Hippophae rhamnoides, and it was 120.5~139.2 of Pinus tabulaeformis. and it was 127.5~154.1mm of natural grassland.
(4) According to the times and effects of the soil erosion, compared with farmland, the runoff of Medicago sativa, Hippophae rhamnoides, Pinus tabuleformis and natural grassland were decreased by 12%,66%,21%,44% and the soil erosion were decreased by 58%,95%,77%, and 92%. Hippophae rhamnoides and natural grassland could decrease runoff and soil erosion.However, the effects of Medicago sativa and Pinus tabuleformis were limited.
(5) According to the study time changes on the effects of soil and water conservation of different vegetation, the results showed, the runoff and sediment in different months had the variously different characteristic because of rainfall distribution, such as inequality. The runoff and soil erosion mainly appeared from June to August. In these months, the means of erosion occupied about 89% of total erosion, and the means of runoff occupied about 86% of total runoff.
(6) In the same rainfall intensity, the sediment generation quatity was related to the land use. The sort of the sediment generation of different land use with the change of rainfall power was Farmland>manual grassland>Pinus tabuleformis>natral grassland> Hippophae rhamnoides. In different rainfall intensity, the sediment generation in different land use style could be described by exponential function.
(7) With the growth of the vegetation, the reduction of soil erosion and runoff was different to different vegetation. The ability of reduction soil erosion and runoff of Medicago sativa was gradually decreased, even disappeared. The ability of reduction soil erosion and runoff was gradually strengthen with the ages of Hippophae rhamnoides. The ability of natural grassland was stable, the changes was insignificant among years. However, to Pinus tabuleformis the ability of reduction runoff was gradually decreased and the ability reduction of soil erosion was gradually increased.
(8)According to the analysis of the soil fertilizer loss on different land use style from 10°~20°, the soil fertilizer loss of woodland was higher than wilderness land. And the soil fertilizer on slope 15°was highest, below 15°it would increase and exceed 15°, it would decrease.
(1)油松林地、坡耕地和苜蓿草地的平均地面径流量占同期平均降水量的比例分别为12.82%、7.17%和8.29%。天然草地和沙棘林地为3%左右。
(2)不同年份的土壤水分有效性年际间均处于难效状态,未能达到田间持水量的60%;各植被类型土壤相对含水量比较稳定,沙棘的土壤相对含水量在50%左右,高于其他植被。
(3)不同土地利用类型土壤水分均处于负平衡状态,在0~100cm土层水分亏缺量大小顺序为:坡耕地>油松林地>天然草地>沙棘林地。坡耕地的亏缺量在139.8~167.8mm之间,油松林地的亏缺量在120.5~139.32mm之间,天然草地的亏缺量在127.5~154.1mm之间,沙棘林地的亏缺量在100.5~127.5mm之间。沙棘林地对土壤水分具有更好的补偿效应。
(4)对各土地利用类型土壤侵蚀次数及效应分析表明,苜蓿草地、沙棘林地、油松林地和天然草地径流量较坡耕地分别降低了12%、66%、21%和44%,土壤侵蚀量较坡耕地分别减少了58%、95%、77%和92%。沙棘林地和天然草地能够有效地减少径流及侵蚀的产生。
(5)由于降雨分布不均匀,各月径流量和侵蚀量具有明显地不均等分布特征。径流和侵蚀主要发生在6-8月份,其土壤平均侵蚀量占总侵蚀量的89%,平均径流量占总径流量的86%。
(6)同一强度雨强下,产沙量的大小取决于土地利用类型,各土地利用类型随雨强变化,产沙量增加大小顺序为:坡耕地>苜蓿草地>油松林地>天然草地>沙棘林地。不同降雨强度下,各土地利用类型产沙量随着降雨强度的增大而增加。各土地利用类型产沙量与降雨强度呈指数函数关系。
(7)各植被类型随时间的变化,其减沙和减流功能不同。苜蓿随着时间的变化减流减沙功能逐渐减弱;沙棘林地的减流减沙功能随着树龄的增长而逐渐增强;天然草地的减流减沙功能比较稳定,年际变化不明显;而油松林地的减流率随时间的变化逐渐减小,减沙率逐渐增大。
(8)对于不同土地利用类型土壤养分流失量分析表明,林地(沙棘林地、油松林地)养分流失量高于荒地(天然荒地、撂荒地)养分流失量。各土地利用类型的养分流失量在15°坡度达到最大,在10°~20°坡度范围内先增后减。
By the long period case studied in the Losses Plateau demonstration district, combining with the investigation data analysis, and chose five types typical vegetation, such as Pinus tabulaeformis, Medicago Sativa, Hippophae rhamnoides, Onobrychis viciacfolia and Prunus armeniaca, were selected in DingXi in gully and hilly of Losses Plateau, analysis the basic of soil moisture recycle ,rainfall distribution characteristic and soil erosion of different vegetation in gully and hilly region of Losses Plateau and summarize the dynamic changes of soil moisture and soil conservation. The purpose was supplying scientific basis for ecological resume. The results showed:
(1) The ratio of ground even runoff flow occupied the even rainfall in same period was different in different land use.It was about 3%~12.82%.The natural grass and Hippophae rhamnoides were least. It was about 3%. The ratio of Pinus tabulaeformis was most.It was about 12.82%. The ratio of farmland and manual grassland were about 7.7% and 8.29%.
(2) According to the compared with the soil moisture in different years among different vegetation, the soil moisture was difficult to utilize by vegetation. The comparative soil moisture was just occupied by 60% of field capacity, and the comparative soil moisture was stable. The comparative soil moisture of Hippophae rhamnoides is highest. It is 52.6%. And The other was about 45%.
(3) Acording to the water balance of different vegetation,soil water content of the vegetation was deficiency.The depth at 0~100cm, the soil moisture of different land use was surplus and deficiency. All of quantity of water surplus and deficiency were above 100mm. Hippophae rhamnoides was least than others and the quantity of farmland was highest. The quantity of farmland was about 139~167.8mm. It was about 135.0~155.3mm of Medicago Sativa, and it was 100.5~127.5mm of Hippophae rhamnoides, and it was 120.5~139.2 of Pinus tabulaeformis. and it was 127.5~154.1mm of natural grassland.
(4) According to the times and effects of the soil erosion, compared with farmland, the runoff of Medicago sativa, Hippophae rhamnoides, Pinus tabuleformis and natural grassland were decreased by 12%,66%,21%,44% and the soil erosion were decreased by 58%,95%,77%, and 92%. Hippophae rhamnoides and natural grassland could decrease runoff and soil erosion.However, the effects of Medicago sativa and Pinus tabuleformis were limited.
(5) According to the study time changes on the effects of soil and water conservation of different vegetation, the results showed, the runoff and sediment in different months had the variously different characteristic because of rainfall distribution, such as inequality. The runoff and soil erosion mainly appeared from June to August. In these months, the means of erosion occupied about 89% of total erosion, and the means of runoff occupied about 86% of total runoff.
(6) In the same rainfall intensity, the sediment generation quatity was related to the land use. The sort of the sediment generation of different land use with the change of rainfall power was Farmland>manual grassland>Pinus tabuleformis>natral grassland> Hippophae rhamnoides. In different rainfall intensity, the sediment generation in different land use style could be described by exponential function.
(7) With the growth of the vegetation, the reduction of soil erosion and runoff was different to different vegetation. The ability of reduction soil erosion and runoff of Medicago sativa was gradually decreased, even disappeared. The ability of reduction soil erosion and runoff was gradually strengthen with the ages of Hippophae rhamnoides. The ability of natural grassland was stable, the changes was insignificant among years. However, to Pinus tabuleformis the ability of reduction runoff was gradually decreased and the ability reduction of soil erosion was gradually increased.
(8)According to the analysis of the soil fertilizer loss on different land use style from 10°~20°, the soil fertilizer loss of woodland was higher than wilderness land. And the soil fertilizer on slope 15°was highest, below 15°it would increase and exceed 15°, it would decrease.
引文
[1]孙长忠,黄宝龙.黄土高原荒坡与林地土壤水分变化规律研究[J].应用生态学报,2000,11(4):523-526.
[2]刘玉平,王桥,王文杰,等.中国西部地区水土流失状况[J].水土保持通报, 2001, 15(6):17-19.
[3]杨文治,邵明安.黄土高原土壤水分研究[M].北京:科学出版社, 2000.
[4]李玉山.黄土区土壤水分循环特征及其对陆地水分循环的影响[J].生态学报, 2003, 3(2):91-101
[5] Liu Guobin, Xua Mingxiang, Coen Ritsema. A study of soil surface characteristics in a small watershed in the hilly, gullied area on the Chinese Loess Plateau[J]. CATENA, 2003,54(1), 31-44.
[6]周作亨.国内外水土保持发展的动态综述.江西水利科技, 1994, 20(1):87-92.
[7]唐政洪,蔡强国,张国远.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区小流域侵蚀产沙的地貌分带研究[J].水土保持学报, 2000, 14(4):34-37.
[8]袁希平,雷廷武.水土保持措施及其减水减沙效益分析.农业工程学报, 2004, 20(2):296-300.
[9]Chen Liding, Huang Zhilin, Gun Jie, ext. The effect of land cover/vegetation on soil water dynamic in the hilly area of the loess plateau [J].CATENA, 2006,10:1-9.
[10]蔡燕,王会肖.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区不同植被类型土壤水分动态[J].水土保持研究, 2006, 13(6):79-81
[11]莫保儒,蔡国军,于洪波,等.定西黄土丘陵沟壑区农林复合系统主要类型及其模式设计[J].甘肃林业科技, 2006(3):31-34.
[12]焦菊英,王万忠,李靖,等.黄土丘陵区水土保持人工林减沙效应研究[J].林业科学, 2002, 38(5):87-94
[13]陈渠昌,雷廷武,赵淑银.坡地水平截流沟的设计方法与工程应用[J].中国水土保持科学. 200, 4(3):70-73.
[14]郑新民.黄土高原沟壑治理措施及其效果[J].中国水土保持,2002(5):6-8
[15]毕慈芬,王富贵,赵耀光.发展沟道人工湿地,改善基岩产沙区生态[J].中国水土保持,2001(5):6-7.
[16]张娥.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区的治理,应走水保生态农业之路[J].环境科学[J], 2005, 34(5):20-26
[17]汪习军.对黄土高原水土流失治理的几点认识[J].中国水土保持, 1999, 12:17-19.
[18]Singh,K.et al.Report of a 60 month study on litter production,changes in soil chemical properties and productivity under poplar (P.deltoides) and eucalyptus inter-planted with aromatic grasses[J].Agroforestry system,1989,9:37-45.
[19]Ong,C.K.et al.Above and below ground interaction in agroforestry[J]. Forest Ecology Management, 1991, 45:45-57.
[20]盛才余,刘伦辉,刘文耀.云南南涧干热退化山地人工植被恢复初期生物量及土壤环境动态[J].植物生态学报, 2000, 24(5):40-49.
[21]卢宗凡,张兴昌,苏敏,等.黄土高原人工草地的土壤水分动态及水土保持效益研究[J].干旱区资源与环境, 1995, 9(5):40-49.
[22]陈海滨,孙长忠.黄土高原沟壑区林地土壤水分特征的研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2003, 18(4):13-16.
[23]QiuYang,FuBojie, WangJun,etc.Soil moisture variation in relation to toppgraphy and use in a hills-lope catcahment of the Loss Plateau,China[J].Journal of Hydrology, 2001, 240:243-263.
[24]杨新民.黄土高原灌木林地水分环境特性研究[J].干旱区研究, 2001, 18(1):8-13.
[25]Singh J.S.,Milchunas D.G.,Lauenroth W.K..Soil water dynamics and vegetation patterns in a semi-arid grassland[J]. Plant Ecology, 1998, 134:77-89.
[26]吕贻忠,李保国,胡克林,等.鄂尔多斯夏初不同地形土壤水分的空间变异[J].中国农业大学学报, 2002, 7(5):38-43.
[27]杜志勇,刘苑秋,郑诗樟,等.退化红壤区不同模式重建森林土壤水分空间变异性[J].水土保持学报, 2007, 21(5):101-105.
[28]李毅,门旗,罗英.土壤水分空间变异性对灌溉决策的影响研究[J].干旱地区农业研究, 2000, 18(2):80-85.
[29]李子忠,龚元石.农田土壤水分和电导率空间变异性及确定其采样数的方法[J] .中国农业大学学报, 2000, 5(5):59-66.
[30]潘成忠,上官周平.黄土半干旱丘陵区坡地土壤水分空间变异性研究[J].农业工程学报[J], 2003, 19(6):5-9.
[31]韩蕊莲,侯庆春.延安试区刺槐林地在不同立地条件下土壤水分变化规律[J].西北林学院学报2003,18(1):74-76.
[32]傅伯杰,陈顶利,马克明.黄土丘陵区小流域土地利用变化对生态环境的影响[J].地理学报,1999,54(3):241-246.
[33]姜秋香,付强,王子龙.黑龙江省西部半干旱区土壤水分空间变异性研究[J].水土保持学报,2007,21(5):118-122.
[34]刘贤赵,衣华鹏.渭北旱塬土壤水分空间变异性[J].山地学报, 2004, 22(5):521-527.
[35]Dvalls F.A., Collins M.E..Soil landscape relationships and soil variability in north central Florida[J]. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 1986, 50:401-408.
[36]王月玲,张源润,蔡进军,等.半干旱退化山区不同生态恢复与重建措施的土壤水分研究.水土保持研究,2006,13(3):211-215.
[37]吴彦,刘庆,等.亚高山针叶林不同恢复阶段群落物种多样性变化及其对土壤理化性质的影响.植物生态学报, 2001, 25(6):648-655.
[38]冯伟,张万军,冯学赞.接坝农牧交错区沙化地生态恢复过程中土壤因子与植被特征分析.干旱区农业研究, 2006, 24(3):130-134.
[39]王孟本,李洪建.晋西北黄土区人工林土壤水分动态的定量研究[J].生态学报, 1995, 15(2):36-45.
[40]Coronato F.R.,Bertiller M.B..Precipitation and landscrape related effect on soil moisture in semi-arid rangelands of Patagonia[J].Journal of Arid Environments, 1996, 3(4):1-9.
[41]魏天兴,朱金兆.黄土残塬沟壑区坡度和坡长对土壤侵蚀的影响分析[J].北京林业大学学报, 2002, 24(1):59-62.
[42]Gomez-plazaA., Martinez-MenaM., AlbaladejoJ., CastilloV.M.. Factors regulating spatialdistribution of soil water content in small semi-arid catcahments[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2001, 253:211-226.
[43]金雁海,伊敏,郑明军,等.大青山南坡人工油松林水土保持效益研究[J].水土保持研究, 1998, 5(3):57-65.
[44]李洪建,王孟本,柴宝峰.晋西北人工林土壤水分特点与降水关系研究[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报, 1998, 4(4):60-65.
[45]侯喜禄,白岗栓,曹清玉.黄土丘陵区湾塌地乔灌林土壤水分检测[J].水土保持研究, 1996, 3(2):57-65.
[46]MillikilC.S.,Bledsoe C.S.,Biomass and distribution of fine and coarse roots from blueoak trees in the northern Sierra Nevada foothills of California[J].Plant Soil,1999.214:27-38.
[47]杨文治,余存祖.黄土高原区域治理与评价[M].北京:科学出版社,1992, 291-294.
[48]王力,邵明安,侯庆春.黄土高原土壤干层初步研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版,29(2):34-38.
[49]刘东生.黄土与环境[M].北京:科学出版社,1985.191-364.
[50]侯庆春,韩蕊莲,韩仕峰.黄土高原人工林草地“土壤干层”问题初探[J].中国水土保持, 1999, (5):11-14.
[51]李玉山.黄土区土壤水分循环特征及其对陆地水分循环的影响[J].生态学报,1983,3(2):91-101.
[52]杨维西.试论我国北方地区人工植被的土壤干化问题[J].林业科学,1996, 32(1):78-85.
[53]中国科学院黄土高原综合考察队.黄土高原区域环境及其演变[M].北京:科学出版社,1992,30.
[54]穆兴民,陈霁巍.黄河断流人之过[J].科学, 1999, (3):49-50.
[55]肖军,赵景波.黄土高原地区土壤干层综合研究.固原师专学报(自然科学)[J],26(6):58-61.
[56]石生新,蒋定生.几种水土保持措施对强化降水入渗和减沙的影响试验研究[J].水土保持研究, 1994,1(1):81-87.
[57] Hornbeck J W, Swank W T. Watershed ecosystem analysis as a basis for multiple use management of eastern forests[J]. EcolAppl,1992(2):238-237.
[58]周正朝,上官周平.土壤侵蚀模型研究综述.中国水土保持科学, 2004, 2(1):52-55
[59]陈云明,侯喜禄,刘文兆.半干旱黄土丘陵沟壑区不同植被类型水土保持功能及生态效益分析.水土保持学报, 2000, 14(3):6-9.
[60]刘士余,左长清.植被对径流影响的研究综述[J].国土与自然资源研究2005(1):42-44.
[61]孙艳红.重庆缙云山不同植被类型坡面土壤水分及地表径流特性[D].北京林业大学,2006(5):44-47.
[62]冉大川,刘斌,王宏,等.泾洛渭河三流域水保措施减水减沙作用研究[J].中国水土保持,2005(12):10-12.
[63]孔刚.人工降雨条件下黄土坡面土壤养分流失试验研究(D).西安理工大学,2007,3.
[64]佘雕,吴发启,刘丽莉.黄土养分流失规律初探[J].西北林学院学报,2003,18(3):19-21.
[65]张学权,胡庭兴,李伟,等.林(竹)+草植被恢复初期地表径流及其养分流失特征[J].中国水土保持, 2005(10):25-28.
[66]张俊华,常庆瑞,贾科利,等.黄土高原植被恢复对土壤肥力质量的影响研究[J].水土保持学报, 2003, 17(4):38-41.
[67]刘举,常庆瑞,张俊华,等.黄土高原不同林地植被对土壤肥力的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2004, 11:111-115.
[68]丁琳霞.黄土高原水土保持的水文环境效应研究进展[J].西北水资源与水工程, 2000, 11(1):17-21.
[69]陈凯.毕节地区水土保持建设对水文环境的良性效应[J].毕节师范高等专科学校校报,2004, 6:33-35.
[70]王国庆,兰跃东,张云,等.黄土丘陵沟壑区小流域水土保持措施的水文效应[J].水土保持学报, 2002,1 6(5):87-89.
[71]刘士余,左长清,朱金兆.地被植物对土壤水分动态和水量平衡的影响研究[J].自然资源学报, 2007, 22(3):424-433.
[72]王海英,刘桂环,董锁成.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区小流域生态环境综合治理开发模式研究-以甘肃省定西九华沟流域为例[J].自然资源学报, 2004, 2(19):207-216.
[73]张海,张立新,柳江华,等.黄土退耕坡地工程治理与林草优化配置模式研究[J].农业工程学报,2006,11(22):93-97.
[74]张生贤,侯维平,李鹏.干旱半干旱地区发展林业的思路与对策[J].甘肃农业大学, 2000, 1(35):13-18.
[75]王月玲,张源润,蔡进军,等.宁南黄土丘陵区不同生态恢复与重建中的土壤水分变化研究[J].农业资源与环境科学, 2005, 7(21):367-370.
[76]张北赢,徐学选,白晓华.黄土丘陵区不同土地利用方式下土壤水分分析[J].干旱地区农业研究,2006,2(24):96-99.
[77]贾志清.晋西北黄土丘陵沟壑区典型灌草植被土壤水分动态变化规律研究[J].水土保持通报, 2006, 1(26):10-15.
[78]阮成江,李代琼,姜峻.半干旱黄土丘陵沟壑区沙棘的水分生理生态及群落特性研究[J].西北植物学报, 2000, 20(4):321-327
[79]陈一鄂,刘康.渭北旱塬紫花紫花苜蓿的蒸腾强度与水量平衡研究[J].水土保持通报,1990,10(6):108-112
[80]阮成江,李代琼.半干旱黄土丘陵区沙棘林地土壤水分及其对沙棘生长影响研究[J].水土保持通报, 1999, 19(5):27-30.
[81]李俊,毕华兴,李孝广,等.晋西黄土残塬沟壑区不同植被类型土壤水分动态研究[J].水土保持研究, 2006, 13(6):65-68
[82]赵鸿雁,吴钦孝,刘国彬.黄土高原人工油松林水文生态效应[J].生态学报,2003,23(2):376-379.
[83]魏晶,吴钢.辽西低山丘陵区人工油松林和沙棘林的水文生态效应[J].生态学报, 2006, 26(7):2087-2092.
[2]刘玉平,王桥,王文杰,等.中国西部地区水土流失状况[J].水土保持通报, 2001, 15(6):17-19.
[3]杨文治,邵明安.黄土高原土壤水分研究[M].北京:科学出版社, 2000.
[4]李玉山.黄土区土壤水分循环特征及其对陆地水分循环的影响[J].生态学报, 2003, 3(2):91-101
[5] Liu Guobin, Xua Mingxiang, Coen Ritsema. A study of soil surface characteristics in a small watershed in the hilly, gullied area on the Chinese Loess Plateau[J]. CATENA, 2003,54(1), 31-44.
[6]周作亨.国内外水土保持发展的动态综述.江西水利科技, 1994, 20(1):87-92.
[7]唐政洪,蔡强国,张国远.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区小流域侵蚀产沙的地貌分带研究[J].水土保持学报, 2000, 14(4):34-37.
[8]袁希平,雷廷武.水土保持措施及其减水减沙效益分析.农业工程学报, 2004, 20(2):296-300.
[9]Chen Liding, Huang Zhilin, Gun Jie, ext. The effect of land cover/vegetation on soil water dynamic in the hilly area of the loess plateau [J].CATENA, 2006,10:1-9.
[10]蔡燕,王会肖.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区不同植被类型土壤水分动态[J].水土保持研究, 2006, 13(6):79-81
[11]莫保儒,蔡国军,于洪波,等.定西黄土丘陵沟壑区农林复合系统主要类型及其模式设计[J].甘肃林业科技, 2006(3):31-34.
[12]焦菊英,王万忠,李靖,等.黄土丘陵区水土保持人工林减沙效应研究[J].林业科学, 2002, 38(5):87-94
[13]陈渠昌,雷廷武,赵淑银.坡地水平截流沟的设计方法与工程应用[J].中国水土保持科学. 200, 4(3):70-73.
[14]郑新民.黄土高原沟壑治理措施及其效果[J].中国水土保持,2002(5):6-8
[15]毕慈芬,王富贵,赵耀光.发展沟道人工湿地,改善基岩产沙区生态[J].中国水土保持,2001(5):6-7.
[16]张娥.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区的治理,应走水保生态农业之路[J].环境科学[J], 2005, 34(5):20-26
[17]汪习军.对黄土高原水土流失治理的几点认识[J].中国水土保持, 1999, 12:17-19.
[18]Singh,K.et al.Report of a 60 month study on litter production,changes in soil chemical properties and productivity under poplar (P.deltoides) and eucalyptus inter-planted with aromatic grasses[J].Agroforestry system,1989,9:37-45.
[19]Ong,C.K.et al.Above and below ground interaction in agroforestry[J]. Forest Ecology Management, 1991, 45:45-57.
[20]盛才余,刘伦辉,刘文耀.云南南涧干热退化山地人工植被恢复初期生物量及土壤环境动态[J].植物生态学报, 2000, 24(5):40-49.
[21]卢宗凡,张兴昌,苏敏,等.黄土高原人工草地的土壤水分动态及水土保持效益研究[J].干旱区资源与环境, 1995, 9(5):40-49.
[22]陈海滨,孙长忠.黄土高原沟壑区林地土壤水分特征的研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2003, 18(4):13-16.
[23]QiuYang,FuBojie, WangJun,etc.Soil moisture variation in relation to toppgraphy and use in a hills-lope catcahment of the Loss Plateau,China[J].Journal of Hydrology, 2001, 240:243-263.
[24]杨新民.黄土高原灌木林地水分环境特性研究[J].干旱区研究, 2001, 18(1):8-13.
[25]Singh J.S.,Milchunas D.G.,Lauenroth W.K..Soil water dynamics and vegetation patterns in a semi-arid grassland[J]. Plant Ecology, 1998, 134:77-89.
[26]吕贻忠,李保国,胡克林,等.鄂尔多斯夏初不同地形土壤水分的空间变异[J].中国农业大学学报, 2002, 7(5):38-43.
[27]杜志勇,刘苑秋,郑诗樟,等.退化红壤区不同模式重建森林土壤水分空间变异性[J].水土保持学报, 2007, 21(5):101-105.
[28]李毅,门旗,罗英.土壤水分空间变异性对灌溉决策的影响研究[J].干旱地区农业研究, 2000, 18(2):80-85.
[29]李子忠,龚元石.农田土壤水分和电导率空间变异性及确定其采样数的方法[J] .中国农业大学学报, 2000, 5(5):59-66.
[30]潘成忠,上官周平.黄土半干旱丘陵区坡地土壤水分空间变异性研究[J].农业工程学报[J], 2003, 19(6):5-9.
[31]韩蕊莲,侯庆春.延安试区刺槐林地在不同立地条件下土壤水分变化规律[J].西北林学院学报2003,18(1):74-76.
[32]傅伯杰,陈顶利,马克明.黄土丘陵区小流域土地利用变化对生态环境的影响[J].地理学报,1999,54(3):241-246.
[33]姜秋香,付强,王子龙.黑龙江省西部半干旱区土壤水分空间变异性研究[J].水土保持学报,2007,21(5):118-122.
[34]刘贤赵,衣华鹏.渭北旱塬土壤水分空间变异性[J].山地学报, 2004, 22(5):521-527.
[35]Dvalls F.A., Collins M.E..Soil landscape relationships and soil variability in north central Florida[J]. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 1986, 50:401-408.
[36]王月玲,张源润,蔡进军,等.半干旱退化山区不同生态恢复与重建措施的土壤水分研究.水土保持研究,2006,13(3):211-215.
[37]吴彦,刘庆,等.亚高山针叶林不同恢复阶段群落物种多样性变化及其对土壤理化性质的影响.植物生态学报, 2001, 25(6):648-655.
[38]冯伟,张万军,冯学赞.接坝农牧交错区沙化地生态恢复过程中土壤因子与植被特征分析.干旱区农业研究, 2006, 24(3):130-134.
[39]王孟本,李洪建.晋西北黄土区人工林土壤水分动态的定量研究[J].生态学报, 1995, 15(2):36-45.
[40]Coronato F.R.,Bertiller M.B..Precipitation and landscrape related effect on soil moisture in semi-arid rangelands of Patagonia[J].Journal of Arid Environments, 1996, 3(4):1-9.
[41]魏天兴,朱金兆.黄土残塬沟壑区坡度和坡长对土壤侵蚀的影响分析[J].北京林业大学学报, 2002, 24(1):59-62.
[42]Gomez-plazaA., Martinez-MenaM., AlbaladejoJ., CastilloV.M.. Factors regulating spatialdistribution of soil water content in small semi-arid catcahments[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2001, 253:211-226.
[43]金雁海,伊敏,郑明军,等.大青山南坡人工油松林水土保持效益研究[J].水土保持研究, 1998, 5(3):57-65.
[44]李洪建,王孟本,柴宝峰.晋西北人工林土壤水分特点与降水关系研究[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报, 1998, 4(4):60-65.
[45]侯喜禄,白岗栓,曹清玉.黄土丘陵区湾塌地乔灌林土壤水分检测[J].水土保持研究, 1996, 3(2):57-65.
[46]MillikilC.S.,Bledsoe C.S.,Biomass and distribution of fine and coarse roots from blueoak trees in the northern Sierra Nevada foothills of California[J].Plant Soil,1999.214:27-38.
[47]杨文治,余存祖.黄土高原区域治理与评价[M].北京:科学出版社,1992, 291-294.
[48]王力,邵明安,侯庆春.黄土高原土壤干层初步研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版,29(2):34-38.
[49]刘东生.黄土与环境[M].北京:科学出版社,1985.191-364.
[50]侯庆春,韩蕊莲,韩仕峰.黄土高原人工林草地“土壤干层”问题初探[J].中国水土保持, 1999, (5):11-14.
[51]李玉山.黄土区土壤水分循环特征及其对陆地水分循环的影响[J].生态学报,1983,3(2):91-101.
[52]杨维西.试论我国北方地区人工植被的土壤干化问题[J].林业科学,1996, 32(1):78-85.
[53]中国科学院黄土高原综合考察队.黄土高原区域环境及其演变[M].北京:科学出版社,1992,30.
[54]穆兴民,陈霁巍.黄河断流人之过[J].科学, 1999, (3):49-50.
[55]肖军,赵景波.黄土高原地区土壤干层综合研究.固原师专学报(自然科学)[J],26(6):58-61.
[56]石生新,蒋定生.几种水土保持措施对强化降水入渗和减沙的影响试验研究[J].水土保持研究, 1994,1(1):81-87.
[57] Hornbeck J W, Swank W T. Watershed ecosystem analysis as a basis for multiple use management of eastern forests[J]. EcolAppl,1992(2):238-237.
[58]周正朝,上官周平.土壤侵蚀模型研究综述.中国水土保持科学, 2004, 2(1):52-55
[59]陈云明,侯喜禄,刘文兆.半干旱黄土丘陵沟壑区不同植被类型水土保持功能及生态效益分析.水土保持学报, 2000, 14(3):6-9.
[60]刘士余,左长清.植被对径流影响的研究综述[J].国土与自然资源研究2005(1):42-44.
[61]孙艳红.重庆缙云山不同植被类型坡面土壤水分及地表径流特性[D].北京林业大学,2006(5):44-47.
[62]冉大川,刘斌,王宏,等.泾洛渭河三流域水保措施减水减沙作用研究[J].中国水土保持,2005(12):10-12.
[63]孔刚.人工降雨条件下黄土坡面土壤养分流失试验研究(D).西安理工大学,2007,3.
[64]佘雕,吴发启,刘丽莉.黄土养分流失规律初探[J].西北林学院学报,2003,18(3):19-21.
[65]张学权,胡庭兴,李伟,等.林(竹)+草植被恢复初期地表径流及其养分流失特征[J].中国水土保持, 2005(10):25-28.
[66]张俊华,常庆瑞,贾科利,等.黄土高原植被恢复对土壤肥力质量的影响研究[J].水土保持学报, 2003, 17(4):38-41.
[67]刘举,常庆瑞,张俊华,等.黄土高原不同林地植被对土壤肥力的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2004, 11:111-115.
[68]丁琳霞.黄土高原水土保持的水文环境效应研究进展[J].西北水资源与水工程, 2000, 11(1):17-21.
[69]陈凯.毕节地区水土保持建设对水文环境的良性效应[J].毕节师范高等专科学校校报,2004, 6:33-35.
[70]王国庆,兰跃东,张云,等.黄土丘陵沟壑区小流域水土保持措施的水文效应[J].水土保持学报, 2002,1 6(5):87-89.
[71]刘士余,左长清,朱金兆.地被植物对土壤水分动态和水量平衡的影响研究[J].自然资源学报, 2007, 22(3):424-433.
[72]王海英,刘桂环,董锁成.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区小流域生态环境综合治理开发模式研究-以甘肃省定西九华沟流域为例[J].自然资源学报, 2004, 2(19):207-216.
[73]张海,张立新,柳江华,等.黄土退耕坡地工程治理与林草优化配置模式研究[J].农业工程学报,2006,11(22):93-97.
[74]张生贤,侯维平,李鹏.干旱半干旱地区发展林业的思路与对策[J].甘肃农业大学, 2000, 1(35):13-18.
[75]王月玲,张源润,蔡进军,等.宁南黄土丘陵区不同生态恢复与重建中的土壤水分变化研究[J].农业资源与环境科学, 2005, 7(21):367-370.
[76]张北赢,徐学选,白晓华.黄土丘陵区不同土地利用方式下土壤水分分析[J].干旱地区农业研究,2006,2(24):96-99.
[77]贾志清.晋西北黄土丘陵沟壑区典型灌草植被土壤水分动态变化规律研究[J].水土保持通报, 2006, 1(26):10-15.
[78]阮成江,李代琼,姜峻.半干旱黄土丘陵沟壑区沙棘的水分生理生态及群落特性研究[J].西北植物学报, 2000, 20(4):321-327
[79]陈一鄂,刘康.渭北旱塬紫花紫花苜蓿的蒸腾强度与水量平衡研究[J].水土保持通报,1990,10(6):108-112
[80]阮成江,李代琼.半干旱黄土丘陵区沙棘林地土壤水分及其对沙棘生长影响研究[J].水土保持通报, 1999, 19(5):27-30.
[81]李俊,毕华兴,李孝广,等.晋西黄土残塬沟壑区不同植被类型土壤水分动态研究[J].水土保持研究, 2006, 13(6):65-68
[82]赵鸿雁,吴钦孝,刘国彬.黄土高原人工油松林水文生态效应[J].生态学报,2003,23(2):376-379.
[83]魏晶,吴钢.辽西低山丘陵区人工油松林和沙棘林的水文生态效应[J].生态学报, 2006, 26(7):2087-2092.