旅游干扰对额济纳旗胡杨林区土壤环境的影响
|
摘要
采用野外取样和室内分析相结合的方法,对额济纳旗不同旅游干扰强度下的土壤进行调查分析。结果表明,胡杨林干扰区土壤沙粒含量、水分和电导率显著高于非干扰区,而养分条件却是非干扰区显著较高。在胡杨林干扰区,随干扰强度的增加,土壤含水量和电导率均增加,而含水量在表层最低、电导率在表层最高,反映了该研究区土壤盐分的表聚现象;同时,土壤表层有机质、总碳和总氮均随干扰强度的增加而降低,在30 cm和50 cm土壤层则随着干扰强度增加而增加,这由表层植物凋落物和深层土壤根系共同决定;受游客踩踏影响,干扰区土壤沙粒含量随干扰强度增加而减少。相关分析和主成分分析表明,土壤质地和土壤养分之间具有显著相关性,在第一主成分得以反映且其贡献率达45. 2%,而土壤含水量、电导率等主要反映在第二和第三主成分,贡献率达37. 4%。说明旅游活动导致了土壤环境物理结构改变、土壤肥力降低、水盐动态变化对胡杨林生态系统产生显著负效应。
The different tourism disturbances on soil environment were investigated and analyzed by means of field sampling and indoor analysis. The results showed that sand content,water content and electrical conductivity of soil in disturbed area of Populus euphratica forest were significantly higher than those in non-disturbed area,while the nutrient conditions were significantly higher in non-disturbed area. The water content and the electrical conductivity of soil were positively correlated with the disturbance intensity in disturbed area of Populus euphratica forest,and the water content was lowest but the electrical conductivity was highest in the surface layer,which reflected salt aggregation on soil surface in the region. The organic matter,total carbon and total nitrogen of soil decreased with the increasing disturbance intensity,while adverse trend was found in soil of 30 cm and 50 cm layers,which was influenced by the litters and roots. The proportion of sand decreased with the increase of tourist tramping. The correlation analysis and principal component analysis indicated that there was the significant correlation between soil texture and soil nutrients,which displayed on the first principal component and contribution reached 45. 2%. While the second and the third principal component mainly reflected the water content and the electrical conductivity of soil,reaching 37. 4% contribution. In conclusion,tourism disturbance changed the soil structure,reduced the soil fertility and affected dynamic of soil water and salinity,leading to the significant negative effect on Populus euphratica ecosystem.
The different tourism disturbances on soil environment were investigated and analyzed by means of field sampling and indoor analysis. The results showed that sand content,water content and electrical conductivity of soil in disturbed area of Populus euphratica forest were significantly higher than those in non-disturbed area,while the nutrient conditions were significantly higher in non-disturbed area. The water content and the electrical conductivity of soil were positively correlated with the disturbance intensity in disturbed area of Populus euphratica forest,and the water content was lowest but the electrical conductivity was highest in the surface layer,which reflected salt aggregation on soil surface in the region. The organic matter,total carbon and total nitrogen of soil decreased with the increasing disturbance intensity,while adverse trend was found in soil of 30 cm and 50 cm layers,which was influenced by the litters and roots. The proportion of sand decreased with the increase of tourist tramping. The correlation analysis and principal component analysis indicated that there was the significant correlation between soil texture and soil nutrients,which displayed on the first principal component and contribution reached 45. 2%. While the second and the third principal component mainly reflected the water content and the electrical conductivity of soil,reaching 37. 4% contribution. In conclusion,tourism disturbance changed the soil structure,reduced the soil fertility and affected dynamic of soil water and salinity,leading to the significant negative effect on Populus euphratica ecosystem.
引文
[1]钟林生,马向远,曾瑜皙.中国生态旅游研究进展与展望[J].地理科学进展,2016(6):679-690.
[2]张晓芹,孙磊,张强.旅游干扰对济南千佛山风景区土壤部分生态因子的影响[J].水土保持学报,2015(4):332-336.
[3]朱芳,白卓灵,陈耿,等.旅游活动对武当山风景区生态环境的影响[J].林业资源管理,2015(3):89-95.
[4]蒋婧,宋明华.植物与土壤微生物在调控生态系统养分循环中的作用[J].植物生态学报,2010(8):979-988.
[5]巩劼,陆林,晋秀龙,等.黄山风景区旅游干扰对植物群落及其土壤性质的影响[J].生态学报,2009(5):2239-2251.
[6]王文娟,李景文,王中斌,等.胡杨根际土壤真菌群落代谢特征及其土壤影响因子研究[J].西北植物学报,2017(7):1429-1437.
[7] ANDRSABELlN M,DEL J A,LANDETECASTILLEJOS T,et al. Impacts of visitors on soil and vegetation of the recreational area “Nacimiento del Río Mundo”(Castilla-La Mancha,Spain)[J]. Environmental Monitoring&Assessment,2005,101(1-3):55-67.
[8]刘钟龄,朱宗元,郝敦元.黑河流域地域系统的下游绿洲带资源—环境安全[J].自然资源学报,2002(3):286-293.
[9]陆林,巩劼,晋秀龙.旅游干扰对黄山风景区土壤的影响[J].地理研究,2011(2):209-223.
[10]赵建昌.旅游干扰对贺兰山典型草原生物多样性及土壤性质的影响[J].水土保持通报,2015(3):293-298.
[11]秦远好,谢德体,魏朝富,等.土壤生态环境对游憩活动冲击的响应研究[J].水土保持学报,2006(3):61-65.
[12]王舒甜,张金池,郑丹扬,等.钟山风景区土壤环境对人为踩踏扰动的响应[J].林业科学,2017(8):9-16.
[13]陈维强,周伟磊,刘倩雯,等.人为干扰对额济纳胡杨林群落组成及更新的影响[J].林业资源管理,2010(1):46-52.
[14]张淑花,赵美微,张雪萍.旅游干扰对二龙山风景区土壤和植被的影响[J].土壤通报,2011(3):523-527.
[15]贾艳红,赵传燕,南忠仁.西北干旱区黑河下游植被覆盖变化研究综述[J].地理科学进展,2007(4):64-74.
[16] MASTRE F T,DELGADOBAQUERIZO M,JEFFRIES T C,et al. Increasing aridity reduces soil microbial diversity and abundance in global drylands[J]. proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the united states of america,2015,112(51):15684-15689.
[17]李鹏,濮励杰,章锦河.旅游活动对土壤环境影响的国内研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2012(8):1097-1105.
[18]冯学钢,包浩生.旅游活动对风景区地被植物—土壤环境影响的初步研究[J].自然资源学报,1999(1):76-79.
[19]马建华,朱玉涛.嵩山景区旅游活动对土壤组成性质和重金属污染的影响[J].生态学报,2008,28(3):955-965.
[20]张芳,塔西甫拉提·特依拜,梁辰,等.天山北麓苏打盐碱化土壤p H值测定中的影响因素分析[J].新疆农业科学,2016(12):2328-2338.
[21]李灵,张玉,江慧华,等.旅游干扰对武夷山风景区土壤质量的影响[J].水土保持研究,2009(6):56-62.
[2]张晓芹,孙磊,张强.旅游干扰对济南千佛山风景区土壤部分生态因子的影响[J].水土保持学报,2015(4):332-336.
[3]朱芳,白卓灵,陈耿,等.旅游活动对武当山风景区生态环境的影响[J].林业资源管理,2015(3):89-95.
[4]蒋婧,宋明华.植物与土壤微生物在调控生态系统养分循环中的作用[J].植物生态学报,2010(8):979-988.
[5]巩劼,陆林,晋秀龙,等.黄山风景区旅游干扰对植物群落及其土壤性质的影响[J].生态学报,2009(5):2239-2251.
[6]王文娟,李景文,王中斌,等.胡杨根际土壤真菌群落代谢特征及其土壤影响因子研究[J].西北植物学报,2017(7):1429-1437.
[7] ANDRSABELlN M,DEL J A,LANDETECASTILLEJOS T,et al. Impacts of visitors on soil and vegetation of the recreational area “Nacimiento del Río Mundo”(Castilla-La Mancha,Spain)[J]. Environmental Monitoring&Assessment,2005,101(1-3):55-67.
[8]刘钟龄,朱宗元,郝敦元.黑河流域地域系统的下游绿洲带资源—环境安全[J].自然资源学报,2002(3):286-293.
[9]陆林,巩劼,晋秀龙.旅游干扰对黄山风景区土壤的影响[J].地理研究,2011(2):209-223.
[10]赵建昌.旅游干扰对贺兰山典型草原生物多样性及土壤性质的影响[J].水土保持通报,2015(3):293-298.
[11]秦远好,谢德体,魏朝富,等.土壤生态环境对游憩活动冲击的响应研究[J].水土保持学报,2006(3):61-65.
[12]王舒甜,张金池,郑丹扬,等.钟山风景区土壤环境对人为踩踏扰动的响应[J].林业科学,2017(8):9-16.
[13]陈维强,周伟磊,刘倩雯,等.人为干扰对额济纳胡杨林群落组成及更新的影响[J].林业资源管理,2010(1):46-52.
[14]张淑花,赵美微,张雪萍.旅游干扰对二龙山风景区土壤和植被的影响[J].土壤通报,2011(3):523-527.
[15]贾艳红,赵传燕,南忠仁.西北干旱区黑河下游植被覆盖变化研究综述[J].地理科学进展,2007(4):64-74.
[16] MASTRE F T,DELGADOBAQUERIZO M,JEFFRIES T C,et al. Increasing aridity reduces soil microbial diversity and abundance in global drylands[J]. proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the united states of america,2015,112(51):15684-15689.
[17]李鹏,濮励杰,章锦河.旅游活动对土壤环境影响的国内研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2012(8):1097-1105.
[18]冯学钢,包浩生.旅游活动对风景区地被植物—土壤环境影响的初步研究[J].自然资源学报,1999(1):76-79.
[19]马建华,朱玉涛.嵩山景区旅游活动对土壤组成性质和重金属污染的影响[J].生态学报,2008,28(3):955-965.
[20]张芳,塔西甫拉提·特依拜,梁辰,等.天山北麓苏打盐碱化土壤p H值测定中的影响因素分析[J].新疆农业科学,2016(12):2328-2338.
[21]李灵,张玉,江慧华,等.旅游干扰对武夷山风景区土壤质量的影响[J].水土保持研究,2009(6):56-62.