浙江省典型森林类型枯落物及林下土壤水文特性
|
摘要
选择浙江省5种典型林型(杉木林、毛竹林、阔叶林、针阔混交林、马尾松林)枯落物及林下土壤作为研究对象,布设30m×30m标准样地,枯落物水文效应测定采用浸泡法,土壤层水文效应测定采用环刀法。结果表明:不同林分类型枯落物蓄积量大小介于10.14～25.07t/hm2,排列顺序分别为针阔混交林>阔叶林>马尾松林>杉木林>毛竹林;最大持水量大小介于21.82～33.64t/hm2,排列顺序为针阔混交林>阔叶林>杉木林>马尾松林>毛竹林;有效拦蓄量大小介于16.8～24.84t/hm2,其排序为针阔混交林>杉木林>阔叶林>马尾松林>毛竹林;5种森林类型枯落物的持水量均随浸水时间而增大并逐步趋于稳定,其关系符合对数函数;前0.5h内枯落物吸水速率最大,1h之后吸水速率急剧降低,而后随着时间的推移,枯落物的吸水速率趋于统一,其关系呈幂函数关系;5种森林类型林下土壤容重、非毛管孔隙度、孔隙度、持水能力等指标差异并不显著,土壤持水力均值介于201.86～296.63t/hm2。综合来看,阔叶林及含有阔叶树种的林分持水能力相对高于针叶林。
Selecting litter and soil of five typical forest types(Chinese fir forest,moso bamboo forest,broadleaved forest,mixed broadleaf-conifer forest,and masson pine forest)in Zhejiang Province as the research object,we set up sample plots with 30 m×30 min which hydrological effects of litter of plots was examined by soaking method,and hydrological effects of soil layer was investigated by cutting ring method.The results are as follows.The litter amounts of different forest types greatly varied from 10.14 t/hm2 to 25.07 t/hm2,and the litter amount decreased in the order:mixed broadleaf-conifer forest>broad-leaved forest>masson pine forest>Chinese fir forest>moso bamboo forest;the maximum water-holding capacity of litter ranged from 21.82 t/hm2 to 33.64 t/hm2,the maximum water-holding capacity decreased in the order:mixed broadleaf-conifer forest>broad-leaved forest>Chinese fir forest>masson pine forest>moso bamboo forest;the effective impoundment amount was between 16.8 t/hm2 and 24.84 t/hm2,and the effective impoundment amount decreased in the order:mixed broadleaf-conifer forest>Chinese fir forest>broad-leaved forest>masson pine forest> moso bamboo forest.The water-holding capacities of litter of the five types of forest increased and stabilized gradually with the increase of immersion time,which could be described by logarithmic function.Forest litter had the largest water absorption rate within the initial half hour,and waterabsorption rate declined sharply after 1 hour;with the increase of immersion time,the water absorption rate of litter tended to be consistent,and they presented the power function relationship;there were no significant differences in the soils of the 5 forest types in terms of soil bulk density,noncapillary porosity,porosity,and water-holding capacity,and the average soil water-holding capacity varied from 201.86 t/hm2 to296.63 t/hm2.In short,water-holding capacities of the broad-leaved forest and forest containing broadleaved tree species were higher than those of the coniferous forest.
Selecting litter and soil of five typical forest types(Chinese fir forest,moso bamboo forest,broadleaved forest,mixed broadleaf-conifer forest,and masson pine forest)in Zhejiang Province as the research object,we set up sample plots with 30 m×30 min which hydrological effects of litter of plots was examined by soaking method,and hydrological effects of soil layer was investigated by cutting ring method.The results are as follows.The litter amounts of different forest types greatly varied from 10.14 t/hm2 to 25.07 t/hm2,and the litter amount decreased in the order:mixed broadleaf-conifer forest>broad-leaved forest>masson pine forest>Chinese fir forest>moso bamboo forest;the maximum water-holding capacity of litter ranged from 21.82 t/hm2 to 33.64 t/hm2,the maximum water-holding capacity decreased in the order:mixed broadleaf-conifer forest>broad-leaved forest>Chinese fir forest>masson pine forest>moso bamboo forest;the effective impoundment amount was between 16.8 t/hm2 and 24.84 t/hm2,and the effective impoundment amount decreased in the order:mixed broadleaf-conifer forest>Chinese fir forest>broad-leaved forest>masson pine forest> moso bamboo forest.The water-holding capacities of litter of the five types of forest increased and stabilized gradually with the increase of immersion time,which could be described by logarithmic function.Forest litter had the largest water absorption rate within the initial half hour,and waterabsorption rate declined sharply after 1 hour;with the increase of immersion time,the water absorption rate of litter tended to be consistent,and they presented the power function relationship;there were no significant differences in the soils of the 5 forest types in terms of soil bulk density,noncapillary porosity,porosity,and water-holding capacity,and the average soil water-holding capacity varied from 201.86 t/hm2 to296.63 t/hm2.In short,water-holding capacities of the broad-leaved forest and forest containing broadleaved tree species were higher than those of the coniferous forest.
引文
[1]曹恒.青海高寒区不同人工林地土壤和枯落物的水文功能研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2014.
[2]景贯阳.陇东黄土高原人工刺槐林枯落物层和土壤层生态水文功能研究[D].兰州:甘肃农业大学,2017.
[3]刘斌,鲁绍伟,李少宁,等.北京西山6种天然纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2015,49(4):73-78.
[4]吴四平.三峡山地不同类型林地的生态水文功能研究[D].武汉:华中师范大学,2017.
[5]刘艳,孙向阳,范俊岗,等.辽宁省森林枯落物现存量及其持水性能[J].应用基础与工程科学学报,2017,25(4):689-699.
[6]张甜,董希斌,唐国华,等.大兴安岭不同类型低质林土壤和枯落物的水文性能[J].东北林业大学学报,2017,45(10):1-5.
[7]夏玲摇,刘美华,叶晨,等.浙江省典型森林群落对大气环境的改善效应[J].江西农业大学学报,2017,39(2):357-365.
[8]齐瑞,杨永红,陈宁,等.白龙江上游5种典型灌木林枯落物蓄积量及持水特性[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(6):123-127.
[9]叶晶,吴家森,张金池,等.不同经营年限山核桃林地枯落物和土壤的水文效应[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(3):87-91.
[10]于晓文,宋小帅,康峰峰,等.辽河源典型森林群落下枯落物的水文特性[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(4):65-69.
[11]胡晓聪,黄乾亮,金亮.西双版纳热带山地雨林枯落物及其土壤水文功能[J].应用生态学报,2017,28(1):55-63.
[12]王谦,孙保平,丁国栋,等.陕西榆林樟子松人工林土壤及枯落物水文效应[J].西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版,2015,43(8):123-132.
[13]胡静霞,杨新兵,朱辰光,等.冀西北地区4种纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(4):304-310.
[14]许景伟,李传荣,夏江宝,等.黄河三角洲滩地不同林分类型的土壤水文特性[J].水土保持学报,2009,23(1):173-176.
[15]钟梁,高友英,孙浩,等.抚河上游生态公益林4种森林类型枯落物层和土壤层水文效应[J].南方林业科学,2017,45(6):5-8.
[2]景贯阳.陇东黄土高原人工刺槐林枯落物层和土壤层生态水文功能研究[D].兰州:甘肃农业大学,2017.
[3]刘斌,鲁绍伟,李少宁,等.北京西山6种天然纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2015,49(4):73-78.
[4]吴四平.三峡山地不同类型林地的生态水文功能研究[D].武汉:华中师范大学,2017.
[5]刘艳,孙向阳,范俊岗,等.辽宁省森林枯落物现存量及其持水性能[J].应用基础与工程科学学报,2017,25(4):689-699.
[6]张甜,董希斌,唐国华,等.大兴安岭不同类型低质林土壤和枯落物的水文性能[J].东北林业大学学报,2017,45(10):1-5.
[7]夏玲摇,刘美华,叶晨,等.浙江省典型森林群落对大气环境的改善效应[J].江西农业大学学报,2017,39(2):357-365.
[8]齐瑞,杨永红,陈宁,等.白龙江上游5种典型灌木林枯落物蓄积量及持水特性[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(6):123-127.
[9]叶晶,吴家森,张金池,等.不同经营年限山核桃林地枯落物和土壤的水文效应[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(3):87-91.
[10]于晓文,宋小帅,康峰峰,等.辽河源典型森林群落下枯落物的水文特性[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(4):65-69.
[11]胡晓聪,黄乾亮,金亮.西双版纳热带山地雨林枯落物及其土壤水文功能[J].应用生态学报,2017,28(1):55-63.
[12]王谦,孙保平,丁国栋,等.陕西榆林樟子松人工林土壤及枯落物水文效应[J].西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版,2015,43(8):123-132.
[13]胡静霞,杨新兵,朱辰光,等.冀西北地区4种纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(4):304-310.
[14]许景伟,李传荣,夏江宝,等.黄河三角洲滩地不同林分类型的土壤水文特性[J].水土保持学报,2009,23(1):173-176.
[15]钟梁,高友英,孙浩,等.抚河上游生态公益林4种森林类型枯落物层和土壤层水文效应[J].南方林业科学,2017,45(6):5-8.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |