南亚热带不同类型人工林的水土保持效应

doi:10.16843/j.sswc.2018.01.009

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要为了探讨不同类型植被恢复过程中的水土保持效应，本文基于设在鹤山森林生态系统国家野外科学观测与研究站的9个地表径流场6年水文监测，研究了不同植被类型恢复过程中的水土流失特征。结果表明：幼龄人工林地表径流系数大小为：尾叶桉林（EU1） < 10物种混交林（M1） < 厚荚相思林（AC） < 30物种混交林（M2） < 红椎（CH），成熟人工林地表径流系数：荷木林（SS） < 窿缘桉（EU） < 马占相思（AM） < 马尾松林（PM），成熟林6年平均径流量较幼龄林减少64.2%。幼龄人工林年平均推移质排序为AC < M1 < M2 < EU1 < CH，成熟人工林年平均推移质：SS < AM < EU，幼龄人工林（3~7年林龄）中年均推移质量是成熟人工林（24~28年林龄）的7.14倍。混交林在短期和长期的减流效果都要好于纯林；桉林在减少地表径流方面短期和长期均有较好的效果，但在减少推移质方面效果不理想。幼龄期红锥林的减少径流和推移质的效果较差，成熟林中松林的减少径流效果较差。总的来看，幼龄人工林径流系数和推移质呈逐年降低趋势并趋于平缓，到2011年已经接近成熟林水平，而成熟林径流系数和推移质多年来均处于一个稳定较低水平；因此，保护森林应首要减少人为干扰，森林在一段时期自然恢复后，均可在水土保持方面发挥重要作用。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	孙聃
	刘素萍
	申卫军
	饶兴权
	郭志峰
	李永强

关键词 ：南亚热带, 成熟人工林, 幼龄人工林, 地表径流, 水土保持

Abstract：[Background] Soil and water conservation is one of the major ecological functions of plantations, which may be affected by plant species composition and age of the plantations. There are 69 million ha plantations in China, which is composed of tens of thousands of plant species including both native and exotic species. These plantations have played important role in soil and water conservation. A study at Heshan National Field Research and Observation Station of Forest Ecosystem was conducted.[Methods] Five kinds of young plantations and four mature plantations were selected, and runoff fields were built under all plantations in order to have the long-term data. Runoff was monitored by automatic level logger placed in every plot. Bed load sediment data was collected at the end of each year. Characteristics of runoff and bed load sediment of each plantation were analyzed with ANOVA.[Results] Mature plantations functioned better than young plantations in terms of runoff reduction, the former reduced runoff by 64.2% compared to young ones in six years (2008-2013). The annual mean runoff of young plantations was 159.4 mm, with the order of EU1 (Eucalyptus urophylla) < M1 (Eucalyptus urophylla) < AC(Acacia crassicarpa) < M2 (30 species mixed forest) < CH (Castanopsis hystrix). Monthly mean runoff was 13.29 mm within the range of 9.22 to 16.59 mm. The annual mean runoff of mature plantations was 57.1 mm, with the order of EU (Eucalyptus urophylla) < AM (Acacia mangium) < SS (Schima superba) < PM (Pinus massoniana). Monthly mean runoff was 4.34 mm within the range of 3.22 to 6.04 mm. On the study of soil erosion, the average bed load sediment of young plantations (3-7 years) was 7.14 times of mature plantations (24-28 years). Bed load sediment varied with plantation type in the order of AC < M1 < M2 < EU1 < CH for young plantations and in the order of SS[Conclusions] Soil and water erosion from different plantations show a significant downward trend through young plantation stage. Eucalyptus spp. is a better candidate for water conservation both in young and mature plantations, but Castanopsis hystrix and Eucalyptus spp. do not act well in reducing bed load sediment in young plantations. Pinus massoniana's bed load sediment is significantly higher than other forest types of mature ones, though the differences of quantity in runoff among different forest types are not big in the long-term restoration. In both young and mature forests, the mixed forests are better than monoculture forests in water and soil conservation.

Key words： southern subtropical area mature plantation young plantation surface runoff soil and water conservation

收稿日期: 2017-12-03

PACS:

S157.5

基金资助:国家自然科学基金"土壤微生物对森林生态系统碳-氮耦合循环过程的调控机制"（31290222）

通讯作者: 申卫军(1971-),男,博士,研究员。主要研究方向:全球变化生态学。E-mail:shenweij@scbg.ac.cn E-mail: shenweij@scbg.ac.cn

作者简介: 孙聃(1983-),男,博士,工程师。主要研究方向:恢复生态学。E-mail:sdgz@scbg.ac.cn

引用本文:

孙聃¹, 刘素萍¹, 申卫军¹, 饶兴权¹, 郭志峰², 李永强². 南亚热带不同类型人工林的水土保持效应[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2018, 16(1): 72-79.
SUN Dan, LIU Suping, SHEN Weijun, RAO Xingquan, GUO Zhifeng, LI Yongqiang. Soil and water conservation effects of different plantations in southern subtropical area of China. SSWC, 2018, 16(1): 72-79.

链接本文:

http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/CN/10.16843/j.sswc.2018.01.009 或 http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/CN/Y2018/V16/I1/72

[1]	ZHOU Guoyi, WEI Xiaohua,CHEN Xiuzhi, et al. Global pattern for the effect of climate and land cover on water yield[J]. Nat Commun, 2015, 6(3):5918.
[2]	李文华,何永涛,杨丽韫. 森林对径流影响研究的回顾与展望[J]. 自然资源学报, 2001(5):3. LI Wenhua, HE Yongtao,YANG Liyun, et al. A summary and perspective of forest vegetation impacts on water yield[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2001(5):3.
[3]	石培礼,李文华. 森林植被变化对水文过程和径流的影响效应[J]. 自然资源学报, 2001(5):86. SHI Peili, LI Wenhua. Influence of forest cover change on hydrological process and watershed runoff[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2001(5):86.
[4]	GARCÍA-RUIZ JOSÉ M, BEGUERÍA SANTIAGO,NADAL-ROMERO ESTELA, et al. A meta-analysis of soil erosion rates across the world[J]. Geomorphology, 2015, 239:16.
[5]	GUO Qiankun, HAO Yanfang, LIU Baoyuan. Rates of soil erosion in China:a study based on runoff plot data[J]. Catena, 2015, 124:68.
[6]	郑粉莉,唐克丽,白红英. 标准小区和大型坡面径流场径流泥沙监测方法分析[J]. 人民黄河, 1994(7):19. ZHENG Fenli, TANG Keli, BAI Hongying, et al. Analysis of monitoring methods of runoff and sediment in standard plot and large sloping runoff field[J]. Yellow River, 1994(7):19.
[7]	邓湘雯,康文星,田大伦,等. 不同年龄阶段杉木人工林生态系统的径流规律[J]. 林业科学, 2007(6):1. DENG Xiangwen, KANG Wenxing, TIAN Dalun, et al. Runoff changes in Chinese fir plantations at different age classes, Huitong, Hunan Province[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2007(6):1.
[8]	王斌,杨校生,李正才,等. 不同气候区4种典型地带性植被土壤水文功能比较[J]. 林业资源管理, 2009(6):84. WANG Bin, YANG Xiaosheng, LI Zhengcai, et al. Comparison of hydrological functions of four typical zonal vegetation in different climatic zones[J]. Forest Resources Management, 2009(6):84.
[9]	江淼华,谢锦升,王维明. 闽北不同土地利用方式水土流失与降雨历时的关系研究[J]. 南昌工程学院学报, 2011(4):6. JIANG Miaohua, XIE Jinsheng, WANG Weiming, et al. Relationship between rainfall duration and loss of soil and water in diverse land-use types of northern Fujian[J]. Journal of Nanchang Institute of Technology, 2011(4):6.
[10]	黄承标,刘运华,秦武明,等. 3种植被恢复过程中水土流失规律的研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2010(2):59. HUANG Chengbiao, LIU Yunhua, QIN Wuming, et al. Study on the water and soil erosion rules during the three types of vegetation recovery process[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition), 2010(2):59.
[11]	张喜,薛建辉,许效天,等. 黔中喀斯特山地不同森林类型的地表径流及影响因素[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2007(6):527. ZHANG Xi, XUE Jianhui, XU Xiaotian,et al. Forest surface runoff and its influence factors in Karst mountainous area in center of Guizhou Province, China[J]. Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Botany, 2007(6):527.
[12]	罗兴录,樊吴静,杨鑫,等. 不同植被下水土流失研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2013(29):162. LUO Xinglu, FAN Wujing, YANG Xin, et al. The study on the water and soil loss in different vegetations[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2013(29):162.
[13]	广东森林编辑委员会. 广东森林[M]. 北京:中国林业出版社, 1990:45. Guangdong Forest Editorial Board. Guangdong forest[M]. Beijing:China Forestry Publishing House, 1990.
[14]	周国逸. 生态系统水热原理及其应用[M]. 北京:中国气象出版社, 1997:147. ZHOU Guoyi. Ecosystem hydrothermal principle and appplication[M]. Beijing:China Meteorological Press, 1997:147.
[15]	申卫军,周国逸,彭少麟,等. 南亚热带鹤山5种生态系统的地表径流[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 1999(4):273. SHEN Weijun, ZHOU Guoyi, PENG Shaolin, et al. Surface runoff in five ecosystems of Heshan subtropical hilly land[J]. Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Botany, 1999(4):273.
[16]	刘世荣,温远光,王兵等. 中国森林生态系统水文生态功能规律[M]. 北京:中国林业出版社, 1996:201. LIU Shirong, WEN Yuanguang, WANG Bin, et al. Hydrological laws functions laws of major forset ecosystems in China[M]. Beijing:China Forestry Publishing House, 1996:201.
[17]	LIU Zhanfeng, WU Jianping, ZHOU Lixia, et al. Effect of understory fern (Dicranopteris dichotoma) removal on substrate utilization patterns of culturable soil bacterial communities in subtropical Eucalyptus plantations[J]. Pedobiologia-International Journal of Soil Biology, 2011, 55(1):7.
[18]	DUAN Wenjun, REN Hai, FU Shenglei, et al. Community comparison and determinant analysis of understory vegetation in six plantations in South China[J]. Restoration Ecology, 2010, 18(2):206.
[19]	POORE M E D, FRIES C. The Ecological effects of Eucalyptus[M]. FAO Paper No.59:4.
[20]	BAI J Y, GAN S M. Social, economic and ecological problems of Eucalyptus plantations[J]. Word Forestry Research, 1996(2):63.
[21]	李松海,蒋军林,吴敏,等. 29年生红锥人工林经济效益分析[J]. 南方农业学报, 2016(6):984. LI Songhai, JIANG Junlin, WU Min, et al. Economic benefit evaluation of 29-year-old Castanopsis hstrix plantation[J]. Journal of Southern Agriculture, 2016(6):984.
[22]	NARAIN P, SINGH R K, SINDHWAL N S, et al. Agroforestry for soil and water conservation in the western Himalayan Valley Region of India 2. Crop and tree production[J]. Agroforestry Systems, 1997, 39(2):175.
[23]	SÁNCHEZ L A, ATAROFF M, LÓPEZ R. Soil erosion under different vegetation covers in the Venezuelan Andes[J]. The Environmentalist, 2002, 22(2):161.