Abstract：[Background] The current soil erosion researches in Fangshan district did not cover the response of soil erosion to typical topographic factors, thus supplementary research is in demand. The 3 main objectives of this study are for quantitative assessment of the distribution pattern and dynamic characteristics of soil erosion, analysis of the response of soil erosion to topographical factors in Fangshan district, and to provide reference for soil erosion prevention and control.[Methods] We used USLE model combined remote sensing inversion and GIS spatial overlay analysis technology to calculate the soil erosion modulus and erosion amount in Fangshan district from 2013 to 2018. Then we calculated the six factors (R, K, L, S, P, and C) of the USLE based on the meteorological data, vegetation index data, land use data and soil attribute data. Thus we obtained the erosion amount and modulus, and divided erosion levels to analyze the soil erosion status of Fangshan district, and the erosion status under different typical topographic conditions.[Results] 1) The soil erosion amount in Fangshan district has gradually decreased in each year, from a maximum of 70.694×104 t in 2013 to 29.082×104 t in 2018. 2) Soil erosion was divided into 6 grades by intensity, showing that the average annual rate of slight erosion was 64.13%, followed by light erosion accounted for 29.99%, the other higher grade areas accounted for <6%. 3) The ratio of slight erosion area gradually increased in each year. The soil erosion modulus at the elevation of[400, 800 m) was the highest, followed by the elevation range lower than 400 m. More than 40% of the erosion amount occurred in the area where elevation was higher than 400 m. In the[0°,25°) slope grade, the soil erosion modulus increased with the increase of the slope; but at slope grade higher than 25°, the soil erosion modulus decreased with the increase of the slope. The soil erosion of this grade for areas with slope of[0°, 5°)accounted for more than 70% of the total erosion.[Conclusions] The overall annual soil erosion in Fangshan district has gradually decreased over time. From 2013 to 2018, the total amount of soil erosion has decreased by 58.86%. The ratio of slight erosion intensity area rose from 55.74% in 2013 to 71.70% in 2018. The overall soil erosion degree in Fangshan district is light or slight. The analysis of the response of soil erosion to topographical factors shows that there is the highest soil erosion modulus at[400, 800) m elevation interval and the slope grade of[15°, 25°), indicating it is the focus area of soil erosion prevention and control in the future.
郭珂歆, 艾刚, 马兴祥, 何鑫. 北方土石山区土壤侵蚀对典型地形因子的响应——以北京市房山区为例[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2021, 19(4): 137-142.
GUO Kexin, AI Gang, MA Xingxiang, HE Xin. Response of soil erosion to typical topographic factors in the rocky mountain area of North China: Taking Fangshan district as an example. SSWC, 2021, 19(4): 137-142.
WISCHMEIER W H. A soil erodibility monograph for farmland and construction sites[J]. Jouranl of Soil and Water Conservation,1971,26(1):189.
[2]
蔡强国,刘纪根.关于我国土壤侵蚀模型研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2003(3):142. CAI Qiangguo, LIU Jigen. Evolution of soil erosion models in China[J]. Progress in Geography,2003(3):142.
[3]
徐保利,鲁恒,邵东国.基于遥感和GIS技术的区域土壤侵蚀量研究[J].灌溉排水学报,2014,33(Z1):291. XU Baoli, LU Heng, SHAO Dongguo. Regional soil erosion based on RS and GIS[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2014,33(Z1):291.
[4]
朱春竹,赵天忠,孙若修,等.小流域水土保持效益评价系统的研建与应用——以北京市房山区蒲洼小流域为例[J]. 林业资源管理,2018(1):132. ZHU Chunzhu, ZHAO Tianzhong, SUN Ruoxiu, et al. Development andapplication of benefit evaluation system for soil and water conservation in small watersheds:A case study of Puwa Small Watershed in Fangshan district, Beijing[J]. Forest Resources Management, 2018(1):132.
[5]
黎俊佑,马岚,刘京晶,等.雨型对华北土石山区坡面土壤侵蚀的影响[J]. 水土保持学报,2020,34(4):1. LI Junyou, MA Lan, LIU Jingjing, et al. Effects of rainfall patterns on slope soil erosion in the rocky mountain area of North China[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020,34(4):1.
[6]
章文波,谢云,刘宝元.利用日雨量计算降雨侵蚀力的方法研究[J]. 地理科学, 2002, 22(6):705.. ZHANG Wenbo, XIE Yun, LIU Baoyuan. Rainfall erosivity estimation using daily rainfall amounts[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2002,22(6):705.
[7]
单奇华,李卫正,俞元春,等.南京城市林业土壤可蚀性及影晌因素[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2008,32(2):47. SHAN Qihua, LI Weizheng, YU Yuanchun, et al. Erodibility of urban forest soil in Nanjing[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2008,32(2):47.
[8]
符素华,刘宝元,周贵云,等. 坡长坡度因子计算工具[J]. 中国水土保持科学,2015,13(5):105. FU Suhua, LIU Baoyuan, ZHOU Guiyun, et al. Calculation tool of topographic factors[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015,13(5):105.
[9]
蔡梦雅.植被盖度对土壤侵蚀模数计算的影响研究[D].长春:东北师范大学,2016:14. CAI Mengya. Effects of vegetation cover on soil erosion modulus calculation[D].Changchun:Northeast Normal University,2016:14.
[10]
朱虹,唐婷婷,蔡艳蓉.土壤侵蚀预报模型中的水土保持措施因子研究进展[J]. 科技展望,2015(21):222. ZHU Hong, TANG Tingting, CAI Yanrong. Progress on soil and water conservation factors in soil erosion prediction model[J]. Technology Outlook, 2015(21):222.
[11]
陈豪,丁文广,TANJIA BinteZafar. 基于USLE模型的祁连山国家公园土壤水力侵蚀评价[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2020, 18(4):38. CHEN Hao, DING Wenguang, TANJIA BinteZafar. Evaluation of soil water erosion in Qilian Mountain National Park based on USLE model[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020,18(4):38.
[12]
魏兰香. 基于USLE模型的祁连山南坡土壤保持量评估[D].西宁:青海师范大学,2017:21. WEI Lanxiang. Evaluation of soil conservation quantity of the southern slope of Qilian Mountains based on universal soil loss quation model[D]. Xining:Qinghai Normal University,2017:21.
2021, Vol. 19 
