基于最小数据集的大渡河干暖河谷典型植被土壤质量评价

doi:10.16843/j.sswc.2021.06.007

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (2)

Download: PDF (1042 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract [Background] Soil quality is defined as the capacity of soil performing its functions within ecosystem boundaries, including sustaining biological productivity, maintaining environmental quality, and promoting plants and animals' growths. Existing studies suggested that serious land degradation resulted in the reduction of vegetation and productivity in the dry and warm valley of Dadu River, thus it is urgent to restore the soil quality. This study evaluated the soil quality in the dry and warm valley of Dadu River, and the results may provide scientific support for establishing restoration measures in this region.[Methods] Nevertheless, soil quality cannot be evaluated by individual soil properties, because many of these properties are interdependent and their responses to environmental changes are difficult to interpret. Thus, to comprehensively assess soil quality, a soil quality index (SQI) that integrated soil properties into an overall index was established and has been widely used. The minimum data set (MDS) method was chosen to calculate the soil quality indexes of 5 typical vegetation types including shrub, grassland, coniferous forest, broadleaf forest, and mixed broadleaf-conifer forest along the dry and warm valley of the Dadu River. The soil quality indexes were graded from low to high:ⅰ, ⅱ, ⅲ and ⅳ.[Results] 1) Based on correlation analysis and principal component analysis, 7 of 16 soil physical and chemical indicators had been confirmed to be the MDS, including capillary porosity, non-capillary porosity, organic matter, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, available phosphorus and available potassium. According to the load of each index factor, the weight of each index was calculated and then the soil quality index was obtained by summing. The top three weighted indicators were capillary porosity (18.53%), total phosphorus (17.36%) and organic matter (15.88%). The soil quality indexes of those 5 vegetation types ranked in the order of shrub (0.558), grassland (0.482), broad-leaved forest (0.392), mixed broadleaf-conifer forest (0.387), and coniferous forest (0.357). Meanwhile, the soil qualities of the 5 typical vegetation types were also assessed by "soil fertility scoring method" referred to the results of the Second National Soil Survey. As expected, the results were coincided with "the minimum data set method". The classification of soil quality indexes showed that shrub and grassland were dominated by grade ⅲ and ⅳ plots, while the other three vegetation types were dominated by grade ⅰ and ⅱ plots.[Conculsions] In short, this study demonstrates that the effect of shrub on soil quality improvement is better than other vegetation types and should be the direction of vegetation restoration in the dry and warm valley of the Dadu River, and grassland has great potential for vegetation restoration due to its quite good soil quality.

Key words： soil quality assessment soil physio-chemical index minimum data set typical vegetation dry and warm valley of Dadu River

Received: 02 March 2020

PACS:

S158

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	WANG Wenwu
	ZHU Wanze
	LI Xia
	SHU Shumiao

Cite this article:

WANG Wenwu,ZHU Wanze,LI Xia, et al. Soil quality assessment of typical vegetation in dry and warm valley of Dadu River based on minimum data set[J]. SSWC, 2021, 19(6): 54-59.

URL:

http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/EN/10.16843/j.sswc.2021.06.007 OR http://journal12.magtechjournal.com/Jweb_stbc/EN/Y2021/V19/I6/54

[1]	BUNEMANN E K, BONGIORNO G, BAI Z, et al. Soil quality:A critical review[J]. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018, 120:105.
[2]	王博文, 陈立新. 土壤质量评价方法述评[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2006, 4(2):120. WANG Bowen, CHEN Lixin. Review on methods of soil quality evaluation[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2006, 4(2):120.
[3]	钟祥浩. 干热河谷区生态系统退化及恢复与重建途径[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2000, 9(3):376. ZHONG Xianghao. Degradation of ecosystem and ways of its rehabilitation and reconstruction in dry and hot valley[J]. Resource and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2000, 9(3):376.
[4]	黄雪菊. 典型干旱河谷土壤质量空间异质性研究[D]. 成都:四川大学, 2005:53. HUANG Xueju. Spatial heterogeneity of soil quality in typical dry valley[D]. Chengdu:Sichuan University, 2005:53.
[5]	严代碧. 岷江上游干旱河谷区退化植被特征及其恢复重建的研究[D]. 北京:北京林业大学, 2006:13. YAN Daibi. Study on characteristics and restoration of degraded vegetation in arid valley of upper Minjiang river[D]. Beijing:Beijing Forestry University, 2006:13.
[6]	WU Tieniu, WU Gaolin, WANG Dong, et al. Soil-hydrological properties response to grazing exclusion in a steppe grassland of the Loess Plateau[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2014, 71(2):745.
[7]	张甘霖, 龚子同. 土壤调查实验室分析方法[M]. 北京:科学出版社, 2012:23. ZHANG Ganlin, GONG Zitong. Soil survey laboratory analysis methods[M]. Beijing:Science Press, 2012:23.
[8]	ANDREWS S S, KARLEN D L, CAMBARDELLA C A. The soil management assessment framework:A quantitative soil quality evaluation method[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2004, 68(6):1945.
[9]	伏耀龙. 岷江上游干旱河谷区土壤质量评价及侵蚀特征研究[D]. 陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2012:41. FU Yaolong. Study on soil quality evaluation and erosion characteristics in dry valley of upper Minjiang River[D]. Yangling, Shanxi:Northwest Agriculture & Forestry University, 2012:41.
[10]	IDOWU O J, HAROLD M V E, ABAWI G S, et al. Farmer-oriented assessment of soil quality using field, laboratory, and VNIR spectroscopy methods[J]. Plant and Soil, 2008, 307(1/2):243.
[11]	陶澍. 应用数理统计方法[M]. 北京:中国环境科学出版社, 1994:220. TAO Shu. Method of applied mathematical statistics[M]. Beijing:China Environmental Science Press, 1994:220.
[12]	ZHA Xiaochun, TANG Keli. Change about soil erosion and soil properties in reclaimed forestland of loess hilly region[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2003, 58(3):464.
[13]	SCHOENHOLTZ S H, MIEGROET H V, BURGER J A. A review of chemical and physical properties as indicators of forest soil quality:Challenges and opportunities[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2000, 138(1):335.
[14]	马海天才, 张家成, 刘峰. 川西北4种灌丛根系分布特征及对土壤养分的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018, 46(11):222. MAHAI Tiancai, ZHANG Jiacheng, LIU Feng. Root distribution characteristics of four shrub species and their effects on soil nutrients in northwestern Sichuan[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 46(11):222.
[15]	WU Jinshui, JOERGENSEN R G, POMMERENING B, et al. Measurement of soil microbial biomass C by fumigation-extraction-an automated procedure[J]. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 1990, 22(8):1167.
[16]	周义贵. 岷江上游干旱河谷区不同土地利用/植被恢复类型土壤生态效益评价[D]. 成都:四川农业大学, 2014:75. ZHOU Yigui. Evaluation of soil ecological benefits of different land use/vegetation restoration types in the dry valley area of the upper Minjiang River[D]. Chengdu:Sichuan Agricultural University, 2014:75.