黄土丘陵区典型退耕恢复植被土壤生态化学计量特征

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2022.026

干旱区地理 ›› 2022, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (6): 1899-1907.doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2022.026

黄土丘陵区典型退耕恢复植被土壤生态化学计量特征

郭鑫(),魏天兴(),陈宇轩,沙国良,任康,于欢

北京林业大学水土保持学院/水土保持国家林业局重点实验室/山西吉县森林生态系统国家野外科学观测研究站，北京 100083

收稿日期:2022-01-17 修回日期:2022-04-15 出版日期:2022-11-25 发布日期:2023-02-01
通讯作者: 魏天兴（1969-），男，博士，教授，主要从事流域自然地理过程、生态修复等方面的研究. E-mail: weitx@bjfu.edu.cn
作者简介:郭鑫（1998-），女，硕士研究生，主要从事水土保持等方面的研究. E-mail: guoxin0408@bjfu.edu.cn
基金资助:
“十三五”国家重点研发计划项目课题(2016YFC0501705);国家生态系统观测研究网络运行服务项目(2019-2020)

Characteristics of soil ecological stoichiometry in typical fallow-restored vegetation in the loess hilly areas

GUO Xin(),WEI Tianxing(),CHEN Yuxuan,SHA Guoliang,REN Kang,YU Huan

College of Soil and Water Conservation/Key Laboratory of State Forestry Administration on Soil and Water Conservation and Desertification Combating/Ji County Station, Chinese National Ecosystem Research Network (CNERN), Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China

Received:2022-01-17 Revised:2022-04-15 Online:2022-11-25 Published:2023-02-01
Contact: Tianxing WEI

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究不同植被土壤碳（C）、氮（N）、磷（P）化学计量特征及其影响因素，以黄土丘陵区油松、刺槐、沙棘和草地4种典型退耕恢复植被0~100 cm土壤为研究对象，分析不同植被土壤有机碳（SOC）、全氮（STN）、全磷（STP）含量及其化学计量特征。结果表明：（1）不同恢复植被对土壤养分含量有显著影响，刺槐的SOC、STN最高，油松的SOC、STN最低，STP表现为草地>刺槐>油松>沙棘。（2）不同恢复植被土壤养分具有“表聚性”，随土层深度增加，SOC和STN含量呈下降趋势，而STP的变异性较弱。特别是刺槐的SOC和STN在60~100 cm呈增加趋势。（3）不同恢复植被土壤SOC:STN（C:N）、SOC:STP（C:P）差异不显著（P>0.05），刺槐的土壤STN:STP（N:P）显著高于其他植被类型（P<0.05），土壤C:N、C:P、N:P均低于全球及全国平均水平，研究区有机质的分解速率较快，P的有效性高，植被生长主要受N元素限制。（4）研究区土壤C:N、C:P和N:P主要受SOC和STN影响；土壤养分与土壤含水量（SWC）和土壤容重（BD）呈负相关，与土壤粉粒（slit）和黏粒（clay）含量呈正相关，STP对土壤细颗粒的响应强度大于SOC和STN。研究区土壤化学计量在不同退耕恢复植被间差异显著，其中刺槐的土壤养分含量较其他植被类型更好，可为该地区植被恢复工作进一步开展提供参考。

关键词: 黄土丘陵区, 退耕恢复植被, 土壤养分, 生态化学计量, 土壤理化性质

Abstract:

The hilly and gully areas of China’s Loess Plateau are an arid and semi-arid region characterized by fragile ecosystems and harsh climates. A series of implemented ecological restoration projects, such as the “Grain for Green Project”, have greatly improved the local environments. To understand local nutrient cycling following vegetation restoration, it is important to study the content and ecological stoichiometry of soil carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorus (P) in different vegetation types and determine their driving factors. In our study, soil samples were collected in 0-100 cm layers from Pinus tabulaeformis, Robinia pseudoacacia, Hippophae rhamnoides, and grassland. The content and ecological stoichiometry of soil organic carbon (SOC), total nitrogen (STN), and total phosphorus (STP) were analyzed. The effects of soil water content (SWC), soil bulk density (BD), and soil texture on the stoichiometric characteristics were also analyzed. The results showed that: (1) Vegetation types had significant effects on the variations in soil nutrient contents. More specifically, Robinia pseudoacacia had the highest SOC and STN contents, whereas Pinus tabulaeformis had the lowest SOC and STN contents. STP content levels can be arranged in the following order: grassland>Robinia pseudoacacia>Pinus tabulaeformis>Hippophae rhamnoides. (2) Substantial soil nutrients accumulated on the soil surface among different vegetation types. With increasing soil depth, SOC and STN showed similar downward trends, whereas the variability of STP was comparatively weak. In particular, SOC and STN in Robinia pseudoacacia showed increases from 60-100 cm. (3) The variations in soil C:N and C:P among different vegetation types were not significant. Robinia pseudoacacia had significantly higher N:P than Pinus tabulaeformis, Hippophae rhamnoides, and grassland. In our study area, C:N, C:P and N:P were lower than global and national average levels, which indicated that the decomposition rate of organic matter in the soil was slow; the effectiveness of phosphorus was high, and vegetation growth was primarily limited by soil nitrogen. (4) C:N was mainly affected by SOC, whereas C:P and N:P were mainly affected by SOC and STN. Overall, soil nutrients were negatively correlated with SWC and BD but positively correlated with soil silt and clay content. The response of STP to soil fine particles was greater than that of SOC and STN. In our study, significant differences in soil stoichiometry characteristics were detected in the 0-100 cm soil layers among different fallow-restored vegetation types. Most notably, Robinia pseudoacacia had higher soil nutrients than other vegetation types. The results of the study can provide guidance for further revegetation restoration work in loess hilly areas.

Key words: the loess hilly areas, fallow restored vegetations, soil nutrients, ecological stoichiometry, soil physical properties

郭鑫, 魏天兴, 陈宇轩, 沙国良, 任康, 于欢. 黄土丘陵区典型退耕恢复植被土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(6): 1899-1907.

GUO Xin, WEI Tianxing, CHEN Yuxuan, SHA Guoliang, REN Kang, YU Huan. Characteristics of soil ecological stoichiometry in typical fallow-restored vegetation in the loess hilly areas[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(6): 1899-1907.

图/表 8

表1

表2

图1

表3

图2

表4

图3

表5

参考文献 38

[1]	Piaszczyk W, Błońska E, Lasota J, et al. A comparison of C:N:P stoichiometry in soil and deadwood at an advanced decomposition stage[J]. Catena, 2019, 179: 1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2019.03.025
[2]	李鑫, 张文菊, 邬磊, 等. 土壤质量评价指标体系的构建及评价方法[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(14): 3043-3056.
	[Li Xin, Zhang Wenju, Wu Lei. et al. Advance in indicator screening and methodologies of soil quality evaluation[J]. Scientia Agricultural Sinica, 2021, 54(14): 3043-3056.]
[3]	Cook K. Soil microbiology, ecology, and biochemistry, fourth edition[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2015, 79(6): 1821. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2015.0006br
[4]	海旭莹, 董凌勃, 汪晓珍, 等. 黄土高原退耕还草地C、N、P生态化学计量特征对植物多样性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(23): 8570-8581.
	[Hai Xuying, Dong Lingbo, Wang Xiaozhen. et al. Effects of carbon, nitrogen, and phosohrus ecological stoichiometry characteristics on plant diversity since returning farmland to grassland on the Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(23): 8570-8581.]
[5]	任璐璐, 张炳学, 韩凤朋, 等. 黄土高原不同年限刺槐土壤化学计量特征分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(2): 339-344.
	[Ren Lulu, Zhang Bingxue, Han Fengpeng. et al. Ecological stoichiometric characteristics of soils in Robinia pseudoacacia forests of different ages on the Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2017, 31(2): 339-344.]
[6]	Liu Y, Fang Y, An S S. How C:N:P stoichiometry in soils and plants responds to succession in Robinia pseudoacacia forests on the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2020, 475: 118394, doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118394. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118394
[7]	杨佳佳, 张向茹, 马露莎, 等. 黄土高原刺槐林不同组分生态化学计量关系研究[J]. 土壤学报, 2014, 51(1): 133-142.
	[Yang Jiajia, Zhang Xiangru, Ma Lusha, et al. Ecological stoichiometric relationships between components of Robinia pseudoacacia of forest in Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2014, 51(1): 133-142.]
[8]	曾全超, 李鑫, 董扬红, 等. 陕北黄土高原土壤性质及其生态化学计量的纬度变化特征[J]. 自然资源学报, 2015, 30(5): 870-879.
	[Zeng Quanchao, Li Xin, Dong Yanghong, et al. Ecological stoichiometry characteristics and physical-chemical properties of soil at different latitudes on the Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2015, 30(5): 870-879.]
[9]	王岩松, 马保明, 高海平, 等. 晋西黄土区油松和刺槐人工林土壤养分及其化学计量比对林分密度的响应[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2020, 42(8): 81-93.
	[Wang Yansong, Ma Baoming, Gao Haiping, et al. Response of soil nutrients and their stoichiometric ratios to stand density in Pinus tabuliformis and Robinia pseudoacacia plantations in the loess region of western Shanxi Province, northern China[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2020, 42(8): 81-93.]
[10]	Mobley M L, Lajtha K, Kramer M G, et al. Surficial gains and subsoil losses of soil carbon and nitrogen during secondary forest development[J]. Global Change Biology, 2015, 21(2): 986-996. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12715 pmid: 25155991
[11]	尹秋龙, 寇萌, 焦菊英, 等. 黄土丘陵沟壑区不同植物群落的土壤养分及其化学计量特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 2017, 37(1): 62-66.
	[Yin Qiulong, Kou Meng, Jiao Juying, et al. Characteristics of soil nutrients and stoichiometry in different communities in hilly-gullied region of Loess Plateau[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2017, 37(1): 62-66.]
[12]	Jobbágy E G, Jackson R B. The vertical distribution of soil organic carbon and its relation to climate and vegetation[J]. Ecological Applications, 2000, 10(2): 423-436. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0423:TVDOSO]2.0.CO;2
[13]	Lorenz K, Lal R. The depth distribution of soil organic carbon in relation to land use and management and the potential of carbon sequestration in subsoil horizons[J]. Advances in Agronomy, 2005, 88: 35-66.
[14]	Fontaine S, Barot S, Barré P, et al. Stability of organic carbon in deep soil layers controlled by fresh carbon supply[J]. Nature, 2007, 450(7167): 277-280. doi: 10.1038/nature06275
[15]	姜丽, 魏天兴, 李亦然, 等. 地形因子对陕北黄土丘陵区防护林树种分布的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6): 1763-1771.
	[Jiang Li, Wei Tianxing, Li Yiran. et al. Effects of topographical factors on tree species distribution of shelter forest in loess hilly region of northern Shaanxi[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(6): 1763-1771.]
[16]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 第三版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2008.
	[Bao Shidan. Study of analysis of soil and agrochemistry[M]. 3^rd ed. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2008.]
[17]	孙骞, 王兵, 周怀平, 等. 黄土丘陵区小流域土壤碳氮磷生态化学计量特征的空间变异性[J]. 生态学杂志, 2020, 39(3): 766-774.
	[Sun Qian, Wang Bing, Zhou Huaiping. et al. Spatial variation of ecological stoichiometry of soil C, N and P in a small catchment of loess hilly area[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2020, 39(3): 766-774.]
[18]	李强, 周道玮, 陈笑莹. 地上枯落物的累积、分解及其在陆地生态系统中的作用[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(14): 3807-3819.
	[Li Qiang, Zhou Daowei, Chen Xiaoying. The accumulation, decomposition and ecological effects of above-ground litter in terrestrial ecosystem[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014, 34(14): 3807-3819.]
[19]	Deng L, Shangguan Z P. Afforestation drives soil carbon and nitrogen changes in China[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 2017, 28(1): 151-165. doi: 10.1002/ldr.2537
[20]	毛娜, 邵明安, 黄来明. 六道沟小流域地形序列土壤碳剖面分布特征及影响因素[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(5): 222-230.
	[Mao Na, Shao Ming’an, Huang Laiming. Distribution characteristics and influencing factors of soil carbon profile along toposequences in Liudaogou Watershed[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2017, 31(5): 222-230.]
[21]	刘若莎, 王冬梅. 黄土高原高寒区不同人工林土壤养分及生态化学计量特征[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2021, 43(1): 88-95.
	[Liu Ruosha, Wang Dongmei. Soil nutrients and ecostoichiometric characteristics of different plantations in the alpine region of the Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2021, 43(1): 88-95.]
[22]	Shi J, Cui L L. Soil carbon change and its affecting factors following afforestation in China[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2010, 98(2): 75-85. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.07.011
[23]	刘伟, 程积民, 高阳, 等. 黄土高原草地土壤有机碳分布及其影响因素[J]. 土壤学报, 2012, 49(1): 68-76.
	[Liu Wei, Cheng Jimin, Gao Yang, et al. Distribution of soil organic carbon in grassland on Loess Plateau and its infuencing factors[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2012, 49(1): 68-76.]
[24]	张智勇, 王瑜, 艾宁, 等. 陕北黄土区不同植被类型土壤有机碳分布特征及其影响因素[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2020, 42(11): 56-63.
	[Zhang Zhiyong, Wang Yu, Ai Ning, et al. Distribution characteristics of soil organic carbon and its influencing factors in different vegetation types in loess region of nourthern Shaanxi Province, northwestern China[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2020, 42(11): 56-63.]
[25]	赵华晨, 高菲, 李斯雯, 等. 长白山阔叶红松林和杨桦次生林土壤有机碳氮的协同积累特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(5): 1615-1624. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201905.040
	[Zhao Huachen, Gao Fei, Li Siwen, et al. Co-accumulation characters of soil organic carbon and nitrogen under broadleaved Korean pine and Betula platyphylla secondary forests in Changbai Mountain, China[J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2019, 30(5): 1615-1624.] doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201905.040
[26]	Tian H, Chen G, Zhang C, et al. Pattern and variation of C:N:P ratios in China’s soils: A synthesis of observational data[J]. Biogeochemistry, 2010, 98(1-3): 139-151. doi: 10.1007/s10533-009-9382-0
[27]	王慧, 郭月峰, 姚云峰, 等. 不同土地利用方式下土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征[J]. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(5): 995-1000.
	[Wang Hui, Guo Yuefeng, Yao Yunfeng, et al. Ecological stoichiometry of soil carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus under different land use patterns[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 33(5): 995-1000.]
[28]	Yang Y H, Fang J Y, Guo D L, et al. Vertical patterns of soil carbon, nitrogen and carbon: Nitrogen stoichiometry in Tibetan grasslands[J]. Biogeosciences Discussions, 2010, 7: 1-24.
[29]	王绍强, 于贵瑞. 生态系统碳氮磷元素的生态化学计量学特征[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(8): 3937-3947.
	[Wang Shaoqiang, Yu Guirui. Ecological stoichiometry characteristics of ecosystem carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus elements[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(8): 3937-3947.]
[30]	Vitousek P M, Farrington H. Nutrient limitation and soil development: Experimental test of a biogeochemical theory[J]. Biogeochemistry, 1997, 37(1): 63-75. doi: 10.1023/A:1005757218475
[31]	温晨, 杨智姣, 杨磊, 等. 半干旱黄土小流域不同植被类型植物与土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(5): 1824-1834.
	[Wen Chen, Yang Zhijiao, Yang Lei, et al. Ecological stoichiometry characteristics of plants and soil under different vegetation types in the semi-arid loess small watershed[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(5): 1824-1834.]
[32]	Wang L L, Zhang G H, Zhu P Z, et al. Soil C, N and P contents and their stoichiometry as affected by typical plant communities on steep gully slopes of the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Catena, 2022, 208: 105740, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105740. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105740
[33]	苏卓侠, 苏冰倩, 上官周平. 黄土高原刺槐叶片-土壤生态化学计量参数对降雨量的响应特征[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(19): 7000-7008.
	[Su Zhuoxia, Su Bingqian, Shangguan Zhouping, et al. Response characteristics of Robinia pseudoacacia leaf and soil ecological stoichiometric parameters to precipitation in the Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(19): 7000-7008.]
[34]	汤洁, 娄云, 李娜, 等. 冻融作用下盐碱水田土壤含水率和氮素对有机碳影响研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2012, 21(4): 620-623.
	[Tang Jie, Lou Yun, Li Na, et al. Soil moisture content and nitrogen impacts on soil organic carbon of saline-alkali paddy field under the effect of freeze-thaw[J]. Ecology and Environment Sciences, 2012, 21(4): 620-623.]
[35]	王亚东, 魏江生, 周梅, 等. 大兴安岭南段杨桦次生林土壤化学计量特征[J]. 土壤通报, 2020, 51(5): 1056-1064.
	[Wang Yadong, Wei Jiangsheng, Zhou Mei, et al. Soil stoichiometric characteristics in the poplar and birch secondary forests in southern Greater Xing’an Mountains[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2020, 51(5): 1056-1064.]
[36]	商素云, 姜培坤, 宋照亮, 等. 亚热带不同林分土壤表层有机碳组成及其稳定性[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(2): 416-424. doi: 10.5846/stxb201111301831
	[Shang Suyun, Jiang Peikun, Song Zhaoliang, et al. Composition and stability of organic carbon in the top soil under different forest types in subtropical China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(2): 416-424.] doi: 10.5846/stxb201111301831
[37]	张岩松, 雷泽勇, 于东伟, 等. 沙质草地营造樟子松林后土壤容重的变化及其影响因子[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(19): 7144-7152.
	[Zhang Yansong, Lei Zeyong, Yu Dongwei, et al. Changes in soil bulk density and its influencing factors after sandy grassland afforestation with Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(19): 7144-7152.]
[38]	葛楠楠, 石芸, 杨宪龙, 等. 黄土高原不同土壤质地农田土壤碳、氮、磷及团聚体分布特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(5): 1626-1632. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201705.021
	[Ge Nannan, Shi Yun, Yang Xianlong, et al. Distribution of soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, total phosphorus and water stable aggregates of cropland with different soil textures on the Loess Plateau, northwest China[J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017, 28(5): 1626-1632.] doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201705.021

植物群落	海拔/m	林龄/a	平均高度/m	平均胸径（基径）/cm	郁闭度（盖度）/%	林下主要植被
油松（Pinus tabulaeformis）	1363	20	7.3	8.9	61	毛莲蒿（Artemisia vestita）
刺槐（Robinia pseudoacacia）	1429	20	10.3	15.0	75	针茅（Stipa capillata）、赖草（Leymus secalinus）、紫苜蓿（Medicago sativa）、兴安胡枝子（Lespedeza daurica）
沙棘（Hippophae rhamnoides）	1390	20	1.8	3.5	70	赖草、茵陈蒿（Artemisia capillaris）、毛莲蒿、兴安胡枝子
草地	1377	20	-	-	85	兴安胡枝子、赖草、针茅

土壤指标	植物群落	最大值/g.kg^-1	最小值/g.kg^-1	平均值/g.kg^-1	标准差	变异系数
SOC	油松	0.562	0.098	0.232	0.105	0.45
	刺槐	0.947	0.219	0.367	0.183	0.50
	沙棘	0.992	0.087	0.302	0.243	0.80
	草地	0.764	0.172	0.341	0.179	0.52
STN	油松	0.055	0.020	0.034	0.009	0.26
	刺槐	0.086	0.044	0.056	0.012	0.21
	沙棘	0.086	0.021	0.043	0.020	0.47
	草地	0.078	0.030	0.044	0.014	0.32
STP	油松	0.646	0.554	0.591	0.031	0.05
	刺槐	0.656	0.565	0.619	0.027	0.04
	沙棘	0.596	0.493	0.557	0.025	0.04
	草地	0.689	0.588	0.631	0.026	0.04

土壤指标	植物群落	最大值	最小值	平均值	标准差	变异系数
C:N	油松	10.163	3.449	6.746	1.959	0.29
	刺槐	10.965	4.768	6.298	1.555	0.25
	沙棘	11.505	3.286	6.284	2.238	0.36
	草地	11.695	5.196	7.516	1.738	0.23
C:P	油松	0.969	0.170	0.395	0.181	0.46
	刺槐	1.456	0.367	0.588	0.272	0.46
	沙棘	1.737	0.146	0.545	0.443	0.81
	草地	1.144	0.276	0.535	0.257	0.48
N:P	油松	0.095	0.035	0.058	0.016	0.28
	刺槐	0.133	0.069	0.090	0.018	0.20
	沙棘	0.174	0.037	0.078	0.037	0.47
	草地	0.117	0.048	0.069	0.021	0.30

土壤养分及化学计量	SOC	STN	STP	C:N	C:P	N:P
SOC	1.000
STN	0.890^**	1.000
STP	0.290^*	0.247^*	1.000
C:N	0.779^**	0.458^**	0.300^*	1.000
C:P	0.986^**	0.885^**	0.151	0.758^**	1.000
N:P	0.850^**	0.973^**	0.035	0.411^**	0.882^**	1.000

土壤理化性质	多元回归方程	r	P
SOC	Y=-0.02sand-7.61BD+14.4	0.41	0.00400
STN	Y =0.002silt-0.76BD-0.001SWC+1.26	0.72	0.00001
STP	Y =0.009silt-0.78BD+1.42	0.66	0.00001
C:P	Y=-7601.8clay+1046.4silt-85.16SWC-23967.74	0.55	0.00100
N:P	Y=-0.002sand-1.04BD-0.001SWC+1.99	0.62	0.00020

黄土丘陵区典型退耕恢复植被土壤生态化学计量特征

Characteristics of soil ecological stoichiometry in typical fallow-restored vegetation in the loess hilly areas

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 38

相关文章 14

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	刘尊方, 雷浩川, 盛海彦. 基于XGBoost模型的湟水流域耕地土壤养分遥感反演[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(10): 1643-1653.
[2]	雒占福, 张蓉, 赵雪雁, 梁晶晶, 王家明. 黄土丘陵区乡村国土空间安全评价及其影响因素研究——以临洮县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(1): 127-138.
[3]	李强,何国兴,文铜,杨冬阳,张德罡,韩天虎,潘冬荣,柳小妮. 东祁连山高寒草甸土壤理化性质对海拔和坡向的响应及其与植被特征的关系[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(5): 1559-1569.
[4]	孙小妹,何明珠,周彬,李金霞,陈年来. 霸王根茎叶非结构性碳与C:N:P计量特征对干旱的响应[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(1): 240-249.
[5]	李浩, 胡婵娟, 冯德显, 赵荣钦, 郭雷, 满洲 . 半干旱黄土丘陵区退化人工林群落结构调整下细根特征分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(6): 1523-1533.
[6]	王晨冰, 张帆, 赵秀梅, 王鸿, 王发林. 垄膜保墒集雨对旱地桃园土壤养分及酶活性的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2018, 41(3): 572-581.
[7]	谢江波, 彭历芝, 李艳明, 李彦. 两种梭梭属幼苗在土壤N和P梯度下的竞争能力研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2018, 41(1): 83-91.
[8]	杨永梅, 李惠梅, 高泽兵, 杨海镇, 卓玛措. 三江源花石峡地区植被退化与土壤养分的关联[J]. 干旱区地理, 2016, 39(2): 361-367.
[9]	赵维俊, 刘贤德, 徐丽恒, 张学龙, 敬文茂, 王顺利, 牛赟, 马剑. 祁连山青海云杉林动态监测样地土壤pH和养分的空间异质性[J]. 干旱区地理, 2015, 38(6): 1179-1189.
[10]	李从娟，徐新文，孙永强，邱永志，李生宇，高培，钟显彬，闫健，王桂芬. 不同生境下三种荒漠植物叶片及土壤C、N、P的化学计量特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2014, 37(5): 996-1004.
[11]	钱亦兵，吴兆宁，常轶深，马玉娥. 艾比湖地区植被和土壤在南-北区段上的差异性分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2013, 36(5): 781-789.
[12]	胡望舒，洪辉，周侃，樊杰. 黄土丘陵区水平梯田与农民收入的关系及原因——以宁夏回族自治区固原市为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2013, 36(3): 536-544.
[13]	张平,刘贤德，,车宗玺,成彩霞. 祁连山青海云杉林土壤养分异质性分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2012, 35(04): 594-598.
[14]	任丽娜，王海燕，丁国栋，高广磊，杨晓娟. 林分密度对华北土石山区油松人工林土壤有机碳及养分特征的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2012, 35(03): 456-464.