乌兰布和沙漠典型植物群落土壤风蚀可蚀性研究

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2020.06.15

Abstract

Abstract: In order to figure out the effect of vegetation restoration on the wind erodibility of the soil in Ulan Buh Desert, Inner Mongolia, China, eight typical plant communities (Nitraria tangutorum Bobr., Ammopiptanthus mongolicus Cheng f., Phragmites communis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud., Artemisia ordosica Krasch., Stipa glareosa P. Smirn., Kalidium foliatum Moq., Agriophyllum squarrosum (L.) Moq., Haloxylon ammodendron Bunge.) in Ulan Buh Desert were investigated in this study. The topsoil in each community at different sand fixing stages was sampled and the soil physical factors (erodible particle content, soil water content, organic matter content), soil crust factor index, and vegetation factor index were monitored to analyze the differences of soil erodible factors among different plant community types and sand fixation stages. Results showed that: (1) In Ulan Buh Desert, the erodible particle content in different plant communities was in the range of 85.23%-91.64%, organic matter content was in the range of 0.42- 3.16 g · kg^{- 1}, soil water content was 11.10- 18.30 g · kg^{- 1}, soil crust factor index was 0.83- 0.99, and vegetation factor index was 0.29- 0.67. (2) The erodible particle content, organic matter content, and soil water content in shrub communities (S. glareosa, K. foliatum, A. squarrosum) were higher than that in herbaceous communities (N. tangutorum, A. mongolicus, H. ammodendron). It can be concluded that wind erosion erodibility of shrub communities is weaker than that of herbaceous communities, indicating a stronger ability in reducing soil wind erosion in shrub community. Vegetation type significantly affects the topsoil erodibility through the way of improving topsoil granulometric composition and organic matter content. P. communis had a significantly higher soil water content that other herbaceous communities since its living condition was always in a low-lying area. (3) The erodible particle content of topsoil shows a decreased tendency in the order of flowing sandy land, semi-fixed sandy land, and fixed sandy land. Meanwhile, organic matter content and soil crust factor of topsoil shows an increased tendency in the order of flowing sandy land, semi-fixed sandy land, and fixed sandy land. No significant difference is observed with the soil water content and vegetation factor among the sand fixation stages. Sand fixation had a significant effect on the topsoil erodibility through the way of improving topsoil granulometric composition and organic matter content, and enhancing biocrusts growth. (4) Soil erodible particles, soil organic matter content, soil water content, soil crust factor index, and vegetation factor index had significant correlations with vegetation types and sand fixation stages. Therefore, to reduce soil wind erosion, both plant species selection and community succession promotion should be considered in ecological construction in the sandy area. This research provided supports for evaluating the ecological function of vegetation ecosystem and guiding the construction sandy desertification combating projects in Ulan Buh Desert.

Key words: Ulan Buh Desert, community type, soil wind erosion, soil erodibility

WANG Jia-ting, YU Ming-han, YANG Hai-long, WU Qi-gan, LIU Tai-han. Soil erosibility of typical plant communities in Ulan Buh Desert[J].Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(6): 1543-1550.

References 31

[1]	刘斌, 高永, 高志海, 等. 土壤风蚀新技术应用研究进展[J]. 内蒙古林业科技, 2017, 43(2): 52-57. [LIU Bin, GAO Yong, GAO Zhi⁃ hai, et al. Research progress on new technology of soil wind erosion [J]. Inner Mongolia Forestry Science and Technology, 2017, 43(2): 52-57. ]
[2]	南岭, 杜灵通, 展秀丽. 土壤风蚀可蚀性研究进展 [J]. 土壤, 2014, 46(2): 204-211. [NAN Ling, DU Lingtong, ZHAN Xiuli. Ad⁃ vances in study on soil erodibility for wind erosion[J]. Soils, 2014, 46(2): 204-211. ]
[3]	CHEPIL W S. Measurement of wind erosiveness of soils by the dry sieving procedure[J]. Scientific Agriculture, 1942, 23(3): 145-160.
[4]	CHEPIL W S. Properties of soil which influence wind erosion: Ⅰ The governing principle of surface roughness[J]. Soil Science, 1950, 69: 149-162.
[5]	CHEPIL W S. Properties of soil which influence wind erosion: Ⅱ Dry aggregate structure as an index of erodibility[J]. Soil Science, 1950, 69: 403-414.
[6]	董光荣, 李长治, 金炯, 等. 关于土壤风蚀风洞实验的某些研究结果[J]. 科学通报, 1987, 32(4): 277-301. [DONG Guangrong, LI Changzhi, JIN Jiong, et al. Some results of wind tunnel experi⁃ ments on soil erosion[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 1987, 32(4): 277-301. ]
[7]	董治宝, 陈渭南, 李振山, 等. 植被对土壤风蚀影响作用的实验研究[J]. 土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报, 1996, (2): 1-8. [DONG Zhi⁃ bao, CHEN Weinan, LI Zhenshan, et al. The laboratory study on the role of vegetation in soil erosion by wind, Institute of Desert Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 1996, (2): 1-8. ]
[8]	GUO Z L, CHANG C, WANG R D, et al. Comparison of different methods to determine wind-erodible fraction of soil with rock frag⁃ ments under different tillage/management[J]. Soil and Tillage Re⁃ search, 2017, 168.
[9]	陈宇轩, 张飞岳, 高广磊, 等. 科尔沁沙地樟子松人工林土壤粒径分布特征 [J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(4): 1051- 1058. [CHEN Yuxuan, ZHANG Feiyue, GAO Guanglei, et al. Soil particle size dis⁃ tribution of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica plantations in the Horqin Sandy Land[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(4): 1051-1058. ]
[10]	张科利, 彭文英, 杨红丽. 中国土壤可蚀性值及其估算[J]. 土壤学报, 2007, (1): 7- 13. [ZHANG Keli, PENG Wenying, YANG Hongli. Soil erodibility and its estimation for agriculture soil in China[J]. Acta Pedologica sinica, 2007, (1): 7-13. ]
[11]	WOODEYFF N P, SIDDOWAY F H. A wind erosion equation[J]. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings, 1956, 29: 602-608.
[12]	刘目兴. 土壤风蚀可蚀性研究综述及其在风蚀预报中的应用 [C] // 中国土壤学会. 土壤资源持续利用和生态环境安全—— 中国土壤学会第十一届二次理事扩大会议暨学术会议论文集. 中国土壤学会: 中国土壤学会, 2009: 164-172. [LIU Mux⁃ ing. A review of soil wind erodion erodibility and its application in wind erosion perdiction[C]//Soil Science Society of China. Proceed⁃ ings of the 11th Expanded and Academic Conference of the Soil Science Socity of China: Sustainable utilization of soil resources and safety of ecological environment. Nanjing: Soil Science Soci⁃ ety of China, 2009: 164-172.]
[13]	刘芳, 郝玉光, 徐军, 等. 乌兰布和沙区风沙运移特征分析[J]. 干旱区地理, 2014, 37(6): 1163- 1169. [LIU Fang, HAO Yuguang, XU Jun, et al. Sand flow characteristics in Ulan Buh Desert[J]. Ar⁃ id Land Geography, 2014, 37(6): 1163-1169. ]
[14]	于宝勒, 吴文俊, 赵学军, 等. 内蒙古京津风沙源治理工程土壤风蚀控制效益研究 [J]. 干旱区研究, 2016, 33(6): 1278- 1286. [YU Baole, WU Wenjun, ZHAO Xuejun, et al. Benefits of soil wind erosion control of the Beijing-Tianjin sand source control project in Inner Mongolia[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2016, 33(6): 1278-1286. ]
[15]	李有奇. 乌兰布和沙漠治理状况及今后发展对策[J]. 内蒙古林业, 2007, (11): 25. [LI Youqi. The situation of Ulan Buh Desert management and its future development countermeasures[J]. Jour⁃ nal of Inner Mongolia Forestry, 2007, (11): 25. ]
[16]	贾鹏, 王乃昂, 程弘毅, 等. 基于 3S 技术的乌兰布和沙漠范围和面积分析[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2015, 29(12): 131-138. [JIA Peng, WANG Naiang, CHENG Hongyi, et al. A study on the range and area of Ulan Buh Desert based on 3S technology[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2015, 29(12): 131-138. ]
[17]	ZHU G Y, TANG Z S, ZHOU P, et al. Factors affecting the spatial and temporal variations in soil erodibility of China[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research. Earth Surface, 2019, 124(3): 737-749.
[18]	邢春燕, 郭中领, 常春平, 等. RWEQ 模型在河北坝上地区的适用性 [J]. 中国沙漠, 2018, 38(6): 1180- 1192. [XING Chunyan, GUO Zhongling, CHANG Chunping, et al. Validation of RWEQ model in the bashang area, Hebei, China[J]. Journal of Desert Re⁃ search, 2018, 38(6): 1180-1192. ]
[19]	马月存, 陈源泉, 隋鹏, 等. 土壤风蚀影响因子与防治技术[J]. 生态学杂志, 2006, (11): 1390- 1394. [MA Yuecun, CHEN Yuan⁃ quan, SUI Peng, et al. Research advances in affecting factors and prevention techniques of soil wind erosion[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2006, (11): 1390-1394. ]
[20]	任宏晶, 李生宇, 雷加强, 等. 不同覆盖度沙粒胶结体风蚀抑制效益研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(1): 56-63. [REN Hongjing, LI Shengyu, LEI Jiaqiang, et al. Field experiment about inhibitory effects on wind erosion of sand cemented bodies with different cov⁃ erage[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(1): 56-63. ]
[21]	李晓原, 张文太, 李建贵, 等. 伊犁河谷沟壑区坡面尺度地形、植被与土壤性质的相互关系[J]. 新疆农业大学学报, 2016, 39(6): 477-482. [LI Xiaoyuan, ZHANG Wentai, LI Jiangui, et al. Corre⁃ lation among terrain, vegetation and soil properties at hillslope scale topography in Ili Valley[J]. Journal of Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2016, 39(6): 477-482. ]
[22]	邢恩德, 马少薇, 郭建英, 等. 植被盖度对典型草原区地表风沙流结构及风蚀量影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2015, 22(6): 331-334. [XING Ende, MA Shaowei, GUO Jianying, et al. Effect of vegeta⁃ tion cover on sandstorm structure and rate of wind erosion in typi⁃ cal steppe[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 22 (6): 331-334. ]
[23]	宋阳, 刘连友, 严平, 等. 土壤可蚀性研究述评[J]. 干旱区地理, 2006, 29(1): 124- 131. [SONG Yang, LIU Lianyou, YAN Ping, et al. A review of soil erodibility research[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2006, 29(1): 124-131. ]
[24]	李胜功, 常学礼, 赵学勇. 沙蓬—流动沙丘先锋植物的研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 1992, (4): 63- 70. [LI Shenggong, CHANG Xueli, ZHAO Xueyong. Study of Agriophyllum squarrosum pioneer⁃ ing plant on shifting sand[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 1992, (4): 63-70. ]
[25]	王珏, 宝音陶格涛. 荒漠草原沙生针茅群落组成及其地上生物量研究 [J]. 中国草地学报, 2014, 36(3): 108-111. [WANG Jue, Baoyin Taogetao. Species composition and the aboveground bio⁃ mass of Stipa glareosa community in desert steppe[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2014, 36(3): 108-111. ]
[26]	马晓静, 郭艳菊, 张嘉玉, 等. 宁夏盐池县沙化草地土壤团聚体分异特征[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(3): 27-37. [MA Xiaojing, GUO Yanju, ZHANG Jiayu, et al. Size distribution of soil aggregates in different grassland desertification in Yanchi County, Ningxia[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(3): 27-37]
[27]	吴汪洋, 张登山, 田丽慧, 等. 青海湖克土沙地沙棘林的防风固沙机制与效益 [J]. 干旱区地理, 2014, 37(4): 777- 785. [WU Wangyang, ZHANG Dengshan, TIAN Lihui, et al. Mechanism and benefit of wind- prevention and sand- fixation of Hippophae rham⁃ noides forestation in Ketu Sandy Land around Qinghai Lake[J]. Ar⁃ id Land Geography, 2014, 37(4): 777-785. ]
[28]	移小勇, 赵哈林, 赵学勇, 等. 不同风沙土含水量因子的抗风蚀性[J]. 土壤学报, 2006, (4): 684-687. [YI Xiaoyong, ZHAO Halin, ZHAO Xueyong, et al. Erodibility of aeolian soils in moisture con⁃ tent [J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2006, (4): 684-687. ]
[29]	吴楠, 张元明, 潘惠霞, 等. 古尔班通古特沙漠苔藓结皮中可培养细菌多样性特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2014, 37(2): 250-258. [WU Nan, ZHANG Yuanming, PAN Huixia, et al. Culture- dependent bacteria diversity of moss crusts in the Gurbantunggut Desert[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2014, 37(2): 250-258. ]
[30]	谭凤翥, 王雪芹, 王海峰, 等. 柽柳灌丛沙堆及丘间地蚀积分布随背景植被变化的风洞实验[J]. 干旱区地理, 2018, 41(1): 56- 65. [TAN Fengzhu, WANG Xueqin, WANG Haifeng, et al. Wind tunnel simulation on distribution change of erosion and deposition around nebkhas and interdune under different background vegeta⁃ tion coverage[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2018, 41(1): 56-65. ]
[31]	王陇, 高广磊, 张英, 等. 毛乌素沙地风沙土粒径分布特征及其影响因素 [J]. 干旱区地理, 2019, 42(5): 1003- 1010. [WANG Long, GAO Guanglei, ZHANG Ying, et al. Particle size distribu⁃ tion of aeolian soils in the Mu Us Sandy Land and the influence factors[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2019, 42(5): 1003-1010. ]

Soil erosibility of typical plant communities in Ulan Buh Desert

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References 31

Related Articles 3

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	WU Yingying,WANG Zhenting. Risk assessment of soil wind erosion in Hetao Plain [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(3): 418-427.
[2]	FENG Zhe,LIU Ruijuan,BAI Yuchen,CHANG Chunping,GUO Zhongling,LI Jifeng,WANG Rende,LI Qing. Variation characteristics of the fetch effect of near surface aeolian sand flux for farmlands [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(5): 1500-1512.
[3]	LIU Fang，HAO Yu-guang，XU Jun，XING Zhi-ming，CHEN Hai-ling，ZHAO Ying-ming. Sand flow characteristics in Ulan Buh Desert [J]. , 2014, 37(6): 1163-1169.