祁连山东段山地典型灌丛枯落物及土壤水源涵养功能研究

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000–6060.2021.166

Abstract

Abstract:

The water conservation function of the Qilian Mountains plays a vital role in the social, economic, and ecological security of the northeast part of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and even the whole Hexi Oasis. To investigate the water conservation function of the shrub litter layer and shrub soil layer in this area, to clarify the difference in water conservation effect of different shrub forests, and to provide theoretical guidance for the restoration and improvement of the water conservation function of shrubs and the vegetation construction in the Qilian Mountains’ alpine region. Taking litter and soil of six typical shrubs in the eastern part of Qilian Mountains as research objects, the hydrological characteristics of litter were studied by field investigation and indoor immersion, The cutting ring method was used to investigate the physical properties of soil, while the coordinate comprehensive evaluation method was used to assess the water conservation function of shrub litter and soil. The outcomes are as follows: (1) The accumulation of litter of the six shrubs ranged from 0.23-3.61 t·hm^-2, and the order of size was as follows: Salix oritrepha>Salix sclerophylla>Spiraea salicifolia>Potentilla fruticosa>Rhododendron capitatum>Rhododendron thymifolium. (2) The maximum water holding the capacity range of litter is 0.57-10.59 t·hm ^-2, with the largest S. oritrepha and the smallest R. thymifolium. The maximum water holding rate ranged from 147.30% to 293.28%, with the largest variation being S. oritrepha and the smallest S. salicifolia. (3) The water holding capacity (Y) and soaking time (t) of the six shrubs are in a logarithmic function relationship: Y=klnt+b, R ²>0.967, and the water absorption rate (V) and soaking time (t) is in a power function relationship: V=Ktⁿ, R²>0.823. (4) The maximum storage capacity and the effective storage capacity were all S. oritrepha>S. sclerophylla>as P. fruticosa>S. salicifolia>R. thymifolium>R. capitatum. The maximum, and effective interception rates were calculated as P. fruticosa>S. oritrepha>S. sclerophylla>S. salicifolia>R. thymifolium>R. capitatum. (5) The soil bulk density of the six types of shrubs ranges from 0.69-0.95 g·cm^-3, with S. oritrepha being the largest and R. thymifolium being the smallest. The total porosity of the soil ranges from 60.94%-68.75%. R. thymifolium is the largest, and S. salicifolia is the smallest. The maximum water holding capacity of the soil ranges from 609.44-687.46 t·hm^-2, R. thymifolium is the largest, and S. salicifolia is the smallest. (6) The litter layer and soil layer’s water conservation function S. oritrepha is the best according to the analysis of coordinate comprehensive evaluation method, next were the S. sclerophylla (0.7385), P. fruticosa (2.3471), S. salicifolia (2.5302), R. capitatum (3.2114) and R. thymifolium (3.4583). To summarize, we should strengthen shrub litter protection and supervision, take full advantage of the differences in hydrological functions between different shrub litter and soil, and appropriately increase the species of shrub litter S. oritrepha, and give full play to the function of a shrub to conserve water resources.

Key words: shrub, litter, soil, hydrological characteristics, alpine region

YANG Xiaoxia,ZHAO Jinmei,ZHANG Xue,FAN Yuhang,ZHANG Bin,WANG Jingnan,ZHANG Biyan. Litter and soil water conservation function of typical shrubs in eastern Qilian Mountains[J].Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(1): 197-207.

Figures/Tables 9

Tab. 1

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Tab. 2

Fig. 5

Tab. 3

Soil physical properties and hydrological characteristics of shrubland"

灌丛类型	土层深度 /cm	容重 /g·cm^-3	非毛管孔隙 /%	毛管孔隙 /%	总孔隙 /%	最大持水量 /t·hm^-2	毛管持水量 /t·hm^-2	最小持水量 /t·hm^-2
山生柳	0~10	0.78±0.06Ca	6.34±0.90Aab	64.30±3.12Ab	70.64±3.65Ab	706.40±36.48Ab	642.96±31.18Ab	63.43±9.02Aab
	10~20	0.81±0.07Ca	4.29±1.46Bab	63.47±2.19Abcd	67.76±3.33Ab	677.57±33.33Ab	634.70±21.93Abcd	42.87±14.64Bab
	20~40	1.17±0.04Aa	2.63±0.33Bb	50.93±1.24Bb	53.56±1.46Bb	535.55±14.58Bb	509.29±12.39Bb	26.27±3.30Bb
	40~60	1.03±0.00Bab	3.55±0.68Bb	53.61±0.26Bab	57.16±0.94Ba	571.63±9.40Ba	536.13±2.60Bab	35.50±6.80Bb
	均值	0.95±0.03a	4.20±0.16a	58.08±0.17b	62.28±0.21b	622.79±2.09b	580.77±1.68b	42.02±1.65a
硬叶柳	0~10	0.79±0.02Da	5.65±1.95Aab	64.64±0.18Ab	70.28±1.92Ab	702.82±19.17Ab	646.35±1.76Ab	56.47±19.53Aab
	10~20	0.87±0.04Ca	6.06±1.70Aab	59.04±2.01Bd	65.10±1.65Bbc	651.05±16.52Bbc	590.41±20.10Bd	60.63±17.02Aab
	20~40	1.10±0.06Ab	3.73±0.73Aa	51.39±2.33Cb	55.12±1.64Cb	551.16±16.41Db	513.90±23.26Cb	37.27±7.34Aa
	40~60	0.99±0.02Bbc	5.39±1.65Aab	53.45±0.79Cab	58.84±2.44Ca	588.42±24.42Ca	534.52±7.92Cab	53.90±16.50Aab
	均值	0.94±0.02a	5.21±1.10a	57.13±1.20b	62.34±1.31b	623.36±13.07b	571.30±12.00b	52.07±10.99a
绣线菊	0~10	0.78±0.15Ca	5.90±2.42Aab	65.90±2.53Ab	71.80±4.30Ab	718.00±43.02Ab	658.97±25.31Ab	59.03±24.23Aab
	10~20	0.86±0.06BCa	3.21±0.32Bb	60.50±0.50Bcd	63.71±0.56Bc	637.14±5.63Bc	605.04±5.02Bcd	32.10±3.21Bb
	20~40	1.07±0.01Ab	3.11±0.27Bab	49.63±0.47Cb	52.74±0.20Cb	527.39±2.00Cb	496.34±4.75Cb	31.05±2.75Bab
	40~60	0.96±0.00ABc	7.53±0.13Aa	47.99±1.19Cc	55.52±1.32Ca	555.21±13.23Ca	479.91±11.93Cc	75.30±1.30Aa
	均值	0.92±0.05a	4.94±0.46a	56.01±0.50b	60.94±0.78b	609.44±7.81b	560.07±5.02b	49.37±4.63a
头花杜鹃	0~10	0.48±0.03Db	5.81±0.23ABab	73.11±0.79Aa	78.92±1.02Aa	789.16±10.20Aa	731.06±7.90Aa	58.10±2.30ABab
	10~20	0.65±0.09Cb	4.78±0.79ABab	68.32±2.50Aab	73.10±1.71Aa	731.05±17.14Aa	683.25±25.02Aab	47.80±7.90ABab
	20~40	0.84±0.02Bd	3.47±0.07Bab	61.31±5.13a	64.77±5.07Ba	647.72±50.68Ba	613.07±51.33Ba	34.65±0.65Bab
	40~60	1.05±0.05Aa	6.74±2.46Aa	50.89±3.02Cb	57.64±5.48Ba	576.38±54.84Ba	508.93±30.19Cb	67.45±24.65Aa
	均值	0.76±0.00c	5.20±0.89a	63.41±0.96a	68.61±0.07a	686.08±0.69a	634.08±9.56a	52.00±8.87a
千里香杜鹃	0~10	0.53±0.02Cb	7.51±1.06Aa	66.53±2.58Bb	74.03±1.52Aab	740.31±15.19Aab	665.26±25.84Bb	75.05±10.65Aa
	10~20	0.54±0.06Cb	5.04±0.12Bab	70.76±1.95Aa	75.80±2.07Aa	757.98±20.70Aa	707.63±19.55Aa	50.35±1.15Bab
	20~40	0.72±0.01Be	3.35±0.25Cab	65.19±1.82Ba	68.53±2.07Ba	685.32±20.66Ba	651.87±18.21Ba	33.45±2.45Cab
	40~60	0.98±0.01Ac	3.05±0.55Cb	53.57±1.12Cab	56.62±0.58Ca	566.23±5.75Ca	535.68±11.20Cab	30.55±5.45Cb
	均值	0.69±0.02d	4.74±0.49a	64.01±0.02a	68.75±0.51a	687.46±5.10a	640.11±0.21a	47.35±4.93a
金露梅	0~10	0.68±0.04Ca	4.22±0.15Bb	68.75±2.93Ab	72.97±3.08Ab	729.68±30.80Ab	687.53±29.35Ab	42.15±1.45Bb
	10~20	0.79±0.09Ba	7.11±2.80Aa	65.39±5.18Abc	72.49±2.37Aa	724.93±23.73Aa	653.88±51.78Abc	71.05±28.05Aa
	20~40	0.95±0.04Ac	2.94±0.81Bab	61.28±5.28ABa	64.23±4.46Ba	642.29±44.64Ba	612.84±52.79ABa	29.45±8.15Bab
	40~60	1.03±0.01Aab	3.08±0.26Bb	53.88±0.18Ba	56.96±0.44Ca	569.60±4.44Ca	538.80±1.84Ba	30.80±2.60Bb
	均值	0.86±0.01b	4.34±0.93a	62.33±3.30a	66.66±2.37a	666.62±23.68a	623.26±33.02a	43.36±9.34a

Tab. 3

Tab. 4

References 37

[1]	杨益帆, 胡宗达, 李亚非, 等. 川西亚高山川滇高山栎灌丛地被物与土壤持水性能[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2020, 26(4):951-960.
	[Yang Yifan, Hu Zongda, Li Yafei, et al. Water conservation capacity of ground cover and soils in the subalpine Quercus aquifolioides shrubs of western Sichuan, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology, 2020, 26(4):951-960. ]
[2]	王晓学, 沈会涛, 李叙勇, 等. 森林水源涵养功能的多尺度内涵、过程及计量方法[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(4):1019-1030.
	[Wang Xiaoxue, Shen Huitao, Li Xuyong, et al. Concepts, processes and quantification methods of the forest water conservation at the multiple scales[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(4):1019-1030. ]
[3]	王玲, 赵广亮, 周红娟, 等. 八达岭林场不同密度油松人工林枯落物水文效应[J]. 生态环境学报, 2019, 28(9):1767-1775.
	[Wang Ling, Zhao Guangliang, Zhou Hongjuan, et al. Hydrological characteristics of litter in a Pinus tabulaeformis plantation with different densities in Badaling Forest Farm[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2019, 28(9):1767-1775. ]
[4]	Neris J, Tejedor M, Rodríguez M, et al. Effect of forest floor characteristics on water repellency, infiltration, runoff and soil loss in Andisols of Tenerife (Canary Islands, Spain)[J]. Catena, 2013, 108:50-57. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2012.04.011
[5]	陈波, 杨新兵, 赵心苗, 等. 冀北山地6种天然纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2012, 26(2):196-202.
	[Chen Bo, Yang Xinbing, Zhao Xinmiao, et al. Hydrological effects of six natural pure forests litters and soil in northern mountain of Hebei Province[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2012, 26(2):196-202. ]
[6]	魏强, 凌雷, 张广忠, 等. 甘肃兴隆山主要森林类型凋落物累积量及持水特性[J]. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(10):2589-2598.
	[Wei Qiang, Ling Lei, Zhang Guangzhong, et al. Water-holding characteristics and accumulation amount of the litters under main forest types in Xinglong Mountain of Gansu, northwest China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2011, 22(10):2589-2598. ]
[7]	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. ]
[8]	赵鹏, 马佳明, 李艳茹, 等. 太行山典型区域不同林分类型枯落物水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(5):176-185.
	[Zhao Peng, Ma Jiaming, Li Yanru, et al. Hydrological effects of litters in different forest types in the typical areas of Taihang Mountains[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34(5):176-185. ]
[9]	Gabarrón-Galeote M A, Martínez-Murillo J F, Ruiz-Sinoga J D, et al. Relevant effects of vegetal cover and litter on the soil hydrological response of two contrasting Mediterranean hillslopes at the end of the dry season (south of Spain)[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2012, 26(11):1729-1738. doi: 10.1002/hyp.v26.11
[10]	Ent R J V D, Coenders-Gerrits A M J, Nikoli R, et al. The importance of proper hydrology in the forest cover-water yield debate: Commentary on Ellison et al. (2012) Global Change Biology, 18, 806-820[J]. Global Change Biology, 2012, 18(9):2677-2680. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02703.x
[11]	Christopher, Burrows R, Martin, et al. Hydrology of the forest city basin, mid-continent, USA: Implications for CO₂ sequestration in the St. Peter Sandstone[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2015, 73(4):1409-1425. doi: 10.1007/s12665-014-3494-0
[12]	燕东. 海南尖峰岭热带雨林凋落物和土壤水文特性研究[D]. 北京: 中国林业科学研究院, 2011.
	[Yan Dong. Study on hydrological characteristics of litter and soil in tropical rainforest in Jianfengling, Hainan Island[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Forestry, 2011. ]
[13]	刘佳茹, 赵军, 沈思民, 等. 基于SRP概念模型的祁连山地区生态脆弱性评价[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(6):1573-1582.
	[Liu Jiaru, Zhao jun, Shen Simin, et al. Ecological vulnerability assessment of Qilian Mountains region based on SRP conceptual model[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(6):1573-1582. ]
[14]	袁杰, 曹广超, 曹生奎, 等. 祁连山南坡不同植被类型枯落物及其土壤持水特性分析[J]. 生态科学, 2018, 37(5):180-190.
	[Yuan Jie, Cao Guangchao, Cao Shengkui, et al. Analysis on litterfall and soil water retention properties of different vegetation types on the south slope of Qilian Mountains[J]. Ecological Science, 2018, 37(5):180-190. ]
[15]	赵维俊. 祁连山水源涵养林水文特征研究[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2008.
	[Zhao Weijun. >Study on the hydrological characteristics of water conservation forest in Qilian Mountains[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2008. ]
[16]	田风霞, 赵传燕, 冯兆东, 等. 祁连山青海云杉林冠生态水文效应及其影响因素[J]. 生态学报, 2012, 32(4):62-72.
	[Tian Fengxia, Zhao Chuanyan, Feng Zhaodong, et al. Eco-hydrological effects of Qinghai spruce (Picea crassifolia) canopy and its influence factors in the Qilian Mountains[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2012, 32(4):62-72. ]
[17]	张学龙, 金铭, 刘贤德, 等. 祁连山5种典型灌木林枯落物蓄积量及其持水特性[J]. 生态环境学报, 2015, 24(5):735-740.
	[Zhang Xuelong, Jin Ming, Liu Xiande, et al. Litter storage and its water holding capacity characteristics of five typical shrubs in Qilian Mountains[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2015, 24(5):735-740. ]
[18]	常宗强, 王金叶, 常学向, 等. 祁连山水源涵养林枯枝落叶层水文生态功能[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2001(增刊1):8-13.
	[Chang Zongqiang, Wang Jinye, Chang Xuexiang, et al. Litter hydrology and ecological functions of water resource conservation forest in Qilian Mountains[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2001(Suppl. 1):8-13. ]
[19]	聂雪花, 车克钧, 刘贤德, 等. 祁连山西水林区主要森林类型土壤水文功能研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2009, 37(15):7269-7272.
	[Nie Xuehua, Che Kejun, Liu Xiande, et al. Study on the main forest type soil hydrological function in Xishui forest region of Qilian Mountain[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2009, 37(15):7269-7272. ]
[20]	赵锦梅, 王彦辉, 王紫, 等. 祁连山东段金强河河谷高寒草地土壤的水文特征[J]. 草业科学, 2020, 37(2):256-265.
	[Zhao Jinmei, Wang Yanhui, Wang Zi, et al. Soil hydrological characteristics of alpine grasslands in the Jinqiang River Valley in eastern Qilian Mountains[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2020, 37(2):256-265. ]
[21]	王金叶. 祁连山水源涵养林生态系统水分传输过程与机理研究[D]. 长沙: 中南林业科技大学, 2006.
	[Wang Jinye. Study of mechanism and process of water transmission on water resoure conservation forests eeosystem in Qilian Mountains[D]. Changsha: Central South University of Forestry and Technology, 2006. ]
[22]	孟好军, 刘贤德, 张宏斌, 等. 祁连山人工林凋落物和土壤水分特性的研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2013, 33(2):11-15.
	[Meng Haojun, Liu Xiande, Zhang Hongbin, et al. Study on litters and soil moisture characteristics of different plantations in Qilian Mountains[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2013, 33(2):11-15. ]
[23]	马剑, 刘贤德, 李广, 等. 祁连山北麓中段青海云杉林土壤水热时空变化特征[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(4):1033-1040.
	[Ma Jian, Liu Xiande, Li Guang, et al. Spatial and temporal variations of soil moisture and temperature of Picea crassifolia forest in north piedmont of central Qilian Mountains[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(4):1033-1040. ]
[24]	王学福. 灌木林在祁连山区的作用及其发展策略研究[J]. 甘肃林业科技, 2005, 30(2):32-35, 57.
	[Wang Xuefu. The importance of shrub in Qilian Mountain and its protection and development countermeasures[J]. Journal of Gansu Forestry Science and Technology, 2005, 30(2):32-35, 57. ]
[25]	陈引珍, 程金花, 张洪江, 等. 缙云山几种林分水源涵养和保土功能评价[J]. 水土保持学报, 2009, 23(2):66-70.
	[Chen Yinzhen, Cheng Jinhua, Zhang Hongjiang, et al. Evaluation of soil and water conservation capacity of several forest in Jinyun Mountain[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2009, 23(2):66-70. ]
[26]	牛勇, 刘洪禄, 张志强. 北京地区典型树种及非生物因子对枯落物水文效应的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(8):183-189.
	[Niu Yong, Liu Honglu, Zhang Zhiqiang. Effects of typical tree species and abiotic factors on hydrologic characters of forest litter in Beijing[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2015, 31(8):183-189. ]
[27]	赵锦梅, 徐长林, 马亚萍, 等. 祁连山东段高寒灌丛地被物与土壤的水文特征[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(10):146-151.
	[Zhao Jinmei, Xu Changlin, Ma Yaping, et al. Surface cover and soil hydrological characteristics of alpine shrub in eastern Qilian Mountains[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2014, 50(10):146-151. ]
[28]	齐瑞, 杨永红, 陈宁, 等. 白龙江上游5种典型灌木林枯落物蓄积量及持水特性[J]. 水土保持学报, 2016, 30(6):123-127.
	[Qi Rui, Yang Yonghong, Chen Ning, et al. Litter storage and water holding capacity characteristics of five typical shrubberies in the upper reaches of Bailongjiang River of Gansu Province[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 30(6):123-127. ]
[29]	林立文, 邓羽松, 李佩琦, 等. 桂北地区不同密度杉木林枯落物与土壤水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(5):200-207, 215.
	[Lin Liwen, Deng Yusong, Li Peiqi, et al. Study on the effects of litter and soil hydrology of different density Cunninghamia lanceolata forests in northern Guangxi[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34(5):200-207, 215. ]
[30]	李晶晶, 白岗栓, 张蕊. 陕北丘陵沟壑区常见树种叶片的吸水性能[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2013, 11(1):99-102.
	[Li Jingjing, Bai Gangshuan, Zhang Rui. Water absorption of common trees leaves in loess hilly and gully region of northern Shaanxi[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2013, 11(1):99-102. ]
[31]	吴晓光, 刘龙, 张宏飞, 等. 砒砂岩区主要造林树种枯落物持水性能及土壤物理性质[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(4):137-144.
	[Wu Xiaoguang, Liu Long, Zhang Hongfei, et al. Litter water-holding capacity and soil physical properties of main afforestation tree species in sandstone area[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34(4):137-144. ]
[32]	梁晓娇, 王树力. 阿什河源头不同类型红松人工林枯落物及其土壤水文特性[J]. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(1):140-145, 152.
	[Liang Xiaojiao, Wang Shuli. Litter and soil hydrological properties of Pinus korainensis plantations in Ashi River’s headstream[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2017, 31(1):140-145, 152. ]
[33]	Hobbie S E, Shevtsova A, Chapin F S. Plant responses to species removal and experimental warming in Alaskan tussock tundra[J]. Oikos, 1999, 84(3):417-434. doi: 10.2307/3546421
[34]	Waite M, Sack L. How does moss photosynjournal relate to leaf and canopy structure? Trait relationships for 10 Hawaiian species of contrasting light habitats[J]. New Phytologist, 2010, 185(1):156-172. doi: 10.1111/nph.2009.185.issue-1
[35]	吕宸, 宫渊波, 龚伟, 等. 川西高寒山地灌丛草甸土壤水文效应特征[J/OL]. 应用与环境生物学报. [2021-04-13]. https://doi.org/10.19675/j.cnki.1006-687x.2020.04029 .
	[Lü Chen, Gong Yuanbo, Gong Wei, et al. Characteristics of soil hydrological effects of alpine shrub meadow in western Sichuan[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology. [2021-04-13]. https://doi.org/10.19675/j.cnki.1006-687x.2020.04029 . ]
[36]	曹文侠, 李文. 千里香杜鹃根系生物量时空动态特征及其生态适应性[J]. 草业学报, 2016, 25(7):52-61.
	[Cao Wenxia, Li Wen. Spatio-temporal trends for fine root biomass of alpine Rhododendron thymifolium and their significance for ecological adaptation in Qilian Mountains[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(7):52-61. ]
[37]	张雪, 赵锦梅, 雷隆举, 等. 祁连山东段六种灌丛降雨再分配特征[J]. 中国草地学报, 2021, 43(1):83-89.
	[Zhang Xue, Zhao Jinmei, Lei Longju, et al. Characteristics of rainfall redistribution of six shrubs in eastern Qilian Mountain[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2021, 43(1):83-89. ]

灌丛类型	经度/E	纬度/N	坡向	海拔/m	坡度/(°)	平均冠幅/cm	平均树高/cm	平均基径/mm	平均株数/株	枯落物厚度/cm
山生柳	102°57′	37°25′	阳坡	3237.70~3241.36	6	172.81	127.91	12.02	57	3.33
硬叶柳	102°57′	37°25′	阳坡	3237.70~3241.36	6	119.17	86.20	7.65	60	2.00
绣线菊	102°57′	37°25′	阳坡	3237.70~3241.36	6	69.38	69.31	6.06	21	0.70
头花杜鹃	102°56′	37°24′	阴坡	3231.21~3232.61	16	61.94	60.62	5.94	46	0.75
千里香杜鹃	102°56′	37°24′	阴坡	3231.21~3232.61	16	55.00	56.33	5.66	47	0.40
金露梅	102°57′	37°25′	阴坡	3231.21~3232.61	16	83.90	63.00	4.32	43	1.10

灌丛类型	持水量与浸水时间		吸水速率与浸水时间
灌丛类型	拟合方程	决定系数（R²）	拟合方程	决定系数（R²）
山生柳	Y=371.603lnt+1894.645	0.971^**	V=880.144t^-1.437	0.920^**
硬叶柳	Y=358.237lnt+1813.809	0.980^**	V=815.394t^-1.393	0.977^**
绣线菊	Y=252.702lnt+1433.572	0.976^**	V=609.293t^-1.485	0.956^**
头花杜鹃	Y=396.161lnt+966.609	0.967^**	V=520.498t^-0.997	0.853^**
千里香杜鹃	Y=354.133lnt+1438.919	0.981^**	V=585.315t^-1.270	0.823^**
金露梅	Y=374.327lnt+1532.965	0.982^**	V=687.293t^-1.257	0.906^**

灌丛类型	枯落物厚度		枯落物蓄积量		枯落物最大持水量		枯落物有效拦蓄量		土壤蓄水能力		综合能力
灌丛类型	P₁²	序次	P₂²	序次	P₃²	序次	P₄²	序次	P₅²	序次	∑P_i ²	序次
山生柳	0.0000	1	0.0000	1	0.0000	1	0.0000	1	0.0376	6	0.0376	1
硬叶柳	0.1595	2	0.1796	2	0.1987	2	0.2007	2	0.0000	1	0.7385	2
绣线菊	0.6238	5	0.5930	3	0.6952	4	0.6154	4	0.0027	3	2.5302	4
头花杜鹃	0.6003	4	0.8105	5	0.8529	5	0.9478	6	0.000003	2	3.2114	5
千里香杜鹃	0.7742	6	0.8766	6	0.8952	6	0.9041	5	0.0081	4	3.4583	6
金露梅	0.4485	3	0.6320	4	0.6641	3	0.5746	3	0.0279	5	2.3471	3

Litter and soil water conservation function of typical shrubs in eastern Qilian Mountains

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 9

References 37

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	LIU Wenli, CHEN Zhang, ZHAO Yong, LIANG Yuxin. Influences of soil moisture anomalies in May on June precipitation in Central Asia [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2024, 47(1): 38-47.
[2]	WEN Xin, SHANG Haili, HUANG Xianwu, LI Jianwei, LI Yilin, YANG Hongyu. Simulation experiment on soil moisture and solute transport in different subsidence stress regions [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(9): 1481-1492.
[3]	LI Ke, DING Jianli, HAN Lijing, GE Xiangyu, GU Yongsheng, ZHOU Qian, LYU Yangxia. Digital mapping of soil salinization in a typical oasis based on PlanetScope images [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(8): 1291-1302.
[4]	SHI Cong, CHEN Lihan, ZHANG Yifei, HE Shuai, XIE Haixia. Soil salinization characteristics of cultivated land in Xiaohaizi Irrigation Area of Xinjiang [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(8): 1314-1323.
[5]	WANG Jianian, LI Xiangyi, LI Chengdao, ZHANG Ailin, LIN Lisha. Decomposition characteristics of two desert plant leaf under natural light and shade environment [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(6): 949-957.
[6]	YU Xiaoyan, WANG Xing, LYU Wen, GAO Yuankang, WANG Yongqiang, WANG Yanchao. Deep soil desiccation and root distribution of belted Caragana korshinskii forest in loess hilly region [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(5): 753-762.
[7]	Madinai ABULIMITI, ZHANG Yongjuan, WANG Li, ZHAO Li, LI Congjuan. Effect of bentonite on physical and chemical properties of aeolian sandy soil and growth of Sorghum sudanense [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(5): 763-772.
[8]	WU Yingying,WANG Zhenting. Risk assessment of soil wind erosion in Hetao Plain [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(3): 418-427.
[9]	JIANG Lei, LIU Xiaolong, GUO Shuai, HE Liang, XING Jianlei, GUO Junjie. Evaluation of soil salinization susceptibility based on Logistic regression analysis: A case of Tarim irrigation area in southern Xinjiang [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(11): 1858-1867.
[10]	LIANG Liang, GUO Xiaosong, CHEN Hanjie, XU Haofan, ZHOU Yanbo, XIE Shaowen, YANG Fen, WEI Chaoyang. Accumulation characteristics and ecological risks of heavy metals in green land soils in core urban area of Urumqi City [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(11): 1868-1878.
[11]	LIU Zunfang, LEI Haochuan, SHENG Haiyan. Remote sensing inversion of soil nutrient on farmland in Huangshui River Basin based on XGBoost model [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(10): 1643-1653.
[12]	WEI Huimin, JIA Keli, ZHANG Xu, ZHANG Junhua. Prediction of soil salinity based on machine learning and multispectral remote sensing in Yinchuan Plain [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(1): 103-114.
[13]	SHI Wanpeng, LI Bei, LIU Jingtao, ZHUO Zijun, CHEN Xi. Formation characteristics and factors effecting of condensation waterin surface soil in Hoh Xil area [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(6): 1729-1739.
[14]	JU Li, RAN Min, YANG Yunpeng, WANG Xin. Composition characteristics of surface soil δ¹³C_org in the southwest margin of Tarim Basin [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(6): 1805-1813.
[15]	WU Quan, YAO Xijun, CHEN Xiaodong, ZHAO Min, ZHAO Huan, YUN Hao. Nondestructive inspection method for soil profile configuration based on ground penetrating radar [J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(6): 1860-1869.