苏南丘陵区坡面经济林土壤侵蚀特征

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202204036

国家林草科技领军期刊
中国精品科技期刊
中国高校百佳科技期刊
江苏省新闻出版政府奖期刊奖
RCCSE林学权威期刊（A+）
CSCD核心期刊
Scopus数据库收录期刊
中文核心期刊
SCD核心期刊

作者加群：102861116

微信公众号：南京林业大学学报

高级检索

南京林业大学学报（自然科学版） ›› 2023, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (6): 70-76.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202204036

所属专题：山水林田湖草一体化保护和生态修复——土壤侵蚀修复研究

• 专题报道Ⅱ：山水林田湖草一体化保护和生态修复——土壤侵蚀修复研究（执行主编张金池） • 上一篇下一篇

苏南丘陵区坡面经济林土壤侵蚀特征

杨瑞¹(), 吴朝明², 朱骊², 胡海波¹^,^*()

1.南京林业大学林草学院、水土保持学院,江苏南京 210037
2.江苏省水文水资源勘测局无锡分局,江苏无锡 214100

收稿日期:2022-04-15 修回日期:2022-07-29 出版日期:2023-11-30 发布日期:2023-11-23
通讯作者: *胡海波(huhb2000@aliyun.com),教授。
基金资助:
无锡市水利局技术支撑与协作项目(2107116);国家林业和草原局长江三角洲森林生态系统定位研究项目(2019132158);江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助项目(PAPD)

Study on soil erosion characteristics of economic forest slope field in southern Jiangsu hilly area

YANG Rui¹(), WU Chaoming², ZHU Li², HU Haibo¹^,^*()

1. College of Forestry and Grassland, College of Soil and Water Conservation, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
2. Wuxi Branch Bureau of Investigation on Hydrologic Water Resources, Jiangsu Province, Wuxi 214100, China

Received:2022-04-15 Revised:2022-07-29 Online:2023-11-30 Published:2023-11-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探索苏南丘陵区不同种植管理措施下经济林地土壤产沙产流特征。【方法】基于2021年无锡宜兴市标准径流小区观测资料,对其坡面产流产沙过程进行分析。【结果】①苏南丘陵经济林坡地产流产沙主要发生在5—8月,不同类型径流小区径流量占比大于72.5%、土壤侵蚀量占比大于68.7%。②不同径流小区径流量与土壤侵蚀量的对比均表现为:Ⅰ-桃林(有草)<Ⅱ-桃林(无草),径流小区Ⅰ较Ⅱ年减流156.3%、减沙122.9%;Ⅴ-茶园(横坡)<Ⅳ-茶园(顺坡),Ⅴ较Ⅳ径流小区年减流57.0%、年减沙41.5%;不同类型经济林年径流较Ⅲ-裸坡减少50.6%~380.4%、年侵蚀减少155.3%~513.1%。③次降雨下,Ⅰ—Ⅴ径流小区最大径流量、最大侵蚀量分别占全年的15.3%、14.5%、10.8%、12.5%、14.4%和7.9%、6.3%、4.5%、7.1%、8.0%,高强度降雨对坡面土壤侵蚀有重要影响。【结论】不同类型经济林径流小区土壤侵蚀量与降雨量、平均雨强、最大30 min降雨强度(I₃₀)以及径流深均呈显著正相关,与雨前土壤含水量等因素相关性较为复杂,其中坡面土壤侵蚀量与径流深关系最为密切(R²=0.553)。

关键词: 经济林, 种植方式, 土壤侵蚀, 产流产沙, 苏南丘陵区

Abstract:

【Objective】 This study aims to explore the characteristics of surface runoff and sediment yield of economic forest land with different planting and management measures in the hilly region of Southern Jiangsu. 【Method】 Analyzing the process of runoff and sediment yield on the slope based on the observation data of runoff plots in Wuxi Yixing City in 2021. 【Result】 ① In the hilly region of Southern Jiangsu, the runoff and sediment yield of economic forest mainly occurred from May to August, in which the runoff and soil erosion yield of different runoff plots accounted for more than 72.5% and 68.7%, respectively. ② The comparison of slope runoff and erosion in different runoff plots is as follows: Ⅰ-peach forest (with grass) <Ⅱ-peach forest (weeding), and compared with Ⅱ, the annual runoff reduction of Ⅰwas 156.3% and the annual soil erosion reduction was 122.9%; Ⅴ-tea garden (cross slope) < Ⅳ-tea garden (along slope), and compared with Ⅳ, Ⅴ had an annual runoff reduction of 57.0% and erosion reduction of 41.5%. In addition to it, the annual runoff of different economic forest slopes was reduced by 50.6%-380.4%, and the annual soil erosion was reduced by 155.3%-513.1% compared with Ⅲ-bare slope (blank). ③ The maximum runoff and erosion of the Ⅰ-Ⅴ plots accounted for 15.3%, 14.5%, 10.8%, 12.5%, 14.4% and 7.9%, 6.3%, 4.5%, 7.1%, 8.0% of the total, respectively. It can be seen that high-intensity rainfall has an important impact on slope soil erosion. 【Conclusion】 Soil erosion in runoff plots of different economic forests was significantly positively correlated with rainfall, average rainfall intensity, I₃₀ and runoff depth, and the correlation with soil water content before rainfall was complex, in which soil erosion had the closest relationship with runoff depth (R²=0.553).

Key words: non-wood forest, cropping pattern, soil erosion, runoff and sediment, southern Jiangsu hilly area

中图分类号:

S714.7

杨瑞,吴朝明,朱骊,等. 苏南丘陵区坡面经济林土壤侵蚀特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(6): 70-76.

YANG Rui, WU Chaoming, ZHU Li, HU Haibo. Study on soil erosion characteristics of economic forest slope field in southern Jiangsu hilly area[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2023, 47(6): 70-76.DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202204036.

图/表 6

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

表4

参考文献 31

[1]	中华人民共和国水利部. 中国水土保持公报(2021年)[R]. 2021-07-14.
	Ministry of Water Resources of the PRC. China soil and water conservation bulletin(2021)[R]. 2021-07-14.
[2]	GUO G, LI X, ZHU X, et al. Effect of forest management operations on aggregate-associated SOC dynamics using a ¹³⁷Cs tracing method[J]. Forests, 2021, 12(7):859.DOI:10.3390/f12070859.
[3]	许海超, 李子君, 林锦阔, 等. 燕山土石山区降雨和下垫面条件对坡面侵蚀产沙的影响[J]. 山地学报, 2016, 34(1):46-53.
	XU H C, LI Z J, LIN J K, et al. Influences of rainfall and underlying surface conditions on soil erosion and sediment yield in Yanshan rocky mountain area[J]. Mt Res, 2016, 34(1):46-53.DOI:10.16089/j.cnki.1008-2786.000099.
[4]	SOLGI A, NAGHDI R, ZENNER E K, et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of mulching for reducing soil erosion in cut slope and fill slope of forest roads in Hyrcanian forests[J]. Croat J For Eng, 2021, 42(2):259-268.DOI:10.5552/crojfe.2021.756.
[5]	朱元皓. 赣南丘陵区代表性经济林土壤抗侵蚀性研究[D]. 南昌: 南昌大学, 2021.
	ZHU Y H. Study on soil erosion resistance of representative economic forest in hilly area of south Jiangxi Province[D]. Nanchang: Nanchang University, 2021.DOI:10.27232/d.cnki.gnchu.2021.002260.
[6]	张文源, 王百田, 杨光檄, 等. 喀斯特黄壤区侵蚀性降雨及产沙特征分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2014, 23(11):1776-1782.
	ZHANG W Y, WANG B T, YANG G X, et al. Erosive rainfall and characteristics analysis of sediment yield on yellow soil area in Karst mountainous[J]. Ecol Environ Sci, 2014, 23(11):1776-1782.DOI:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2014.11.022.
[7]	ADIMASSU Z, MEKONNEN K, YIRGA C, et al. Effect of soil bunds on runoff,soil and nutrient losses,and crop yield in the central Highlands of Ethiopia[J]. Land Degrad Develop, 2014, 25(6):554-564.DOI:10.1002/ldr.2182.
[8]	张蕾, 张凤荣, 李超, 等. 土壤侵蚀作用对黄土高原黏化层鉴定和淋溶土分类的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2021, 52(2):261-268.
	ZHANG L, ZHANG F R, LI C, et al. Impact of soil erosion on argic horizon identification and luvisols classification in the loess plateau[J]. Chin J Soil Sci, 2021, 52(2):261-268.DOI:10.19336/j.cnki.trtb.2020090702.
[9]	ZHENG F L. Effect of vegetation changes on soil erosion on the Loess Plateau 1[J]. Pedosphere, 2006, 16(4):420-427.DOI:10.1016/S1002-0160(06)60071-4.
[10]	WU S B, CHEN L, WANG N L, et al. Variable scale effects on hillslope soil erosion during rainfall-runoff processes[J]. CATENA, 2021, 207:105606.DOI:10.1016/j.catena.2021.105606.
[11]	张相, 李肖, 林杰, 等. 南方红壤丘陵区侵蚀沟道内土壤团聚体及有机碳特征[J]. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(19):115-123.
	ZHANG X, LI X, LIN J, et al. Characteristics of soil aggregates and organic carbon in eroded gully in red soil region of Southern China[J]. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng, 2020, 36(19):115-123.DOI:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2020.19.013.
[12]	NAJMAN Y, BICKLE M, BOUDAGHER-FADEL M, et al. The Paleogene record of Himalayan erosion:Bengal basin,Bangladesh[J]. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 2008, 273(1/2):1-14.DOI:10.1016/j.pngl.2008.04.028.
[13]	秦伟, 左长清, 晏清洪, 等. 红壤裸露坡地次降雨土壤侵蚀规律[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(2):124-132.
	QIN W, ZUO C Q, YAN Q H, et al. Regularity of individual rainfall soil erosion in bare slope land of red soil[J]. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng, 2015, 31(2):124-132.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.02.018.
[14]	DE VENTE J, POESEN J. Predicting soil erosion and sediment yield at the basin scale:scale issues and semi-quantitative models[J]. Earth Sci Rev, 2005, 71(1/2):95-125.DOI:10.1016/j.earscirev.2005.02.002.
[15]	DURÁN ZUAZO V H, RODRÍGUEZ PLEGUEZUELO C R. Soil erosion and runoff prevention by plant covers: a review[J]. Agron Sustain Dev, 2008, 28(1):65-86.DOI:10.1051/agro:2007062.
[16]	林代杰, 郑子成, 张锡洲, 等. 不同土地利用方式下土壤入渗特征及其影响因素[J]. 水土保持学报, 2010, 24(1):33-36.
	LIN D J, ZHENG Z C, ZHANG X Z, et al. Characteristic and influencing factors of soil infiltration of different land use patterns[J]. J Soil Water Conserv, 2010, 24(1):33-36.DOI:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2010.01.016.
[17]	张祖莲, 洪斌, 黄英, 等. 降雨作用下红土型坡面径流特性与土壤侵蚀的关系研究[J]. 山地学报, 2017, 35(4):535-542.
	ZHANG Z L, HONG B, HUANG Y, et al. Study on relationship between runoff characteristics and soil erosion of laterite slope under rainfall[J]. Mt Res, 2017, 35(4):535-542.DOI:10.16089/j.cnki.1008-2786.000251.
[18]	HUANG Z G, OUYANG Z Y, LI F R, et al. Response of runoff and soil loss to reforestation and rainfall type in red soil region of Southern China[J]. J Environ Sci, 2010, 22(11):1765-1773.DOI:10.1016/S1001-0742(09)60317-X.
[19]	RAN Q H, SU D Y, LI P, et al. Experimental study of the impact of rainfall characteristics on runoff generation and soil erosion[J]. J Hydrol, 2012, 424/425:99-111.DOI:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.12.035.
[20]	李超. 黄土丘陵沟壑区坡面覆被格局的土壤侵蚀效应研究[D]. 西安: 陕西师范大学, 2018.
	LI C. Study on soil erosion effect of slope cover pattern in loess hilly and gully region[D]. Xi’an: Shaanxi Normal University, 2018.
[21]	FANG N F, SHI Z H, LI L, et al. The effects of rainfall regimes and land use changes on runoff and soil loss in a small mountainous watershed[J]. CATENA, 2012, 99:1-8.DOI:10.1016/j.catena.2012.07.004.
[22]	孙佳美. 覆被坡面的水文、侵蚀及生源要素过程研究[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2018.
	SUN J M. Research of runoff,erosion and biogenic element processes on covered slopes[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2018.DOI: 10.26949/d.cnki.gblyu.2018.000059.
[23]	BAI L C, WANG N, JIAO J Y, et al. Soil erosion and sediment interception by check dams in a watershed for an extreme rainstorm on the Loess Plateau,China[J]. Int J Sediment Res, 2020, 35(4):408-416.DOI:10.1016/j.ijsrc.2020.03.005.
[24]	EL KATEB H, ZHANG H F, ZHANG P C, et al. Soil erosion and surface runoff on different vegetation covers and slope gradients:a field experiment in Southern Shaanxi Province,China[J]. CATENA, 2013, 105:1-10.DOI:10.1016/j.catena.2012.12.012.
[25]	娄义宝, 史东梅, 江娜, 等. 土壤侵蚀对坡耕地土壤水分及入渗特性影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(6):1399-1410.
	LOU Y B, SHI D M, JIANG N, et al. Effects of soil erosion on soil moisture and infiltration characteristics of slope farmland[J]. Acta Pedol Sin, 2020, 57(6):1399-1410.DOI:10.11766/trxb201912270288.
[26]	GHOLAMI V, SAHOUR H, HADIAN AMRI M A. Soil erosion modeling using erosion pins and artificial neural networks[J]. CATENA, 2021, 196:104902.DOI:10.1016/j.catena.2020.104902.
[27]	OJEDA G, ALCAÑIZ J M, ORTIZ O. Runoff and losses by erosion in soils amended with sewage sludge[J]. Land Degrad Dev, 2003, 14(6):563-573.
[28]	严冬春, 文安邦, 张忠启, 等. 坡面版WEPP模型在川中丘陵区的应用研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2007, 21(5):42-45,63.
	YAN D C, WEN A B, ZHANG Z Q, et al. Using study of sloping WEPP model in Sichuan hilly basin[J]. J Soil Water Conserv, 2007, 21(5):42-45,63.DOI:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2007.05.008.DOI:10.1190/1.1444025.
[29]	CASPER D A, KUNG K S. Simulation of ground-penetrating radar waves in a 2-D soil model[J]. Geophysics, 2012, 61(4): 1034-1049.DOI:10.1190/1.1444025.
[30]	KELLN C, SHARMA J, HUGHES D. A finite element solution scheme for an elastic-viscoplastic soil model[J]. Comput Geotech, 2008, 35(4):524-536.DOI:10.1016/j.compgeo.2007.10.003.
[31]	HEISTER K, HÖSCHEN C, PRONK G J, et al. NanoSIMS as a tool for characterizing soil model compounds and organomineral associations in artificial soils[J]. J Soils Sediments, 2012, 12(1):35-47.DOI:10.1007/s11368-011-0386-8.

小区类型 plot type	种植方式 planting pattern	平均高度/m average vegetation height	管理措施 management measures
Ⅰ-桃林peach(with grass)	不除草	3.0	修枝、施肥
Ⅱ-桃林peach(weeding)	除草	3.0	修枝、施肥、定期除草
Ⅲ-裸地bare land(CK)	空白	0.0	定期除草
Ⅳ-茶园tea graden (along slope)	顺坡种植	0.5	施肥、不定期除草
Ⅴ-茶园tea graden (cross slope)	横坡种植	0.5	施肥、不定期除草

小区类型 olot type	径流系数/% runoff coefficient	年径流量/ (m³·km^-2) annual runoff	年侵蚀量/ (t·km^-2) sediment yield
Ⅰ-桃林(有草)peach(with grass)	8.4	1 252.35	106.30
Ⅱ-桃林(无草)peach(weeding)	21.5	3 209.10	237.00
Ⅲ-裸坡(空白)bare land(CK)	40.3	6 016.20	651.74
Ⅳ-茶园(顺坡)tea garden(along slope)	26.8	3 994.50	255.30
Ⅴ-茶园(横坡)tea garden(cross slope)	17.1	2 544.10	180.40

小区类型 plot type	降雨历时 rainfall duration	降雨量 rainfall	平均雨强 average rainfall intensity	I₃₀	径流深 runoff depth	径流系数 runoff coefficient	土壤含水量 soil moisture contents
小区类型 plot type	降雨历时 rainfall duration	降雨量 rainfall	平均雨强 average rainfall intensity	I₃₀	径流深 runoff depth	径流系数 runoff coefficient	雨前 before rainfall	雨后 after rainfall
Ⅰ-桃林(有草)peach(with grass)	0.096	0.639^**	0.508^**	0.601^**	0.559^**	0.102	0.193	0.584^**
Ⅱ-桃林(无草)peach(weeding)	0.240	0.666^**	0.566^**	0.643^**	0.695^**	0.315	0.242	0.223
Ⅲ-裸坡(空白)CK	0.273	0.825^**	0.468^**	0.593^**	0.774^**	0.116	0.283	0.228
Ⅳ-茶园(顺坡)tea garden(along slope)	0.038	0.657^**	0.552^**	0.661^**	0.725^**	0.335^*	0.362^*	0.431^**
Ⅴ-茶园(横坡)tea garden(cross slope)	0.144	0.710^**	0.484^**	0.604^**	0.757^**	0.321^*	0.312	0.316

模型(标准化系数) model	R²	F	P
S_E=0.744 D	0.553	232.688	<0.01
S_E=0.617 D- 0.381 C	0.682	200.824	<0.01
S_E=0.520 D- 0.418 C+ 0.213 I₃₀	0.719	158.823	<0.01
S_E=0.529 D- 0.441 C+ 0.227 I₃₀- 0.119 W₁	0.732	126.519	<0.01
S_E=0.499 D- 0.445 C+ 0.221 I₃₀-0.139 W₁+ 0.101 W₂	0.741	105.786	<0.01

苏南丘陵区坡面经济林土壤侵蚀特征

Study on soil erosion characteristics of economic forest slope field in southern Jiangsu hilly area

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者

读者

审稿

[1]	张相, 丁鸣鸣, 林杰, 李卓远, 崔琳琳, 郭赓, 杨皓. 水蚀作用下红壤丘陵区土壤特性的空间分异特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(6): 77-84.
[2]	王珏, 李彦杰, 陈益存, 高暝, 赵耘霄, 吴立文, 黄世清, 张永志, 朱康烁, 汪阳东. 近红外光谱技术在林业领域的应用[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(3): 237-246.
[3]	陈菁菁, 李颂, 丁胜, 吴梦迪, 赵庆建. 基于空间视角的我国经济林产业集聚分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(2): 159-166.
[4]	林杰, 张相, 姜姜, 蒯杰, 郭赓, 孟苗婧, 李肖. 水力侵蚀过程中土壤有机碳循环研究进展[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2022, 46(6): 187-194.
[5]	彭方仁, 朱凯凯, 谭鹏鹏. 我国经济林研究主要进展及有待突破的关键技术[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2022, 46(6): 127-134.
[6]	陈超, 齐斐, 徐雁南, 黎家作, 赵传普, 苏新宇. 基于空间自相关的县域尺度土壤侵蚀抽样方法研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2022, 46(3): 177-184.
[7]	吴炅, 蒋馥根, 彭邵锋, 马开森, 陈松, 孙华. 结合树冠体积的油茶树高与产量估测研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2022, 46(2): 53-62.
[8]	丁胜, 李颂, 梁钰坤, 赵庆建, 曹福亮, 吕柳. 经济林产业上市公司融资影响因素分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2021, 45(3): 224-232.
[9]	陈茁新,张金池. 近10年全球水土保持研究热点问题述评[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2018, 61(03): 167-174.
[10]	舒正悦,王景燕,龚伟,吕向楠,闫思宇,蔡煜,赵昌平. 复合养殖对柑橘林土壤微团聚体分形特征及理化性质的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2017, 60(05): 92-98.
[11]	韩诚,张金池,庄义琳,庄家尧,刘鑫,杨志华,顾哲衍. 苏南丘陵区麻栎林冠层水文效应及其影响因素[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2014, 57(02): 93-98.
[12]	李平,王国兵,郑阿宝,沈玉娟,赵琦齐,王琳飞,蒋如生,李莉,阮宏华. 苏南丘陵区4种典型人工林土壤活性有机碳分布特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2012, 55(04): 79-83.
[13]	孔维健，周本智*，傅懋毅，李正才，谢锦忠，吴明. 不同土地利用类型水土保持特征研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2009, 52(04): 57-61.
[14]	徐天蜀;彭世揆;岳彩荣. 基于GIS的小流域土壤侵蚀评价研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2002, 45(04): 43-46.
[15]	胡海波;项卫东. 长江中下游环境特征与洪灾的关系[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 1999, 42(02): 37-41.