以太湖流域东战备河自然河道为对象,比较分析了4种植被类型及3 m和6 m宽度河岸带分别对TN、NH+4-N、TP和COD等4种面源污染物去除效果的影响。结果表明,不同植被类型对污染物的去除率受季节和污染物种类变化的影响。灌草植被河岸带对面源污染物的去除率在全年内均较高,草本植被对污染物去除率在夏秋季最高而冬季最低,乔灌草植被的去除率高于乔草。不同河岸带宽度对污染物去除率的影响随季节、污染物类型和植被类型而变化,表现为冬季大于夏季,TN大于TP,乔草大于灌草。总体来看,现行条件下4种植被除了对TN的去除率较低,全年仅为20%～40%外,对NH+4-N、TP和COD的去除率分别达到了20%～70%、50%～90%和40%～80%,去除效果显著。
Abstract
Riparian buffer play an important role in improving and protecting water quality from non-point source pollution. Understanding the riparian structure and width is critical for its function and management. In this study, the selected natural buffers were in the Dongzhanbei River basin in Danyang city. The effects of four vegetation types and two kinds of vegetation width(3 m and 6 m)on TN, NH+4-N, TP and COD removal were assessed respectively. The results indicated that vegetation types had significant effect on pollutant’s removal and the removal ratio varied with different seasons, vegetations and pollutants. The removal values of shrub-herb buffer for these four pollutants were higher than the other three vegetation types all through the year. In summer and autumn, the removal rate of riparian buffer with reed was the highest, while it was the lowest in winter. It was also demonstrated that the pollutant removal rates of riparian buffer with arbor- shrub-herb were higher than that of arbor-herb. The removal efficiency of pollutants for different buffer widths varied with seasons, vegetation and pollutant types. And it was higher in winter than in summer, for TN than for TP, and for arbor-herb than shrub-herb. Overall, the removal rates of the four vegetation types were changing with 20%-40% for TN, 20%-70% for NH+4-N, 50%-90% for TP and 40%-80% for COD.
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] Messer T L, Burchell M R, Grabow G L, et al. Groundwater nitrate reductions within upstream and downstream sections of a riparian buffer[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2012, 47:297-307.
[2] Clinton B D. Stream water responses to timber harvest:Riparian buffer width effectiveness[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2011, 261:979-988.
[3] Fortier J, Gagnon D, Truax B, et al. Biomass and volume yield after 6 years in multiclonal hybrid poplar riparian buffer strips[J]. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2010, 34:1028-1040.
[4] Hefting M M, Clement J, Bienkowski P, et al. The role of vegetation and litter in the nitrogen dynamics of riparian buffer zones in Europe[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2005, 24:465-482.
[5] Manderülo, Kuusemets V, Lõhmus K, et al. Efficiency and dimensioning of riparian buffer zones in agricultural catchments[J]. Ecological Engineering, 1997,8:299-324.
[6] Zhao T, Xu H, He Y, et al. Agricultural non-point nitrogen pollution control function of different vegetation types in riparian wetlands:A case study in the Yellow River wetland in China[J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2009,21:933-939.
[7] 王劲修, 齐实, 张耀启,等.山西沁河上游河岸植被缓冲带综合评价[J].南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2012,36(1):152-155.Wang J S, Qi S, Zhang Y Q, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of riparian buffer strips on the upper reaches of the Qin river, Shanxi province[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University:Natural Sciences Edition, 2012,36(1):152-155.
[8] 阎丽凤,石险峰,于立忠,等,沈阳地区河岸植被缓冲带对氮、磷的削减效果研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2011,19(2):403-408.Yan L F, Shi X F, YU L Z, et al. Elimination effects of riparian vegetation buffer zones on surface water nitrogen and phosphorus in Shenyang suburbs[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2011, 19(2):403-408.
[9] 张广分,齐实,肖红霞,等. 北京地区滨水缓冲带的现状研究[J].湖南农业科学,2011(8):35-36.Zhang G F, Qi S, Xiao H X, et al. The status of the waterfront buffer zones in Beijing[J]. Hunan Agricutural Science, 2011(8):35-36.
[10] 苏天杨,李林英,姚延梼.不同草本缓冲带对径流污染物滞留效益及其最佳宽度研究[J].天津农业科学,2010,16(3):121-123.Su T Y, Li L Y, Yao Y S. Effects of different grass and width of riparian buffer strips on runoff purification[J]. Tianjin Agricultural Sciences,2010,16(3):121-123.
[11] 徐成斌,于宁,马溪平,等.不同河岸植物带对非点源污染河水污染物降解试验研究[J].气象与环境学报,2008,24(6):63-66.Xu C B, Yu N, Ma X P, et al. Degradation of different riparian vegetation buffer belt to pollutant of non-point source polluted river[J].Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2008,24(6):63-66.
[12] 王毅琴.河岸植被对防治河水污染的拦截作用探讨[J]. 林业经济,2012(5):120-122.Wang Y Q. The prevention of river pollution interceptor role of riparian vegetation[J]. Forestry Economics, 2012(5):120-122.
[13] 王敏,吴建强,黄沈发,等.不同坡度缓冲带径流污染净化效果及其最佳宽度[J].生态学报,2008,28(10):4951-4956.Wang M, Wu J Q, Huang S F, et al. Effects of slope and width of riparian buffer strips on runoff purification[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008,28(10):4951-4956.
基金
收稿日期:2013-04-14 修回日期:2013-06-24
基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目(40901112); 江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助项目(PAPD)
第一作者:李萍萍,教授。E-mail: ppli@njfu.edu.cn。
引文格式:李萍萍,崔波,付为国,等. 河岸带不同植被类型及宽度对污染物去除效果的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2013,37(6):47-52.
PDF(1073727 KB)
