南京林业大学学报(自然科学版) ›› 2010, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (03): 62-66.doi: 10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2010.03.013

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

流溪河小流域3种林分的土壤水分物理性质

邱治军1,曾震军2,周光益1,杨松1,谭斌2   

  1. 1.中国林业科学研究院热带林业研究所,广东 广州 510520;2.广州市流溪河林场,广东 广州 510956
  • 出版日期:2010-06-29 发布日期:2010-06-29
  • 基金资助:
    收稿日期:2009-07-17修回日期:2010-01-25基金项目:科技部国际合作项目(2007DFA31070);广州市林业局科技项目作者简介:邱治军(1974—),助理研究员,博士。Email: qzhijun@126.com。引文格式:邱治军,曾震军,周光益,等. 流溪河小流域3种林分的土壤水分物理性质[J]. 南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2010,34(3):62-66.

Soil moisture physical characteristics of three types of forest in Liuxihe small watershed

QIU Zhijun1, ZENG Zhenjun2, ZHOU Guangyi1, YANG Song1, TAN Bin2   

  1. 1.Research Institute of Tropical Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Guangzhou 510520, China; 2.Guangzhou Liuxihe Forest Farm, Guangzhou 510956, China
  • Online:2010-06-29 Published:2010-06-29

摘要: 采用环刀法测定了流溪河流域常绿阔叶林、毛竹林和荔枝林的0~60 cm土壤水分物理性质。结果表明:(1)3种林分的土壤密度都是随着土层深度的增加而增加,其大小分别为荔枝林1.45 g/cm3、阔叶林1.22 g/cm3、竹林1.11 g/cm3。(2)3种林分0~60 cm土壤孔隙度随着土层深度的增加而减少。竹林土壤的总孔隙度和毛管孔隙度最大,荔枝林和阔叶林的总孔隙度相差不大;非毛管孔隙度分别为阔叶林11.51 %、竹林7.38 %、荔枝林5.91 %。(3)3种林分0~60 cm土壤的蓄水能力大小分别为阔叶林63.39 mm、竹林41.86 mm、荔枝林33.96 mm;3种林分的排水能力大小分别为阔叶林65.44 mm、竹林43.59 mm、荔枝林34.68 mm。因此,流溪河流域不同林分的土壤水分物理性质存在明显的差异:竹林在密度、总孔隙度和毛管孔隙度指标上优于阔叶林和荔枝林,而阔叶林则在土壤蓄水、排水指标上优于竹林、荔枝林。

Abstract: In order to understand ecohydrology effect of forest soil in Liuxihe small watershed, soil physical characteristics and water conservation characteristics of evergreen broadleaf forest, bamboo forest and litchi forest in Liuxihe small watershed were measured by cutting ring method. The test results showed that: (1)soil bulk density of three types of forest increased with soil layer depth. Soil bulk densities 0—60 cm depth were ranked in the order of litchi forest (1.45 g/cm3), broadleaf forest(1.22 g/cm3), bamboo forest (1.11 g/cm3). (2)Porosity of three types of forest decreased with the soil depth. In 0—60 cm depth, total porosity and capillary porosity of bamboo forest were the max in three types of forest, and total porosity of litchi forest and evergreen broadleaf forest were almost the same. Noncapillary porosities in 0—60 cm depth were ranked in the order of broadleaf forest (11.51 %), bamboo forest(7.38 %), and litchi forest(5.91 %). (3) Water storage capacity in 0—60 cm depth were ranked in the order of broadleaf forest (63.39 mm), bamboo forest(41.86 mm), and litchi forest(33.96 mm). Water draught capacity of 0—60 cm soil depth were ranked in the order of broadleaf forest (65.44 mm), bamboo forest(43.59 mm), and litchi forest(34.68 mm). Therefore, forest of Liuxihe watershed had good effect on soil physical characteristics, and the water conservation capacity of broadleaf forest was better than that of bamboo and litchi forest.

中图分类号: