Ӧ����̬ѧ�� 2005, 16(09) 1623-1627  DOI:      ISSN: 1001-9332 CN: 21-1253/Q

����Ŀ¼ | ����Ŀ¼ | ����� | �߼�����                                                            [��ӡ��ҳ]   [�ر�]
Supporting info
Email Alert
Ѧ��1��2 ����2 ����2 ���2 �����2
1�й��ѧԺ��ͬɭ����̬����վ����ͬ 418307�� 2����ũҵ��ѧ��ѧԺ�� ���� 510642

�Ի���骡���ľ���������ֵ������������ʡ��ֵس�ˮ���ԡ�������֡�΢����������ø���Խ������о�. ��������3���ֵص��������طֱ�Ϊ1.19��1.26��1.06 g��cm-3,�ܿ�϶�ֱ�Ϊ56.73%��54.18%��60.74%, ������Ȼ��ˮ���ֱ�Ϊ15.7%��13.0%��19.4%,ë�ܳ�ˮ���ֱ�Ϊ43.2%��37.8%��45.8%.������ֵص�������ˮ��һ���ͨ���Բ��ľ�ֵص�������ˮ�Ժ�ͨ���Ծ��,�����ֵص�������ˮ�Ժ�ͨ���Ժ�.����骡���ľ����������������ˮ���ֱ�Ϊ20��8��15 kg���ֵطֱ�Ϊ16��13��17 t��hm-2;����骡���ľ������������������ִ����ֱ�Ϊ112.71��31.20��87.30 g���ֵطֱ�Ϊ84.35��51.86��98.11 kg��hm-2.3���ֵس�ǿ����. �����ֵص������л��ʡ�ȫN��ȫP��ȫK�����N����ЧP�������ߣ�����ЧK����Ϊ��ľ�ֵ�>�����ֵ�>������ֵ�. ������ֵ��л��ʺ�����ȫN�ͼ��N����>��ľ�ֵأ���ľ�ֵص�ȫP��ȫK����ЧP����>������ֵ�. ϸ��ռ΢����������94%����,�����ֵص�ϸ�������ߴ�41��105����g-1�������������ֵغͺ�ľ�ֵطֱ�Ϊ3.4��104����g-1������5.3��104����g-1����.�����ֵص���ø����������ø������ø���������ľ�ֵ���ά�طֽ�ø�������.3���ַ��У������ֵ������������.


Soil properties and water holding capacities of Michelia macclurei,Schima superba and Castanopsis fissa stands

XUE Li1,2,LI Yan2,QU Ming2,YAN Shu2,WANG Xiang'e 2

1Huitong Experimental Station of Forest Ecology,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Huitong 418307��China;2College of Forestry,South China Agricultural University,Guangzhou 510642,China


The study showed that the soil density,total porosity,natural water capacity and capillary moisture capacity were 1.19 g��cm-3,56.73%,15.7% and 43.2% in Michelia macclurei stand,1.26 g��cm-3,54.18%,13.0% and 37.8% in Schima superb stand,and 1.06 g��cm-3,60.74%,19.4%,and 45.8% in Castanopsis fissa stand,respectively.Soil water holding capacity and aeration were good in Castanopsis fissa stand but bad in Schima superba stand,whereas Michelia macclurei stand had a medium water holding capacity and a bad aeration.The water holding capacity of litter per tree was in order of Michelia macclurei(20 kg)>Castanopsis fissa(15 kg)>Schima superba(8 kg),whereas that of litter in stand was Castanopsis fissa(17 t��hm-2)>Michelia macclurei(16 t��hm-2)>Schima superba(13 t��hm-2).The nutrient storage of litter per tree was 112.71,31.20 and 87.30 g in Michelia macclurei,Schima superba and Castanopsis fissa stands,respectively,and that of litter in stand was 84.35, 51.86 and 98.11 kg��hm-2,respectively.The soil in the three stands was strong acidic,and the content of soil organic matter,total N,total P,total K,alkalized N,available P and available K was 18.43 g��kg-1,0.69 g��kg-1,0.17 g��kg-1,5.83 g��kg-1,45.67 mg��kg-1,0.83 mg��kg-1 and 23.13 mg��kg-1 in Michelia macclurei stand,13.40 g��kg-1,0.68 g��kg-1,0.20 g��kg-1,12.32 g��kg-1,40.78 mg��kg-1,0.85 mg��kg-1 and 90.63 mg��kg-1 in Schima superba stand,and 28.50 g��kg-1,0.97 g��kg-1,0.23 g��kg-1,18.77 g��kg-1,73.40 mg��kg-1,1.45 mg��kg-1 and 66.50 mg��kg-1 in Castanopsis fissa stand, respectively.Soil bacteria accounted for >94% of soil microbes,and their individuals were 41��105,34��104 and 5.3��104 g-1 in Michelia macclurei, Schima superba and Castanopsis fissa stands,respectively.The activities of soil urease,catalase and phosphatase in Castanopsis fissa stand were the greatest among the three stands,while soil cellulase activity in Michelia macclurei stand was greater than that in other two stands.In a word,soil fertility of Castanopsis fissa stand was the highest among three test stands.

�ո����� 2004-10-28 �޻����� 2005-02-24 ����淢������  




Copyright by Ӧ����̬ѧ��