西南喀斯特地区典型林分土壤优先流特征及影响因素

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202301.020

应用生态学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (1): 31-38.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202301.020

西南喀斯特地区典型林分土壤优先流特征及影响因素

管凝¹, 程金花^1,2*, 侯芳¹, 曾合州¹, 沈子雅¹, 赵梦圆¹, 秦建淼¹

¹北京林业大学云南建水荒漠生态系统国家定位观测研究站, 北京 100083;
²北京林业大学水土保持国家林业和草原局重点实验室, 北京 100083

收稿日期:2022-02-09 修回日期:2022-09-25 出版日期:2023-01-15 发布日期:2023-06-15
通讯作者: ^*E-mail: Jinhua_cheng@126.com
作者简介:管凝, 女, 1998年生, 硕士研究生。主要从事水土保持研究。E-mail: 879076781@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(32071839)资助。

Characteristics and influencing factors of soil preferential flow in typical stands of Karst area in southwest China

GUAN Ning¹, CHENG Jin-hua^1,2*, HOU Fang¹, ZENG He-zhou¹, SHEN Zi-ya¹, ZHAO Meng-yuan¹, QIN Jian-miao¹

¹National Orientation Observation and Research Station of Yunnan Jianshui Desert Ecosystem, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China;
²Key Laboratory of National Forestry and Grassland Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China

Received:2022-02-09 Revised:2022-09-25 Online:2023-01-15 Published:2023-06-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究喀斯特地区的优先流现象,明确影响优先流的主要因素,对当地植被恢复具有重要意义。通过野外染色示踪试验以及图像处理技术,获得染色溶液在垂直和水平方向上的分布情况,并提取总染色面积比、基质流深度、优先流比和长度指数作为优先流特征参数,运用灰色关联度分析法对影响优先流的14个因子进行分析。结果表明: 喀斯特地区典型林分土壤存在优先流现象,其优先流主要有漏斗状和树枝状两类,有横向水流运动现象发生。喀斯特地区林下的染色面积比平均为19.4%,基质流深度、优先流比和长度指数平均分别为4.96 cm、62.9%和385.5%。在影响优先流的14个环境因子中,对染色面积比影响最大的是土壤初始含水量,对基质流深度影响最大的是速效钾含量,对优先流比和长度指数影响最大的均为速效磷含量。喀斯特地区典型林分下优先流的发育程度高且空间变化剧烈,土壤初始含水量等物理性质对其有较大影响,土壤养分也是优先流的一个重要影响因素。

关键词: 优先流, 喀斯特地区, 染色示踪实验, 灰色关联度, 影响因素

Abstract: The study of preferential flow phenomena in Karst areas and the identification of the main factors influencing preferential flow are of great importance for the recovery of local vegetation. The distribution of the dyeing solution in the vertical and horizontal directions was examined by field staining tracer test and image processing technique. We analyzed the total dyeing area ratio, matrix flow depth, preferential flow ratio, and length index as pre-ferential flow characteristic parameters, and 14 factors affecting preferential flow using grey correlation analysis. The results showed that there were two main types of preferential flow, funnel-shaped and dendritic, with lateral water movement occurring in the soil of typical Karst stands. The mean value of the dyeing area ratio of the understory in Karst areas was 19.4%, and that of the matrix flow depth, preferential flow ratio, and length index was 4.96 cm, 62.9%, and 385.5%, respectively. Among the 14 environmental factors influencing preferential flow, the initial soil moisture content had the strongest influence on the dyeing area ratio, the available potassium content had the most significant influence on the matrix flow depth, and available phosphorous content had the most significant influence on both the preferential flow ratio and the length index. The high degree of development and spatial variability of preferential flow under typical forest stands in Karst areas was strongly influenced by physical properties such as initial soil water content, while soil nutrient also exerts important influence on preferential flow.

Key words: preferential flow, Karst area, dye tracer experiment, grey relational degree, influencing factor.

管凝, 程金花, 侯芳, 曾合州, 沈子雅, 赵梦圆, 秦建淼. 西南喀斯特地区典型林分土壤优先流特征及影响因素[J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(1): 31-38.

GUAN Ning, CHENG Jin-hua, HOU Fang, ZENG He-zhou, SHEN Zi-ya, ZHAO Meng-yuan, QIN Jian-miao. Characteristics and influencing factors of soil preferential flow in typical stands of Karst area in southwest China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2023, 34(1): 31-38.

参考文献

[1] Gerke HH. Preferential flow descriptions for structured soils. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 2006, 169: 382-400
[2] Clothier BE, Green SR, Deurer M. Preferential flow and transport in soil: Progress and prognosis. European Journal of Soil Science, 2010, 59: 2-13
[3] Zhang YH, Zhang MX, Niu JZ, et al. The preferential flow of soil: A widespread phenomenon in pedological perspectives. Eurasian Soil Science, 2016, 49: 661-672
[4] Li G, Lin H. Addressing two bottlenecks to advance the understanding of preferential flow in soils. Advances in Agronomy, 2018, 147: 61-117
[5] 万艳萍, 赵洋毅, 段旭, 等. 红河干旱河谷地区植物根系与砾石对土壤优先路径形成的影响. 水土保持研究, 2022, 29(1): 140-147
[6] Liu Y, Zhang YH, Xie LM, et al. Effect of soil characteristics on preferential flow of Phragmites australis community in Yellow River Delta. Ecological Indicators, 2021, 125: 1-8
[7] 程竞锋, 闫加亮, 徐满厚, 等. 吕梁关帝山不同植被坡面土壤优先流特征及其影响因素. 生态学杂志, 2021, 40(12): 3890-3900
[8] 王佩佩, 苏雪萌, 周正朝, 等. 黄土丘陵区典型植被群落坡面土壤优先流特征及其影响因素. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(5): 16-23
[9] Freda P, Aaron M, Edwin C. Effects of antecedent moisture and macroporosity on infiltration and water flow in frozen soil. Hydrological Processes, 2020, 34: 795-809
[10] Karin M, Celine D, Anne JT, et al. Orchard management and preferential flow in Andosols comparing two kiwifruit orchards in New Zealand. Soil Research, 2019, 57: 616-628
[11] Jiang ZC, Lian YQ, Qin XQ. Rocky desertification in southwest China: Impacts, causes, and restoration. Earth Science Reviews, 2014, 132: 1-12
[12] Jakob S, Fabian R, Martin S, et al. Significance of preferential flow at the rock soil interface in a semi-arid Karst environment. Catena, 2014, 123: 1-10
[13] Kan XQ, Cheng JH, Hu XJ, et al. Effects of grass and forests and the infiltration amount on preferential flow in Karst regions of China. Water, 2019, 11: 1-19
[14] Zhao ZM, Shen YX, Jiang RH, et al. Rock outcrops change infiltrability and water flow behavior in a Karst soil. Vadose Zone Journal, 2020, 19: 1-15
[15] Liu DD, She DL. The effect of fracture properties on preferential flow in carbonate derived laterite from Karst mountainous agroforestry lands. Soil and Tillage Research, 2020, 203: 1-11
[16] 张静举. 广西喀斯特区甘蔗地土壤大孔隙流特征研究. 硕士论文. 桂林: 桂林理工大学, 2018
[17] 蔡路路. 喀斯特典型裂隙土壤水分运移与养分迁移研究. 硕士论文. 贵州: 贵州师范大学, 2021
[18] 李焱秋. 喀斯特地下浅层孔(裂)隙土壤水文特征研究. 硕士论文. 贵州: 贵州大学, 2020
[19] 牟洋, 范弢, 户红红. 滇东南喀斯特小生境土壤水来源与运移的稳定同位素分析. 福建农林大学学报: 自然科学版, 2020, 49(4): 540-545
[20] 陈晓冰, 张洪江, 程金花, 等. 基于染色图像变异性分析的优先流程度定量评价. 农业机械学报, 2015, 46(5): 93-100
[21] 连经纬, 胡海波, 王灿, 等. 枫香麻栎混交林土壤优先流特征及其对碳运移的影响. 农业科技导报, 2019, 21(8): 122-131
[22] 武娟娟, 邱云霄, 王渝淞, 等. 坝上地区不同退化程度小叶杨细根分布特征. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(5): 242-248
[23] 李浩, 胡婵娟, 赵荣钦, 等. 黄土丘陵区典型人工林的根系分布特征. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(5): 1420-1428
[24] 姚晶晶, 程金花, 张洪江, 等. 入渗水量对重庆四面山草地优先流影响的定量评价. 水土保持学报, 2018, 32(2): 45-51
[25] 陈晓冰, 严磊, 李振东, 等. 耕作方式对岩溶区甘蔗地土壤优先流特征的影响. 土壤, 2019, 51(4): 786-794
[26] 陈晓冰, 韦灵, 吴晗, 等. 秸秆覆盖下桂北岩溶区水稻田土壤优先流特征. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(5): 124-130
[27] 郑欣, 程金花, 张洪江, 等. 北京地区2种类型土壤优先流染色形态特征及其影响因素. 水土保持学报, 2018, 32(3): 113-119
[28] Kan XQ, Cheng JH, Hou F. Response of preferential soil flow to different infiltration rates and vegetation types in the Karst region of southwest China. Water, 2020, 12: 11-20
[29] 李瑶, 刘冬冬, 车陆禄. 喀斯特山地森林土壤入渗特征对人为踩踏的响应规律. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(4): 96-105
[30] 刘目兴, 宋兴敏, 卢世国, 等. 三峡库区不同植被覆盖坡地的土壤优先流运动特征研究. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(5): 1321-1335
[31] Luo ZT, Niu JZ, Zhang L. Roots-enhanced preferential flows in deciduous and coniferous forest soils revealed by dual-tracer experiments. Journal of Environmental Quality, 2019, 48: 136-146
[32] 王发, 付智勇, 陈洪松, 等. 喀斯特洼地退耕和耕作土壤优先流特征. 水土保持学报, 2016, 30(1): 111-116
[33] 宋佳丽, 王鸿雁, 张淑香, 等. 施肥和秸秆还田对黑土农田土壤剖面养分分布的影响. 生态学杂志, 2021, 41(1): 108-115
[34] 戴翠婷, 刘窑军, 王天巍, 等. 三峡库区高砾石含量紫色土优先流形态特征. 水土保持学报, 2017, 31(1): 103-108
[35] Wang R, Dong ZB, Zhou ZC, et al. Temporal variation in preferential water flow during natural vegetation restoration on abandoned farmland in the Loess Plateau of China. Land, 2019, 8: 1-16
[36] 吕殿青, 潘云. 南北方粘质土壤的水分特征研究. 灌溉排水学报, 2009, 28(1): 20-23
[37] 马昀, 孟晨, 岳健敏, 等. 宁夏荒漠草原不同林龄人工柠条林地土壤优先流研究. 生态学报, 2022, 42(3): 1-9
[38] 侯芳, 程金花, 祁生林, 等. 重庆四面山不同林地类型优先流特征及染色形态定量评价. 西南林业大学学报: 自然科学版, 2021, 41(2): 107-117
[39] Pauline C, David B, Cécile V, et al. Statistical metrics for the characterization of Karst network geometry and topology. Geomorphology, 2017, 283: 122-142
[40] 解璐萌, 张英虎, 张明祥, 等. 黄河三角洲刺槐群落土壤优先流及养分分布特征. 生态学报, 2021, 41(19): 7713-7724
[41] 侯芳, 杨志, 程金花, 等. 永定河(北京段)滨河带藤本和次生乔木林土壤优先流特征. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(3): 143-149
[42] 邵一敏, 赵洋毅, 段旭, 等. 金沙江干热河谷典型林草地植物根系对土壤优先流的影响. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(3): 725-734

西南喀斯特地区典型林分土壤优先流特征及影响因素

Characteristics and influencing factors of soil preferential flow in typical stands of Karst area in southwest China

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	申继凯, 黄懿梅, 黄倩, 徐凤璟. 黄土高原不同植被类型土壤微生物残体碳的积累及其对有机碳的贡献 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(1): 124-132.
[2]	张岁梦, 叶丽敏, 周肄智, 王晓霞, 许元科, 姜姜, 刘自强. 南方丘陵区马尾松-麻栎群落水分利用来源及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(7): 1729-1736.
[3]	邵明勤, 王剑颖, 丁红秀. 中国白鹤越冬适宜生境模拟及种群扩张驱动因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(6): 1639-1648.
[4]	张自正, 张蕾, 孙桂英, 刘俊祥. 清江流域生态系统服务权衡时空效应及驱动因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(4): 1051-1062.
[5]	赵梓琨, 田园盛, 翁学先, 李欢玮, 孙文义. 1986—2021年黄河流域地表水体面积的时空变化特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(3): 761-769.
[6]	石铁矛, 王迪, 汤煜, 李沛颖, 初亚奇. 城市生态系统碳汇固碳能力计算方法与影响因素研究进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(2): 555-565.
[7]	冯平, 杨妮娟, 李建柱. 滦河流域遥感生态指数改进及生态环境质量评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(12): 3195-3202.
[8]	张文龙, 张守红, 张建军. 生物滞留系统径流与水质调控效应研究进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(1): 264-276.
[9]	毛立, 孙志高, 陈冰冰, 胡星云, 武慧慧. 湿地土壤硫氧化-还原过程及其与其他元素的耦合作用研究进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(2): 560-568.
[10]	王明慧, 黄来明, 陈翠柏. 西藏高寒区不同土地利用方式下土壤持水能力差异及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(12): 3287-3293.
[11]	张雅琪, 陈林, 庞丹波, 何文强, 李学斌, 吴梦瑶, 曹萌豪. 土壤微生物群落对枯落物输入的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(11): 2943-2953.
[12]	曹琪琪, 肖辉杰, 刘涛, 孙景宽, 夏江宝, 王栋, 辛智鸣, 贺文君, 赵丹丹, 黄文文. 乌兰布和沙漠东北部不同耕作年限农田土壤有机碳密度及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(10): 2628-2634.
[13]	吴晗, 陈晓冰, 姜波, 秦梓城, 刘思佳, 刘俊杰. 秸秆还田对甘蔗地土壤优先流运动特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(1): 141-148.
[14]	刘冉, 余新晓, 蔡强国, 孙莉英, 方海燕, 贾国栋, 和继军. 黄土丘陵沟壑区黄土坡面侵蚀过程及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(8): 2886-2894.
[15]	万艳萍, 赵洋毅, 段旭, 王克勤, 朱梦雪, 卢华兴, 涂晓云, 杜云祥. 干湿交替对红河干旱河谷区土壤优先流形成特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(7): 2397-2406.