可燃物调控手段对大兴安岭樟子松人工林地表死可燃物燃烧性和火行为的影响

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202604.008

应用生态学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (4): 1014-1024.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202604.008

可燃物调控手段对大兴安岭樟子松人工林地表死可燃物燃烧性和火行为的影响

叶东明¹, 李奕帆¹, 宁吉彬¹, 张瑞杰¹, 章林², 赵凤君³, 陈锋⁴, 杨光^1*

¹东北林业大学林学院, 森林生态系统可持续经营教育部重点实验室, 哈尔滨 150040;
²吉林省林业科学研究院, 长春 130022;
³中国林业科学研究院森林生态环境与自然保护研究所, 北京 100091;
⁴北京林业大学生态与自然保护学院, 北京 100083

收稿日期:2025-12-03 修回日期:2026-03-02 出版日期:2026-04-18 发布日期:2026-05-29
通讯作者: *E-mail: lx_yg@163.com
作者简介:叶东明, 男, 2003年生, 硕士研究生。主要从事森林可燃物管理研究。E-mail: 2442278804@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(32401584)和中国博士后科学基金特别资助项目(2025T180545)

Effects of fuel regulation treatment on the flammability and fire behavior of surface dead fuels in Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica plantations, Daxing’anling Mountains, China

YE Dongming¹, LI Yifan¹, NING Jibin¹, ZHANG Ruijie¹ , ZHANG Lin² , ZHAO Fengjun³ , CHEN Feng⁴ , YANG Guang^1*

¹Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Sustainable Forest Ecosystem Management, College of Forestry, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China;
²Jilin Provincial Academy of Forestry Sciences, Changchun 130022, China;
³Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China;
⁴College of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China

Received:2025-12-03 Revised:2026-03-02 Online:2026-04-18 Published:2026-05-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 东北林区可燃物大量堆积,科学调控地表可燃物对降低林火风险至关重要。为探究不同可燃物调控手段的有效性,以大兴安岭樟子松人工林为研究对象,设置低、中、高强度(不同程度割草、割灌、修枝、清除地表死可燃物)、清理地表、载量加强、割灌木6种调控手段,以未处理林分为对照,研究不同手段对地表死可燃物的理化性质、火行为及热解特性的影响。结果表明:与对照相比,高强度处理可燃物灰分含量、燃点、含水率分别显著升高58.0%、4.3 ℃、60.9%,而粗脂肪含量、载量、火焰高度、燃烧最高温度分别显著降低7.5%、74.0%、43.8%、100.8 ℃;清理地表处理可燃物含水率显著升高,而粗脂肪含量、载量、蔓延速度分别显著降低;载量加强处理可燃物粗脂肪含量、载量、蔓延速度显著升高;割灌木处理可燃物粗脂肪、灰分含量显著升高,而蔓延速度显著降低;中强度处理可燃物燃点显著升高,而火焰高度显著降低;低强度处理可燃物蔓延速度显著升高。与对照相比,各处理综纤维素阶段跨越温度显著升高;割灌木处理后,综纤维素失重速率峰值和平均速率、放热峰面积、失木质素百分比、总消耗量显著降低,其余处理差异不显著。主成分综合燃烧性排序表明,燃烧性从高至低为载量加强处理>中强度处理>割灌木处理>未处理>低强度处理>清理地表处理>高强度处理。综上,高强度处理下樟子松林中地表死可燃物燃烧性明显下降,可作为短时间内的防火调控手段。

关键词: 森林可燃物管理, 人工调控, 燃烧性, 热解特性, 火行为, 樟子松

Abstract: A large amount of fuel has accumulated in the forests of Northeast China. Scientific regulation of surface fuel is crucial for reducing forest fire risk. To explore the effectiveness of different fuel regulation treatments, we set up six regulation treatments in Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica plantations in the Daxing’anling Mountains: low, medium, and high strength (different degrees of mowing, shrub clearing, pruning, and clearing dead surface fuel), surface clearing, fuel load enhancement, and shrub clearing, with untreated stands as the control. The effects of different treatments on physicochemical properties, fire behavior, and pyrolysis characteristics of dead surface fuel were examined. The results showed that high-strength treatment significantly increased ash content, ignition point, and water content of the fuel by 58.0%, 4.3 ℃, and 60.9%, respectively, while crude fat content, load, flame height, and maximum combustion temperature significantly decreased by 7.5%, 74.0%, 43.8%, and 100.8 ℃. In the surface clearing treatment, water content of the fuel significantly increased, while crude fat content, load, and rate of spread significantly decreased. In the fuel load enhancement treatment, crude fat content, load, and rate of spread of the fuel significantly increased. In the shrub clearing treatment, crude fat and ash content of the fuel significantly increased, while the rate of spread significantly decreased. In the medium-strength treatment, the ignition point of the fuel significantly increased, while the flame height significantly decreased. In the low-strength treatment, the spread rate of the fuel significantly increased. Compared with the control, the holocellulose degradation temperature range of each treatment increased significantly. After shrub clearing, the peak and average weight loss rates of holocellulose, the exothermic peak area, the percentage of lignin loss, and the total consumption decreased significantly, while the differences in other treatments were not significant. The principal component analysis comprehensive flammability ranking showed that the flammability from high to low was: fuel load enhancement treatment > medium-strength treatment > shrub clearing treatment > untreated > low-strength treatment > surface clearing treatment > high-strength treatment. In summary, the flammability of dead surface fuel in Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica forests significantly decreased under high-strength treatment, which could be used as a fuel regulation treatment for short-term fire prevention.

Key words: forest fuel management, hand labor method, flammability, pyrolysis characteristics, fire behavior, Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica

叶东明, 李奕帆, 宁吉彬, 张瑞杰, 章林, 赵凤君, 陈锋, 杨光. 可燃物调控手段对大兴安岭樟子松人工林地表死可燃物燃烧性和火行为的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(4): 1014-1024.

YE Dongming, LI Yifan, NING Jibin, ZHANG Ruijie , ZHANG Lin , ZHAO Fengjun , CHEN Feng , YANG Guang. Effects of fuel regulation treatment on the flammability and fire behavior of surface dead fuels in Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica plantations, Daxing’anling Mountains, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2026, 37(4): 1014-1024.

参考文献

[1] Zhao J, Yue C, Wang JM, et al. Forest fire size amplifies postfire land surface warming. Nature, 2024, 633: 828-834
[2] Chen GC, Qiu MH, Wang P, et al. Continuous wildfires threaten public and ecosystem health under climate change across continents. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2024, 18: 130
[3] Li B, Xu ZH, Liu BY, et al. Development of a finer-resolution multi-year emission inventory for open biomass burning in Heilongjiang Province, China. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14: 29969
[4] Wu ZW, He HS, Liu ZH, et al. Comparing fuel reduction treatments for reducing wildfire size and intensity in a boreal forest landscape of northeastern China. Science of the Total Environment, 2013, 454-455: 30-39
[5] 张思玉. 杉木、马尾松人工林地表可燃物利用潜力分析. 浙江林业科技, 2012, 32(1): 54-57
[6] 孙思琦. 纤维素高效降解菌对帽儿山三种人工林地表可燃物降解研究. 博士论文. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学, 2020
[7] Grupenhoff AR, Young DJN, Barbato M, et al. Evaluating short-term effects of fuel treatments on fuel loading in western US dry conifer forests: A meta-analysis. Forest Ecology and Management, 2025, 590: 122808
[8] Stephens SL, Mciver JD, Boerner REJ, et al. The effects of forest fuel-reduction treatments in the United States. Bioscience, 2012, 62: 549-560
[9] Bowman DMJS, Weston E, Nichols SC, et al. Impacts of commercial thinning on stand demography, fuel loads, microclimate and fire behaviour in Eucalyptus delegatensis forest in eastern Tasmania. Forest Ecology and Management, 2025, 596: 123054
[10] 王明玉, 舒立福, 姚树人. 北京地区森林可燃物人工调控技术. 森林防火, 2012(3): 46-48
[11] 金琳, 刘晓东, 张永福. 森林可燃物调控技术方法研究进展. 林业科学, 2012, 48(2): 155-161
[12] Stener L, Rytter L, Jansson G. Effects of pruning on wood properties of planted silver birch in southern Sweden. Silva Fennica, 2017, 51: 1713
[13] 王云霓, 曹恭祥, 徐丽宏, 等. 疏伐强度对华北落叶松人工林自然更新的影响. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 15-23
[14] Zhang YY, Zhou WM, Yuan Q, et al. Niches, interspecific associations, and community stability of main understory regeneration species after understory removal in temperate forests. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2024, 15: 1371898
[15] Udali A, Chung W, Talbot B, et al. Managing harvesting residues: A systematic review of management treatments around the world. Forestry, 2025, 98: 117-135
[16] Peterson DW, Harrod RJ, Dodson EK, et al. Mechanical mastication and prescribed burning reduce forest fuels and alter stand structure in dry coniferous forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 2025, 593: 122909
[17] Davis KT, Peeler J, Fargione J, et al. Tamm review: A meta-analysis of thinning, prescribed fire, and wildfire effects on subsequent wildfire severity in conifer dominated forests of the Western US. Forest Ecology and Management, 2024, 561: 121885
[18] 满钰玲, 任云卯, 冯昕, 等. 抚育间伐对北京西山林场油松林可燃物特征及潜在火行为的影响. 西北农林科技大学学报: 自然科学版, 2025, 53(5): 88-99
[19] Toy-Opazo O, Fuentes-Ramirez A, Palma-Soto V, et al. Flammability features of native and non-native woody species from the southernmost ecosystems: A review. Fire Ecology, 2024, 20: 21
[20] 喻泓, 杨晓晖. 地表火干扰时间序列上樟子松林竞争强度的变化. 生态学报, 2010, 30(1): 79-85
[21] 全国森林消防标准化技术委员会. 东北、内蒙古林区改培型防火林带技术规程(LY/T 2799—2017). 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2017
[22] Chen XT, Wang MY, Li BZ, et al. Effects of fuel removal on the flammability of surface fuels in Betula platyphylla in the wildland-urban interface. Fire, 2024, 7: 261
[23] 全国森林消防标准化技术委员会. 森林可燃物的测定(LY/T 2013—2012). 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2012
[24] 胡海清, 高健, 胡同欣. 基于热重分析的延边州地区7种常见乔木树种的燃烧性排序. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2020, 40(11): 1-10
[25] 杨光, 张瑞杰, 王立轩, 等. 大兴安岭塔河地区雷击火烧迹地地表可燃物燃烧性变化及其影响因素. 生态学报, 2025, 45(22): 1-13
[26] 闫凯达, 赵凤君, 杨光, 等. 基于MODIS火点数据的中国边境地区2001—2022年植被火分布特征. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(11): 3095-3106
[27] 牟韵洁, 高德民, 龙腾腾, 等. 张家口崇礼区主要植物叶片理化性质及燃烧性分析. 南京林业大学学报: 自然科学版, 2024, 48(6): 239-244
[28] 王立轩, 杨光, 高佳琪, 等. 兴安落叶松林火烧迹地地表枯落物燃烧性变化. 林业科学, 2022, 58(6): 110-121
[29] 苏文静, 李世友, 张思玉. 三种针叶树种凋落物的热解研究. 消防科学与技术, 2017, 36(5): 591-593
[30] 吴雪铭, 余新晓, 陈丽华, 等. 间伐强度对坝上樟子松林下持水能力的影响. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(7): 2347-2354
[31] 祝美云, 田文翰, 梁丽松, 等. 不同种类榛子油脂脂肪酸组成及抗氧化活性. 食品科学, 2012, 33(23):47-50
[32] 赵凤君, 王秋华, 舒立福, 等. 大兴安岭针叶可燃物的热值和燃点与其超临界萃取物含量的相关性. 林业科学, 2016, 52(4): 68-74
[33] 刘菲, 胡海清. 森林可燃物理化性质与燃烧性的研究综述. 森林防火, 2005(1): 28-30
[34] Zhang Y, Luo A. Applicability analysis of flame height estimation based on Byram’s fireline intensity model under flat and windless conditions. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14: 4441
[35] Schachtschneider CL, Strand EK, Launchbaugh KL, et al. Targeted cattle grazing to alter fuels and reduce fire behavior metrics in shrub-grasslands. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 2024, 96: 105-116
[36] Hakkenberg CR, Clark ML, Bailey T, et al. Ladder fuels rather than canopy volumes consistently predict wildfire severity even in extreme topographic-weather conditions. Communications Earth & Environment, 2024, 5:721
[37] Dai ZY, Huang CB, Chen YC, et al. Experimental study on fire extinguishing efficiency of polymer hydrogel fire extinguishing agent in pine-fir mixed coniferous forest fires. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 2024, 64: 105413
[38] Song X, Lv HB, Jiang ZM, et al. Sustainable lignin-based high-efficiency flame-retardant epoxy resins with excellent mechanical properties. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 2024, 282: 136742
[39] Smucker BD, Jayasuriya WJ, Niemeyer KE, et al. Influence of lignin on smoldering propagation. Combustion and Flame, 2024, 265: 113451
[40] Villagra PE, Cesca E, Alvarez LM. Spatial and temporal patterns of forest fires in the Central Monte: Relationships with regional climate. Ecological Processes, 2024, 13: 5
[41] Cruz MG, Alexander ME, Kilinc M, et al. Wildfire rates of spread in grasslands under critical burning conditions. Fire, 2022, 5: 55
[42] Liang F, Zhang T, Xiang HZ, et al. Pyrolysis characte-ristics of cellulose derived from Moso bamboo and poplar. Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 2018, 132: 1359-1365
[43] 陈伯轩, 郭妍, 范佳乐, 等. 黑龙江省6种乔木叶片热解特性及气体释放特征. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(1): 76-84
[44] 王庆飞, 郝泽周, 李乐, 等. 广州城市森林主要林型可燃物空间分布与燃烧性等级. 生态学杂志, 2025, 44(3): 780-789

可燃物调控手段对大兴安岭樟子松人工林地表死可燃物燃烧性和火行为的影响

Effects of fuel regulation treatment on the flammability and fire behavior of surface dead fuels in Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica plantations, Daxing’anling Mountains, 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]	赵帅明, 王蕊, 李诚浩, 刘金花, 孟亚馨, 苏海瑶, 徐学华. 降水对樟子松人工林根际土壤微生物碳氮磷养分限制特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 43-51.
[2]	张丽荣, 李镐然, 王奇龙, 刘丹丹, 赵雅琪, 王维芳. 基于哑变量与联立方程组的樟子松人工林碳储量生长模型 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 145-154.
[3]	尚晓妍, 张晓, 温烁, 韩辉, 张日升, 包常亮, 徐创军, 时忠杰. 科尔沁沙地不同密度樟子松人工林年内径向生长及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(9): 2719-2728.
[4]	王荣潇, 张颂安, 高广磊, 丁国栋, 张英, 朱宾宾. 不同林龄樟子松人工林枯落物-根系-土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(6): 1699-1707.
[5]	袁超峰, 王文志, 吴喆虹, 苏勇, 罗玲卓. 健康与衰退樟子松和杨树径向生长响应气候及其生态弹性差异 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(2): 411-417.
[6]	刘一麟, 任悦, 高广磊, 丁国栋, 张英, 柳叶. 樟子松林根际与非根际土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(3): 615-621.
[7]	闫晶, 宋林姝, 李秉玲, 刘燕. 6种北京常见草本植物燃烧性分析与评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(2): 363-370.
[8]	孙昊慷, 韩佳轩, 贾建恒, 张子航, 付立华, 张岩, 郭明明. 不同林龄及径级樟子松径向生长对干旱事件的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(11): 2942-2950.
[9]	邱杨, 王兆鹏, 张冬有, 李祥友, 罗陶然, 王新瑞, 李琳琳, 赵悦如. 大兴安岭北部不同树种径向生长对气温突变的响应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(11): 2933-2941.
[10]	黎书会, 吴艳, 孙志东, 陈继恩, 嬴登宇, 黄跃跃, 晋一棠, 李志超. 凉山州15种主要经济树种的防火性能 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(1): 203-211.
[11]	刘春颖, 党宏忠, 陈帅, 李明阳, 葛金楠, 乔一娜, 刘玉国. 不同起源樟子松林水分利用的差异及机制 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(10): 2619-2628.
[12]	翟培凤, 关家欣, 何鹏, 刘贺永, 满良, 姜勇, 马成仓. 沿干旱梯度樟子松人工林针叶和枝条非结构性碳水化合物及氮含量的变化 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(6): 1518-1524.
[13]	高翔, 周宇, 孟平, 裴松义, 张劲松. 辽西樟子松人工林净生态系统碳交换 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1183-1190.
[14]	陈伯轩, 郭妍, 范佳乐, 李保中, 谭传巧, 李东晖, 胡海清, 胡同欣. 黑龙江省6种乔木叶片热解特性及气体释放特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(1): 76-84.
[15]	吴雪铭, 余新晓, 陈丽华, 贾国栋, 邱云霄, 彭修文. 间伐强度对坝上樟子松林下持水能力的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(7): 2347-2354.