欢迎访问《应用生态学报》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

应用生态学报

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

宁夏六盘山人工林和天然林生长季的蒸散特征

曹恭祥1,王绪芳2,熊伟1**,王彦辉1,于澎涛1,王云霓1,徐丽宏1,李振华1   

  1. (1中国林业科学研究院森林生态环境与保护研究所国家林业局森林生态环境重点实验室, 北京 100091; 2宁夏回族自治区固原市六盘山林业局, 宁夏泾源 756400)
  • 出版日期:2013-08-18 发布日期:2013-08-18

Evapotranspiration characteristics of artificial and natural forests in Liupan Mountains of Ningxia, China during growth season.

CAO Gong-xiang1, WANG Xu-fang2, XIONG Wei1, WANG Yan-hui1, YU Peng-tao1, WANG Yun-ni1, XU Li-hong1,  LI Zhen-hua1   

  1. (1State Forestry Administration Key Laboratory of Forestry Ecology and Environment,
    Research Institute of Forest Ecology, Environment and Protection, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China;
    2Liupan Mountain Forestry Bureau of Guyuan City in Ningxia Autonomous Region, Jingyuan 756400, Ningxia, China)
  • Online:2013-08-18 Published:2013-08-18

摘要:

为了系统地认识森林生态系统结构对蒸散特征的影响,2009年5—10月,应用热扩散技术和传统水文学方法,对六盘山香水河小流域华北落叶松人工林和华山松天然林的蒸散及分量进行对比研究.结果表明: 华北落叶松人工林生长季总蒸散量为518.2 mm,是同期降雨量的104.6%,远高于天然林蒸散量420.5 mm.两种林分总蒸散量在其垂直层次上的分配比例相近,表现为冠层蒸腾量>草本+土壤层蒸散量>灌木蒸腾量,但林分各组成分量占总蒸散量的比例明显不同.其中,人工林冠层月均截留量和蒸腾量为19.6和25.2 mm,分别是天然林的1.2和1.9倍;人工林灌木层月均蒸腾量为 4.4 mm,占天然林的23.4%;人工林草本+土壤层月均蒸散量为37.1 mm,是天然林的1.8倍.采用Penman-Monteith方程对林分的实测蒸散量进行对比检验,两种方法对林分蒸散量的估计值基本接近.

 

Abstract: In order to understand the effects of the structure of forest ecosystem on the hydrological processes, a comparative study by using thermal dissipation technique and hydrological methodology was made on the evapotranspiration (ET) and its components of Larix principisrupprechtii plantation and Pinus armandi natural forest in two adjacent stands in a small catchment Xiangshuihe of Liupan Mountains during the growth season (May-October) in 2009. Throughout the growth season, the total ET from the plantation was 518.2 mm, which accounted for 104.6% of the precipitation and was much higher than that (420.5 mm) of the natural forest. The allocation of ET in the vertical layers performed similarly between the two stands, with the order of canopy layer > herb and soil layer > shrub layer, but the ratio of each component to total ET differed significantly. The plantation consumed 0.2 and 0.9 times more water for canopy interception (19.6 mm per month) and tree transpiration (25.2 mm per month) than the natural forest, respectively. However, the transpiration from the plantation was 4.4 mm per month, and took up 23.4% of the natural forest. In contrast, the sum of soil evaporation and herbage evapotranspiration consumed 37.1 mm water per month in the plantation, which was 0.8 times higher than that in the natural forest. The ET was calculated by Penman-Monteith equation to compare the results estimated by sap flow measurements, and the values estimated by the two methods were similar.