泰山景区不同林型空气颗粒物浓度研究

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0183

中国农学通报 ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (19): 100-105.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0183

所属专题：资源与环境；园艺；农业气象

• 资源·环境·生态·土壤·气象 • 上一篇下一篇

泰山景区不同林型空气颗粒物浓度研究

张刘东¹(), 郭建曜¹, 万家隆², 付德刚¹, 高晴¹, 申卫星³, 张义坤³, 李传荣²()

¹山东省林业保护和发展服务中心,济南 250000
²山东农业大学林学院/山东泰山森林生态系统国家定位观测研究站/黄河下游森林培育国家林业和草原局重点实验室,山东泰安 271018
³泰安市泰山风景名胜区管理委员会,山东泰安 271018

收稿日期:2021-02-26 修回日期:2021-05-18 出版日期:2021-07-05 发布日期:2021-07-29
通讯作者: 李传荣
作者简介:张刘东,男,1986年出生,山东临朐人,工程师,硕士,研究方向：林业。E-mail： sdlyzld@163.com
基金资助:
山东省林业科技创新项目“生态旅游区森林康养功能精准提升关键技术研究与示范”(LYCX07-2018-37)

Study on Ambient Particulate Matter Concentration of Different Forest Types in Mountain Tai Scenic Area

Zhang Liudong¹(), Guo Jianyao¹, Wan Jialong², Fu Degang¹, Gao Qing¹, Shen Weixing³, Zhang Yikun³, Li Chuanrong²()

¹Shandong Forestry Protection and Development Service Center, Jinan 250000
²College of Forestry, Shandong Agricultural University/ Key Laboratory of State Forestry Administration for Silviculture of the Lower Reaches of the Yellow River/Shandong Taishan Forest Ecosystem National Positioning Observation Research Station, Tai’an Shandong 271018
³Taishan Scenic Area Management Committee of Taian City, Tai’an Shandong 271018

Received:2021-02-26 Revised:2021-05-18 Online:2021-07-05 Published:2021-07-29
Contact: Li Chuanrong

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究泰山景区不同林分的康养效果,以泰山景区刺槐林、油松林和以桃和板栗为主的经济林3种典型林型为研究对象,对林内TSP、PM₁₀、PM_2.5和PM₁4种颗粒物浓度进行测定,分析不同林型对颗粒物浓度的影响。结果表明：（1）不同林型在8:00—18:00内4种粒径的颗粒物浓度日变化整体趋势基本相同,变化曲线均呈现上午高下午低的“V型”趋势,且低谷值出现于14:00左右,其中粗颗粒浓度的低谷时间早于细颗粒物浓度;（2）8:00—18:00各林型颗粒物浓度均达到国家二级标准,各林型不同粒径颗粒物削减率为油松林>刺槐林>经济林;（3）颗粒物所占比例与该林分的颗粒物浓度之间相关性不大,不同林分之间的颗粒物所占比例无显著性差异;（4）颗粒物浓度变化受气候因素的影响,颗粒物浓度与温度、风速呈显著负相关,与湿度呈正相关。在泰山景区森林的建设管理规划中,可适当增加油松等常绿针叶树种比例,以充分利用其较好的颗粒物阻隔能力,这对行人游憩环境的改善、康养效果的提升具有一定作用。

关键词: 森林康养, 林型, 空气颗粒物, 小气候, 日动态

Abstract:

The paper aims to study the health effects of different forest types in Mountain Tai. The concentrations of TSP, PM₁₀, PM_2.5 and PM₁ in Robinia pseudoacacia forest, Pinus tabulaeformis forest and economic forest dominated by Amygdalus persica and Castanea mollissima in Mountain Tai Scenic Area were measured, and the effects of different forest types on particulate matter were analyzed. The results show that: (1) the diurnal variation trend of particulate matter concentration of four kinds of particle sizes in different forest types are basically the same in the period of 8:00-18:00, the variation curve presents a ‘V’ trend of high in the morning and low in the afternoon, the trough time of coarse particle concentration is earlier than that of fine particle concentration; (2) in the period of 8:00-18:00, the concentration of particulate matter of all forest types could reach the national second level standard; (3) there is no significant correlation between the proportion of particulate matter and the concentration of particulate matter in the stand, and there is no significant difference in the proportion of particulate matter among different stands; (4) the change of particulate matter concentration is affected by climate factors, the particulate matter concentration is negatively correlated with temperature and wind speed, and positively correlated with humidity. The proportion of evergreen conifer species such as Pinus tabulaeformis can be appropriately increased in the forest construction and management planning of Mountain Tai Scenic Area, so as to make full use of its better particulate matter barrier ability, which could play an important role in improving the pedestrian recreation environment and enhancing the health care.

Key words: forest health care, forest types, air particulate matter, microclimate, diurnal dynamics

中图分类号:

S719

张刘东, 郭建曜, 万家隆, 付德刚, 高晴, 申卫星, 张义坤, 李传荣. 泰山景区不同林型空气颗粒物浓度研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(19): 100-105.

Zhang Liudong, Guo Jianyao, Wan Jialong, Fu Degang, Gao Qing, Shen Weixing, Zhang Yikun, Li Chuanrong. Study on Ambient Particulate Matter Concentration of Different Forest Types in Mountain Tai Scenic Area[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(19): 100-105.

图/表 6

参考文献 19

[20]	张维康, 王兵, 牛香. 不同树种叶片微观结构对其滞纳空气颗粒物功能的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(9):2507-2513.
[21]	刘浩栋, 陈亚静, 李清殿, 等. 城市道路林对细颗粒物(PM_2.5)的阻滞作用解析[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2020, 37(3):397-406.
[22]	古琳, 王成, 王艳英, 等. 夏季持续高温天气下无锡惠山游憩林内空气颗粒物变化特征[J]. 林业科学, 2013, 49(10):66-73.
[23]	杜万光, 王成, 王茜, 等. 春季旗山福建柏林内外空气颗粒物变化特征[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2017, 40(10):176-184.
[1]	Ding J, Zhang Y F, Zhao P S, et al. Comparison of size-resolved hygroscopic growth factors of urban aerosol by different methods in Tianjin during a haze episode[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 678:618-626. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.005
[2]	Eckel S P, Cockburn M, Shu Y H, et al. Air pollution affects lung cancer survival[J]. Thorax, 2016, 71(10):891-898. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207927 URL
[3]	Zhao B, Johnsyon F H, Salima F, et al. Short-term exposure to ambient fine particulate matter and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a nationwide case-crossover study in Japan[J]. The Lancet Planetary Health, 2020, 4(1):15-23.
[4]	Ahmed M, Guo X, Zhao X M. Determination and analysis of trace metals and surfactant in air particulate matter during biomass burning haze episode in Malaysia[J]. Atmospheric environment, 2016, 141:219-229. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.06.066 URL
[5]	George S, Chua M L, Zhe W, et al. Personal level exposure and hazard potential of particulate matter during haze and non-haze periods in Singapore[J]. Chemosphere, 2020, 243:125401. doi: S0045-6535(19)32641-4 pmid: 31995870
[6]	Bontempi E. First data analysis about possible COVID-19 virus airborne diffusion due to air particulate matter (PM): The case of Lombardy (Italy)[J]. Environmental Research, 2020, 186:109639. doi: S0013-9351(20)30532-6 pmid: 32668559
[7]	Mosammam H M, Niaj J T, Khani H, et al. Monitoring land use change and measuring urban sprawl based on its spatial forms: The case of Qom city[J]. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 2017, 20(1):103-116. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrs.2016.08.002 URL
[8]	Jim C Y. The urban forestry programme in the heavily built-up milieu of Hong Kong[J]. Cities, 2000, 17(4):271-283. doi: 10.1016/S0264-2751(00)00023-8 URL
[9]	Barrico L, Castro H, Coutinho A P, et al. Plant and microbial biodiversity in urban forests and public gardens: Insights for cities' sustainable development[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2018, 29:19-27.
[10]	Mcdonald R I, Marcotullio P J, Gvneralp B. Urbanization and global trends in biodiversity and ecosystem services[A]. //Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: Challenges and opportunities[M]. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013:31-52.
[11]	胡镜清, 江丽杰, 彭锦, 等. 现代医学模式下亚健康概念特征属性的思考及其意义[J]. 中国中医基础医学杂志, 2011, 17(6):683-685,690.
[12]	杨亚玲, 曹帮华, 武德, 等. 泰山风景林主要观赏树种资源分析[J]. 内蒙古农业大学学报:自然科学版, 2007(1):19-24.
[13]	杨亚玲, 曹帮华, 郑黎明, 等. 泰山中路风景林主要树种生长状况与美学特征的关系[J]. 林业实用技术, 2007(4):44-46.
[14]	段敏杰, 王月容, 刘晶. 北京紫竹院公园绿地生态保健功能综合评价[J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(7):1973-1983.
[15]	Wang Y, Zhuang G, Sun Y, et al. The variation of characteristics and formation mechanisms of aerosols in dust, haze, and clear daysin Beijing[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2006, 40(34):6579-6591. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.05.066 URL
[16]	慕彩芸, 屠月青, 冯瑶. 气象因子对哈密市大气可吸入颗粒物浓度的影响分析[J]. 气象与环境科学, 2011, 34(S1):75-79.
[24]	陈亚静, 迟增臻, 李清殿, 等. 不同气象条件下道路景观林对大气颗粒物浓度的影响[J]. 中国城市林业, 2020, 18(6):55-60.
[17]	郭二果, 王成, 彭镇华, 等. 北京西山三种典型游憩林春季空气颗粒物日变化规律[J]. 林业科学, 2009, 45(6):145-148.
[18]	Tallis M, Taylor G, Sinnett D, et al. Estimating the removal of atmospheric particulate pollution by the urban tree canopy of London, under current and future environments[J]. Landscape and Urban Planting, 2011, 103(2):129-138.
[19]	Lin Y, Wu X, Hao X, et al. Influence of green belt structure on the dispersion of particle pollutants in street canyons[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(21):6561-6567.

编号	林分类型	平均胸径/cm	平均树高/m	林下主要植被	郁闭度
1	油松纯林	19.75	10.15	萌生荆条、荩草、白莲蒿等	0.85
2	刺槐纯林	16.91	8.40	萌生刺槐、苔草、马唐等	0.80
3	经济林	10.32	5.56	荩草、马唐、白莲蒿、牛筋草等	0.70

编号	林分类型	平均胸径/cm	平均树高/m	林下主要植被	郁闭度
1	油松纯林	19.75	10.15	萌生荆条、荩草、白莲蒿等	0.85
2	刺槐纯林	16.91	8.40	萌生刺槐、苔草、马唐等	0.80
3	经济林	10.32	5.56	荩草、马唐、白莲蒿、牛筋草等	0.70

样地	TSP	PM₁₀	PM_2.5	PM₁
油松纯林	98.99±13.78c	47.01±7.71c	15.06±2.15c	5.06±0.92c
刺槐纯林	102.40±11.10c	51.43±8.13bc	15.98±1.89b	5.75±0.98b
经济林	110.15±10.89b	52.85±8.08b	17.59±1.74ab	6.26±0.90ab
CK	125.29±15.65a	59.89±9.31a	20.84±2.66a	7.46±1.04a

样地	TSP	PM₁₀	PM_2.5	PM₁
油松纯林	98.99±13.78c	47.01±7.71c	15.06±2.15c	5.06±0.92c
刺槐纯林	102.40±11.10c	51.43±8.13bc	15.98±1.89b	5.75±0.98b
经济林	110.15±10.89b	52.85±8.08b	17.59±1.74ab	6.26±0.90ab
CK	125.29±15.65a	59.89±9.31a	20.84±2.66a	7.46±1.04a

	温度	湿度	风速	TSP	PM₁₀	PM_2.5	PM₁
温度	1
湿度	-0.614^*	1
风速	0.251	-0.190	1
TSP	-0.323^*	0.460	-0.468^*	1
PM₁₀	-0.380^*	0.179	-0.412^*	0.461^*	1
PM_2.5	-0.691^*	0.587	-0.337^*	0.347^*	0.522^*	1
PM₁	-0.238^*	0.041	-0.380^*	0.382^*	0.343^*	0.472^*	1

泰山景区不同林型空气颗粒物浓度研究

Study on Ambient Particulate Matter Concentration of Different Forest Types in Mountain Tai Scenic Area

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 19

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们

[1]	田红灯, 甘国娟, 申文辉, 谭一波, 朱慧, 唐忠香, 叶建平. 广西猫儿山国家级自然保护区森林康养模式研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(25): 52-57.
[2]	华烨, 周昊楠, 许婷婷, 吉春容. 密度对棉花株间小气候、农艺性状及产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(19): 36-41.
[3]	谢子扬, 江蓝, 朱静, 李长顺, 邓慧颖, 刘金福, 何中声. 空气负（氧）离子研究的知识图谱[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(13): 153-160.
[4]	钟伟霖,钟秀金,赖荣泉. 龙岩烟区烟蚜种群对烤烟不同品种及其小气候的反应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(5): 137-143.
[5]	孙慧,吴中能,刘俊龙,苗婷婷,杨传宝,曹志华. 间伐对杨-油菜复合模式内油菜产量及品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(36): 67-71.
[6]	安学武. 基于分布式测量的农业小气候智能观测系统设计[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(34): 112-126.
[7]	张述斌,高山,徐崇志,许高磊,张锐. 不同间作模式对核桃生长状况的比较分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(3): 82-86.
[8]	李效珍,王志伟,鲁宇星,秦雅娟,刘洁莉. 晋北冬春茬温室番茄定植气象条件分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(15): 119-127.
[9]	张红梅,吴剑桥,金海军,丁小涛,余纪柱. 地膜不同覆盖方式对大棚秋季小气候及黄瓜生长和品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(25): 53-59.
[10]	康晓明,崔丽娟,赵欣胜,李伟,张曼胤,马牧源,雷茵茹,魏圆云. 北京市湿地缓解热岛效应功能分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(22): 199-205.
[11]	袁静,王令军,徐剑平,秦增良,郑学山,崔建云,李树军. 大樱桃大棚小气候特征分析及预报[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(19): 173-179.
[12]	王荣英魏瑞江王鑫邢文发朱慧钦王霞. 不同年型下日光温室内小气候差异[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(8): 244-249.
[13]	王春玲魏瑞江申双和王鑫邢文发朱慧钦敖雪. 基于BP神经网络的冬季日光温室小气候模拟[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(5): 149-157.
[14]	魏瑞江,马凤莲,王鑫,董航宇,乐章燕. 日光温室内小气候环境各因子间量化关系研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(32): 282-287.
[15]	佟庆. 东北林蛙圈舍小气候特征[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(31): 1-8.