Soil Anti-scourability of Vegetation Configurations in Black Soil Region of Northeast China

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0173

Abstract

Abstract:

The research on soil anti-scourability and its influencing factors under different vegetation configuration in the black soil region of northeast China will provide a certain theoretical basis for the selection and allocation of plants for soil and water conservation. Field sampling and runoff scouring experiment were carried out. The results showed that the slope position had a certain influence on the soil anti-scourability. The soil anti-scourability of different slope positions for Lespedeza and Amorpha was different, and the change rule was different in the upper layer (0-10 cm) of the soil, and was similar in the lower layer (10-20 cm). The soil anti-scourability of different vegetation configurations gradually increased with the scouring time. The relationship between the influencing factors and the soil anti-scourability was ranked according to the correlation: sand content > soil water content > WSA_{0.25 mm}> root surface area density > soil bulk density > organic matter. The model of Lespedeza + poplar was the best, indicating that Lespedeza was more suitable for growing under poplar trees, and could be used as an excellent tree species for soil and water conservation in the vegetation configuration of poplar forests.

Key words: vegetation configuration, soil anti-scourability, influencing factors, slope position, black soil region of Northeast China

CLC Number:

S157.1

TONG Fan, WEI Lin, LIU Xujun, REN Xianping, LI Zhifei, WANG Ping, HAO Yanfang. Soil Anti-scourability of Vegetation Configurations in Black Soil Region of Northeast China[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(2): 44-51.

Figures/Tables 6

References 23

[1]	朱显谟, 田积莹. 强化黄土高原土壤渗透性及抗冲性的研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 1993, 7(3):1-10.
[2]	李勇. 黄土高原土壤抗冲性机理初步研究[J]. 科学通报, 1990, 35(5):390-393.
[3]	刘国彬. 黄土高原草地土壤抗冲性及其机理研究[J]. 土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报, 1998, 4(1):93-96.
[4]	刘定辉, 李勇. 植物根系提高土壤抗侵蚀性机理研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2003, 17(3):34-37,117.
[5]	GYSSELS G, PoeSen J, BOCHET E, et al. Impact of plant roots on the resistance of soils to erosion by water: A review[J]. Process in physical geography, 2005, 29(2):189-217.
[6]	ZHOU Z C, SHANGGUAN Z P. Soil anti-scouribility enhanced by plant roots[J]. Journal of integrative plant biology, 2005, 47(6):676-682. doi: 10.1111/jipb.2005.47.issue-6 URL
[7]	VANNOPPEN W, DE BAETS S, KEEBLE J, et al. How do root and soil characteristics affect the erosion-reducing potential of plant species?[J]. Ecological engineering, 2017, 109:186-195. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.08.001 URL
[8]	李强, 刘国彬, 许明祥, 等. 黄土丘陵区撂荒地土壤抗冲性及相关理化性质[J]. 农业工程学报, 2013, 29(10):153-159.
[9]	郭明明, 王文龙, 史倩华, 等. 黄土高塬沟壑区退耕地土壤抗冲性及其与影响因素的关系[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(10):129-136.
[10]	王雅琼, 张建军, 李梁, 等. 祁连山区典型草地生态系统土壤抗冲性影响因子[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(1):122-131.
[11]	孙丽丽, 査轩, 黄少燕, 等. 花岗岩红壤区不同治理模式土壤抗冲性因素试验[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(5):34-40,49.
[12]	刘绪军, 延秀杰. 黑土区植物篱带对土壤抗蚀性作用效果研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2018, 49(5):1214-1219.
[13]	肖鹏, 吕刚, 王洪禄, 等. 不同植被恢复模式对露天煤矿排土场土壤抗冲性的影响[J]. 水土保持研究, 2019, 26(6):18-24,31.
[14]	史东梅, 陈晏. 紫色丘陵区农林混作模式的土壤抗冲性影响因素[J]. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(5):1400-1409.
[15]	宋坤, 陈玉霞, 潘晓星, 等. 5种护坡植物根系土壤抗侵蚀性比较[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2013, 41(9):63-67.
[16]	李兴桃. 三种植物对土壤水势适应性的研究[D]. 哈尔滨:东北林业大学, 2012.
[17]	金晓, 陈丽华. 晋西黄土区不同植被类型土壤抗冲性及表层根系分布特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(6):120-126.
[18]	何淑勤, 宫渊波, 郑子成, 等. 不同植被条件下土壤抗冲性及其影响因素[J]. 水土保持通报, 2013, 33(6):75-79,83.
[19]	伏耀龙, 张兴昌. 岷江干旱河谷区不同土地利用方式下土壤抗冲性试验[J]. 农业机械学报, 2012, 43(7):50-55.
[20]	任改, 张洪江, 白芝兵. 重庆四面山水源涵养林土壤抗冲性及影响因素[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2013, 11(1):1-7.
[21]	WU Q X, ZHANG H Y. Soil and water conservation functions of seabuckthorn and its role in controlling and exploiting Loess Plateau[J]. Forestry studies in China, 2000, 2(2):50-66.
[22]	肖俊波, 孙宝洋, 李占斌, 等. 冻融条件下土壤抗冲性的变化特征[J]. 中国水土保持, 2017(1):37-40,68.
[23]	谌芸, 何丙辉, 练彩霞, 等. 紫色土区香根草不同径级的根系特征与培肥效应[J]. 草业学报, 2016(2):187-197.

配置模式	土层/cm	坡位	根长密度/(cm/cm³)	根表面积密度/(cm²/cm³)	体积密度/(cm³/cm³)
胡枝子 +杨树	0~10	上	3.12	0.42	0.004
		中	3.17	0.42	0.007
		下	2.72	0.52	0.006
	10~20	上	1.02	0.20	0.003
		中	1.86	0.31	0.004
		下	2.02	0.32	0.004
紫穗槐 +杨树	0~10	上	2.15	0.35	0.005
		中	3.15	0.47	0.006
		下	3.56	0.57	0.007
	10~20	上	1.34	0.18	0.002
		中	1.39	0.20	0.002
		下	1.91	0.25	0.003

配置模式	土层/cm	坡位	根长密度/(cm/cm³)	根表面积密度/(cm²/cm³)	体积密度/(cm³/cm³)
胡枝子 +杨树	0~10	上	3.12	0.42	0.004
		中	3.17	0.42	0.007
		下	2.72	0.52	0.006
	10~20	上	1.02	0.20	0.003
		中	1.86	0.31	0.004
		下	2.02	0.32	0.004
紫穗槐 +杨树	0~10	上	2.15	0.35	0.005
		中	3.15	0.47	0.006
		下	3.56	0.57	0.007
	10~20	上	1.34	0.18	0.002
		中	1.39	0.20	0.002
		下	1.91	0.25	0.003