Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (12): 65-69.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0453
Special Issue: 农业地理
Previous Articles Next Articles
YANG Ni1(), LIU Changhai1,2(
), JIA Yuru1, GU Mengyi1
Received:
2023-06-12
Revised:
2023-10-09
Online:
2024-04-25
Published:
2024-04-22
YANG Ni, LIU Changhai, JIA Yuru, GU Mengyi. Soil Moisture Characteristics of Different Vegetation Types in Wind-sandy Loess Region in Northern Shenmu City[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(12): 65-69.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0453
植被类型(林下植被) | 经纬度 | 坡度/° | 坡向/° | 冠幅/m | 林龄 | 平均树高/m | 盖度/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
柠条1 | 110°16′44″E;39°18′46″N | 25 | 29 | 2.7×2.8 | 1967年 | — | — |
草地1 | 110°16′45″E;39°18′46″N | 2 | 350 | — | — | — | >90 |
樟子松 | 110°13′06″E;39°17′13″N | 3 | 140 | 1.61×1.67 | 造林10 a,树17 a | 3.12 | — |
草地2 | 110°13′08″E;39°17′16″N | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
沙棘 | 110°16′47″E;39°18′46″N | 3 | 42 | 2.7×2.7 | — | — | — |
杏树 | 110°16′50″E;39°18′49″N | 13 | 334 | 148×196 | — | — | — |
柠条2 | 110°16′49″E;39°18′55″N | 24 | 209° | 280×270 | — | — | — |
植被类型(林下植被) | 经纬度 | 坡度/° | 坡向/° | 冠幅/m | 林龄 | 平均树高/m | 盖度/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
柠条1 | 110°16′44″E;39°18′46″N | 25 | 29 | 2.7×2.8 | 1967年 | — | — |
草地1 | 110°16′45″E;39°18′46″N | 2 | 350 | — | — | — | >90 |
樟子松 | 110°13′06″E;39°17′13″N | 3 | 140 | 1.61×1.67 | 造林10 a,树17 a | 3.12 | — |
草地2 | 110°13′08″E;39°17′16″N | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
沙棘 | 110°16′47″E;39°18′46″N | 3 | 42 | 2.7×2.7 | — | — | — |
杏树 | 110°16′50″E;39°18′49″N | 13 | 334 | 148×196 | — | — | — |
柠条2 | 110°16′49″E;39°18′55″N | 24 | 209° | 280×270 | — | — | — |
植被 | n | 均值/% | 标准差SD | 标准误SE | 均值的95%置信区间/% | 极小值 | 极大值 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
最小值 | 最大值 | |||||||
柠条1 | 6 | 10.83 | 6.242 | 2.548 | 4.28 | 17.38 | 2 | 17 |
草地1 | 6 | 3.67 | .816 | .333 | 2.81 | 4.52 | 3 | 5 |
樟子松 | 6 | 3.33 | 1.862 | .760 | 1.38 | 5.29 | 2 | 7 |
草地2 | 6 | 2.17 | .753 | .307 | 1.38 | 2.96 | 1 | 3 |
沙棘 | 6 | 11.50 | 1.643 | .671 | 9.78 | 13.22 | 9 | 13 |
杏树 | 6 | 17.83 | 3.430 | 1.400 | 14.23 | 21.43 | 13 | 22 |
柠条2 | 6 | 10.00 | 7.797 | 3.183 | 1.82 | 18.18 | 4 | 21 |
总数 | 42 | 8.48 | 6.549 | 1.011 | 6.44 | 10.52 | 1 | 22 |
植被 | n | 均值/% | 标准差SD | 标准误SE | 均值的95%置信区间/% | 极小值 | 极大值 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
最小值 | 最大值 | |||||||
柠条1 | 6 | 10.83 | 6.242 | 2.548 | 4.28 | 17.38 | 2 | 17 |
草地1 | 6 | 3.67 | .816 | .333 | 2.81 | 4.52 | 3 | 5 |
樟子松 | 6 | 3.33 | 1.862 | .760 | 1.38 | 5.29 | 2 | 7 |
草地2 | 6 | 2.17 | .753 | .307 | 1.38 | 2.96 | 1 | 3 |
沙棘 | 6 | 11.50 | 1.643 | .671 | 9.78 | 13.22 | 9 | 13 |
杏树 | 6 | 17.83 | 3.430 | 1.400 | 14.23 | 21.43 | 13 | 22 |
柠条2 | 6 | 10.00 | 7.797 | 3.183 | 1.82 | 18.18 | 4 | 21 |
总数 | 42 | 8.48 | 6.549 | 1.011 | 6.44 | 10.52 | 1 | 22 |
植被 | n | 均值/mm | 标准差SD | 标准误SE | 均值的95%置信区间 | 极小值 | 极大值 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
最小值 | 最大值 | |||||||
柠条1 | 6 | 96.067512 | 89.3557733 | 36.4793417 | 2.294378 | 189.840645 | 2.5063 | 215.7234 |
草地1 | 6 | 31.161459 | 25.2496974 | 10.3081458 | 4.663527 | 57.659391 | 4.2556 | 69.9760 |
樟子松 | 6 | 103.668275 | 102.5370880 | 41.8605909 | -3.937800 | 211.274349 | 2.5063 | 261.3285 |
草地2 | 6 | 31.161466 | 25.2497117 | 10.3081517 | 4.663518 | 57.659413 | 4.2556 | 69.9760 |
沙棘 | 6 | 33.930038 | 36.6322735 | 14.9550630 | -4.513175 | 72.373252 | 3.6538 | 102.0152 |
杏树 | 6 | 20.249580 | 17.2869423 | 7.0573646 | 2.108047 | 38.391113 | 2.8357 | 42.5091 |
柠条2 | 6 | 86.035048 | 61.5016153 | 25.1079293 | 21.493061 | 150.577035 | 11.7720 | 173.0619 |
总数 | 42 | 57.467625 | 64.8761936 | 10.0106140 | 37.250780 | 77.684470 | 2.5063 | 261.3285 |
植被 | n | 均值/mm | 标准差SD | 标准误SE | 均值的95%置信区间 | 极小值 | 极大值 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
最小值 | 最大值 | |||||||
柠条1 | 6 | 96.067512 | 89.3557733 | 36.4793417 | 2.294378 | 189.840645 | 2.5063 | 215.7234 |
草地1 | 6 | 31.161459 | 25.2496974 | 10.3081458 | 4.663527 | 57.659391 | 4.2556 | 69.9760 |
樟子松 | 6 | 103.668275 | 102.5370880 | 41.8605909 | -3.937800 | 211.274349 | 2.5063 | 261.3285 |
草地2 | 6 | 31.161466 | 25.2497117 | 10.3081517 | 4.663518 | 57.659413 | 4.2556 | 69.9760 |
沙棘 | 6 | 33.930038 | 36.6322735 | 14.9550630 | -4.513175 | 72.373252 | 3.6538 | 102.0152 |
杏树 | 6 | 20.249580 | 17.2869423 | 7.0573646 | 2.108047 | 38.391113 | 2.8357 | 42.5091 |
柠条2 | 6 | 86.035048 | 61.5016153 | 25.1079293 | 21.493061 | 150.577035 | 11.7720 | 173.0619 |
总数 | 42 | 57.467625 | 64.8761936 | 10.0106140 | 37.250780 | 77.684470 | 2.5063 | 261.3285 |
[1] |
张梦雅, 马育军, 谢婷. 青海湖流域生长季土壤水分空间分布特征研究[J]. 水利水电技术(中英文), 2023, 54(3):85-95.
|
[2] |
张璐. 半干旱草原型流域土壤水分动态特征及其影响因素分析[D]. 哈尔滨: 内蒙古农业大学, 2021.
|
[3] |
刘姣, 艾宁, 宗巧鱼, 等. 毛乌素沙地南缘臭柏群落土壤水分空间分布特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33(5):80-84.
|
[4] |
魏瑶瑶. 陕北山地苹果园土壤水分动态及树体耗水特性研究[D]. 延安: 延安大学, 2022.
|
[5] |
何娜娜, 贾如浩, 叶苗泰, 等. 黄土高原旱地苹果园油菜间作对土壤大孔隙结构的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(1):259-264.
|
[6] |
高思远, 张建军, 李梁, 等. 黄土区水土保持林地的蓄水动态及雨水渗透深度[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2019, 17(2):17-26.
|
[7] |
刘存梅. 黄土高原干旱山区造林技术探析[J]. 农业科技与信息, 2022(5):54-56.
|
[8] |
尚文婧, 刘华, 李振艳. 陕北黄土高原造林成活率提升措施分析[J]. 智慧农业导刊, 2021, 1(21):100-102.
|
[9] |
寇涛, 王燕. 生态系统下黄土高原水土流失问题的现状及发展对策研究[J]. 黑龙江粮食, 2021(7):101-102.
|
[10] |
宁嘉晨. 黄土高原退耕还林投入与水土保持效果的空间错配及对策研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2022.
|
[11] |
宋光. 陕北黄土高原刺槐功能性状对环境因子的适应性研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2013.
|
[12] |
单玉琳, 解建仓, 韩霁昌, 等. 黄土高原坡面土壤水分特征及时间稳定性——以延安市九龙泉沟为例[J]. 中国水土保持科学(中英文), 2021, 19(6):1-7.
|
[13] |
杨建利, 贾如浩, 王春丽, 等. 黄土高原苹果园间作油菜对土壤水分与苹果品质的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2021, 27(8):1397-1406.
|
[14] |
李志强. 水土保持生态环境建设与植被恢复研究[J]. 城市建设理论研究(电子版), 2017(16):48.
|
[15] |
谢建辉. 水土保持生态环境建设与植被恢复[A].中国社会科学院城市发展与环境研究中心.城市生态建设与植被恢复、重建技术交流研讨会论文集[C]. 2007:179-183.
|
[16] |
徐澜, 王云强, 孙慧, 等. 黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错带小流域土壤水分季节变化特征与主控因素[J]. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(5):122-129.
|
[17] |
陈小洋, 李力. 煤矿塌陷区中心位置地表土壤水分空间异质性及其影响因素分析[J]. 矿业安全与环保, 2022, 49(6):123-129.
|
[18] |
赵世伟, 周印东, 吴金水. 子午岭次生植被下土壤蓄水性能及有效性研究[J]. 西北植物学报, 2003, 23(8):1389-1392.
|
[19] |
姚艳芬, 马玉飞. 陕北沙地樟子松造林技术探讨[J]. 农民致富之友, 2016(12):112-113.
|
[20] |
王延平. 陕北黄土区陡坡地土壤水分植被承载力研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2009.
|
[21] |
郝宝宝, 艾宁, 贾艳梅, 等. 毛乌素沙地南缘不同植被类型土壤水分特征[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2020, 34(5):196-200.
|
[22] |
郝亮亮, 田路. 黄土高原土壤水分与水土保持措施相互作用[J]. 中国新技术新产品, 2020(10):122-123.
|
[23] |
李琪, 李志萍, 马雅静. 黄土高原植被建设对土壤干层影响研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2021, 49(6):10-14.
|
[24] |
丁文斌, 王飞. 植被建设对黄土高原土壤水分的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(13):5531-5542.
|
[25] |
刘培娟, 隋栋梁, 孙金芬. 不同灌木林地土壤蓄水性能及渗透性能的研究[J]. 山东水利, 2007(12):17-19,33.
|
[1] | YU Shuhui, ZHU Guoliang, MU Xiaoling, DONG Hao, SHI Guifang, ZHENG Zheng, ZHANG Weijian. Effects of Peanut and Green Fertilizer Rotation on Soil Water Content and Soil Fertility [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(8): 74-79. |
[2] | PAN Rundong, LI Peizheng, HAN Dongyin, FU Yueguan, ZHAN Canlan, LI Lei. Effect of Soil Type and Water Content on the Development and Eclosion of Frankliniella Intonsa Pseudopupa [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(30): 138-143. |
[3] | XU Shuang, KAN Yuchen. Correlation of Soil Compactness and Water Content Under Different Fertility Levels [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(36): 94-100. |
[4] | LEI Jun, ZHAO Funian, LU Guoyang, YAO Rui, NIU Haiyang, LI Wenju, YANG Huining. Environmental Factors Influencing Spring Wheat Yield in Semi-arid Region of Loess Plateau [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(32): 55-62. |
[5] | Wei Yutao, Liu Minghuan, Liu Ke, Pu Weiru. Progress of Multi-scale Soil Moisture Monitoring [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(26): 140-145. |
[6] | Zhang Qilin, Hu Juan, Gao Yingzhi, Zhou Daowei. Spatiotemporal Variations of Soil Water and Saline-alkali in Compound Ecosystem of Sand and Meadow in the Songnen Plain [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(20): 49-58. |
[7] | Chen Zhiming, Li Guang, Wu Jianguo, Yan Lijuan. Effects of Irrigation and Nitrogen Application on Spring Wheat Yield, Soil Water Content and Available Nitrogen Content in Loess Plateau of Central Gansu [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(8): 8-16. |
[8] | Qiao Bin, Chen Guoqian, Shi Mingming, Zhao Huifang, Zhu Cunxiong, Cao Xiaoyun, Shi Feifei. Soil Moisture Dynamics and Response to Precipitation Under Different Land Use Patterns: A Case Study of Shallow Mountain Dry Land in Huzhu, Qinghai [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(13): 115-123. |
[9] | Zhai Haoran, Li Xican, Zhong Hao, Zhou Yu. Hyperspectral Indirect Estimation Model of Soil Water Content in Cultivated Layer [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(11): 86-91. |
[10] | . Dynamics of soil water storage in maize growing season in Shuozhou City [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(3): 134-139. |
[11] | . Amount of Drip Irrigation Under Mulch Film: Effects on Soil Water Content and Yield Formation of Summer Soybean [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(12): 36-44. |
[12] | . Effect of Different Tillage Methods on Soil Properties and Wheat Yield in Shajiang Black Soil [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2017, 33(36): 20-24. |
[13] | . Effects of Different Water Treatments on Moisture Dynamics and Plant Height of Spring Maize [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2017, 33(27): 1-7. |
[14] | . Effect of No-tillage with Straw Mulching on Soil Water Content and Temperature and Crop Yield in Semi-humid Area [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2016, 32(3): 71-78. |
[15] | Yang Jun,Huang Shue,Zhang Jinen,Zhang Chonghua and Wang Shangming. Effects of Soil Water Content After Field Drying on Rice Effective Tillers [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2016, 32(24): 36-42. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||