|Table of Contents|

Comprehensive assessment of soil quality under different vegetation types inthe provenance slope of the area of high-frequency debris flow*(PDF)

Chinese Journal of Applied & Environmental Biology[ISSN:1006-687X/CN:51-1482/Q]

Issue:
2016 02
Page:
249-256
Research Field:
Articles
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Comprehensive assessment of soil quality under different vegetation types inthe provenance slope of the area of high-frequency debris flow*
Author(s):
CHEN Aimin1 DENG Haojun1 YAN Siwei1 LIN Yongming1 2** ZHANG Guangshuai1 DU Kun1 WUChengzhen1 2 3 & HONG Wei1 2
1College of Forestry, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China2Key Laboratory for Forest Ecosystem Process and Management of Fujian Province, Fuzhou 350002, China3College of Ecology and Resource Engineering, Wuyi University, Wuyi
Keywords:
debris flow soil quality integrated soil quality index vegetation restoration
CLC:
S154.4
PACS:
DOI:
10.3724/SP.J.1145.2015.07038
DocumentCode:

Abstract:
Aiming to understand the effect of vegetation type on soil quality in the area of fragile ecological environment,this research studied the soil quality of different vegetation types at Jiangjia Gully, Yunnan, China in the provenance slopeof the area of high-frequency debris flow. The physical and chemical properties and enzyme activities of the soil of Arachishypogage (AH), Punica granatum (PG), Heteropogon contortus (HC), Dodonaea viscose (DV) and Leucaena leucocephala(LL) were analyzed and investigated their soil quality by the integrated soil quality index. The results showed that: (1) The soilpermeability and structure stability were better in HC and DV than in LL, AH and PG; the water retention was the best in DVbut inferior in LL and AH. (2) The contents of soil organic matter, total-N, and alkali-hydrolysable-N were significantly higherin DV and HC than in LL, PG and AH; the contents of available-P and available-K was the highest in PG. (3) The situation ofredox was the best in HC and the worst in AH. (4) The integrated soil quality index was in the order of DV (0.68) > HC (0.60)> PG (0.56) > LL (0.45) > AH (0.33). The results indicated that DV and HC are more helpful in improving the soil quality,and it is advisable to take shrub (DV) and grass (HC) into priority consideration for vegetation restoration in the area of highfrequencydebris flow. Besides, we should focus on reducing tillage and protecting the fertilizer of soil in this area.

References

1 Doran JW, Parkin TB. Defining and assessing soil quality [J]. Soil SciSoc Am J, 1994, 58: 1039-10542 张汪寿, 李晓秀, 黄文江, 李建辉, 任万平, 高中灵. 不同土地利用条件下土壤质量综合评价方法[J]. 农业工程学报, 2010, 26 (12): 311-318[Zhang WS, Li XX, Huang WJ, Li JH, Ren WP, Gao ZL. Comprehensiveassessment methodology of soil quality under different land use condition[J]. Trans CSAE, 2010, 26 (12): 311-318]3 尹刚强, 田大伦, 方晰, 洪瑜. 不同土地利用方式对湘中丘陵区土壤质量的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2008, 44 (8): 9-15 [Yin GQ, Tian DL, FangX, Hong Y. Effect of land use types on soil quality of the hilly area incentral Hunan province [J]. Sci Silv Sin, 2008, 44 (8): 9-15]4 刘占峰, 傅伯杰, 刘国华, 朱永官. 土壤质量与土壤质量指标及其评价[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26 (3): 901-913 [Liu ZF, Fu BJ, Liu GH, Zhu YG.Soil quality: concept, indicators and its assessment [J]. Acta Ecol Sin,2006, 26 (3): 901-913]5 黄婷, 岳西杰, 葛玺祖, 王旭东. 基于主成分分析的黄土沟壑区土壤肥力质量评价—以长武县耕地土壤为例[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2010,28 (3): 141-147,187 [Huang T, Yue XJ, Ge XZ, Wang XD. Evaluation ofsoil quality on gully region of loess plateau based on principal componentanalysis [J]. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2010, 28 (3): 141-147, 187]6 Marzaioli R, D’Ascoli R, De Pascale RA, Rutigliano FA. Soil quality ina Mediterranean area of Southern Italy as related to different land usetypes [J]. Appl Soil Ecol, 2010, 44 (3): 205-2127 Glaciela K, Odair A, Mariangela H. Quantifying effects of differentagricultural land uses on soil microbial biomass and activity in Brazilianbiomes: inferences to improve soil quality [J]. Plant Soil, 2011, 338 (1-2):467-4818 桂东伟, 穆桂金, 雷加强, 曾凡江, 王辉. 干旱区农田不同利用强度下土壤质量评价[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20 (4): 894-900 [Gui DW, MuGJ, Lei JQ, Zeng FJ, Wang H. Assessment of farm land soil quality underdifferent utilization intensity in arid area [J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2009, 20(4): 894-900]9 贡璐, 张雪妮, 吕光辉, 韩丽. 塔里木河上游典型绿洲不同土地利用方式下土壤质量评价[J]. 资源科学, 2012, 34 (1): 120-127 [Gong L, ZhangXN, Lü GH, Han L. Soil quality assessment under different land usetypes in typical oasis of the upper reaches of the Tarim River [J]. ResourSci, 2012, 34 (1): 120-127]10 白文娟, 郑粉莉, 董莉丽, 丁晓斌. 黄土高原地区水蚀风蚀交错带土壤质量综合评价[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2010, 8 (3): 28-37 [Bai WJ,Zheng FL, Dong LL, Ding XB. Integrated assessment on soil qualityin the water-wind erosion region of the loess plateau area [J]. Sci SoilWater Conserv, 2010, 8 (3): 28-37]11 Masto RE, Chhonkar PK, Singh D. Alternative soil quality indices forevaluating the effect of intensive cropping, fertilization and manuringfor 31years in the semi-arid soils of India [J]. Environ Monit Ass, 2008,136 (2): 419-43512 Fallahzade J, Hajabbasi MA. The effects of irrigation and cultivation onthe quality of desert soil in central Iran [J]. Land Degrad Dev, 2012, 23:53-6113 Xue YJ, Liu SG, Hu YM, Yang JF. Soil quality assessment usingweighted fuzzy association rules [J]. Pedosphere, 2010, 20: 334-34114 Karlen DL, Tomer MD, Neppel J, Cambardella CA. A preliminarywatershed scale soil quality assessment in north central Iowa, USA [J].Soil Tillage Res, 2008, 99: 291-29915 黄勇, 杨忠芳. 土壤质量评价国外研究进展[J]. 地质通报, 2009, 28(1): 130-136 [Huang Y, Yang ZF. Recent research progress of overseassoil quality evaluation [J]. Geol Bull, 2009, 28 (1): 130-136]16 Andrews SS, Karlen DL, Mitchell JP. A comparison of soil qualityindexing methods for vegetable production systems in northernCalifornia [J]. Agri Ecosyst Envi, 2002, 90: 25-4517 王道杰, 崔鹏, 朱波, 韦方强. 云南蒋家沟泥石流滩地土壤肥力特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 2003, 23 (6): 7-11 [Wang DJ, Cui P, Zhu B, WeiFQ. Soil fertility properties of debris flow waste-shoal land in JiangjiaGully of Yunnan province [J]. Bull Soil Water Conserv, 2003, 23 (6):7-11]18 张广帅, 邓浩俊, 杜锟, 林勇明, 马瑞丰, 王道杰. 泥石流滩地不同植被类型土壤肥力质量综合评价[J]. 福建林学院学报, 2014, 34(3): 214-219 [Zhang GS, Deng HJ, Du K, Lin YM, Ma RF, Wang DJ.Comprehensive estimation of soil fertility in different land use typesof debris flow waste-shoal land [J]. J Fujian Coll For, 2014, 34 (3): 214-219]19 张广帅, 俞伟, 邓浩俊, 林勇明, 王道杰, 吴承祯, 洪伟, 马瑞丰. 干热河谷泥石流流域不同分区土壤养分特征[J]. 西南林业大学学报, 2014, 34 (1): 8-13 [Zhang GS, Yu W, Deng HJ, Lin YM, Wang DJ,Wu CZ, Hong W, Ma RF. The soil nutrition characteristics in differentpartitions of debris flow basin in dry-hot valley [J]. J Southwest ForUniv, 2014, 34 (1): 8-13]20 张有富. 云南蒋家沟泥石流区干热退化山地引种拟金毛的技术与效果[J]. 山地学报, 2000, 18 (6): 563-567 [Zhang YF. Technique andresults of common eulaliopsis’ application on xerothermic degradedmountain in Jiangjiagou debris flow gully [J]. J Mount Sci, 2000, 18 (6):563-567]21 崔鹏, 王道杰, 韦方强. 干热河谷生态修复模式及其效应—以中国科学院东川泥石流观测站为例[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2005, 3 (3): 60-64 [Cui p, Wang DJ, Wei FQ. Model and effect of ecological restorationof dry-hot valley: a case study of the CAS Dongchuan Debris FlowObservation Station [J]. Sci Soil Water Conserv, 2005, 3 (3): 60-64 ]22 吴积善, 康志成, 田连权, 章书成. 云南蒋家沟泥石流观测研究[M].北京:科技出版社, 1990: 238-239 [Wu JS, Kang ZC, Tian LQ, ZhangSC. Observation Study in Jiangjia Gully in Yunnan Province [M].Beijing: Science Press, 1990: 238-239]23 郭灵辉, 王道杰, 张云红, 陈东. 泥石流源区新银合欢林地土壤微团聚体分形特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2010, 24 (5): 243-247 [Guo LH,Wang DJ, Zhang YH, Chen D. Fractal features of soil micro-aggregatesunder leucaena leucocephala forest in debris flow source area [J]. J SoilWater Conserv, 2010, 24 (5): 243-247]24 谢贤健, 韦方强. 泥石流频发区不同盖度草地土壤颗粒的分形特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2011, 25 (4): 202-206 [Xie XJ, Wei FQ.Characteristics of soil particle fractal dimension under differentcoverage grassland of the area with high-frequency debris flow [J]. JSoil Water Conserv, 2011, 25 (4): 202-206]25 林勇明, 崔鹏, 葛永刚, 王道杰, 谢贤健. 泥石流频发区人工恢复新银合欢林种内竞争——以云南东川蒋家沟流域为例[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2008, 30 (3): 13-17 [Lin YM, Cui P, Ge YG, Wang DJ, XieXJ. Intraspecific competition of leucaena leucocephala plantation in thearea of high frequency debris flow: Taking the Jiangjiagou Gully as anexample [J]. J Beijing For Univ, 2008, 30 (3): 13-17]26 赵娜, 孟平, 张劲松, 陆森, 程志庆. 华北低丘山地不同退耕年限刺槐人工林土壤质量评价[J]. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25 (2): 351-358[Zhao N, Meng P, Zhang JS, Lu S, Cheng ZQ. Soil quality assessmentof Robinia psedudoacia plantations with various ages in the Grain-for-Green Program in hilly area of North China [J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2014,25 (2): 351-358]27 杨江峰, 黄自立, 郭占富. 延安地区耕地土壤质量模糊评价及其应用[J]. 土壤通报, 1992, 23 (1): 21-24 [Yang JF, Huang ZL, Guo ZF. Thefuzzy evaluation and its application of farmland soil quality in Yan’an [J].Chin J Soil Sci, 1992, 23 (1): 21-24]28 Fu BJ, Liu SL, Chen LD, Lü YH, Liu J. Soil quality regime in relation toland cover and slope position across a highly modified slope landscape[J]. Ecol Res, 2004, 19: 111-11829 黄冠华, 詹卫华. 土壤颗粒的分形特征及其应用[J]. 土壤学报, 2002,39 (4): 490-497 [Huang GH, Zhan WH. Fractal property of soil particlesize distribution and its application [J]. Acta Pedol Sin, 2002, 39 (4):490-497]30 董莉丽, 郑粉莉. 黄土丘陵区不同土地利用类型下土壤酶活性和养分特征[J]. 生态环境, 2008, 17 (5): 2050-2058 [Dong LL, Zheng FL.Characteristics of soil enzyme activities and nutrients under variousland use in the Loessial hilly-gully region [J]. Ecol Environ, 2008, 17 (5):2050-2058]31 邱莉萍, 张兴昌. 子午岭不同土地利用方式对土壤性质的影响[J]. 自然资源学报, 2006, 21 (6): 965-972 [Qiu LP, Zhang XC. Effects of landuse on soil properties in ziwuling region [J]. J Nat Resour, 2006, 21 (6):965-972]32 Gong L, Ran QY, He GX, Tashpolat T. A soil quality assessment underdifferent land use types in Keriya river basin, Southern Xinjiang, China[J]. Soil Tillage Res, 2015, 146: 223-22933 杜锟, 严思维, 张广帅, 林勇明, 邓浩俊, 陈爱民, 吴承祯, 王道杰,邵树枞. 蒋家沟泥石流滩地不同堆积时期土壤肥力质量演变特征[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2015, 21 (4): 762-769 [Du K, Yan SW,Zhang GS, Lin YM, Deng HJ, Chen AM, Wu CZ, Wang DJ, Shao SC.Soil quality evolution characteristics of debris flow waste-shoal landindifferent deposit periods in Jiangjia Gully [J]. Chin J Appl EnvironBiol, 2015, 21 (4): 762-769]34 李静鹏, 徐明锋, 苏志尧, 孙余丹, 胡砚秋. 不同植被恢复类型的土壤肥力质量评价[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34 (9): 2297-2307 [Li JP, Xu MF,Su ZY, Sun YD, Hu YQ. Soil fertility quality assessment under differentvegetation restoration patterns. Acta Ecol Sin, 2014, 34 (9): 2297-2307]

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2016-04-25