|Table of Contents|

Corrosion Resistance of Typical Soil Types Along the Qinghai-Tibet Railway

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2020年12
Page:
111-117
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Corrosion Resistance of Typical Soil Types Along the Qinghai-Tibet Railway
Author(s):
ZHANG Peng12YAO Tiantian12YU Wu12WAN Dan12NIE Xiaogang12ZHOU Jinxing3
(1.Department of Resources and Environment,Tibet Agricultural and Animal Husbandry College,Linzhi,Tibet 860000;2.Alpine-cold Region Water and Soil Conservation Research Center,Tibet Agricultural and Animal Husbandry College,Linzhi,Tibet 860000;3.School of Soil and Water Conservation,Beijing Forestry University,Beijing 100083)
Keywords:
Qinghai-Tibet railwaysoil typessoil corrosion resistanceprincipal component analysis
PACS:
-
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20193747
Abstract:
Soil corrosion resistance is an important comprehensive index to evaluate the potential occurrence of soil erosion.In this study,four typical soil types were taken as the research object,which belonged to desert soil,grassland soil,meadow soil and brushwood soil.Through principal component analysis,soil aggregates,soil basic physical indexes and soil organic colloids in the research area,and 11 anti-corrosion indexes were analyzed.By studying the corrosion resistance of typical soil types along the Qinghai-Tibet railway,this study aimed to provide reference for the ecological environment restoration in the cold areas at high altitude.The results showed that 11 indicators for characterizing soil corrosion resistance in the study area could be optimized into six indicators:capillary porosity,moisture content,soil bulk density,aggregate structure failure rate,>0.5 mm water stable aggregate content,and organic matter.The evaluation model finally yielded the order of soil erosion resistance of four typical land use types,followed by meadow soil (1.13)>desert soil (-0.25)>shrub soil (-0.27)>prairie soil (-0.61).

References:

[1]付允,贾亚男,蓝家程.岩溶区不同土地利用方式土壤抗蚀性分析[J].水土保持研究,2011,18(5):5-9.[2]聂晓刚,梁博,喻武,等.藏中半干旱地区不同土地利用类型土壤抗蚀性研究[J].西北林学院学报,2018,33(2):43-47.[3]聂晓刚,梁博,杨东升,等.色季拉山土壤抗蚀性空间差异性分析[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2018,46(5):69-76.[4]丁文峰,李占斌.土壤抗蚀性的研究动态[J].水土保持科技情报,2001(1):36-39.[5]尹先平,周运超,罗明,等.赣江源区主要土壤抗蚀性能对比[J].中国水土保持科学,2010,8(2):8-14.[6]赵锦梅,徐长林,马瑞,等.东祁连山不同高寒灌丛草地土壤抗蚀性研究[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(5):119-123.[7]史晓梅,史东梅,文卓立.紫色土丘陵区不同土地利用类型土壤抗蚀性特征研究[J].水土保持学报,2007(4):63-66.[8]王佩将,戴全厚,丁贵杰,等.退化喀斯特植被恢复过程中的土壤抗蚀性变化[J].土壤学报,2014,51(4):806-815.[9]程昊,陈泽昊.青藏铁路荒漠地段沿线植被自然恢复的可行性探讨[J].中国铁路,2002(11):52-54.[10]程昊.青藏铁路荒漠地区植被类型及自然恢复初探[J].西藏科技,2003(9):54-57.[11]易作明.青藏铁路(格拉段)沿线植被恢复研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2007.[12]谢胜波,屈建军.青藏铁路沿线植被土壤的类型分布及特征分析[J].安徽农业科学,2013,41(19):8268-8270.[13]刘世海,冯玲正,许兆义.青藏铁路K1533路基风蚀防治措施效益研究[J].水土保持学报,2007,21(5):68-71.[14]张宪洲,石培礼,刘允芬,等.青藏高原高寒草原生态系统CO2排放及其碳平衡[J].中国科学D辑:地球科学,2004,34:193-199.[15]裴志永,欧阳华.青藏高原高寒草原碳排放及其迁移过程研究[J].生态学报,2003,23(2);231-236.[16]赵亮,古松,徐世晓,等.青藏高寒草甸生态系统碳通量特征及其控制因子[J].西北植物学报,2007,27(5):1054-1060.[17]李晓明,崔明,周金星,等.青藏铁路沿线土壤有机碳含量变异特征分析[J].林业资源管理,2011(5):41-46.[18]刘国彬.黄土高原土壤抗冲性研究及有关问题[J].水土保持研究,1997(S1):91-101.[19]刘光崧.土壤理化分析与剖面描述[M].北京:中国标准出版社,1996.[20]中国林业科学研究院林业研究所森林土壤研究实验室.LY/T 1215—1999森林土壤水分-物理性质的测定[S].北京:中国标准出版社,1999.[21]中国农学会.土壤农业化学分析方法[M].北京:中国农业科技出版社,2000.[22]刘晶,田耀武,张巧明.豫西黄土丘陵区不同土地利用方式对土壤团聚体有机碳含量及其矿化特征[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(3):255-261.[23]刘艳丽,李成亮,高明秀,等.不同土地利用方式对黄河三角洲土壤物理特性的影响[J].生态学报,2015,35(15):5183-5190.[24]蒲玉琳,林超文,谢德体,等.植物篱—农作坡地土壤团聚体组成和稳定性特征[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(1):122-128.[25]陈正法,史冬梅,谢均强,等.紫色土旱坡地土壤团聚体稳定性特征对侵蚀过程的影响[J].中国农业科学,2011,44(13):2721-2729.[26]万丹,何财基,王玉民,等.藏东南高寒区尼洋河河谷地带不同土地利用方式土壤抗蚀性研究[J].西南师范大学学报(自然科学版),2018,43(9):106-114.[27]张社奇,王国栋,刘建军,等.黄土高原刺槐林地土壤水分物理性质研究[J].西北林学院学报,2004,19(3):11-14.[28]梁博,聂晓刚,万丹,等.喜马拉雅山脉南麓典型林地对土壤理化性质及可蚀性K值影响[J].土壤学报,2018,55(6):1377-1388.[29]张华渝,王克勤,宋娅丽.滇中尖山河流域不同土地利用类型土壤抗蚀性[J].水土保持学报,2019,33(5):50-57.[30]杨秀清,韩有志.关帝山森林土壤有机碳和氮素的空间变异特征[J].林业科学研究,2011,24(2):223-229.[31]陈同德,焦菊英,王颢霖,等.青藏高原土壤侵蚀研究进展[J].土壤学报,2020(4):1-22.[32]康琳琦,周天财,干友民,等.1984—2013年青藏高原土壤侵蚀时空变化特征[J].应用与环境生物学报,2018,24(2):245-253.[33]刘斌涛,陶和平,史展,等.青藏高原土壤可蚀性K值的空间分布特征[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(4):11-16.[34]李元寿,王根绪,王军德,等.137Cs示踪法研究青藏高原草甸土的土壤侵蚀[J].山地学报,2007(1):114-121.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2020-08-25