LIN Shuai,YAN Wei,JIA Xuewen,et al.Comprehensive Evaluate of Soil Fertility of Different Forests in MU Us Sandy Land[J].Northern Horticulture,2019,43(15):91-98.[doi:10.11937/bfyy.20184305]
毛乌素沙地不同林型下土壤肥力综合评价
- Title:
- Comprehensive Evaluate of Soil Fertility of Different Forests in MU Us Sandy Land
- Keywords:
- MU Us sandy land; membership function; principal component analysis; comprehensive evaluation of soil fertility; Nemerow index method
- 文献标志码:
- A
- 摘要:
- 土壤理化性质是评估林下土壤肥力重要指标；土壤肥力差异影响植被分布、演替轨迹等；探究土壤肥力质量，以期为鄂尔多斯地区毛乌素沙地人工造林树种选择、科学经营森林等提供参考。以鄂尔多斯地区毛乌素沙地杨柴（Hedysarum mongolicum）、藏锦鸡儿（Caragana tibetica）、沙地柏（Sabina vulgaris）、柠条锦鸡儿（Caragana korshinskii）、沙柳（Salix linearistipularis）5种典型林型下土壤为研究对象，选取土壤pH、有机质、全氮、全磷、全钾、铵态氮、速效磷、速效钾含量等指标作为评价土壤肥力因子，基于隶属度函数法对数据标准化，确定各项指标隶属度值，采用主成分分析法确定各指标权重，结合隶属度值及权重值，应用综合评价法对不同林型下土壤进行综合肥力评价，利用内梅罗指数法和综合评价法得出结论辅助验证。结果表明：1）研究区土壤pH变化范围为7.31~10.46，均值为8.35。2）7项因子对不同研究区综合土壤肥力贡献率依次为全钾（0.177）＞速效磷（0.148）＞铵态氮（0.138）＞速效钾（0.134）＞有机质（0.127）＞全磷（0.099）＞全氮（0.057）。3）不同林型下土壤应用综合评价法和内梅罗指数法确定土壤综合肥力质量变化趋势一致，依次为杨柴林＞藏锦鸡儿林＞沙地柏林＞柠条锦鸡儿林＞沙柳林。研究区土壤整体属于碱性土壤；土壤中全钾含量较高，对林地土壤肥力贡献率最高；土壤全氮、全磷含量较低，是林地土壤肥力主要限制因子；杨柴林林下土壤肥力较高，相较其它林分立地条件较好。
- Abstract:
- Soil physical and chemical properties are important indicators for assessing soil fertility in forest；soil fertility differences affect vegetation distribution,succession trajectory,etc.To explore the quality of soil fertility in order to provide reference for the selection and scientific management of forest species in MU Us sandy land in Ordos region.Five kinds of forests,including Hedysarum mongolicum,Caragana tibetica,Sabina vulgaris,Caragana korshinskii,Salix linearistipularis in Ordos region were chosen to measure and analyze soil pH,organic matter,total nitrogen,total phosphorus,total potassium,ammonium nitrogen,available phosphorus and available potassium in soil.The data were standardized based on the membership function method,and the membership value of each index was determined,the weight of each index was determined by principal component analysis.Combined with the membership value and weight value,the comprehensive evaluation method was applied to evaluate the comprehensive fertility of soil under different forest types.The Nemero index method was used to inspect a conclusion for the comprehensive evaluation method.The results showed that,1) The soil pH were ranged from 7.31-10.46,and mean value of 8.35.2) In different study areas,the contribution rates of the seven factors to the comprehensive soil fertility ranking:total potassium (0.177)>available phosphorus (0.148)>ammonium nitrogen (0.138)>available potassium (0.134)>organic matter (0.127)>total phosphorus (0.099)>total nitrogen (0.057).3) The comprehensive evaluation method and the Nemerow index method to determine of soil comprehensive fertility quality were consistent trend,as followed:Hedysarum mongolicum plantation＞Caragana tibetica plantation＞Sabina vulgaris plantation＞Caragana korshinskii plantation＞Salix linearistipularis plantation.The soil in the study area belonged to alkaline soil.The high total potassium content in the soil had the highest contribution rate to the soil fertility of forest land.The soil had lower total nitrogen and total phosphorus,which was the main limiting factor of soil fertility in forest land.Hedysarum mongolicum plantation had higher soil fertility under the forest,and was better than other forests.
参考文献/References:
[1]张连金,赖光辉,孔颖,等.基于因子分析法的北京九龙山土壤质量评价[J].西北林学院学报,2016,31(3):7-14.[2]杨晓娟,王海燕,刘玲,等.东北过伐林区不同林分类型土壤肥力质量评价研究[J].生态环境学报,2012,21(9):1553-1560.[3]GARAY I,PELLENS R,KINDEL A,et al.Evaluation of soil conditions in fast-growing plantations of Eucalyptus grandis and Acacia mangium in Brazil:A contribution to the study of sustainable land use[J].Applied Soil Ecology,2004,27(2):177-187.[4]AC R,HOOGMOED W,BRUSSAARD L.Soil quality assessment in rice production systems:Establishing a minimum data set[J].Journal of Environmental Quality,2008,37(2):623.[5]张连金,赖光辉,孙长忠,等.北京九龙山土壤质量综合评价[J].森林与环境学报,2016,36(1):22-29.[6]冯嘉仪,储双双,王婧,等.华南地区5种典型林分类型土壤肥力综合评价[J].华南农业大学学报,2018,39(3):73-81.[7]FU B,CHEN L,MA K,et al.There lationships between land use and soil conditions in the hilly area of the loess plateau in northern Shaanxi,China[J].Catena,2000,39(1):69-78.[8]RHOADES C C,MILLER S P,SHEA M M.Soil properties and soil nitrogen dynamics of prairie-like forest opening sand surrounding forests in Kentucky′s Knobs region[J].American Midl and Naturalist,2004,152(1):1-11.[9]张社奇,王国栋,张蕾.黄土高原刺槐林对土壤养分时空分布的影响[J].水土保持学报,2008(5):91-95.[10]吕瑞恒,刘勇,于海群,等.北京山区不同林分类型土壤肥力的研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2009,31(6):159-163.[11]安云.毛乌素沙地4种典型植被恢复模式生态效益分析[D].北京:北京林业大学,2013.[12]高国雄.毛乌素沙地东南缘人工植被结构与生态功能研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2007.[13]吕荣,刘朝霞,吕维向.毛乌素沙地固沙造林针叶树种选择的研究[J].中国沙漠,1998,18(1):81-86.[14]白雄雄.毛乌素沙地沙漠化及景观变化的遥感评价[D].北京:中国科学院大学,2014.[15]李志熙.毛乌素沙地高等植被调查与研究[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2005.[16]李如意,赵景波.毛乌素沙地1960—2013年极端气温变化[J].中国沙漠,2016,36(2):483-490.[17]陈国祥,董治宝,崔徐甲,等.毛乌素沙地中部风成沙的组成与微形态特征[J].中国沙漠,2018,38(3):473-483.[18]刘海霞,李晋昌,苏志珠,等.毛乌素沙地西南缘灌丛沙丘沉积物的粒度和元素特征[J].中国沙漠,2015,35(1):24-31.[19]冯秀绒,卜崇峰,郝红科,等.基于光谱分析的生物结皮提取研究:以毛乌素沙地为例[J].自然资源学报,2015,30(6):1024-1034.[20]BO W,LONG J C.Land scape change and desertification development in the Mu Us Sand land,Northern China[J].Journal of Arid Environments,2002,50(3):429-444.[21]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].3版.北京:中国农业出版社,2000.[22]王建国,杨林章,单艳红.模糊数学在土壤质量评价中的应用研究[J].土壤学报,2001(2):176-183.[23]全国土壤普查办公室.中国土壤[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1998.[24]吴玉红,田霄鸿,同延安,等.基于主成分分析的土壤肥力综合指数评价[J].生态学杂志,2010,29(1):173-180.[25]张凯旋,商侃侃,达良俊.上海环城林带不同植物群落土壤质量综合评价[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2015,39(3):71-77.[26]王倩,李军,宁芳,等.渭北旱作麦田长期保护性耕作土壤肥力特征综合评价[J].应用生态学报,2018,29(9):131-140.[27]叶回春,张世文,黄元仿,等.北京延庆盆地农田表层土壤肥力评价及其空间变异[J].中国农业科学,2013,46(15):3151-3160.[28]邓南荣,吴志峰,刘平,等.城市园林绿化用地土壤肥力诊断与综合评价:以广州市长虹苗圃为例[J].土壤与环境,2000(4):287-289.[29]吕新,寇金梅,李宏伟.模糊评判方法在土壤肥力综合评价中的应用研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2004(3):56-59.[30]管东生,何坤志,陈玉娟.广州城市绿地土壤特征及其对树木生长的影响[J].环境科学研究,1998(4):53-56.[31]解倩,王莹,齐瑞鹏,等.毛乌素沙区退化湿地土壤剖面水分和养分特征[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(3):150-155,288.[32]冯万忠,段文标,许皞.不同土地利用方式对城市土壤理化性质及其肥力的影响:以保定市为例[J].河北农业大学学报,2008(2):61-64.[33]周伟,王文杰,张波,等.长春城市森林绿地土壤肥力评价[J].生态学报,2017,37(4):1211-1220.[34]李金芬,程积民,刘伟,等.黄土高原云雾山草地土壤有机碳、全氮分布特征[J].草地学报,2010,18(5):661-668.[35]郑宝仁,卢宝伟.哈尔滨城市园林树木绿地土壤肥力质量调查[J].黑龙江科技信息,2010(2):131,36.[36]金晶炜,许岳飞,熊俊芬,等.应用灰色关联度法评价砷污染土壤修复效果[J].水土保持通报,2009,29(6):213-216.[37]WANG J H,LU X G,JIANG M,et al.Fuzzy synthetic evaluation of wetland soil quality degradation:A case study on the Sanjiang Plain,Northeast China[J].Pedosphere,2009,19(6):756-764.
相似文献/References:
[1]黄修梅,郝丽珍,王怀栋,等.毛乌素沙地沙芥和斧形沙芥根系分布特征[J].北方园艺,2012,36(08):20.
HUANG Xiu-mei,HAO Li-zhen,WANG Huai-dong,et al.Root Distribution Characteristic of P.cornutum(L.) Gaertn and P.dolabratum Maxim in Mu Us Sandy Land[J].Northern Horticulture,2012,36(15):20.
[2]黄修梅,郝丽珍,张凤兰,等.沙埋和供水对毛乌素沙地沙芥与斧形沙芥出苗的影响[J].北方园艺,2015,39(04):76.[doi:10.11937/bfyy.201504018]
HUANG Xiu-mei,HAO Li-zhen,ZHANG Feng-lan,et al.Effect of Sand Burial and Water Supply on Seedling Emergence of P.cornutum and P.dolabratum in Mu Us Sandy Land[J].Northern Horticulture,2015,39(15):76.[doi:10.11937/bfyy.201504018]
[3]冯伟,李卫,杨文斌.不同固沙植被下沙丘土壤水分动态比较[J].北方园艺,2019,43(06):108.[doi:10.11937/bfyy.20182011]
FENG Wei,LI Wei,YANG Wenbin.Comparative Study on Soil Moisture Dynamics of Dunes in Different Sand-binding Vegetations[J].Northern Horticulture,2019,43(15):108.[doi:10.11937/bfyy.20182011]
[4]贾光普,左合君,韩雪莹,等.毛乌素沙地沙化土地时空动态研究[J].北方园艺,2019,43(21):79.[doi:10.11937/bfyy.20190774]
JIA Guangpu,ZUO Hejun,HAN Xueying,et al.Temporal and Spatial Dynamics of Desertified Land in MU Us Sandy Land[J].Northern Horticulture,2019,43(15):79.[doi:10.11937/bfyy.20190774]
备注/Memo
第一作者简介：林帅(1993-)，女，硕士研究生，研究方向为林木生物技术。E-mail:linshuai168m@163.com.责任作者：白淑兰（1960-），女，博士，教授，博士生导师，研究方向为林木生物技术。E-mail:baishulan0079@imau.edu.cn.基金项目：政府预算收支科目资助项目（2130299号）。收稿日期：2019-03-14