Soil Physical Properties and Water Retention Characteristics of the Sand-Fixing Plant Root Zone in the Desert-Oasis Transition Area of Gansu Corridor
-
摘要: 河西走廊中部的临泽绿洲位于巴丹吉林沙漠西南缘,在沙漠-绿洲过渡带上生长发育了大量的防风固沙植物。以梭梭、沙拐枣、泡泡刺三种固沙植物根区的土壤为研究对象,探究不同固沙植物根区土壤物理性质指标和持水特性的变化规律及其相互间的关系,旨在为防沙治沙工程实践中固沙植物的选择和空间配置提供科学依据。结果表明:(1)三种固沙植物根区的土壤容重均随土层深度增加而降低,均值表现为:沙拐枣 > 泡泡刺 > 梭梭;土壤孔隙度均随土层深度增加而增大,均值表现为:梭梭 > 泡泡刺 > 沙拐枣;三种固沙植物根区的土壤物理性质指标随土层加深差异性增大。(2)0 ~ 120 cm土层深度范围内,梭梭根区的土壤持水特性最好,泡泡刺次之,沙拐枣最低;0 ~ 40 cm土层深度范围内三种固沙植物根区的土壤持水特性均不存在显著差异;40 ~ 60 cm土层深度范围内梭梭与沙拐枣根区的土壤持水特性存在显著差异;60 ~ 80 cm土层深度范围内三种固沙植物根区的土壤持水特性均存在显著差异。(3)三种固沙植物根区的土壤持水特性均与土壤容重、总孔隙度和毛管孔隙度呈显著相关关系(P < 0.01),但与非毛管孔隙度的相关性却不同,其中梭梭根区的土壤持水特性非与毛管孔隙度呈显著正相关(P < 0.01),而沙拐枣、泡泡刺根区的则呈不显著相关关系。Abstract: The Linze Oasis in the middle of the Hexi Corridor is located on the southwestern edge of the Badain Jaran Desert. A large number of windbreak and sand fixation plants are grown and developed in the desert-oasis transition zone. Taking the soil in the root zone of the three sand-fixing plants of Haloxylon ammodendron, Calligonum mongolicum and Nitraria sphaerocarpa as the research object, the changes of soil physical properties and water-holding performance indices in the root zone of different sand-fixing plants were explored, including their relationships with each other, in order to provide a scientific basis for the selection and spatial configuration of the sand-fixing plants in the practice of sand prevention and control engineering. The results showed that: (1) The soil bulk densities in the root zones of the three sand-fixing plants were decreased with the increase of the soil depth, presenting a mean value order by Calligonum mongolicum > Nitraria sphaerocarpa > Haloxylon ammodendron. The soil porosities in the root zones of the three sand-fixing plants were increased with the increase of soil depth, showing a mean value order by Haloxylon ammodendron > Nitraria sphaerocarpa > Calligonum mongolicum, while the soil physical properties in the root zones of the three sand-fixing plants were increased with the deepening of the soil depth. (2) Within the soil depth of 0-120 cm, the water retention characteristics of the soil in the root zone of Haloxylon ammodendron was the best, followed by Nitraria sphaerocarpa, and that of Calligonum mongolicum was the lowest. There were significant differences in soil water retention characteristics in the root zone between Haloxylon ammodendron and Calligonum mongolicum in the soil depth of 40-60 cm, as well as in the soil water retention characteristics of the root zones of the three sand-fixing plants within the soil depth of 60-80 cm. (3) The soil water holding capacities of the root zones of the three sand-fixing plants were significantly correlated with soil bulk density, total porosity and capillary porosity (P < 0.01), but their correlations with non-capillary porosity was different. Meanwhile, the soil water retention characteristics of Haloxylon ammodendron root zone was significantly positively correlated with non-capillary porosity (P < 0.01), whereas there was no significant correlation between soil water retention characteristics and non-capillary porosity in the root zones of Calligonum mongolicum and Nitraria sphaerocarpa.
-
表 1 三种固沙植物根区土壤物理性质的描述性统计
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of soil physical properties of three sand-fixing plants
植物类型
Vegetation type土层深度
Soil depth
(cm)容重
Bulk density总孔隙度
Total porosity毛管孔隙度
Capillary porosity非毛管孔隙度
Non-capillary porosity均值
Mean
(g cm−3)变异系数
Coefficient of
variation均值
Mean
(%)变异系数
Coefficient of
variation均值
Mean
(%)变异系数
Coefficient of
variation均值
Mean
(%)变异系数
Coefficient of
variation梭梭
Haloxylon ammodendron0 ~ 20 1.56 0.06 40.82 0.04 34.63 0.07 6.10 0.31 20 ~ 40 1.58 0.04 40.93 0.04 35.68 0.05 5.54 0.24 40 ~ 60 1.53 0.05 41.61 0.04 36.43 0.05 5.21 0.28 60 ~ 80 1.47 0.14 46.9 0.20 41.13 0.20 5.65 0.47 80 ~ 100 1.42 0.17 48.3 0.21 41.52 0.21 6.48 0.30 100 ~ 120 1.43 0.16 48.86 0.24 42.26 0.25 6.31 0.32 均值 1.50 44.57 38.61 5.88 沙拐枣
Calligonum mongolicum0 ~ 20 1.62 0.02 40.44 0.03 35.39 0.07 5.04 0.34 20 ~ 40 1.59 0.03 41.38 0.05 36.07 0.06 5.31 0.24 40 ~ 60 1.61 0.03 39.69 0.04 35.30 0.08 4.39 0.42 60 ~ 80 1.57 0.05 40.81 0.06 36.03 0.10 4.77 0.34 80 ~ 100 1.57 0.04 41.16 0.07 35.76 0.05 5.40 0.56 100 ~ 120 1.59 0.04 40.75 0.08 35.00 0.11 5.74 0.32 均值 1.59 40.71 35.59 5.11 泡泡刺
Nitraria sphaerocarpa0 ~ 20 1.59 0.04 40.44 0.03 35.56 0.05 4.88 0.28 20 ~ 40 1.57 0.05 41.03 0.04 35.57 0.06 5.46 0.18 40 ~ 60 1.57 0.06 40.10 0.07 35.13 0.09 4.97 0.43 60 ~ 80 1.54 0.08 41.97 0.14 36.52 0.15 5.44 0.26 80 ~ 100 1.54 0.08 45.03 0.22 37.85 0.30 5.97 0.37 100 ~ 120 1.54 0.09 43.78 0.17 38.19 0.22 5.59 0.23 均值 1.56 42.06 36.47 5.39 表 2 三种固沙植物根区土壤持水特征指标的描述性统计
Table 2. Descriptive statistics of soil water retention characteristics of three sand-fixing plants
植物类型
Vegetation type土层深度
Soil depth
(cm)饱和持水量
Saturated water毛管持水量
Capillary water capacity田间持水量
Field capacity均值
Mean
(%)变异系数
Coefficient of
variation均值
Mean
(%)变异系数
Coefficient of
variation均值
Mean
(%)变异系数
Coefficient of
variation梭梭
Haloxylon ammodendron0 ~ 20 26.26 0.09 24.71 0.10 22.31 0.11 20 ~ 40 25.92 0.06 24.39 0.05 22.60 0.06 40 ~ 60 27.12 0.07 25.79 0.05 23.73 0.06 60 ~ 80 33.68 0.39 31.53 0.39 29.49 0.38 80 ~ 100 36.17 0.42 33.90 0.41 31.08 0.41 100 ~ 120 36.32 0.40 34.56 0.41 31.45 0.41 均值 30.91 29.15 26.78 沙拐枣
Calligonum mongolicum0 ~ 20 24.99 0.05 23.85 0.08 21.90 0.09 20 ~ 40 26.00 0.06 24.52 0.05 22.68 0.06 40 ~ 60 24.53 0.05 23.64 0.09 21.84 0.09 60 ~ 80 26.11 0.08 24.94 0.11 23.09 0.12 80 ~ 100 26.26 0.11 25.35 0.12 22.80 0.06 100 ~ 120 25.70 0.11 24.68 0.13 22.11 0.13 均值 25.60 24.50 22.41 泡泡刺
Nitraria sphaerocarpa0 ~ 20 25.47 0.05 24.38 0.06 22.42 0.08 20 ~ 40 26.26 0.08 25.12 0.09 22.79 0.09 40 ~ 60 25.58 0.07 24.42 0.11 22.46 0.11 60 ~ 80 27.53 0.19 26.33 0.22 24.02 0.22 80 ~ 100 29.99 0.34 28.93 0.37 25.37 0.43 100 ~ 120 29.14 0.29 28.04 0.32 25.57 0.34 均值 27.33 26.21 23.77 表 3 三种固沙植物根区土壤物理性质与持水特征指标之间的相关性分析
Table 3. Correlation analysis between soil physical properties and water retention characteristics of three sand-fixing plants
植物种类
Vegetation type指标类型
Index type容重
Bulk density总孔隙度
Total porosity毛管孔隙度
Capillary porosity非毛管孔隙度
Non-Capillary
porosity饱和持水量
Saturated water毛管持水量
Capillary water
capacity田间持水量
Field capacity梭梭
Haloxylon
ammodendron容重 1 总孔隙度 −0.882** 1 毛管孔隙度 −0.846** 0.973** 1 非毛管孔隙度 −0.479** 0.409** 0.210 1 饱和持水量 −0.955** 0.972** 0.942** 0.452** 1 毛管持水量 −0.949** 0.970** 0.951** 0.410** 0.996** 1 田间持水量 −0.945** 0.968** 0.963** 0.361** 0.994** 0.995** 1 沙拐枣
Calligonum
mongolicum容重 1 总孔隙度 −0.651** 1 毛管孔隙度 −0.697** 0.955** 1 非毛管孔隙度 0.301* −0.076 −0.367** 1 饱和持水量 −0.814** 0.968** 0.948** −0.150 1 毛管持水量 −0.817** 0.957** 0.952** −0.202 0.991** 1 田间持水量 −0.828** 0.940** 0.975** −0.332** 0.982** 0.984** 1 泡泡刺
Nitraria
sphaerocarpa容重 1 总孔隙度 −0.435** 1 毛管孔隙度 −0.334** 0.716** 1 非毛管孔隙度 −0.041 0.168 −0.568** 1 饱和持水量 −0.780** 0.901** 0.632** 0.170 1 毛管持水量 −0.732** 0.844** 0.733** −0.040 0.932** 1 田间持水量 −0.674** 0.752** 0.920** −0.413** 0.826** 0.882** 1 注:**在0.01级别(双尾),相关性显著;*在0.05级别(双尾),相关性显著。 -
[1] Schlesinger W H, Ward T J, Anderson J. Nutrient losses in runoff from grassland and shrubland habitats in Southern New Mexico. I. Rainfall simulation experiments[J]. Biogeochemistry, 1999, 45(1): 21 − 34. [2] Gill R. Global patterns of root turnover for terrestrial ecosystems[J]. New Phytologist, 2000, 147(1): 13 − 31. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00681.x [3] Messing I, Alriksson A, Johansson W. Soil physical properties of afforested and arable land[J]. Soil Use and Management, 1997, 13(4): 209 − 217. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-2743.1997.tb00588.x [4] 郭泉水, 王春玲, 郭志华, 等. 我国现存梭梭荒漠植被地理分布及其斑块特征[J]. 林业科学, 2005, 41(5): 2 − 7, 219. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2005.05.001 [5] Hamerlynck E P, Mcauliffe J R, Smith M D D. Ecological responses of two Mojave Desert shrubs to soil horizon development and soil water dynamics[J]. Ecology, 2002, 83(3): 768 − 779. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[0768:EROTMD]2.0.CO;2 [6] 李 生, 任华东, 姚小华. 土地利用方式对桂西北石漠化地区土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2013, 33(3): 58 − 62, 190. [7] 曹国栋, 陈接华, 夏 军, 等. 玛纳斯河流域扇缘带不同植被类型下土壤物理性质[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(1): 195 − 204. [8] 孙程鹏, 赵文智, 杨淇越. 绿洲边缘夹粘沙丘持水特性[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(11): 3879 − 3888. [9] 张宏伟. 荒漠-绿洲过渡带斑块状植被区土壤有机质空间异质性及环境影响因素研究[D]. 兰州交通大学, 2017. [10] 吕 猛, 吕 刚, 翟景轩, 等. 科尔沁沙地南缘不同林草措施土壤抗冲性及其与物理性质的关系[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2019, 38(S1): 90 − 93. [11] 柴 华, 何念鹏. 中国土壤容重特征及其对区域碳贮量估算的意义[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(13): 3903 − 3910. [12] 马 璠, 王 健, 张鹏辉, 等. 干湿交替处理对土壤抗冲性的影响试验研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(35): 178 − 184. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.2014-1582 [13] 张 素, 熊东红, 校 亮, 等. 干湿交替对土壤性质影响的研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2017, 48(3): 762 − 768. [14] 张小菊, 每 杭, 沈 艳. 平茬方式对宁夏荒漠草原人工柠条林土壤物理性质及持水能力的影响[J]. 草原与草坪, 2020, 40(4): 73 − 79. [15] Wang G, Yu K, Gou Q. Effects of sand burial disturbance on establishment of three desert shrub species in the margin of oasis in northwestern China[J]. Ecological Research, 2019, 34(1): 127 − 135. doi: 10.1111/1440-1703.1269 [16] 解婷婷, 苏培玺, 等. 荒漠绿洲过渡带不同立地条件下物种多样性及其与土壤理化因子的关系[J]. 中国沙漠, 2013, 33(2): 508 − 514. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00069 [17] Kahle P, Janssen M. Impact of short‐rotation coppice with poplar and willow on soil physical properties[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 2020, 183(2): 119 − 128. doi: 10.1002/jpln.201900443 [18] 王宏燕, 王 波, 田 睿, 等. 绿洲过渡带退化胡杨林地土壤水文生态特性[J]. 塔里木大学学报, 2018, 30(4): 28 − 35. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-0568.2018.04.005 [19] 杜满义, 张连金, 裴顺祥, 等. 不同类型油松混交林土壤物理特性[J]. 生态学志, 2020, 39(11): 3588 − 3595. [20] 陈玉福, 董 鸣. 毛乌素沙地景观的植被与土壤特征空间格局及其相关分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2001, 25(3): 265 − 269. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1005-264X.2001.03.002 [21] 文海燕, 赵哈林. 退化沙质草地植被与土壤分布特征及相关分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2004, 21(1): 76 − 80. [22] 盛晋华, 乔永祥, 刘宏义, 等. 梭梭根系的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2004, 12(2): 91 − 94. doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2004.02.003 [23] 周 海, 赵文智, 何志斌. 两种荒漠生境条件下泡泡刺水分来源及其对降水的响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(7): 2083 − 2092. [24] 王 婷, 吕 刚, 魏忠平, 等. 科尔沁沙地南缘樟子松固沙林更新迹地土壤理化特性演变研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2016, 47(6): 1332 − 1338. [25] 苟博文, 魏 博, 马松梅, 等. 古尔班通古特沙漠南缘梭梭根区土壤养分的分布特征研究[J]. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(6): 1229 − 1234. [26] 曹艳峰, 丁俊祥, 于亚军, 等. 不同质地土壤中荒漠灌木梭梭“肥岛”的初步探讨[J]. 土壤学报, 2016, 53(1): 261 − 270. doi: 10.11766/trxb201508130326 [27] 席军强, 杨自辉, 郭树江, 等. 人工梭梭林对沙地土壤理化性质和微生物的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2015, 24(5): 44 − 52. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20150506 [28] 匡文浓, 钱建强, 马 群, 等. 五种荒漠灌木群落土壤有机碳垂直分布及其与根系分布的关系[J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(2): 275 − 281. [29] Rawls W J, Nemes A, Pachepsky Y. Effect of soil organic carbon on soil hydraulic properties[J]. Developments in Soil Science, 2004, 30(4): 95 − 114. [30] 张宏伟, 胡广录, 刘桂民, 等. 黑河中游荒漠绿洲过渡带斑块植被区土壤水分与有机质空间变异特征[J]. 土壤通报, 2016, 47(6): 627 − 633. [31] 郝芳华, 孙铭泽, 张 璇, 等. 河套灌区土壤水和地下水动态变化及水平衡研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 2013, 33(3): 771 − 779. [32] 王德金, 胡广录, 廖亚鑫, 等. 黑河中游荒漠-绿洲过渡带斑块状植被区积沙量的空间异质性分析[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2016, 30(5): 105 − 112. [33] 周 宏, 赵文智. 荒漠区包气带土壤物理特征及其对地下水毛管上升影响的模拟[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(9): 2999 − 3009. [34] Betti G, Grant C D, Murray R S, et al. Size of subsoil clods affects soil-water availability in sand-clay mixtures[J]. Soil Research, 2016, 54(3): 276. doi: 10.1071/SR15115 [35] 康 义, 郭泉水, 程瑞梅, 等. 三峡库区消落带土壤物理性质变化[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(6): 1 − 5. doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20100601 [36] 刘 欣, 彭道黎, 邱新彩. 华北落叶松不同林型土壤理化性质差异[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2018, 24(4): 735 − 743. [37] 张晓梅, 邸 利, 王彦辉, 等. 黄土高原典型林分土壤水文物理性质及持水性能[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2019, 54(3): 117 − 124. [38] 于冬雪, 贾小旭, 黄来明. 黄土区不同土层饱和导水率空间变异与影响因素[J]. 土壤通报, 2018, 49(5): 1073 − 1079.