金沙江河谷3种近熟人工林凋落物持水性研究

舒圣评; 吴军

doi:10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.03.013

用微信扫码二维码

分享至好友和朋友圈

English

旧版入口

WE ARE COMMITTED TO REPORTING THE LATEST FORESTRY ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS

留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

金沙江河谷3种近熟人工林凋落物持水性研究

舒圣评 , 吴军

文章导航 > 四川林业科技 > 2018 > 39(3): 61-65

舒圣评, 吴军. 金沙江河谷3种近熟人工林凋落物持水性研究[J]. 四川林业科技, 2018, 39(3): 61-65. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.03.013

引用本文:

舒圣评, 吴军. 金沙江河谷3种近熟人工林凋落物持水性研究[J]. 四川林业科技, 2018, 39(3): 61-65. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.03.013

SHU Sheng-ping, WU Jun. Analysis of Water-holding Capacity of Litters in Three Types of Near-mature Plantations in the Jinsha River Valleys[J]. Journal of Sichuan Forestry Science and Technology, 2018, 39(3): 61-65. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.03.013

Citation:

SHU Sheng-ping, WU Jun. Analysis of Water-holding Capacity of Litters in Three Types of Near-mature Plantations in the Jinsha River Valleys[J]. Journal of Sichuan Forestry Science and Technology, 2018, 39(3): 61-65. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.03.013

金沙江河谷3种近熟人工林凋落物持水性研究

doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.03.013

舒圣评¹,
吴军²

详细信息

会东县姜州林业站，四川会东 615200;会东县淌塘林业站，四川会东 615200

作者简介:
舒圣评(1990-),女,四川南充人,学士,主要从事森林资源保护和管理、森林病虫害防治、林业调查规划设计工作。

中图分类号: S714

Analysis of Water-holding Capacity of Litters in Three Types of Near-mature Plantations in the Jinsha River Valleys

SHU Sheng-ping¹,
WU Jun²

More Information

The Forestry Bureau of Huidong County, Huidong 615200, China;Rangtang Forestry Station of Huidong County, Huidong 615200, China

摘要: 为了解金沙江河谷近熟人工林凋落物的涵养蓄水能力，对3种典型林分凋落物的储量、持水量、持水率和吸水速率进行了研究。结果表明：不同林型的凋落物干储量、持水量、持水率、吸水率有所差异，其大小顺序均符合：软阔林凋落物（桤木） > 硬阔林凋落物（青冈） > 针叶林凋落物（华山松）。凋落物持水量和持水率与浸泡时间的变化规律符合对数方程W=a×ln（t）+b（其中a和b为常数），凋落物吸水速率与时间的变化规律符合乘幂方程W=a×t^-b，且均达到显著相关水平（P<0.05），可见软阔（桤木）林具有比另外两种林型高的保水性，通过对3种人工林凋落量及其持水性动态变化的监测和研究，凋落物自然含水量在13.75%~63.62%之间变化。未分解凋落物和半分解凋落物饱和持水率分别在85.05%~323.41%，147.66%~251.11%之间波动，半分解凋落物饱和持水率变幅相对较小。
- 人工林;
- 凋落物;
- 持水性
Abstract: To understand the litter water-holding capacity of near-mature plantations in the jinsha river basin,studies were made of litter reserves, water-holding capacity, water-holding rate and water absorption rate in three typical forest types of the jinsha river basin.The results showed that dry litter reserves, water holding capacity, water holding rate, water absorption rate were different in different types of forest, the order of the indexes above were all as follows:softwood forest litter (Alnus cremastogyne) > hardwood forest litter (Cyclobalanopsis glauca) > coniferous forest litter (Pinus armandii). the variation rule of water holding capacity, water retention rate and the immersion time conformed to the logarithmic equation W=a×ln(T)+b (where a and B were constants), water absorption rate and time variation rule conformed to power equation W=a×t^-b, and the difference reached the significant level (P<0.05). Softwood forest had higher water retention than the other two forest types. Through monitoring and research of dynamic variation on litter water holding capacity in three kinds of plantations, natural water content of litter varied between 13.75% and 63.62%, water-holding rate of undecomposed litter and half-decomposed litter varied respectively in 85.05%~323.41% and 147.66%~251.11%, the later varied in a smaller amplitude.
- Plantation;
- Litter;
- Water holding capacity

[1]	莫江明,孔国辉,Sandra Brown,等.鼎湖山马尾松林凋落物及其对人类干扰的响应研究[J].植物生态学报,2001,25(6):656~664.
[2]	廖利平,马越强,汪思龙,等.杉木与主要阔叶造林树种叶凋落物的混合分解[J].植物生态学报,2006,24(1):27~33.
[3]	Rapp M,Regina I S,Rico M,et al.Biomass,nutrientcontent,litter-fall an d nutrient return to the soil in Med-iterranean oak forest[J].Forest Ecology Manage,2009,119:39~49.
[4]	Kavvadias V A,Alifragis D,Tsiontsis A,et al.Litter-fall,litter accumulation and litter decompo sition rates infour forest ecosystems in no~hern Greece[J].Forest E-cology Manage,2001,144:113~127.
[5]	Bubb K A,Xu Z H,Simpson J A.Some nutrient dynamics associated with litter-fall and litter decomposition inhope pine plantations of southern Queensland,Australia[J].Forest Ecology Manage,2008,110:343~352.
[6]	张洪江,程金花,史立虎,等.三峡库区3种林下枯落物储量及其持水特性[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(3):55~58 ,123.
[7]	方华,莫江明.氮沉降对森林凋落物分解的影响[J].生态学报,2006,26(9):3127~3136.
[8]
[9]	任向荣,薛立,曹鹤,等.3种人工林凋落物的持水特性[J].华南农业大学学报,2008,29(3):47~51.
[10]	李清磊,李林延,李清焱,等.几种常见林型枯落物层蓄水功能差别的研究[J].黑龙江生态工程职业学院学报,2007,20(5):36~37.
[11]	陈水莲,叶金盛,曾曙才,等.几种人工林凋落物的持水性研究[J].植物生态学,2010,260~272.

[1]	江磊, 秦富仓, 李龙, 赵金洋, 王露. 基于分形维数的黄土丘陵沟壑区不同人工林对土壤结构和养分的影响 . 四川林业科技, 2022, 43(3): 71-79. doi: 10.12172/202108160001
[2]	贺维, 杨育林, 高鹏, 张炜, 尤继勇, 张好. 岷江干旱河谷两种主要人工林林下豆科物种组成及植被多样性 . 四川林业科技, 2022, 43(5): 41-47. doi: 10.12172/202111220002
[3]	李雅, 张传晶, 谭坤, 黄志旁, 肖文. 建筑群间人工林蚂蚁多样性的年周期监测 . 四川林业科技, 2022, 43(4): 67-75. doi: 10.12172/202111180001
[4]	唐婕, 林自芳, 王晓琴, 程一伦, 彭建, 王芳, 杨汉波, 辜云杰. 区域尺度桢楠人工林土壤养分特征 . 四川林业科技, 2021, 42(4): 26-34. doi: 10.12172/202103030001
[5]	肖庆辉, 覃发超, 胡进耀, 黄怡. 基于CiteSpace的凋落物水土保持效应研究现状及趋势 . 四川林业科技, 2021, 42(3): 111-119. doi: 10.12172/202012060001
[6]	唐源盛, 王戈, 曾祥波, 付利军, 蔡天文, 杨礼通, 张文静, 辜云杰. 雷竹与慈竹凋落物持水性比较研究 . 四川林业科技, 2021, 42(6): 60-63. doi: 10.12172/202104220001
[7]	周琳, 海来曲博. 雅安市老板山3种典型人工林群落物种多样性研究 . 四川林业科技, 2019, 40(6): 32-37,54. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2019.06.006
[8]	付梦渠, 左明华. 四川盆地北缘马尾松人工林生长过程研究 . 四川林业科技, 2018, 39(1): 72-76. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.01.015
[9]	王伟平, 李绍才, 孙海龙, 缪宁, 马瑞, 陶文静, 杨皓. 杉木和柳杉人工林的土壤理化性质对比 . 四川林业科技, 2018, 39(5): 68-73. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.05.016
[10]	梁元平, 李裕, 张杰, 冯洁, 杨汉文. 四川珙县人工林近自然经营措施的探讨 . 四川林业科技, 2017, 38(3): 135-138. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2017.03.032
[11]	王恩平, 余天宇, 靳伟, 贾晨, 辜云杰. 宜宾油樟人工林生长特性 . 四川林业科技, 2017, 38(5): 101-104. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2017.05.024
[12]	张快富, 陈绍安, 许林红, 钟萍, 陈伟. 西双版纳加勒比松人工林群落特征研究 . 四川林业科技, 2017, 38(1): 87-89. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2017.01.022
[13]	盛玉珍, 周庆, 李诗娟, 安勇明, 王丽. 不同营林措施对杉木人工林地力维持的影响 . 四川林业科技, 2016, 37(3): 100-102. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2016.03.019
[14]	张琴, 余柏均, 张晓庆, 马海燕, 彭彩云, 肖玖金. 四川盆周西缘山地3种典型人工林土壤渗透性研究 . 四川林业科技, 2016, 37(5): 7-11. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2016.05.002
[15]	胡和, 凌娟, 贾晨, 周永丽, 刘强, 罗建勋. 鹅掌楸天然林与人工林群落特征及物种多样性研究 . 四川林业科技, 2016, 37(3): 39-43. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2016.03.007
[16]	贾晨, 兰发正, 熊大国, 罗建勋. 剑阁县藏柏人工林生长特性研究 . 四川林业科技, 2016, 37(3): 15-19. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2016.03.003
[17]	王文武, 赵庆霞, 冯德枫. 宝兴县硗碛镇峨眉冷杉人工林群落结构与碳密度 . 四川林业科技, 2015, 36(6): 52-56. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2015.06.009
[18]	贾晨, 侯盛昌, 辜云杰, 罗建勋, 高洁, 周云霞. 蓬溪县乔木型香椿人工林生长特性研究 . 四川林业科技, 2015, 36(2): 108-112. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2015.02.025
[19]	王晓丽, 辜云杰, 贾晨, 高洁, 张时林, 罗建勋. 简阳“蜀台红香椿”人工林生长特性 . 四川林业科技, 2015, 36(4): 90-94. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2015.04.018
[20]	王利萍. 沐川天然林与人工水杉林保水功能比较 . 四川林业科技, 2013, 34(5): 65-68. doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2013.05.014

点击查看大图

计量

文章访问数: 451
HTML全文浏览量: 59
PDF下载量: 5
被引次数: 0

金沙江河谷3种近熟人工林凋落物持水性研究

doi: 10.16779/j.cnki.1003-5508.2018.03.013

舒圣评¹,
吴军²

会东县姜州林业站，四川会东 615200;会东县淌塘林业站，四川会东 615200

作者简介:
舒圣评(1990-),女,四川南充人,学士,主要从事森林资源保护和管理、森林病虫害防治、林业调查规划设计工作。

收稿日期: 2018-03-07

中图分类号: S714

关键词:

人工林 /
凋落物 /
持水性

摘要: 为了解金沙江河谷近熟人工林凋落物的涵养蓄水能力，对3种典型林分凋落物的储量、持水量、持水率和吸水速率进行了研究。结果表明：不同林型的凋落物干储量、持水量、持水率、吸水率有所差异，其大小顺序均符合：软阔林凋落物（桤木） > 硬阔林凋落物（青冈） > 针叶林凋落物（华山松）。凋落物持水量和持水率与浸泡时间的变化规律符合对数方程W=a×ln（t）+b（其中a和b为常数），凋落物吸水速率与时间的变化规律符合乘幂方程W=a×t^-b，且均达到显著相关水平（P<0.05），可见软阔（桤木）林具有比另外两种林型高的保水性，通过对3种人工林凋落量及其持水性动态变化的监测和研究，凋落物自然含水量在13.75%~63.62%之间变化。未分解凋落物和半分解凋落物饱和持水率分别在85.05%~323.41%，147.66%~251.11%之间波动，半分解凋落物饱和持水率变幅相对较小。

English Abstract

Analysis of Water-holding Capacity of Litters in Three Types of Near-mature Plantations in the Jinsha River Valleys

SHU Sheng-ping¹,
WU Jun²

The Forestry Bureau of Huidong County, Huidong 615200, China;Rangtang Forestry Station of Huidong County, Huidong 615200, China

Received Date: 2018-03-07

Keywords:

Abstract: To understand the litter water-holding capacity of near-mature plantations in the jinsha river basin,studies were made of litter reserves, water-holding capacity, water-holding rate and water absorption rate in three typical forest types of the jinsha river basin.The results showed that dry litter reserves, water holding capacity, water holding rate, water absorption rate were different in different types of forest, the order of the indexes above were all as follows:softwood forest litter (Alnus cremastogyne) > hardwood forest litter (Cyclobalanopsis glauca) > coniferous forest litter (Pinus armandii). the variation rule of water holding capacity, water retention rate and the immersion time conformed to the logarithmic equation W=a×ln(T)+b (where a and B were constants), water absorption rate and time variation rule conformed to power equation W=a×t^-b, and the difference reached the significant level (P<0.05). Softwood forest had higher water retention than the other two forest types. Through monitoring and research of dynamic variation on litter water holding capacity in three kinds of plantations, natural water content of litter varied between 13.75% and 63.62%, water-holding rate of undecomposed litter and half-decomposed litter varied respectively in 85.05%~323.41% and 147.66%~251.11%, the later varied in a smaller amplitude.