文章摘要
郝弯弯, 赵鹏, 李思维, 谷建才.御道口牧场不同类型防护林的枯落物水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2019,33(6):197~204
御道口牧场不同类型防护林的枯落物水文效应
Hydrologic Effects of Different Forest Types Shelterbelt Litter in Yudaokou Ranch
投稿时间:2019-05-31  
DOI:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2019.06.028
中文关键词: 御道口牧场  不同林分  防护林  枯落物  水文效应
英文关键词: Yudaokou ranch  different forest stands  shelterbelt  litter  hydrological effects
基金项目:国家重点研发计划项目"坝上高原及华北北部山地沙化土地治理与沙产业技术研发及示范"(2016YFC0500802);基于CFERN基础上的不同人工针叶林生物量和碳储量研究(LY201515)
作者单位E-mail
郝弯弯, 赵鹏, 李思维, 谷建才 河北农业大学林学院, 河北 保定 071000 gujiancai@126.com 
摘要点击次数: 112
全文下载次数: 114
中文摘要:
      以承德市围场县御道口牧场4种不同类型(落叶松、樟子松、落叶松和樟子松混交林、樟子松和榆树混交林)防护林为研究对象,采用样地调查和室内浸泡法,对其枯落物的水文效应进行研究。结果表明:各种类型防护林的枯落物蓄积量的范围为5.42~24.59 t/hm2,其中落叶松蓄积量最大,为24.59 t/hm2,樟子松和榆树混交林蓄积量最小,为5.42 t/hm2,且4种林分类型的半分解层蓄积量均大于未分解层;平均最大持水量规律为落叶松(16.61 t/hm2) > 樟子松和落叶松混交林(14.80 t/hm2) > 樟子松(10.22 t/hm2) > 樟子松和榆树混交林(9.99 t/hm2);平均最大持水率大小依次为落叶松(427.02%) > 樟子松和榆树混交林(396.30%) > 樟子松和落叶松混交林(360.88%) > 樟子松(303.13%);有效拦蓄量规律为樟子松和落叶松混交林(74.65 t/hm2) > 落叶松(71.21 t/hm2) > 樟子松(48.82 t/hm2) > 樟子松和榆树混交林(17.66 t/hm2);有效拦蓄率规律为落叶松(344.99%) > 樟子松和榆树混交林(326.66%) > 樟子松和落叶松混交林(286.27%) > 樟子松(215.49%)。综合结果表明落叶松的枯落物层持水能力最好,该地区落叶松防护林的枯落物层涵养水源功能优于其他类型的林分。
英文摘要:
      In this paper, four different forest stands (larch pine forest, camphor pine forest, mixed forest of larch pine and camphor pine, and mixed forest of camphor pine and elm) of yudaokou pasture in weichang County, Chengde city were chosen as objects and their hydrologic effect of litter was studied by sample survey and indoor soaking method. The results showed that the amount of litter in various forest stands was 5.42~24.59 t/hm2, of which larch pine forest had the largest amount, 24.59 t/hm2, and the amount of mixed forests of camphor pine and elm was the smallest, 5.42 t/hm2. The contents of the semi-partition layer of the four stands of forest were all larger than the undecomposed layer. The average maximum water holding capacity was larch pine forest (16.61 t/hm2) > mixed forest of larch pine and camphor pine (14.80 t/hm2) > camphor pine forest (10.22 t/hm2) > mixed forest of camphor pine and elm (9.99 t/hm2). The average maximum water holding rate was larch pine forest (427.02%) > mixed forest of camphor pine and elm (396.30%) > mixed forest of larch pine and camphor pine (360.88%) > camphor pine forest (303.13%). The effective retaining content was mixed forest of larch pine and camphor pine (74.65 t/hm2) > larch pine forest (71.21 t/hm2) > camphor pine forest (48.82 t/hm2) > mixed forest of camphor pine and elm (17.66 t/hm2). The effective retaining rate was larch pine forest (344.99%) > mixed forest of camphor pine and elm (326.66%) > mixed forest of larch pine and camphor pine (286.27%) > camphor pine forest (215.49%). The comprehensive results showed that larch pine forest has the best water holding capacity in litter layer, and the function of retaining water in litter layer of larch shelter forest in this area is better than other types of forest stand.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭