丹江口水库入库河口土壤肥力综合评价

doi:10.16036/j.issn.1000-2650.2021.04.015

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 【目的】以青塘河入丹江口水库河口处作为研究区,将离散样点拟合为连续的空间分布,综合评价入库河口土壤肥力,以期改善植被,保护水源地生态环境和水质安全。【方法】利用主成分分析法、聚类分析法、普通Kriging插值法进行数据分析。【结果】土壤pH值平均7.14,变异系数4.99%,基本呈中性。速效磷变异系数高达86.51%,受人为因素影响较大。其余养分指标呈现中等强度变异,含量较稳定;土壤肥力大多集中在二级和三级肥力,分别占22.58%和58.06%,仅有19.36%的样点属于一级肥力。【结论】研究区土壤肥力整体处于中、低水平。土壤综合肥力从西北到东南呈上升趋势,与土壤酸碱度正相关,一级肥力集中在东南区域,面积占14%,二级和三级肥力分别占研究区面积的46%和40%。

关键词: 丹江口水库, 土壤肥力, 综合评价, 空间分布

Abstract: 【Objective】 The purpose of this study is to comprehensively evaluate the soil fertility taking the estuary of Qingtang River into Danjiangkou Reservoir is selected as the area studied by fitting the discrete local sample points into continuous spatial distribution, in order to provide the basis for differential improvement of vegetation, so as to protect the ecological environment and water quality safety of the water source. 【Method】 The method of principal component analysis, cluster analysis and Kriging interpolation were used. 【Result】 The results show that the average pH value of soil in the area studied was basically neutral which was 7.14. The coefficient of variation of pH value is only 4.99%, which indicates the stability of acidity and alkalinity. The coefficient of variation of available phosphorus was 86.51%, which indicates that available phosphorus was greatly affected by Human activities. In addition to the above, other indicators of the soil fertility were concentrated in the second grade which accounting for 22.58% and third grade which accounting for 58.06% respectively, and only 19.36% of the sample sites belonged to the first grade. In conclusion, the soil fertility in the area studied was in the middle and low level generally. 【Conclusion】 The comprehensive soil fertility in the area studied increased from northwest to Southeast, and was positively correlated with soil pH value. the first grade fertility was concentrated in the southeast area, accounting for 14%, and the second and third grade fertility accounted for 46% and 40% of the study area, respectively.

Key words: Danjiangkou Reservior, soil fertility, comprehensive evaluation, spatial distribution

中图分类号:

S158

薛盈杉, 雷俊山. 丹江口水库入库河口土壤肥力综合评价[J]. 四川农业大学学报, 2021, 39(4): 532-540.

XUE Yingshan, LEI Junshan. Comprehensive Evaluation of Soil Fertility in the Estuary of Danjiangkou Reservior[J]. Journal of Sichuan Agricultural University, 2021, 39(4): 532-540.

参考文献 34

[1]	李秋华, 刘送平, 林陶, 等. 贵州某入库河口段水质改善工程的设计与分析[J]. 中国给水排水, 2011, 27(4): 47-53.
[2]	李德生, 张萍, 张水龙, 等. 黄前库区流域植被水源涵养功能及制备类型选择的研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2003, 17(4):128-131.
[3]	扈祥来. 甘肃省黄土高原丘陵地带森林植被对水资源的影响[J]. 水科学进展, 2000, 11(2): 199-201.
[4]	张丹丹, 王冬梅, 信忠保, 等. 漓江滨岸草带对径流泥沙的拦截效果[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(21): 6985-6993.
[5]	申小波. 草本植被过滤带对主要农业面源污染物的拦截效果研究[D]. 长沙: 中南林业科技大学, 2014.
[6]	安韶山. 黄土丘陵区土壤肥力质量对植被恢复的响应及其演变[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2004.
[7]	孙玉君, 李丹华. 南水北调中线工程水源区水质现状分析[J]. 人民长江, 2016, 47(14): 15-18.
[8]	张建, 雷刚, 漆良华, 等. 2003—2018年土地利用变化对丹江口市景观格局与生态服务价值的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(4): 1280-1290.
[9]	孔小莉, 张华钢, 杨德丽. 十三五丹江口库区生态环境现状及治理对策研究[J]. 中国环境管理干部学院学报, 2017, 27(2): 26-28.
[10]	彭芳. 丹江口库区陕西段水生态保护对策及建议[J]. 陕西水利, 2017(3): 183-184.
[11]	SHARMA R P, CHATTARAJ S, VASU D, et al.Spatial variability assessment of soil fertility in black soils of central India using geostatistical modeling[J]. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 2021, 67(7): 876-888.
[12]	CHANDRAKALA M, PRASAD B, NIRANJANA K V, et al.Application of soil fertility capability classification (fcc) in dry semi arid land of south telangana plateau, andhra pradesh[J]. Com-munications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 2021, 52(2): 161-171.
[13]	裴小龙, 韩小龙, 钱建利, 等. 自然资源综合观测视角下的土壤肥力评价指标[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(10): 1953-1964.
[14]	张美荣. 复垦村庄土壤肥力评价研究[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学, 2015.
[15]	马强, 宇万太, 赵少华, 等. 黑土农田土壤肥力质量综合评价[J]. 应用生态学报, 2004, 15(10): 1916-1920.
[16]	BERNDTSSON R, BAHRI A, JINNO K.Spatial dependence of geochemical elements in a semiarid agriculatural field: Geostatistical properties[J]. Soil Science Society of Americal Journal,1993, 57: 1323-1329.
[17]	ADEJUWON J O, EKANADE O.A comparison of soil properties under different landuse types in a part of the Nigerian cocoa belt[J]. Elsevier, 1988, 15: 319-331.
[18]	张庆费, 宋永昌, 由文辉, 等. 浙江天童植物群落次生演替与土壤肥力的关系[J]. 生态学报, 1999, 19(2): 32-36.
[19]	吕晓男, 陆允甫, 王人潮, 等. 浙江低丘红壤肥力数值化综合评价研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2000, 31(3): 107-110.
[20]	黄安, 杨联安, 杜挺, 等. 基于主成分分析的土壤养分综合评价[J]. 干旱区研究, 2014, 31(5): 819-825.
[21]	WEBSTER R.Quantitative spatial analysis of soil in the field[J]. Advance Soil Science, 1985, 3: 1-70.
[22]	MARIJA R, DAVOR R.Heavy metals distribution in agricultural topsoils in urban area[J]. Environmental Geology, 2003, 43(7):795-805.
[23]	吕苏丹, 汪光宇, 邬亚浪, 等. 东阳万亩园区土壤养分综合评价研究[J]. 浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2002, 28(3): 272-276.
[24]	史利江, 郑丽波, 柳云龙, 等. 长三角地区农田土壤养分空间变异及养分综合评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2008, 17(6):839-845.
[25]	张阳, 屠乃美, 谢会雅, 等. 茶陵县烟稻复种区土壤养分时空变异特征[J]. 土壤通报, 2021, 52(2): 297-305.
[26]	王添乐, 郭青霞, 王海斌, 等. 岔口流域不同退耕还林地土壤养分分析[J]. 中国水土保持科学(中英文), 2021, 19(2):61-70.
[27]	王永平, 周子柯, 滕昊蔚, 等. 滇南小流域3种土地利用方式下土壤侵蚀及养分流失特征[J]. 水土保持研究, 2021, 28(1):11-18.
[28]	侯春兰, 杨瑞, 杨宝勇, 等. 贵州威宁草海不同土地利用类型土壤理化性质研究[J]. 林业资源管理, 2020(5): 138-143.
[29]	秦富仓, 牛晓乐, 杨振奇, 等. 冒山小流域不同地形和土地利用下的土壤养分空间变异特征[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2020, 22(6): 138-148.
[30]	戴方喜, 许文年, 陈芳清. 对三峡库区消落带梯度生态系统及其生态修复的思考[J]. 中国水土保持SWCC, 2006(12): 6-8.
[31]	徐超, 付川, 牟新利, 等. 三峡库区消落带生态环境污染现状及潜在问题分析[J]. 现代农业科技, 2010(5): 263-264.
[32]	张君, 蔡德宝, 杨树琼, 等. 基于主成分和聚类分析的丹江口水源区农田土壤肥力质量评价: 以淅川县为例[J]. 河南农业科学, 2021, 50(4): 79-87.
[33]	胡贵贵, 杨粉莉, 杨联安, 等. 基于主成分和机器学习的土壤有机质含量空间预测建模[J/OL]. 干旱区地理: 1-13[2021-04-20]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/65.1103.X.20210401.1820.002.html.
[34]	张成君, 康文娟, 张翠梅, 等. 基于主成分-聚类分析评价不同轮作模式对土壤肥力的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34(1): 292-300.