ISWC OpenIR  > 水保所知识产出(1956---)
不同植被措施下排土场边坡细沟发育时空特征
崔志强1,2; 王文龙1,3; 郭明明3; 康宏亮3; 李建明2
2020
发表期刊土壤学报
卷号57期号:5页码:1155-1165
摘要

为明确不同恢复年限植被措施对煤矿排土场边坡水土流失的防治效应,采用样方调查法,以内蒙古准格尔旗永利煤
矿矿区排土场边坡为研究对象,以裸露边坡(CK)为对照,研究不同恢复年限(1 a、3 a、5 a)的沙柳方格+沙棘+沙打旺
(SHA)和沙柳方格+沙打旺(SA)2 种措施对细沟发育的影响。结果表明:(1)1a 时 CK、 SHA 与 SA 措施细沟宽度均集
中分布在 4~8 cm,细沟深度均集中分布在 2~4 cm;3 a 时 CK、 SHA 与 SA 措施细沟宽度则集中分布在 4~8 cm、8~12 cm、
4~8 cm,细沟深度均集中分布在 4~6 cm;5 a 时 CK 与 SHA 措施细沟宽度均集中分布在 8~12 cm,而细沟深度则集中分
布在 4~6 cm 和 8~14 cm;(2)CK(1~5 a)、SHA 措施(1~5 a)和 SA 措施(1~3 a)的细沟平均宽分别为 7.57~11.35 cm、
7.58~13.31 cm 和 5.57~6.14 cm,细沟平均深分别为 3.38~6.23 cm、4.19~10.34 cm、2.59~4.24 cm,三者的细沟平均宽深
比分别为 2.39、2.12 和 2.05,平均细沟密度分别为 1.52~5.25 m·m –2 、1.42~1.68 m·m –2 和 1.88~2.25 m·m –2 ;(3)1 a 时 CK、
SHA 和 SA 措施的细沟宽深比随坡长变化幅度较大,随着恢复年限增加,宽深比则呈下降趋势,CK、SHA 措施和 SA 措施
的细沟密度和细沟侵蚀量均随坡长增加呈增大趋势; (4)与CK相比,1 a 时SHA和 SA 措施边坡细沟侵蚀模数分别减小 25.0%
和 25.86%,两种措施减蚀效果差别不大,而 3 a 时则分别减小了 61.73%和 35.31%,SHA 措施减蚀效果显著增强。研究结果
可以为矿区排土场边坡的植被合理布设提供科学依据与理论指导。

其他摘要

【Objective】Slopes of coal mine dump are characterized by severity of soil erosion, diversity of erosion type and
complexity of erosion processes. The law of soil erosion on the slopes is different from that on slopes of original landform in
mining areas. In order to explore effects of revegetation controlling soil erosion on slopes of coal mine dumps, survey of a
dumping site was carried out in the Yongli Coal Mining of Zhungeer Banner, Inner Mongolia. 【Method】The survey, using the
quadrat survey procedure, covered a bare slope as CK, and slopes revegetated in the pattern of Salix cheilophila+ Hippophae
rhamnoides Linn. And Astragalus adsurgens Pall (SHA) or Salix heilophila and Astragalusadsurgens Pall (SA), for a different
time period of 1a, 3a or 5a, in an attempt to explore spatial and temporal effects of the revegetation on rill development on the
slopes. 【Result】Results show: (1) on all the slopes, the rills varied in the range of 4-8 cm in width and in the range of 2-4 cm in
depth in the first year, on the slopes of CK, SHA and SH did in the range of 4-8 cm, 8-12 cm and 4-8 cm in width, respectively,
and all in the range of 4-6 cm in depth in the third year, and on the slopes of CK and SHA, they did in the range of 8-12 cm in
width and in the range of 4-6 cm and 8-14 cm in depth respectively; (2) Over the five years, the rills on Slopes CK, SHA and SA
varied in the range of 7.57-11.35 cm, 7.58-13.31 cm and 5.57-6.14 cm, respectively, in mean width, in the range of 3.38-6.23 cm,
4.19-10.34 cm, and 2.59-4.24 cm, respectively in mean depth, and in the range of 1.52-5.25 m·m –2 , 1.42-1.68 m·m –2 and 1.88-2.25
m·m –2 , respectively, in density; (3) For the first year, the rills in all the slopes increased with length of the slope in ratio of width
and depth quite sharply, but with the time going on, they showed a decreasing trend in the ratio, while they varied in an increasing
trend in rill density and rill erosion amount with length of the slope; and(4)Compared with CK, SHA and SA decreased the slope
rill erosion modulus by 25.0% and 25.86%, respectively, showing little erosion controlling effect in the first year, but they did by
61.73% and 35.31% respectively, showing significantly enhanced erosion controlling effect. 【Conclusion】SHA and SA come to be
effective only in the third year and on. The rills on Slopes SHA and SA varied in the range of 8 -12 cm and 4-8 cm, respectively,
in width and in a range of 4-6 cm and 2-6 cm, respectively, in depth, which indicates SA is more effective in controlling
development of rills, in terms of width and depth of rills. And the rills on Slopes SHA and SA varied in the range of 1.42-1.68
m·m –2 and 1.88-2.25 m ·m –2 , respectively, in density, which suggests that SHA is more effective in terms of number of rills per
unit area. Both of the effects become more significant with increasing distance from the top of the slope. Erosion modulus was
1.15% lower in SHA than in SA in in the first year, and then came up to 1.55 kg·m –2 ·a –1 and 2.62 kg·m –2 ·a- 1 , respectively, in the
two, suggesting that SHA is more effective in controlling erosion. All the findings in this survey may serve as a scientific basis
and theoretical guidance for rational revegetation of mine dump slopes.

关键词排土场边坡 细沟侵蚀 植被措施 细沟形态 恢复年限
收录类别中文核心期刊要目总览
语种中文
文献类型期刊论文
条目标识符sbir.nwafu.edu.cn/handle/361005/9908
专题水保所知识产出(1956---)
作者单位1.中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所
2.中国科学院大学
3.西北农林科技大学水土保持研究所黄土高原土壤侵蚀与旱地农业国家重点实验室
第一作者单位中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
崔志强,王文龙,郭明明,等. 不同植被措施下排土场边坡细沟发育时空特征[J]. 土壤学报,2020,57(5):1155-1165.
APA 崔志强,王文龙,郭明明,康宏亮,&李建明.(2020).不同植被措施下排土场边坡细沟发育时空特征.土壤学报,57(5),1155-1165.
MLA 崔志强,et al."不同植被措施下排土场边坡细沟发育时空特征".土壤学报 57.5(2020):1155-1165.
条目包含的文件 下载所有文件
文件名称/大小 文献类型 版本类型 开放类型 使用许可
不同植被措施下排土场边坡细沟发育时空特征(4705KB)期刊论文作者接受稿开放获取CC BY-NC-SA浏览 下载
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
查看访问统计
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[崔志强]的文章
[王文龙]的文章
[郭明明]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[崔志强]的文章
[王文龙]的文章
[郭明明]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[崔志强]的文章
[王文龙]的文章
[郭明明]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
文件名: 不同植被措施下排土场边坡细沟发育时空特征_崔志强.pdf
格式: Adobe PDF
此文件暂不支持浏览
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。