岩溶地区不同土地利用方式下土壤斥水性的空间变化

陶涣壮; 彭扬建; 甘磊; 马蕊; 程芳丽

doi:10.19303/j.issn.1008-0384.2017.01.016

岩溶地区不同土地利用方式下土壤斥水性的空间变化

doi: 10.19303/j.issn.1008-0384.2017.01.016

陶涣壮^1,,
彭扬建^{1, 2},
甘磊^{1, 2, 3, ,},
马蕊³,
程芳丽⁴

1.
桂林理工大学广西岩溶地区水污染控制与用水安全保障协同创新中心, 广西桂林 541004
2.
桂林理工大学广西环境污染控制理论与技术重点实验室, 广西桂林 541004
3.
桂林理工大学环境科学与工程学院, 广西桂林 541004
4.
桂林市农业科学院, 广西桂林 541004

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金 41501230

国家自然科学基金 41301289

广西自然科学基金 2016GXNSFAA380197

详细信息

作者简介:
陶涣壮 (1991-), 男, 硕士研究生, 研究方向:农田水土 (E-mail:799634972@qq.com)

通讯作者:
甘磊 (1983-), 男, 博士, 研究方向:土壤物理性质及土壤水热运动模拟 (E-mail:allen_gl2006@163.com)

中图分类号: S152
计量
- 文章访问数: 1493
- HTML全文浏览量: 171
- PDF下载量: 274
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2016-06-19
- 修回日期: 2016-11-23
- 刊出日期: 2017-01-01

Spatial Distribution of Water Repellency of Soils on Plots Planted with Different Crops in Karst Regions

TAO Huan-zhuang^1
,,
PENG Yang-jian^{1, 2},
GAN Lei^{1, 2, 3
, ,},
MA Rui³,
CHENG Fang-li⁴

1.
Guangxi Collaborative Innovation Center for Water Pollution Control and Water Safety in Karst Area, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, Guangxi 541004, China
2.
Guangxi Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution Control Theory and Technology, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, Guangxi 541004, China
3.
College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin, Guangxi 541004, China
4.
Guilin Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guilin, Guangxi 541004, China

摘要

摘要: 以广西桂林市农业科学院大豆、甘蔗及梨树植被覆盖的土壤为例，研究不同土地利用模式下土壤斥水性的空间变化。通过对每个试验区面积为135 m×105 m的100个测量点应用滴水穿透时间法（water drop penetration time，WDPT）进行土壤斥水性测量，利用土壤含水量确定干旱（0.062±0.025）cm³·cm^-3、中等（0.151±0.045）cm³·cm^-3和湿润（0.237±0.086）cm³·cm^-3的土壤水分条件。运用地统计方式，对土壤斥水性进行空间变化分析。结果表明：在干旱和湿润水分条件下，WDPT的大小均表现出梨树地最大，甘蔗地次之，大豆地最小，与土壤含水量和有机质大小的变化一致，但是在中等水分条件下，WDPT均值大豆地高于甘蔗地，同时3个试验区的滴水入渗持续时间都达到最大。土壤斥水性的地统计分析结果表明，在3种水分条件下，3个试验区的空间结构比基本上大于75%，空间相关性较强。在土壤斥水性的高阈值空间分布上，甘蔗地的稳定性比大豆地强，而梨树的空间分布稳定性最弱。研究结果说明人类的活动会对土壤斥水性空间稳定性产生干扰，但土壤本身仍具有恢复其空间分布稳定性的能力。
- 不同植被覆盖 /
- 土壤含水量 /
- WDPT /
- 地统计分析 /
- 空间变异
Abstract: Spatial distribution of water repellency of the soils from plots planted with different crops was studied under the dry, moderately or wet soil conditions. Soybeans, sugarcane or pear trees were grown on the plots in the karst region near Guilin Institute of Agricultural Sciences in Guangxi. The spatial distribution of water repellency in the soils from the plots was determined by using a geostatistical analysis on the plots of 135 m×105 m in size. There were 100 sampling points on each plot for measurement of water drop penetration time (WDPT). The soils were also classified according to their moisture content as dry (0.062±0.025) cm³·cm^-3, moderately (0.151±0.045) cm³·cm^-3 or wet (0.237±0.086) cm³·cm^-3. The results showed that, under dry and wet conditions, the greatest WDPT and contents of moisture and organic matters were found in the soil where pear trees were grown, while the lowest on the soybean plot. However, under the moderately wet soil condition, the lowest values on these parameters were on the sugarcane plot. Meanwhile, the water retention time reached a maximum for all plots. It appeared that geostatiatical analysis significant correlation existed among the spatial distribution of water repellencies in 3 planting plots under 3 soil conditions as the ratio was substantially greater than 75%.Due to the high threshold water repellency distribution, the soil at the sugarcane plot seemed to be more stable than that at the soybean field, while that at the pear tree plot being the weakest of all. It suggested that the soils might be able to recover spatial distribution of water repellency after being disturbed by human activity.
- vegetation coverage /
- soil moisture content /
- WDPT /
- geostatistical analysis /
- spatial distribution

HTML全文

图 1 大豆地土壤斥水性空间分布

注：a为干旱条件，b为中等条件，c为湿润条件。图 2~3同。

Figure 1. Spatial distribution of water repellency in soils under soybean field

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 甘蔗地土壤斥水性空间分布

Figure 2. Spatial distribution of water repellency in soils under sugarcane field

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 梨树地土壤斥水性空间分布

Figure 3. Spatial distribution of water repellency in soils under pear field

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 3个试验区的土壤质地、容重 (BD)、总孔隙度 (TP) 和有机质 (SOM)

Table 1. Texture, bulk density (BD), total porosity (TP) and soil organic matters (SOM) of soils on 3 planting plots

试验区	砂粒 /%	粉粒 /%	粘粒 /%	容重/ (g·cm^-3)	总孔隙度 /%	土壤有机质 /(g·kg^-1)
梨树地	41.99±1.4a	20.92±1.6a	37.09±1.9a	1.27±0.03b	45.84±0.05a	15.29±0.41b
甘蔗地	35.67±2.1b	26.28±1.8a	38.05±2.2a	1.29±0.04b	47.78±0.6a	13.36±0.34a
大豆地	37.11±1.7b	25.68±1.3a	37.21±2.1a	1.38±0.02a	45.17±0.7a	11.41±0.25a
注：同列数据后不同小写字母表示差异显著 (P < 0.05)，n=7。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 土壤3种湿度状态下土壤含水量和WDPT

Table 2. Moisture content and water repellency in soils under 3 soil conditions

土壤湿度状态	试验区	含水量均值/ (cm³·cm^-3)	标准误差/ (cm³·cm^-3)	WDPT均值 /s	标准误差 /s
干旱	大豆地	0.043	0.001	6.14	0.039
	甘蔗地	0.056	0.002	6.15	0.040
	梨树地	0.087	0.003	7.75	0.081
中等	大豆地	0.121	0.004	8.11	0.132
	甘蔗地	0.137	0.004	7.79	0.081
	梨树地	0.196	0.005	9.01	0.086
湿润	大豆地	0.163	0.003	6.60	0.063
	甘蔗地	0.226	0.006	7.36	0.062
	梨树地	0.323	0.009	8.81	0.080

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 土壤斥水性在土壤湿度的3种状态下地统计分析结果

Table 3. Geostatistics on water repellency in soils under 3 soil conditions

土壤水分条件	试验区	最大相关距离 /m	块金值 C₀	偏基台值 C	基台值 (C+C₀)	空间结构比K /%
干旱	大豆地	29.92	3.57E-02	1.11E-01	1.47E-01	75.71
	甘蔗地	28.49	2.65E-02	1.23E-01	1.50E-01	82.31
	梨树地	28.84	6.18E-02	4.90E-01	5.52E-01	88.81
中等	大豆地	66.57	1.87E-01	1.30E+00	1.49E+00	87.41
	甘蔗地	144.30	1.76E-01	4.90E-01	6.66E-01	73.58
	梨树地	27.50	9.52E-02	5.18E-01	6.13E-01	84.49
湿润	大豆地	177.92	2.40E-01	1.22E-01	3.62E-01	33.76
	甘蔗地	207.20	2.29E-01	1.34E-01	3.64E-01	36.96
	梨树地	35.97	1.99E-02	5.67E-01	5.87E-01	96.62

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(26)

[1]	YANG BANGJIE, BLACKWELL P S, NICHOLSON D F. Modeling heat and water movement in a water repellent sandy soil[J].Acta Pedologica Sinica, 1996, 33(4):351-359. http://pedologica.issas.ac.cn/trxben/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=19960404&flag=1
[2]	BACHMANN J, HORTON R, PLOEG R R, et al.Modified sessile dropmethod for assessing initial soil-water contact angle of sandy soil[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2000, 64(2):564-567. doi: 10.2136/sssaj2000.642564x
[3]	陈俊英, 张智韬, 杨飞, 等.土壤的斥水性和含水量变化关系的数学模型[J].灌溉排水学报, 2009, (6):35-38. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GGPS200906008.htm
[4]	MARÍA RODRÍGUEZ-ALLERES, ESTHER DE BLAS, ELENA BENITO. Estimation of soil water repellency of different particle size fractions in relation with carbon content by different methods[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2007, 378:147-150. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.01.034
[5]	MASAMI FUTAMATA, XIAOHUI GAI, HIDENOBU ITOH.Improvement of water repellency homogeneity by compound fluorine carbon sprayed coating and silane treatment[J]. Vacuum, 2004, 73:519-525. doi: 10.1016/j.vacuum.2003.12.072
[6]	WAHL N A, BENS O, SCHAFER B. Impact of changes in land-use management on soil hydraulic properties:Hydraulic conductivity, water repellency and water retention[J].Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 2003, 28(33):1377-1387. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228702980_Impact_of_changes_in_land-use_management_on_soil_hydraulic_properties_Hydraulic_conductivity_water_repellency_and_water_retention?_sg=8NiXp1PASgymeo5n9uC7CdWGB4yCu8Rc9vrambrXi1g91XAlRyd4Q5sP_HP3ZBV63vqyedDaB_HDIBWqLUEyyQ
[7]	GHADIM A K. Water repellency:a whole-farm bio-economic perspective[J]. J Hydrol, 2000, 231/232:396-405. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00211-0
[8]	孙棋棋, 刘前进, 于兴修, 等.沂蒙山区桃园棕壤斥水性对理化性质的空间响应[J].土壤学报, 2014, (3):648-655. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRXB201403025.htm
[9]	郭丽俊, 李毅, 李敏, 等.盐渍化农田土壤斥水性与理化性质的空间变异性[J].土壤学报, 2011, (2):277-285. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRXB201102007.htm
[10]	LETEY J. Measurement of contact angle, water drop penetration time, and critical surface tension[C]//DeBano L F and Letey J (Eds.), Water repellent soils-Proceedings of the Symposium on Water Repellent Soils. CA:University of California Riverside, 1969:43-47.
[11]	李亮亮, 依艳丽, 凌国鑫, 等.地统计学在土壤空间变异研究中的应用[J].土壤通报, 2005, (2):265-268. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRTB200502029.htm
[12]	CAMBARDELLA C A, MOORMAN, et al. Field scale variability of soil properties in Central Iowa soils[J]. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 1994, 58:1501-1511. doi: 10.2136/sssaj1994.03615995005800050033x
[13]	杨昊天, 刘立超, 高艳红, 等.腾格里沙漠沙丘固定后土壤的斥水性特征研究[J].中国沙漠, 2012, (3):674-682. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGSS201203016.htm
[14]	DOERRA S H, THOMASB A D. The role of soil moisture in controlling water repellency:new evidence from forest soils in Portugal[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2000, 231-232:134-147. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00190-6
[15]	李子忠, 吴延磊, 龚元石, 等.内蒙古草原土壤斥水性的季节变化[J].干旱地区农业研究, 2010, (2):208-213. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHDQ201002043.htm
[16]	BISDOM E B A, DEKKER L W, SCHOUTE J F T.Water repellency of sieve fractions from sandy soils and relationships with organic material and soil structure[J]. Geoderma, 1993, 56(1/4):105-118.
[17]	HUMBERTO BLANCO CANQUI, LAL R.Extent of soil water repellency under long-term no-till soils[J].Geoderma, 2009, 149(1-2):171-180. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.11.036
[18]	霍颖, 张杰, 王美超, 等.梨园行间种草对土壤有机质和矿质元素变化及相互关系的影响[J].中国农业科学, 2011, (7):1415-1424. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZNYK201107015.htm
[19]	李青山, 王冬梅, 信忠保, 等.漓江水陆交错带典型立地根系分布与土壤性质的关系[J].生态学报, 2014, (8):2003-2011. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-STXB201408011.htm
[20]	陈俊英, 张智韬, 汪志农, 等.土壤斥水性影响因素及改良措施的研究进展[J].农业机械学报, 2010, (7):84-89, 83. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYJX201007017.htm
[21]	陈俊英, 吴普特, 张智韬, 等.土壤斥水性对含水率的响应模型研究[J].农业机械学报, 2012, (1):63-67, 82. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYJX201201012.htm
[22]	GAN L, PENG X, PETH S, et al.2012b.Effects of grazing intensity on soil water regime and flux in Inner Mongolia Grassland, China[J]. Pedosphere, 22(22):165-177. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233726332_Effects_of_Grazing_Intensity_on_Soil_Water_Regime_and_Flux_in_Inner_Mongolia_Grassland_China
[23]	张继光, 苏以荣, 陈洪松, 等.典型岩溶洼地土壤水分的空间分布及影响因素[J].生态学报, 2014, (12):3405-3413. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-STXB201412029.htm
[24]	庄恒扬, 刘世平, 沈新平, 等.长期少免耕对稻麦产量及土壤有机质与容重的影响[J].中国农业科学, 1999, (4):41-46. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZNYK904.006.htm
[25]	甘磊, 马蕊, 彭扬建, 等.不同放牧强度下羊草和大针茅草原土壤含水量的空间变化[J].生态环境学报, 2015, (8):1274-1279. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRYJ201508003.htm
[26]	甘磊, 陶涣壮, 张静举, 等.桂林地区不同土地利用方式下土壤热容量空间变化的研究[J].西南农业学报, 2016, (2):368-373. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNYX201602029.htm