林业科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 62 ›› Issue (3): 25-35.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20250444
朱长轩1,张金3,李威3,张玉珊1,冯泳翰1,蒋涛1,贾国栋1,2,*(
),余新晓1,2
收稿日期:2025-07-15
修回日期:2025-11-15
出版日期:2026-03-15
发布日期:2026-03-12
通讯作者:
贾国栋
E-mail:jgd3@163.com
基金资助:
Changxuan Zhu1,Jin Zhang3,Wei Li3,Yushan Zhang1,Yonghan Feng1,Tao Jiang1,Guodong Jia1,2,*(
),Xinxiao Yu1,2
Received:2025-07-15
Revised:2025-11-15
Online:2026-03-15
Published:2026-03-12
Contact:
Guodong Jia
E-mail:jgd3@163.com
摘要:
目的: 定量评估坝上地区不同典型固沙树种(小叶杨、樟子松、柠条)防护林带在冬春季的防风效能和固沙效率差异,揭示该差异与植被形态特征、地表覆盖和土壤性质等近地表特征的响应关系及其驱动机制,为优化该区域植被防护体系构建、提升全年防风固沙效能提供科学依据。方法: 在河北省康保县选取3种优势树种(小叶杨、樟子松、柠条)的防护林带和裸地对照样地,于2024年11月及2025年3和4月开展野外观测。在每种优势树种的林前、林内和林后沿主风向设置3个观测点,以裸地为对照,利用风杯风速仪和全向旋转集沙仪同步测定风速和输沙通量,计算林带的防风效能和固沙效率。调查树高、冠幅、盖度、枯落物厚度和密度(未分解层、半分解层)以及林下植被高度和盖度,分析表层土壤(0~10 cm)粒径分布(砂粒、粉粒、黏粒)、土壤密度和含水率。采用单因素方差分析比较差异,Pearson相关分析探究关联性,冗余分析和多元回归分析量化关键驱动因子及其贡献。结果: 冬春季不同树种防风固沙效能存在显著差异,防风效能表现为樟子松防护林带(81.16%)>小叶杨防护林带(63.94%)>柠条防护林带(47.96%),固沙效率表现为小叶杨防护林带(97.78%)>樟子松防护林带(96.23%)>柠条防护林带(89.39%)。植被恢复可显著改变近地表特征,相较于裸地,植被样地表层土壤黏粒含量降低(1.80%~2.62%)、粉粒含量增加(10.88%~11.84%)、土壤密度下降(11.52%~20.00%);小叶杨样地的枯落物特征和林下植被高度显著优于樟子松和柠条样地。冗余分析和多元回归分析表明,近地表特征可共同解释防风固沙效能变异总量的89.2%。冠幅是防风固沙效能的主导驱动因子(解释率60.3%),其次为土壤含水率(解释率9.4%)、黏粒含量(解释率6.0%)和枯落物未分解层密度(解释率4.5%)。结论: 在干旱区风蚀高发的冬春季,不同固沙树种防风固沙效能存在显著差异,常绿乔木凭借持存冠层维持最高防风效能,落叶乔木因累积大量枯落物表现出最优固沙效率。冠幅是调控防护效能的最关键因子,但对其直接管理受限。提升地表覆盖度(特别是高蓄积量枯落物)是增强冬春季风蚀防控的有效途径。本研究结果强调在植被恢复实践中,需兼顾冬春季防护需求,强风蚀区应优先配置樟子松以削弱风速,表土脆弱区应侧重配置小叶杨以抑制颗粒运移,从而实现区域土壤风蚀的全年有效防控和生态系统的可持续管理。
中图分类号:
朱长轩,张金,李威,张玉珊,冯泳翰,蒋涛,贾国栋,余新晓. 坝上地区典型树种防护林带冬春季防风固沙效能[J]. 林业科学, 2026, 62(3): 25-35.
Changxuan Zhu,Jin Zhang,Wei Li,Yushan Zhang,Yonghan Feng,Tao Jiang,Guodong Jia,Xinxiao Yu. Windbreak and Sand-Fixation Benefits of Shelterbelts of Typical Tree Species in the Bashang Region during Winter and Spring[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2026, 62(3): 25-35.
表1
各植被类型试验区的基本情况①"
| 植被类型 Vegetation type | 林分类型 Stand type | 林龄 Forest age/a | 林带宽度 Shelterbelt width/m | 林分密度 Stand density/ (trees?hm?2) | 株距 Plant spacing/m | 树高 Tree height/m | 冠幅 Crown width/m | 郁闭度 Canopy closure | 坐标 Coordinate | 海拔 Altitude/ m | 面积 Area/ hm2 |
| SP | 人工林 Forest plantation | 42 | 85.4±3.25 | 452.4±14.3 | 2.85±0.18 | 11.93±0.41 | 3.55±0.14 | 0.11 | 41°55′34″N,114°50′28″E | 2.12 | |
| MP | 人工林 Forest plantation | 48 | 71.2±1.39 | 825.4±19.5 | 2.57±0.23 | 12.23±0.28 | 1.56±0.11 | 0.42 | 41°55′22″N,114°50′34″E | 2.08 | |
| KP | 人工林 Forest plantation | 10 | 93.7±4.16 | 1.35±0.08 | 1.19±0.04 | 0.74±0.05 | 0.04 | 41°55′24″N,114°50′41″E | 1.97 | ||
| BL | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 41°55′35″N,114°50′17″E | 5.78 |
表2
不同植被类型近地表覆盖特征①"
| 植被类型 Vegetation type | 树高 Tree height/ m | 冠幅 Crown width/m | 盖度 Coverage (%) | 枯落物 Litter | 林下植被 Understory vegetation | |||||
| 未分解层 Undecomposed layer | 半分解层 Semi-decomposed layer | 高度 Height/cm | 盖度 Coverage (%) | |||||||
| 厚度 Thicknesses/ mm | 密度 Density/ (g?m?2) | 厚度 Thicknesses/ mm | 密度 Density/ (g?m?2) | |||||||
| SP | 12.23±0.28A | 1.56±0.11B | 8.42±0.96B | 15.57±2.71A | 664.84±147.14A | 13.14±1.58A | 12.71±0.56A | 22.28±1.78C | ||
| MP | 11.93±0.41A | 3.55±0.14A | 39.33±0.84A | 11.23±1.61A | 383.77±51.84B | 10.42±1.58A | 8.28±0.42B | 66.28±2.67A | ||
| KP | 1.19±0.04B | 0.74±0.05C | 3.42±0.17C | 3.45±0.48B | 37.59±2.62C | 4.97±0.58B | 74.39±5.94C | 4.85±0.50C | 48.71±2.20B | |
表3
不同植被类型土壤特性①"
| 植被类型 Vegetation type | 土壤质地Soil texture | 土壤含水率 Soil moisture content (%) | 土壤密度 Soil density/ (g?cm?3) | ||
| 黏粒含量 Clay content (%) | 粉粒含量 Silt content (%) | 砂粒含量 Sand content (%) | |||
| SP | 1.25±0.02D | 75.79±0.35A | 23.43±0.53B | 12.61±1.71A | 1.32±0.01C |
| MP | 1.45±0.02C | 76.04±0.32A | 22.93±0.65B | 12.14±1.93A | 1.46±0.01B |
| KP | 2.07±0.03B | 76.75±0.07A | 21.17±0.08C | 8.47±1.29A | 1.62±0.02A |
| BL | 3.87±0.06A | 64.91±0.97B | 31.22±0.94A | 7.44±0.06A | 1.65±0.04A |
表6
防风效能和固沙效率与近地表覆盖特征的Pearson相关分析结果①"
| 指标Index | WBE | SFE | TH | CW | CO | LUT | LUD | LPT | LPD | UH | UC | CL | SI | SA | SMC | SBD |
| WBE | 1 | |||||||||||||||
| SFE | 0.506* | 1 | ||||||||||||||
| TH | 0.678** | 0.927** | 1 | |||||||||||||
| CW | 0.786** | 0.557** | 0.709** | 1 | ||||||||||||
| CO | 0.749** | 0.431 | 0.588** | 0.987** | 1 | |||||||||||
| LUT | 0.381 | 0.733** | 0.694** | 0.308 | 0.197 | 1 | ||||||||||
| LUD | 0.307 | 0.727** | 0.686** | 0.258 | 0.142 | 0.905** | 1 | |||||||||
| LPT | 0.452* | 0.689** | 0.686** | 0.332 | 0.226 | 0.817** | 0.765** | 1 | ||||||||
| LPD | 0.391 | 0.828** | 0.819** | 0.349 | 0.216 | 0.780** | 0.809** | 0.808** | 1 | |||||||
| UH | 0.348 | 0.769** | 0.785** | 0.198 | 0.051 | 0.659** | 0.710** | 0.573** | 0.851** | 1 | ||||||
| UC | 0.315 | ?0.278 | ?0.133 | 0.574** | 0.688** | ?0.370 | ?0.424 | ?0.338 | ?0.447* | ?0.582** | 1 | |||||
| CL | ?0.552** | ?0.939** | ?0.976** | ?0.545* | ?0.406 | ?0.725** | ?0.736** | ?0.703** | ?0.870** | ?0.873** | 0.328 | 1 | ||||
| SI | ?0.291 | ?0.504* | ?0.497* | ?0.267 | -0.195 | ?0.461* | ?0.505* | ?0.189 | ?0.439* | ?0.423 | 0.172 | 0.518* | 1 | |||
| SA | 0.359 | 0.591** | 0.617** | 0.355 | 0.269 | 0.431 | 0.566** | 0.472* | 0.581** | 0.596** | ?0.218 | ?0.646** | ?0.464* | 1 | ||
| SMC | 0.509* | 0.387 | 0.411 | 0.267 | 0.214 | 0.615** | 0.531* | 0.503* | 0.469* | 0.393 | ?0.158 | ?0.400 | ?0.246 | 0.031 | 1 | |
| SBD | ?0.403 | ?0.865** | ?0.885** | ?0.318 | ?0.166 | ?0.672** | ?0.712** | ?0.675** | ?0.848** | ?0.920** | 0.524* | 0.954** | 0.428 | ?0.580** | ?0.366 | 1 |
图4
RDA(冗余分析)结果排序 WBE:防风效能Windbreak efficiency;SFE:固沙效率Sand-fixing efficiency;TH:树高Tree height;CW:冠幅Crown width;CO:盖度Coverage;LUT:枯落物未分解层枯落物厚度Thickness of litter in the undecomposed layer of litter;LUD:枯落物未分解层枯落物密度Density of litter in the undecomposed layer of litter;LPT:枯落物半分解层枯落物厚度Thickness of litter in the semi-decomposed layer of litter;LPD:枯落物半分解层枯落物密度Density of litter in the semi-decomposed layer of litter;UH:林下植被高度Height of understory vegetation;UC:林下植被盖度Understory vegetation cover;CL:黏粒含量Clay content;SI:粉粒含量Silt content;SA:砂粒含量Sand content;SMC:土壤含水率Soil moisture content;SBD:土壤密度Soil bulk density. SP:小叶杨人工纯林Populus simonii artificial pure forest;MP:樟子松人工纯林Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica artificial pure forest;KP:柠条人工纯林Caragana korshinskii artificial pure forest."
| 白子怡, 董治宝, 南维鸽, 等. 两种草本植物群落的防风固沙效能对比. 地理科学, 2025, 45 (2): 438- 448. | |
| Bai Z Y, Dong Z B, Nan W G, et al. Comparison of windbreak efficiency between two herbaceous plant communities. Geographical Science, 2025, 45 (2): 438- 448. | |
|
迟 旭, 崔向新, 党晓宏, 等. 吉兰泰盐湖绿洲柽柳灌丛生长与沙堆形态特征的关系. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 50 (3): 49- 58.
doi: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2022.03.007 |
|
|
Chi X, Cui X X, Dang X H, et al. Relationship between Tamarix chinensis shrub growth and sandpile morphology in Jilantai Salt Lake Oasis. Journal of Northwest A& F University(Natural Sciences Edition), 2022, 50 (3): 49- 58.
doi: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2022.03.007 |
|
| 杜华栋, 曹祎晨, 聂文杰, 等. 黄土沟壑区采煤塌陷地人工与自然植被恢复下土壤性质演变特征. 煤炭学报, 2021, 46 (5): 1641- 1649. | |
| Du H D, Cao Y C, Nie W J, et al. Evolution of soil properties under artificial and natural revegetation in loess gully coal mining subsidence area. Journal of China Coal Society, 2021, 46 (5): 1641- 1649. | |
| 何文强, 陈 林, 庞丹波, 等. 枯落物输入改变对森林生态系统土壤理化性质的影响. 生态学报, 2024, 44 (4): 1755- 1763. | |
| He W Q, Chen L, Pang D B, et al. Effects of litter input change on soil physical and chemical properties in forest ecosystem. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2024, 44 (4): 1755- 1763. | |
|
黄 羡, 余新晓, 贾国栋, 等. 林分密度对小叶杨人工林林下植被和土壤性质的影响. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36 (4): 1035- 1042.
doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202504.001 |
|
|
Huang X, Yu X X, Jia G D, et al. Effects of stand density on understory vegetation and soil properties in Populus simonii plantations. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2025, 36 (4): 1035- 1042.
doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202504.001 |
|
| 蒋 涛. 2022,. 华北地区典型人工林树干液流动态变化及对环境因子响应研究. 北京: 北京林业大学. | |
| Jiang T. 2022,. Sap flow dynamics and environmental responses of typicalplantation forest in north China. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University. [in Chinese] | |
|
靳文娟, 魏忠义. 柴河铅锌矿尾矿库复垦治理中不同覆土与植被措施的效益估算. 中国环境科学, 2022, 40 (6): 2577- 2587.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2020.06.028 |
|
|
Jin W J, Wei Z Y. Benefit estimation of different soil covering and vegetation measures in the reclamation and remediation of the tailings pond of Chaihe lead-zinc mine. China Environmental Science, 2022, 40 (6): 2577- 2587.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6923.2020.06.028 |
|
|
李登科, 卓 静, 孙智辉. 基于RS和GIS的退耕还林生态建设工程成效监测. 农业工程学报, 2008, 24 (12): 120- 126.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1002-6819.2008.12.026 |
|
|
Li D K, Zhuo J, Sun Z H. Monitoring the effects of ecosystem restructuring project after returning farmland to forest based on RS and GIS. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2008, 24 (12): 120- 126.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1002-6819.2008.12.026 |
|
| 李锦隆, 王满堂, 李涵诗, 等. 冠层高度对江西69种阔叶树小枝单叶生物量与出叶强度关系的影响. 林业科学, 2021, 57 (2): 62- 71. | |
| Li J L, Wang M T, Li H S, et al. Effects of canopy height on the relationship between individual leaf mass and leafing intensity of 69 broad leaved trees in Jiangxi Province. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57 (2): 62- 71. | |
| 厉静文, Dosmanbetov D A, 郭 浩, 等. 不同配置乔灌混交林防风效益的风洞试验. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36 (11): 95- 102. | |
| Li J W, Dosmanbetov D A, Guo H, et al. Wind tunnel experiment on protection benefits of arbor-shrub mixed forest belts in different configurations. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2020, 36 (11): 95- 102. | |
| 李 鹏, 陈 璇, 杨章旗, 等. 不同密度马尾松人工林枯落物输入对土壤理化性质的影响. 水土保持学报, 2022, 36 (2): 368- 377. | |
| Li P, Chen X, Yang Z Q, et al. Effects of litter input on soil physical and chemical properties of Pinus massoniana plantations with different densities. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022, 36 (2): 368- 377. | |
| 李学斌, 吴秀玲, 陈 林, 等. 荒漠草原4种主要植物群落枯落物层水土保持功能. 水土保持学报, 2012, 26 (4): 189- 193. | |
| Li X B, Wu X L, Chen L, et al. Litter layer of soil and water conservation function of four plant communities in desert steppe. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2012, 26 (4): 189- 193. | |
| 李转桃. 2024,. 基于风洞试验模拟三种典型荒漠植物防风固沙效能的研究. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学. | |
| Li Z T. 2024,. Study on the effectiveness of three typical desert plants in preventing wind and fixing sand based on wind tunnel test simulation. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University. [in Chinese] | |
|
赛 克, 赵媛媛, 包岩峰, 等. 干旱半干旱区落叶期农田防护林防风效果的风洞试验研究. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37 (5): 157- 165.
doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2021.05.018 |
|
|
Sai K, Zhao Y Y, Bao Y F, et al. Wind-tunnel tests study of shelter effects of deciduous farmland shelterbelts in arid and semi-arid areas. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2021, 37 (5): 157- 165.
doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2021.05.018 |
|
|
孙悦超, 麻硕士, 陈 智, 等. 旱作农田近地表风沙运动与防风蚀效果. 农业机械学报, 2011, 42 (1): 54- 58.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1298.2011.01.013 |
|
|
Sun Y C, Ma S S, Chen Z, et al. Drought farmland near surface blown sand and wind erosion controlling effect. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2011, 42 (1): 54- 58.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1298.2011.01.013 |
|
| 王荣潇, 张颂安, 高广磊, 等. 不同林龄樟子松人工林枯落物-根系-土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36 (6): 1699- 1707. | |
| Wang R X, Zhang S A, Gao G L, et al. Characteristics of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry in litter-root-soil of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica plantations with different stand age. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2025, 36 (6): 1699- 1707. | |
| 王镱潼, 唐泽军, 陈 超, 等. 内蒙库布齐沙漠表层固沙室内风洞模拟试验. 中国环境科学, 2017, 37 (8): 2888- 2895. | |
| Wang Y T, Tang Z J, Chen C, et al. Wind tunnel experimental study on desert surface of Kubuqi Desert, Inner Mongolia. China Environmental Science, 2017, 37 (8): 2888- 2895. | |
|
王志刚, 辛智鸣, 赵英铭, 等. 我国绿洲防护林冬季相防风效应的估算. 林业科学, 2014, 50 (8): 90- 96.
doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20140813 |
|
|
Wang Z G, Xin Z M, Zhao Y M, et al. Evaluation of wind protection effect of oasis shelterbelts in China. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2014, 50 (8): 90- 96.
doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20140813 |
|
|
解李娜, 吴祺琪, 王宇萌, 等. 锦鸡儿属灌木阻止干旱草地沙漠化生态过程. 生态学报, 2024, 44 (4): 1680- 1691.
doi: 10.20103/j.stxb.202210223010 |
|
|
Xie L N, Wu Q Q, Wang Y M, et al. Ecological processes of preventing arid grasslands from changing into deserts by Caragana shrubs. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2024, 44 (4): 1680- 1691.
doi: 10.20103/j.stxb.202210223010 |
|
|
杨 京, 张延文, 李 灿, 等. 毛乌素沙地固沙林枯落物−土壤连续体生态化学计量特征. 水土保持学报, 2023, 37 (3): 345- 352.
doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.03.044 |
|
|
Yang J, Zhang Y W, Li C, et al. Stoichiometric characteristics of the litter-soil continuum in sand fixation forest of the Mu Us sandy land. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2023, 37 (3): 345- 352.
doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.03.044 |
|
|
袁立敏, 黄海广, 闫德仁, 等. 不同沙埋程度下带状沙障的防风固沙效果研. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35 (16): 172- 179.
doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.16.019 |
|
|
Yuan L M, Huang H G, Yan D R, et al. Effect of wind-preventing and sand fixation of belt sand barrier under different degree of sand burial. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35 (16): 172- 179.
doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.16.019 |
|
|
袁小琴, 刘生权, 艾 峰, 等. 毛乌素沙地东南缘沙柳(Salix psammophila)群落枯落物抗风蚀特征. 中国沙漠, 2022, 42 (1): 134- 138.
doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2021.00138 |
|
|
Yuan X Q, Liu S Q, Ai F, et al. Wind erosion resistance of litter of Salix psammophila community in the southeast edge of Mu Us sandy land, China. Journal of Desert Research, 2022, 42 (1): 134- 138.
doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2021.00138 |
|
|
赵沛义, 妥德宝, 李焕春, 等. 土壤含水率及物理性砂粒含量对风蚀模数影响的风洞模拟. 农业工程学报, 2012, 28 (24): 188- 195.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2012.24.026 |
|
|
Zhao P Y, Tuo D B, Li H C, et al. Effects of soil moisture and physical sand content on wind erosion modulu in wind tunnel testing. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2012, 28 (24): 188- 195.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2012.24.026 |
|
| 赵晓萌, 程 宏, 蒋 宁, 等. 京津风沙源土壤风蚀时空格局及其演化. 科学通报, 2023, 68 (Z1): 238- 253. | |
| Zhao X M, Cheng H, Jiang N, et al. Spatial and temporal evolution of soil wind erosion in the Beijing-Tianjin sandstorm sources. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2023, 68 (Z1): 238- 253. | |
|
智 丹, 王京学, 肖辉杰, 等. 乌兰布和荒漠绿洲过渡带白刺灌丛沙堆防风效应风洞模拟. 农业工程学报, 2024, 40 (3): 147- 155.
doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.202307119 |
|
|
Zhi D, Wang X J, Xiao H J, et al. Wind tunnel simulation on the windbreak effect of Nitraria tangutorum nebkhas in Ulan Buh desert-oasis ecotone of China. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2024, 40 (3): 147- 155.
doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.202307119 |
|
| 朱教君, 姜凤岐, 范志平, 等. 林带空间配置与布局优化研究. 应用生态学报, 2003, 14 (8): 1205- 1212. | |
| Zhu J J, Jiang F Q, Fan Z P, et al. Optimization of spatial arrangements and patterns for shelterbelts or windbreaks. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14 (8): 1205- 1212. | |
| Borrelli P, Panagos P, Alewell C, et al. Policy implications of multiple concurrent soil erosion processes in European farmland. Nature Sustainability, 2023, 6 (1): 103- 112. | |
|
Du H Q, Wang T, Xue X. Potential wind erosion rate response to climate and land-use changes in the watershed of the Ningxia-Inner Mongolia reach of the Yellow River, China, 1986—2013. Earth Surface Processes And Landforms, 2017, 42 (13): 1923- 1937.
doi: 10.1002/esp.4146 |
|
| Feng Y H, Sui X, Tang J, et al. Responses of belowground fine root biomass and morphology in Robinia pseudoacacia L. plantations to aboveground environmental factors. Global Ecology and Conservation, 2024, 2017 (50): e02863. | |
|
Gong G L, Liu J Y, Shao Q Q, et al. Sand-fixing function under the change of vegetation coverage in a wind erosion area in northern China. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2014, 5 (2): 105- 114.
doi: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2014.02.002 |
|
| Hagen L J, Casada M E. 2013,. Effect of canopy leaf distribution on sand transport and abrasion energy. Aeolian Research, (10): 37−42. | |
|
Jiang N, Cheng H, Liu C C, et al. A wind tunnel study of the effects of vegetation structural characteristics on the airflow field. Catena, 2024, 242, 108064.
doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2024.108064 |
|
|
Liu Q F, Zhang Q, Yan Y Z, et al. Ecological restoration is the dominant driver of the recent reversal of desertification in the Mu Us Desert (China). Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 268, 122241.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122241 |
|
| Miri A, Dragovichb D, Dong Z B. Wind-borne sand mass flux in vegetated surfaces: wind tunnel experiments with live plants. Catena, 2019, 172, 421- 434. | |
| Parolari A J, Li D, Bou-Zeid E, et al. 2016,. Climate, not conflict, explains extreme Middle East dust storm. Environmental Research Letters, 11: 114013. | |
| Torita H, Satou H. Relationship between shelterbelt structure and mean wind reduction. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2007, 145 (3): 186- 194. | |
| Wang S Q, Baima G, Ge J Z, et al. 2022,. Soil erosion-reducing efficiency of litter cover varies with litter shape and coverage in a desert ecosystem. Journal of Arid Environments, 196: 104655. | |
|
Wei X H, Wu X D, Wang D, et al. Spatiotemporal variations and driving factors for potential wind erosion on the Mongolian Plateau. Science of the Total Environment, 2023, 862, 160829.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160829 |
|
|
Yan Y C, Wang X, Guo Z J, et al. Influence of wind erosion on dry aggregate size distribution and nutrients in three steppe soils in northern China. Catena, 2018, 170, 159- 168.
doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2018.06.013 |
|
|
Zhang J M, Yu X X, Jia G D, et al. Determination of optimum vegetation type and layout for soil wind erosion control in desertified land in north China. Ecological Engineering, 2021, 171, 106383.
doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2021.106383 |
|
| Zhang J P, Jia Z Q, Li Q X, et al. Determine the optimal vegetation typefor soil wind erosion prevention and control in the alpine sandy land ofthe Gonghe Basin on the Qinghai Tibet Plateau. Forests, 2023, 14 (12): 2342. | |
| Zhang J Q, Zhang C L, Chang C P, et al. 2017,. Comparison of wind erosion based on measurements and SWEEP simulation: a case study in Kangbao County, Hebei Province, China. Soil & Tillage Research, 165: 169−180. |
| [1] | 郑群芳,庞建壮,张祎帆,吴小云,张勤,许行,许杨,张志强. “三北”工程区植被水分利用效率的时空变化特征[J]. 林业科学, 2026, 62(2): 75-84. |
| [2] | 普慧梅,李源,吴锦奎,马泽,宋维峰. 哈尼梯田水源区3种典型植被下不同水体的氢氧稳定同位素特征及相互关系[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(5): 1-9. |
| [3] | 邹杰, 丁建丽. 2000—2014年中亚地区主要植被类型水分利用效率特征[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(3): 175-182. |
| [4] | 徐红霞;辛中尧;王洪建;王香枝. 甘肃白水江自然保护区的天牛群落多样性[J]. 林业科学, 2011, 47(8): 182-187. |
| [5] | 余新晓;耿玉清;牛丽丽;岳永杰. 采样尺度对北京山区典型流域森林土壤养分空间变异的影响——以密云潮关西沟流域为例[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(10): 162-166. |
| [6] | 周玮 周运超. 北盘江喀斯特峡谷区不同植被类型的土壤酶活性[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(1): 136-141. |
| [7] | 谭芳林 朱炜 林捷 林武星 付忠华. 沿海木麻黄防护林基干林带防风效能定量评价研究[J]. 林业科学, 2003, 39(zk): 27-31. |
| [8] | 孟平,宋兆民,张劲松,马秀玲. 农林复合系统防尘效应的研究*[J]. 林业科学, 1998, 34(2): 11-16. |
| [9] | 黄承标 韦炳二 黎洁娟. 广西不同植被类型地表径流的研究[J]. , 1991, 27(5): 490-497. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||