马尾松针阔混交人工林凋落物和土壤水源涵养能力

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20211103

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective: The effect of mixed management mode of different broad-leaved species on water conservation capacity of the litter and soil in Pinus massoniana plantation was evaluated and in order to provide a scientific basis for the construction and transformation of coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forests and the improvement of hydrological function. Method: Five mixed forests of coniferous and broad-leaved trees (P. massoniana×Bretschneidera sinensis, P. massoniana×Manglietia chingi, P. massoniana×Cercidiphyllum japonicum, P. massoniana×Camellia oleifera, P. massoniana×Michelia maudiae) with almost same site conditions and forest management models selected in Longli State-Owned Forest Farm of Guizhou Province were studied, and pure P. massoniana plantation was used as the control. Field investigation and indoor test were used in combination with volume of litter stocks, contents of soil aggregates and soil organic carbon to compare the characteristics of the litter-soil layer and the changes of water holding capacity of the different plantations after 15 years of transformation Result: The rank of the effective water conservation capacity of the litters in different plantations is P. massoniana×M. maudiae (23.11 t·hm^-2) > P. massoniana×C. japonicum (18.77 t·hm^-2) > P. massoniana×B. sinensis (18.28 t·hm^-2) > P. massoniana×M. chingi (16.01 t·hm^-2) > pure P. massoniana forest (13.39 t·hm^-2) > P. massoniana×C. oleifera (8.85 t·hm^-2). In 0-20 cm soil layer, the addition of B. sinensis, M. chingi, C. oleifera, and M. maudiae increased the soil saturated water storage of P. massoniana plantation by 6.94%, 9.00%, 15.10%, and 23.90%, respectively, while the addition of C. japonicum decreased the soil saturated water storage of P. massoniana plantation by 6.62%. In 0-100 cm soil layer, C. oleifera and M. maudiae increased the soil saturated water storage of P. massoniana plantation by 8.08% and 19.47% respectively. Soil capillary water storage, soil non-capillary water holding capacity and soil saturated water storage were positively correlated with soil organic carbon, soil capillary porosity, soil non-capillary porosity and total porosity (P < 0.01), and negatively correlated with soil density and fractal dimension (P < 0.05). The comprehensive coordinate method showed that M. maudiae is more suitable to be used as a mixed tree species for the transformation of P. massoniana plantation. The addition of C. oleifera will reduce the water conservation capacity of litter-soil layer of P. massoniana plantation, and it is not suitable to be used as a mixed tree species. Conclusion: 15 years after transformation of P. massoniana plantation by planting with different broad-leaved trees, water conservation capacity of the litter and soil was changed to various extents due to the changes of litter composition, quantity, and physical and chemical properties of soil. In our study, the order of water conservation capacity of litter and soil from strong to weak was P. massoniana×M. maudiae > P. massoniana×B. sinensis > P. massoniana×C. japonicum > P. massoniana×M. chingi > pure P.massoniana plantation > P. massoniana×C. oleifera. We suggest that forest resource managers take into account the impact of differences among tree species on the ecological hydrology of plantation and add appropriate species into the masson pine plantation when making management decisions.

Key words: water conservation, forest mixed modes, litter, soil, Pinus massoniana plantation

CLC Number:

S714
S715

Yunxing Bai,Yunchao Zhou,Xunyuan Zhang,Jiaojiao Du. Water Conservation Capacity of Litter and Soil in Mixed Plantation of Pinus massoniana and Broadleaved Trees[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(11): 24-36.

Figures/Tables 11

Table 1

Table 2

Fig.1

Table 3

Fig.2

Table 4

Physical and chemical properties of soil of different stand types"

林分类型 Stand type	土层 Soil layer/cm	平均质量直径 Mean weight diameter(MWD)/mm	几何平均值径 Geometric mean diameter GMD/mm	分形维数 Fractal dimension(D)	土壤密度 Soil density/(g·cm^-3)	毛管孔隙度 Capillary porosity (%)	非毛管孔隙度 Non-capillary porosity (%)	总孔隙度 Total porosity (%)	土壤有机碳含量 Soil organic carbon content/ (g·kg^-1)
Ⅰ	0~20	3.01±0.25b	1.42±0.30ab	2.73±0.05c	1.36±0.04b	44.98±1.44ab	5.55±0.63ab	50.53±1.68ab	18.80±0.82a
	20~40	3.17±0.30b	1.59±0.35ab	2.71±0.06bc	1.53±0.02b	39.94±1.35a	3.23±0.37a	43.17±1.16ab	13.98±1.40a
	40~60	3.54±0.33a	2.19±0.44abc	2.59±0.06b	1.55±0.43bc	39.52±1.50a	3.33±0.47a	42.84±1.30a	12.83±1.66a
	60~80	3.38±0.58a	2.07±0.67a	2.63±0.10b	1.57±0.03b	41.81±1.64b	2.90±0.34ab	44.71±1.58b	12.32±3.36ab
	80~100	3.67±0.11a	2.27±0.23a	2.59±0.07a	1.59±0.04bc	42.42±2.32bc	2.69±0.32ab	45.10±2.11b	10.74±2.95a
	均值Meanvalue	3.35±0.22b	1.91±0.29ab	2.65±0.05c	1.52±0.02c	41.73±0.78b	3.54±0.24a	45.27±0.80b	13.73±1.34a
Ⅱ	0~20	2.10±0.33a	0.78±0.22a	2.80±0.04c	1.23±0.03ab	49.57±2.29b	4.47±0.53a	54.04±2.22b	22.72±1.39a
	20~40	2.21±0.36a	0.84±0.21a	2.80±0.04c	1.38±0.05ab	45.04±1.92b	2.92±0.36a	47.96±1.94b	15.22±0.85a
	40~60	2.95±0.19a	1.37±0.16a	2.72±0.01bc	1.54±0.05bc	36.30±2.17a	3.25±0.46a	39.55±1.97a	13.19±0.75a
	60~80	3.73±0.03a	2.25±0.06a	2.63±0.02b	1.67±0.02bc	34.26±0.76a	2.38±0.27a	36.64±0.65a	9.61±0.47a
	80~100	3.61±0.11a	2.24±0.18a	2.58±0.03a	1.66±0.03bc	36.71±0.97a	2.57±0.25ab	39.29±1.09a	9.59±0.82a
	均值Mean value	2.92±0.10a	1.50±0.07a	2.71±0.01cd	1.50±0.03c	40.38±1.16ab	3.12±0.20a	43.49±1.22ab	14.08±1.33a
Ⅲ	0~20	2.18±0.16a	0.89±0.08a	2.74±0.01c	1.27±0.03abc	49.34±0.76b	6.08±0.75ab	55.08±1.10b	19.34±0.49a
	20~40	3.11±0.47b	1.74±0.45ab	2.64±0.06bc	1.51±0.05ab	40.42±1.57a	3.18±0.55a	43.93±1.82ab	9.88±1.02a
	40~60	3.00±0.34a	1.59±0.36a	2.65±0.07b	1.54±0.04bc	38.90±1.02a	3.18±0.47a	42.08±1.17a	8.55±1.67a
	60~80	3.39±0.22a	1.86±0.30a	2.66±0.04a	1.60±0.05b	38.15±1.61ab	2.01±0.32a	40.16±1.87a	9.04±0.76a
	80~100	3.56±0.17a	2.19±0.30a	2.57±0.06a	1.55±0.03b	38.14±0.99ab	2.25±0.37a	40.39±1.05a	8.22±1.34a
	均值Mean value	3.05±0.07ab	1.65±0.03a	2.65±0.01c	1.50±0.03c	40.99±0.83ab	3.34±0.31a	44.33±1.04ab	11.00±1.20a
Ⅳ	0~20	3.51±0.32bc	2.17±0.48b	2.58±0.06b	1.40±0.05bc	42.70±1.91a	4.49±0.54a	47.19±1.91a	27.48±3.70ab
	20~40	3.89±0.21b	2.74±0.36bc	2.49±0.07b	1.58±0.03b	39.33±0.85a	2.75±0.37a	42.08±0.86a	13.40±2.68a
	40~60	3.96±0.21a	2.88±0.32bc	2.46±0.04ab	1.60±0.03c	37.72±1.15a	2.75±0.24a	40.47±1.28a	10.28±2.42a
	60~80	2.81±0.25a	2.53±0.42ab	2.54±0.08b	1.56±0.03b	36.99±1.12a	2.59±0.29a	39.58±1.18a	8.08±0.49a
	80~100	3.80±0.21a	2.60±0.34a	2.51±0.05a	1.55±0.03b	36.07±1.62a	2.45±0.36ab	38.52±1.56a	7.86±2.73a
	均值Meanvalue	3.79±0.13c	2.58±0.20bc	2.52±0.03b	1.54±0.02c	38.56±0.69a	3.01±0.20a	41.57±0.75a	13.42±2.19a
Ⅴ	0~20	3.69±0.28bc	2.49±0.42bc	2.51±0.05b	1.26±0.04abc	53.14±1.01bc	5.02±0.33ab	58.16±1.10bc	36.46±5.85b
	20~40	3.36±0.14b	1.91±0.78b	2.61±0.02bc	1.32±0.05a	47.79±1.46bc	3.58±0.51a	51.37±1.53bc	19.28±3.21ab
	40~60	3.17±0.56a	1.87±0.65ab	2.63±0.11b	1.43±0.04b	44.61±0.91b	3.22±0.36a	47.84±0.96b	13.04±4.83a
	60~80	3.77±0.17a	2.52±0.28ab	2.53±0.05b	1.46±0.05ab	42.32±0.85bc	2.91±0.34ab	45.23±0.88b	8.84±4.13a
	80~100	3.98±0.34a	2.87±0.63a	2.49±0.11a	1.43±0.06ab	39.67±1.00abc	2.38±0.13ab	42.05±0.97ab	10.30±3.95a
	均值Mean value	3.59±0.13bc	2.33±0.17b	2.55±0.04bc	1.38±0.02b	45.51±0.84c	3.42±0.20a	48.93±0.96c	17.58±3.18a
Ⅵ	0~20	3.87±0.06c	2.98±0.08bc	2.27±0.01a	1.15±0.07a	55.19±1.62c	7.42±1.44b	62.61±1.80c	40.89±5.84bc
	20~40	3.78±0.12b	2.84±0.15bc	2.32±0.01a	1.29±0.06a	51.51±1.13c	5.69±1.26b	57.19±1.99d	30.82±10.57b
	40~60	4.03±0.06a	3.22±0.11c	2.27±0.04a	1.27±0.07a	48.89±1.16c	4.81±0.64b	53.71±1.35c	28.76±9.69b
	60~80	4.32±0.07a	3.67±0.17b	2.19±0.07a	1.37±0.06a	46.38±1.56d	3.95±0.80b	50.33±1.86c	20.43±5.62b
	80~100	3.79±0.23a	2.83±0.45a	2.32±0.14a	1.35±0.07a	43.29±1.31c	3.31±0.35b	46.60±1.28bc	16.01±3.64a
	均值Mean value	3.96±0.07c	3.11±0.14c	2.28±0.05a	1.29±0.03a	49.05±0.85d	5.04±0.47b	54.09±1.10d	27.38±3.67b

Table 4

Table 5

Soil water storage capacity of different stand types"

林分类型 Stand type	土层 Soil layer/cm	土壤饱和蓄水量 Soil saturated water storage/(t·hm^-2)	土壤毛管蓄水量 Soil capillary water storage/(t·hm^-2)	土壤非毛管持水量 Soil non-capillary water holding capacity/(t·hm^-2)
Ⅰ	0~20	1 010.65±33.69ab	899.59±228.76ab	111.07±12.60ab
	20~40	863.42±23.12ab	798.85±26.99a	64.58±7.30a
	40~60	856.85±25.99a	790.29±30.00a	66.56±9.30a
	60~80	894.27±31.52b	836.18±32.80b	58.09±6.88ab
	80~100	902.05±42.14b	848.32±46.44b	53.73±6.35ab
	均值Mean value	905.45±15.99b	834.64±15.54b	70.80±4.87a
Ⅱ	0~20	1 080.76±44.40b	991.45±45.70b	89.31±10.62a
	20~40	959.18±38.76b	900.87±38.46b	58.31±7.12a
	40~60	790.91±39.36a	725.91±43.38a	65.00±9.27a
	60~80	732.78±13.03a	685.16±15.20a	47.62±5.40a
	80~100	785.71±21.88a	734.27±19.47a	51.44±5.08ab
	均值Mean value	869.87±24.30ab	807.53±23.16ab	62.34±4.00a
Ⅲ	0~20	1 101.64±21.92b	986.80±15.51b	121.51±14.98ab
	20~40	878.59±36.42ab	808.37±31.31a	63.56±10.94a
	40~60	841.61±23.43a	777.95±20.35a	63.67±9.41a
	60~80	803.17±37.41a	762.97±32.10ab	40.20±6.43a
	80~100	807.79±20.95a	762.70±19.85ab	45.09±7.12a
	均值Mean value	886.56±20.79ab	819.76±16.62ab	66.80±6.17a
Ⅳ	0~20	943.70±38.17a	853.92±38.21a	89.78±10.87a
	20~40	841.50±17.20a	786.50±16.92a	55.00±7.35a
	40~60	809.33±25.56a	754.38±22.90a	54.96±4.74a
	60~80	791.60±23.62a	739.71±22.44a	51.89±5.71a
	80~100	770.42±31.27a	721.42±32.50a	49.00±7.21ab
	均值Mean value	831.31±15.08a	771.19±13.73a	60.12±3.91a
Ⅴ	0~20	1 163.28±21.94bc	1062.86±20.16bc	100.42±6.51ab
	20~40	1 027.39±30.61bc	955.70±29.15bc	71.69±10.23a
	40~60	956.72±19.17b	892.23±18.22b	64.49±7.24a
	60~80	904.55±17.55b	846.35±16.97bc	58.20±6.75ab
	80~100	841.02±19.45ab	793.42±20.04abc	47.60±2.61
	均值Mean value	978.59±19.21c	910.11±16.74c	68.48±4.05a
Ⅵ	0~20	1 252.21±35.98c	1 103.75±32.47c	148.47±28.79b
	20~40	1 143.86±39.90d	1 030.11±22.61c	113.76±25.28b
	40~60	1 074.15±26.98c	977.88±23.28c	96.27±12.87b
	60~80	1 006.53±37.13c	927.60±31.12d	78.93±16.04b
	80~100	931.97±25.52bc	865.75±26.17bc	66.22±7.10b
	均值Mean value	1 081.75±21.97d	981.02±17.02d	100.73±9.45b

Table 5

Table 6

Fig.3

Fig.4

Table 7

References 0

	丁怡飞, 曹永庆, 姚小华, 等. 油茶-鼠茅草复合系统细根空间分布及地下竞争. 生态学杂志, 2018, 37 (4): 981- 986.
	Ding Y F , Cao Y Q , Yao X H , et al. Spatial distribution of fine roots and underground competition in Camellia oleifera-Vulpia myuros intercropping system. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2018, 37 (4): 981- 986.
	何圣嘉, 谢锦升, 杨智杰, 等. 南方红壤丘陵区马尾松林下水土流失现状、成因及防治. 中国水土保持科学, 2011, 9 (6): 65- 70. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-3007.2011.06.011
	He S J , Xie J S , Yang Z J , et al. Status, causes and prevention of soil and water loss in Pinus massoniana woodland in hilly red soil region of southern China. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2011, 9 (6): 65- 70. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-3007.2011.06.011
	聂泽旭, 齐实, 马曦瑶, 等. 华蓥市山区典型林分水源涵养功能评价. 水土保持学报, 2020, 34 (2): 276- 282.
	Nie Z X , Qi S , Ma X Y , et al. Evaluation of water conservation function of typical stands in mountainous areas of Huaying City. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 34 (2): 276- 282.
	潘春翔, 李裕元, 彭亿, 等. 湖南乌云界自然保护区典型生态系统的土壤持水性能. 生态学报, 2012, 32 (2): 538- 547.
	Pan C X , Li Y Y , Peng Y , et al. Soil water holding capacity under four typical ecosystems in Wuyunjie Nature Reserve of Hunan Province. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2012, 32 (2): 538- 547.
	孙艳红, 张洪江, 程金花, 等. 缙云山不同林地类型土壤特性及其水源涵养功能. 水土保持学报, 2006, 20 (2): 106- 109. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2006.02.026
	Sun Y H , Zhang H J , Cheng J H , et al. Soil characteristics and water conservation of different forest types in Jinyun Mountain. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2006, 20 (2): 106- 109. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2006.02.026
	王棣, 吕皎. 油松混交林的水土保持及水源涵养功能研究. 水土保持学报, 2001, 15 (4): 44- 46. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2001.04.012
	Wang D , Lü J . Effects of replanting broad-leaved tree species on water conservation of Pinus massoniana plantation in red soil eroded region. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2001, 15 (4): 44- 46. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2001.04.012
	王利, 于立忠, 张金鑫, 等. 浑河上游水源地不同林型水源涵养功能分析. 水土保持学报, 2015, 29 (3): 249- 255.
	Wang L , Yu L Z , Zhang J X , et al. Analysis of water conservation functions of different forest types in the upper reaches of Hunhe River. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 29 (3): 249- 255.
	颜耀, 张辉, 黄智军, 等. 补植阔叶树种对红壤侵蚀区马尾松林水源涵养功能的影响. 福建农林大学学报: 自然科学版, 2020, 49 (1): 67- 73.
	Yan Y , Zhang H , Huang Z J , et al. Effects of replanting broad-leaved tree species on water conservation of Pinus massoniana plantation in red soil eroded region. Journal of Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University: (Natural Science Edition), 2020, 49 (1): 67- 73.
	朱少木. 杉木深山含笑混交林分生物量结构研究. 安徽农学通报(上半月刊), 2012, 18 (13): 121- 123.
	Zhu S M . Biomass structure of Cunninghamia lanceolata and Michelia maudiae in mixed stand. Anhui Agricultural Science Bulletin (semimonthly), 2012, 18 (13): 121- 123.
	朱万泽, 盛哲良, 舒树淼. 川西亚高山次生林恢复过程中土壤物理性质及水源涵养效应. 水土保持学报, 2019, 33 (6): 205- 212.
	Zhu W Z , Sheng Z L , Shu S M . Soil physical properties and water holding capacity of natural secondary forests in a sub-alpine region of western Sichuan, China. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 33 (6): 205- 212.
	Bahnmann B , Mašínová T , Halvorsen R , et al. Effects of oak, beech and spruce on the distribution and community structure of fungi in litter and soils across a temperate forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2018, 119, 162- 173. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.01.021
	Baptista M , Livesley S , Ghanbari Parmehr E , et al. Variation in leaf area density drives the rainfall storage capacity of individual urban tree species. Hydrological Processes, 2018, 32 (25): 3729- 3740. doi: 10.1002/hyp.13255
	Chen S , Cao T , Tanaka N , et al. Hydrological properties of litter layers in mixed forests in Mt. Qinling, China. IForest, 2018, 11 (1): 243- 250.
	Gao X , Li H , Zhao X , et al. Identifying a suitable revegetation technique for soil restoration on water-limited and degraded land: considering both deep soil moisture deficit and soil organic carbon sequestration. Geoderma, 2018, 319, 61- 69. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.01.003
	Gerrits M , Pfister L , Savenije H . Spatial and temporal variability of canopy and forest floor interception in a beech forest. Hydrological Processes, 2010, 24 (21): 3011- 3025. doi: 10.1002/hyp.7712
	Gerrits M , Savenije H , Hoffmann L , et al. New technique to measure forest floor interception-an application in a beech forest in Luxembourg. Hydrology and Earth Systems Sciences, 2007, 11 (74): 695- 701.
	Gomyo M , Kuraji K . Effect of the litter layer on runoff and evapotranspiration using the paired watershed method. Journal of Forest Research, 2016, 21 (6): 306- 313. doi: 10.1007/s10310-016-0542-5
	Gu Z , Xiaoxia W , Feng Z , et al. Estimating the effect of Pinus massoniana Lamb plots on soil and water conservation during rainfall events using vegetation fractional coverage. Catena, 2013, 109, 225- 233. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2013.03.008
	Horodecki P , Nowiński M , Jagodziński A . Advantages of mixed tree stands in restoration of upper soil layers on postmining sites: a five-year leaf litter decomposition experiment. Land Degradation and Development, 2018, 30 (1): 3- 13.
	Jia X , Shao M , Zhu Y , et al. Soil moisture decline due to afforestation across the Loess Plateau, China. Journal of Hydrology, 2017, 546, 113- 122. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.01.011
	Keenan R , Reams G , Frédéric A , et al. Dynamics of global forest area: results from the FAO global forest resources assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management, 2015, 352, 9- 20. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2015.06.014
	Lee R . Forest Hydrology. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.
	Li X , Xiao Q , Niu J , et al. Rainfall interception by tree crown and leaf litter: an interactive process. Hydrological Processes, 2017, 31 (20): 3533- 3542. doi: 10.1002/hyp.11275
	Li Y , Li B , Zhang X , et al. Differential water and soil conservation capacity and associated processes in four forest ecosystems in Dianchi Watershed, Yunnan Province, China. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 70 (3): 198- 206. doi: 10.2489/jswc.70.3.198
	Liu B , Liu Q , Daryanto S , et al. Responses of Chinese fir and Schima superba seedlings to light gradients: implications for the restoration of mixed broadleaf-conifer forests from Chinese fir monocultures. Forest Ecology and Management, 2018, 419, 51- 57.
	Molina A , Llorens P , Garcia-Estringana P , et al. Contributions of throughfall, forest and soil characteristics to near-surface soil water-content variability at the plot scale in a mountainous Mediterranean area. Science of The Total Environment, 2018, 647, 1421- 1432.
	Mosley M . The effect of a New Zealand Beech forest canopy on the kinetic energy of water drops and on surface erosion. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 1982, 7 (2): 103- 107. doi: 10.1002/esp.3290070204
	Neris J , Tejedor M , Rodríguez M , et al. Effect of forest floor characteristics on water repellency, infiltration, runoff and soil loss in Andisols of Tenerife (Canary Islands, Spain). Catena, 2013, 108, 50- 57. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2012.04.011
	Pérez-Bejarano A , Mataix-Solera J , Zornoza R , et al. Influence of plant species on physical, chemical and biological soil properties in a Mediterranean forest soil. European Journal of Forest Research, 2010, 129 (1): 15- 24. doi: 10.1007/s10342-008-0246-2
	Rodell M , Beaudoing H , L'Ecuyer T , et al. The observed state of the water cycle in the early 21st century. Journal of Climate, 2015, 28 (21): 8289- 8318. doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00555.1
	Seitz S , Goebes P , Zumstein P , et al. The influence of leaf litter diversity and soil fauna on initial soil erosion in subtropical forests. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 2015, 40 (11): 1439- 1447. doi: 10.1002/esp.3726
	Stone R . Nursing China's ailing forests back to health. Science, 2009, 325 (5940): 556- 558. doi: 10.1126/science.325_556
	Wang B , Zhao X , Liu Y , et al. Using soil aggregate stability and erodibility to evaluate the sustainability of large-scale afforestation of Robinia pseudoacacia and Caragana korshinskii in the Loess Plateau. Forest Ecology and Management, 2019, 450, 117491. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2019.117491
	Xie J , Guo J , Yang Z , et al. Rapid accumulation of carbon on severely eroded red soils through afforestation in subtropical China. Forest Ecology and Management, 2013, 300, 53- 59. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2012.06.038
	Zhu G , Shangguan Z , Deng L . Soil aggregate stability and aggregate-associated carbon and nitrogen in natural restoration grassland and Chinese red pine plantation on the Loess Plateau. Catena, 2017, 149, 253- 260. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2016.10.004
	Zhu X , Liu W , Chen H , et al. Effects of forest transition on litterfall, standing litter and related nutrient returns: implications for forest management in tropical China. Geoderma, 2019, 333, 123- 134. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.07.023

林分类型 Stand type	马尾松 Pinus massoniana		阔叶树种 Broadleaf tree species		密度 Density/ hm^-2	混交比例 Mix proportion	坡度 Slope/(°)	坡向 Aspect
林分类型 Stand type	树高Tree height/ m	DBH/ cm	树高Tree height/ m	DBH/ cm	密度 Density/ hm^-2	混交比例 Mix proportion	坡度 Slope/(°)	坡向 Aspect
Ⅰ	28.68	32.98	-	-	750	-	19	西北Northwest
Ⅱ	29.22	36.45	8.93	9.62	733	7∶3	23	西北Northwest
Ⅲ	28.07	47.27	13.53	15.24	708	7∶3	26	东北Northeast
Ⅳ	30.66	44.84	9.88	10.89	710	7∶3	15	东East
Ⅴ	30.82	39.79	2.49	4.97	775	7∶03	18	西南Southwest
Ⅵ	29.04	44.73	6.59	13.74	750	7∶03	27	东南Southeast

林分类型 Stand type	厚度 Thickness/cm		储量 Stock/(t·hm^-2)
林分类型 Stand type	未分解层 Undecomposed	半分解层 Semi-decomposed	未分解层(比例) Undecomposed (proportion)	半分解层(比例) Semi-decomposed (proportion)
Ⅰ	2.15±0.23a	0.69±0.17a	11.58±2.56a(78.62%)	3.15±0.73a(21.38%)
Ⅱ	2.71±0.24b	1.32±0.17b	8.83±1.13a(68.13%)	4.13±0.60b(31.87%)
Ⅲ	2.35±0.39ab	1.29±0.12b	9.39±0.75ab(64.58%)	5.15±0.62b(35.42%)
Ⅳ	1.68±0.16a	1.26±0.17b	6.38±1.18a(58.75%)	4.48±0.61b(41.25%)
Ⅴ	2.22±0.49ab	1.63±0.29b	5.99±1.44ac(60.94%)	3.84±0.55b(39.06%)
Ⅵ	3.14±0.52b	1.58±0.16b	6.48±1.00ac(64.80%)	3.52±0.52b(35.20%)

凋落物Litter	林分类型Stand type	曲线方程Curve equation	R²	P
半分解层 Semi-decomposed	Ⅰ	y=0.195 8lnx+1.351 6	0.956	0.001
	Ⅱ	y=0.183 9lnx+1.433 8	0.972	0.001
	Ⅲ	y=0.187 8lnx+1.165 6	0.957	0.001
	Ⅳ	y=0.190 6lnx+1.220 3	0.956	0.001
	Ⅴ	y=0.168 2lnx+0.897 8	0.967	0.001
	Ⅵ	y=0.179 6lnx+1.346 1	0.972	0.001
未分解层 Undecomposed	Ⅰ	y=0.157 7lnx+1.541 4	0.974	0.001
	Ⅱ	y=0.177 0lnx+1.479 0	0.989	0.001
	Ⅲ	y=0.172 3lnx+1.437 8	0.982	0.001
	Ⅳ	y=0.207 3lnx+1.475 1	0.975	0.001
	Ⅴ	y=0.138 8lnx+1.001 3	0.976	0.001
	Ⅵ	y=0.188 8lnx+1.723 8	0.97	0.001

项目 Item	土壤饱和蓄水量 Soil saturated water storage	土壤毛管蓄水量 Soil capillary water storage	土壤非毛管持水量 Soil non-capillary water holding capacity	土壤密度 Soil density	非毛管孔隙度 Non-capillary porosity	毛管孔隙度 Capillary porosity	总孔隙度 Total porosity	平均质量直径 Mean weight diameter(MWD)	几何平均直径 Geometric mean diameter(GMD)	分形维数 Fractal dimension(D)	土壤有机碳含量 Soil organic carbon content
土壤饱和蓄水量 Soil saturated water storage	1
土壤毛管蓄水量 Soil capillary water storage	0.989^**	1
土壤非毛管持水量 Soil non-capillary water holding capacity	0.761^**	0.657^**	1
土壤密度Soil density	-0.901^**	-0.873^**	-0.773^**	1
非毛管孔隙度 Non-capillary porosity	0.762^**	0.658^**	1.000^**	-0.774^**	1
毛管孔隙度 Capillary porosity	0.989^**	1.000^**	0.657^**	-0.873^**	0.659^**	1
总孔隙度Total porosity	1.000^**	0.989^**	0.761^**	-0.901^**	0.762^**	0.989^**	1
平均质量直径 Mean weight diameter(MWD)	0.411	0.404	0.326	-0.254	0.326	0.404	0.411	1
几何平均直径 Geometric mean diameter(GMD)	0.513^*	0.497^*	0.444	-0.377	0.444	0.497^*	0.514^*	0.973^**	1
分形维数 Fractal dimension(D)	-0.655^**	-0.631^**	-0.574^*	0.528^*	-0.574^*	-0.631^**	-0.655^**	-0.871^**	-0.950^**	1
土壤有机碳含量 Soil organic carbon content	0.667^**	0.598^**	0.786^**	-0.741^**	0.785^**	0.598^**	0.667^**	0.331	0.404	-0.503^*	1

[1]	Juan Song,Zhuhua Wu,Xingliang Weng,Xing Zhao,Xuexiang Yang,Ronglin Tang,Bing Cao,Yu Wu,Houyu Shen,Jiahong Ren,Fengmao Chen. Diversity of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi in Rhizosphere of Liquidambar formosana [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(9): 98-109.
[2]	Zixuan Wang,Ding Wang,Pengwu Zhao,Qiyue Zhang,Lei Yang,Mei Zhou. Effects of Management Methods of Burned Wood on Soil Respiration and Its Components in the Permafrost Region of Cold Temperate Zone [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(8): 13-23.
[3]	Huanying Fang,Shengsheng Xiao,Xiaofang Yu,Yong Xiong,Xunzhi Ouyang,Xiaolei Qin. Responses of Soil Respiration and Its Components to Simulated Acid Rain in Pinus elliottii Plantation [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(7): 20-31.
[4]	Xiang Zheng,Minmin Cao,Xiaofang Ji,Wanli Fang,Shenglong Liu,Jiang Jiang. Progress in Studies of Responses to Phosphorus Addition of Soil Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Forest Soil [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(6): 150-157.
[5]	Yanlin Zhang,Caifeng Huang,Mingzhuo Bao,Chuifan Zhou,Zongming He. Effects of Biochar and Its Aging Biochar on Soils Nutrients and Microbial Community Composition in Cunninghamia lanceolata Plantations: a Laboratory Simulation Experiment [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(6): 169-179.
[6]	Lihong Wang,Hongkun Gao,Yusen Zhao,Qiang Fu,Chuanyuan He,Xin Sun,Jianxin Liang,Xiaopeng Zhang. Regulation Effects of Burned Areas Vegetation Restoration on Forest Microclimate Characteristics in the Growing Season [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(4): 14-23.
[7]	Yanli Gao,Zhijie Yang,Li Zhang,Decheng Xiong. Effects of Different Regenerated Models on Soil Nitrogen Mineralization in Subtropical Evergreen Broad-Leaved Forest [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(4): 24-31.
[8]	Yun Xie,Fangyun Guo,Lihua Chen,Bing Cao. Effects of Elevated CO₂ Concentration on Soil Microbial Functional Diversity and Carbon Source Utilization Characteristics in the Root Zone of Lycium barbarum [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(4): 163-172.
[9]	Chen Lu,Xiaodong Jiang,Guanyu Wu,Shuangjing Hao,Hongbo Ding,Xiaogang Tong. Content and Spectral Properties of Water Dissolved Organic Matters in Surface Soil of Various Cropland-Converted Forest in the Loess Hilly Region [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(11): 13-23.
[10]	Liu Jingru, Cao Yi, Li Han, Zhang Li, You Chengming, Xu Zhenfeng, Tan Bo. Diversity of Soil Arthropods during Cinnamomum camphora and Pinus massoniana Litter Decomposition in Low Mountainous and Hilly Areas of Sichuan [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(11): 119-133.
[11]	Gong Jinyu, Peng Jingen, Xie Lijuan, Zhang Yinfeng, Li Chaochan, Wang Yanmei. Microbial Diversity in Rhizosphere Soil of Rhododendron moulmainense with Different Tree Potential in Wutong Mountain of Shenzhen [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(11): 190-200.
[12]	Yijun Yin,Yunfei Mao,Lu Yang,Lulu Zhang,Yanli Hu,Zhiquan Mao,Xuesen Chen,Xiang Shen. Effects of Aerated Irrigation on the Growth and Rhizosphere Soil of Malus hupehensis [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(10): 59-70.
[13]	Xiaohong Zhao,Shanshan Chai,Manman Zhang,Yichang Fan,Yunfei Mao,Zhiquan Mao,Xiang Shen. Effects of Shell Powder on Microbial Diversity in Acidified Soil and Growth of Malus hupehensis var. mengshanensis Seedlings [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2020, 56(9): 153-163.
[14]	Ao Tian,Jiaguo Wang,Zhencheng Han,Jiawei Wu,Weijie Li. Impacts on Decomposition of Flower to Leaf Ration in the Litter of Rhododendron delavayi in Baili Azalea Forest Area of Guizhou Province [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2020, 56(8): 1-10.
[15]	Wenjun Hou,Ming Zou,Baofu Li,Yuanchun Yu. Effect of Glyphosate on Soil Physicochemical Properties of Eucalyptus Plantations [J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2020, 56(8): 20-26.

Water Conservation Capacity of Litter and Soil in Mixed Plantation of Pinus massoniana and Broadleaved Trees

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 11

References 0

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

林分类型 Stand type	土壤蓄水性能 Soil water storage capacity	凋落物拦蓄能力 Litter water holding capacity	综合评价 Comprehensive evaluation
Ⅰ	0.61	0.98	1.59
Ⅱ	0.75	0.57	1.33
Ⅲ	0.68	0.75	1.44
Ⅳ	0.85	0.57	1.42
Ⅴ	0.49	2.25	2.74
Ⅵ	0.00	0.07	0.07