Scientia Silvae Sinicae ›› 2021, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (11): 24-36.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20211103
Previous Articles Next Articles
Yunxing Bai,Yunchao Zhou*,Xunyuan Zhang,Jiaojiao Du
Received:
2020-06-20
Online:
2021-11-25
Published:
2022-01-12
Contact:
Yunchao Zhou
CLC Number:
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.
Table 1
Survey of sample plots"
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 | ||
树高Tree height/ m | DBH/ cm | 树高Tree height/ m | DBH/ cm | |||||
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 |
Table 2
Litter thickness and stock of different stands types"
林分类型 Stand type | 厚度 Thickness/cm | 储量 Stock/(t·hm-2) | |||
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%) |
Table 3
Relationship between water holding rate (x) and immersion time (y) of litter of different stand types"
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 |
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 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 6
Correlation analysis of soil properties and water storage capacity"
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 |
Table 7
Comprehensive evaluation of water conservation capacity of litter and soil of different stand types"
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 |
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 |
[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. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||