米老排与红锥幼龄林及其混交林凋落物和土壤的水源涵养能力评价
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

1.广东省德庆林场;2.中国林业科学研究院热带林业研究所;3.广州市林业和园林科学研究院

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

S714.7

基金项目:

广东省林学会科技计划项目(2021-GDFS-KJ-05);广州市生态园林科技协同创新中心(202206010058)


The evaluation of water conservation capacity in litter and soil under the pure and mixed young plantations of Mytilaria laosensis and Castanopsis hystrix
Author:
Affiliation:

Research Institute of Tropical Forestry,Chinese Academy of Forestry

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    [目的]探究米老排与红锥混交组合模式的水源涵养能力特征,筛选出水源涵养能力最佳的混交组合模式,为西江流域水源涵养林的构建与经营管理提供科学依据。[方法]通过3种混交比例(1:3、2:2、3:1)和3种混交方式(株间混交、行带混交、块状混交)设置了9种米老排与红锥的混交林组合模式,并以米老排、红锥纯林为对照,对比分析了11种林分凋落物层、土壤层的水源涵养能力差异,利用熵权TOPSIS(Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution)模型筛选出最佳水源涵养能力的混交组合模式。[结果](1)试验林凋落物层生物量、自然持水量、有效拦蓄量和最大持水量分别介于1.17~4.21、0.38~2.29、5.15~10.58、6.40~13.37 t·hm-2,均与试验林中米老排比例显著正相关(P<0.05);相比于株间混交、块状混交,行带混交的凋落物层生物量与有效拦蓄量较高。(2)试验林0—30 cm土层的自然持水量、毛管持水量、非毛管持水量、饱和蓄水量的变化范围分别为756.14~1007.21、1130.73~1388.40、117.96~422.63、1444.70~1590.66 t·hm-2;其中,毛管持水量、非毛管持水量在不同林分之间差异显著,且均与试验林中米老排比例存在显著的线性回归关系(P<0.05)。(3)基于熵权TOPSIS模型的水源涵养能力评价,表明米老排与红锥以3:1混交比例进行行带混交的林分水源涵养能力最好,米老排纯林次之,其后是其余混交林,最后是红锥纯林。[结论]在幼龄林阶段,米老排与红锥混交林的水源涵养能力在一定程度上要好于各自的纯林,且这种混交效应受混交比例与混交方式的影响。

    Abstract:

    [Objective] In this study, we aimed to explore the mixed plantation with the optimal water conservation capacity of Mytilaria laosensis and Castanopsis hystrix, which would be benefited for construction and management of water conservation forest in Xijiang river valley located in Guangdong province. [Method] The nine mixed plantation patterns within three mixed proportion (i.e., 1:3, 2:2 and 3:1) and three mixed modes (i.e., interplant mixing, mixture in strip and row, block mixing) of Mytilaria laosensis and Castanopsis hystrix were selected, and the pure plantations of Mytilaria laosensis and Castanopsis hystrix were controls. The differences of water conservation capacity in litter and soil varied the eleven mixed plantations were evaluated, and then the mixed plantation with the optimal water conservation capacity was screened out using an entropy weight TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution) model. [Result] (1) The biomass, natural water storage, effective water interception amount and maximum water interception amount in litter layer were 1.17~4.21, 0.38~2.29, 5.15~10.58 and 6.40~13.37 t·hm-2, respectively. These indexes were positively and significantly correlated with the number percentages of Mytilaria laosensis in the plantations (P<0.05). Compared to the interplant mixing and block mixing of the plantations, the mixture in strip and row of the plantations had higher biomass and effective water interception amount in litter layer. (2) The natural moisture storage, capillary water storage, non- capillary water storage and saturated water storage in soil at the depth of 0—30 cm were 756.14~1007.21, 1130.73~1388.40, 117.96~422.63 and 1444.70~1590.66 t·hm-2, respectively. The capillary water storage and non-capillary water storage were significantly different among the different plantations, and were significantly correlated with the number percentages of Mytilaria laosensis in the plantations (P<0.05). (3) The water conservation capacity in the plantations was evaluated using an entropy weight TOPSIS model, indicating that the mixed plantation of Mytilaria laosensis and Castanopsis hystrix with a ratio of 3:1 and mixture in strip and row had the optimal water conservation capacity. The water conservation capacity of other plantations in the following order: the pure plantation of Mytilaria laosensis, the other mixed plantation patterns and the pure plantation of Castanopsis hystrix. [Conclusion] The water conservation capacity of mixed plantation of Mytilaria laosensis and Castanopsis hystrix to some extent better than each pure plantation in the young stand stage, which would be affected by the mixed proportion and modes.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2024-05-14
  • 最后修改日期:2024-09-19
  • 录用日期:2024-09-20
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: