排土场典型植被恢复过程对土壤可蚀性的影响研究
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

1.西安科技大学建筑与土木工程学院;2.陕西省建筑材料工业设计研究院有限公司;3.西北综合勘察设计研究院;4.金堆城钼业股份有限公司

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

S157

基金项目:


Study on the Influence of Typical Vegetation Restoration Processes in Waste Dumps on Soil Erodibility
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

The National Natural Science Foundation of China (General Program, Key Program, Major Research Plan)

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

    [目的]探究露天排土场不同恢复年限草本植物根系对土壤团聚体稳定性和抗侵蚀能力的影响,为矿区生态环境恢复和水土保持效益评价提供科学依据。[方法]选取高羊茅、紫花苜蓿为研究对象,以荒草地为对照,通过LB法模拟暴雨侵蚀扰动情况下对恢复不同年限(1,3,5a)和不同深度(0-10,10-20,20-30cm)的2种草本植物进行处理,对直径R>0.2mm团聚体含量(WR>0.2)、平均重量直径(MWD)、平均几何直径(GMD)和土壤可蚀性因子K值进行测定。分析了紫花苜蓿和高羊茅土壤团聚体组成和稳定性以及在不同年限、不同土层间根系与土壤可蚀性的关系,并进一步探究其影响因素。[结果] ①5a生紫花苜蓿在表层(0-10cm)的根横截面积比(RAR)较1a增加了16.03倍,高羊茅增加了5.6倍,且紫花苜蓿深层(20-30cm)根生物量密度(RMD)的增幅(16.56倍)高于高羊茅(5.5倍)。②两种植被根系影响下的土壤在快速湿润(FW)扰动模式下团聚体稳定性指标MWD和GMD总体表现为5a>3a>1a>荒草地,在土层深度上表现为S3(20-30cm)>S2(10-20cm)>S1(0-10cm)。土壤可蚀性因子K值则有相反的趋势。③对于反映大团聚体占比情况的WR>0.2指标,紫花苜蓿根系生长5a后的20-30cm深度范围土层WR>0.2较1年生和3年生分别增加25.46%和7.93%,而高羊茅根系生长区仅0-10cm深度范围内大团聚体占比有小幅度提高。[结论]对于近乎重构性质的排土场边坡浅层土体,直根型紫花苜蓿的生长区内土壤团聚体稳定性指标WR>0.2、MWD和GMD与RAR相关性明显大于须根型的高羊茅,紫花苜蓿根系有利于大团聚体的形成和增强深层土壤的稳定性,高羊茅通过表层密集的须根物理缠绕减少团聚体颗粒的分散,使其表层土壤抗侵蚀能力优于紫花苜蓿。

    Abstract:

    [Objective] Investigating the effects of herbaceous plant root systems at different restoration time points in open-pit waste dumps on soil aggregate stability and erosion resistance provides scientific basis for ecological restoration and soil and water conservation benefit assessment in mining areas. [Method] Tall fescue and alfalfa were selected as study subjects, with fallow grassland serving as the control. Using the LB method, the effects of simulated heavy rainfall erosion disturbance on two types of herbaceous plants with different restoration durations (1, 3, 5 years) and different depths (0-10, 10-20, 20-30 cm) were treated. The content of aggregates with diameter R>0.2mm (WR>0.2), mean weight diameter (MWD), mean geometric diameter (GMD), and soil erodibility factor K were measured. The soil aggregate composition and stability of alfalfa and tall fescue were analyzed, along with the relationship between root systems at different ages and soil layers and soil erodibility. The influencing factors were further investigated.[Results] ① The root area ratio (RAR) of 5-year-old alfalfa in the topsoil layer (0-10 cm) increased by 16.03 times compared to 1-year-old plants, while tall fescue increased by 5.6 times. Furthermore, the increase in root biomass density (RMD) of alfalfa in the deep soil layer (20-30cm) (16.56 times) was higher than that of tall fescue (5.5 times). ② Under the influence of two vegetation root systems, soil aggregate stability indices MWD and GMD in the rapid wetting (FW) disturbance mode generally showed the following order: 5a > 3a > 1a > fallow grassland. At different soil depths, the order was S3 (20-30 cm) > S2 (10-20 cm) > S1 (0-10 cm). Conversely, the soil erodibility factor K exhibited the opposite trend. ③ For the WR>0.2 indicator reflecting the proportion of large aggregates, the soil layer at a depth of 20-30cm showed a WR>0.2 increase of 25.46% and 7.93% after 5 years of alfalfa root growth compared to 1-year-old and 3-year-old plants, respectively. In contrast, the tall fescue root growth zone exhibited only a slight increase in the proportion of large aggregates within the 0-10 cm depth range.[Conclusion] For shallow soil layers near the slopes of waste dumps undergoing near-reconstruction, the soil aggregate stability indices within the growth zone of taproot-type alfalfa showed WR>0.2, MWD, and GMD showed significantly stronger correlations with RAR than those of fibrous-rooted tall fescue. Alfalfa roots promote the formation of large aggregates and enhance deep soil stability, while tall fescue reduces aggregate particle dispersion through dense surface fibrous roots that physically entangle, resulting in superior surface soil erosion resistance compared to alfalfa.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
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:2025-09-21
  • 最后修改日期:2025-12-13
  • 录用日期:2025-12-15
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: