不同植被恢复方式对马尾松林土壤及凋落物持水能力的影响  

Effects of different vegetation restoration of Pinus massoniana on the water-holding capacities of soil and litter in southern subtropical region

作　　者：李贵玉[1] 张卫强[2] 甘先华[2] 王明怀[2] 魏龙[2] 

机构地区：[1]中水珠江规划勘测设计有限公司,广东广州510610 [2]广东省林业科学研究院,广东广州510520

出　　处：《广东农业科学》2014年第20期159-164,169,共7页Guangdong Agricultural Sciences

基　　金：广东省林业科技创新专项(2010KJCX013-02);广东省矿山开发水土流失治理及生态修复研究项目

摘　　要：以南亚热带低效马尾松林下套种改造（马尾松改造模式Ⅰ和马尾松改造模式Ⅱ）和白然更新（马尾松自然更新Ⅲ）3种试验林为研究对象,探讨了不同植被恢复方式对马尾松林土壤及凋落物持水能力的影响.结果表明,3种试验林间土壤容重、孔隙度和土壤持水能力差异不显著,不同植被恢复对土壤容重、孔隙度和土壤持水能力影响不显著.土壤容重介于1.36～1.39 g/cm3,土壤最大持水量和非毛管持水量表现为马尾松改造模式Ⅰ＞马尾松改造模式Ⅱ＞马尾松自然更新Ⅲ,毛管持水量表现为马尾松改造模式Ⅱ＞马尾松自然更新Ⅲ＞马尾松改造模式Ⅰ,而田间持水量大小为马尾松自然更新Ⅲ＞马尾松改造模式Ⅱ＞马尾松改造模式Ⅰ.3种试验林间凋落物蓄积量差异不显著,其蓄积量介于13.74～18.56t/hm^2之间.马尾松改造模式Ⅱ和马尾松自然更新模式Ⅲ凋落物最大持水量、最大拦蓄量和有效拦蓄量显著高于马尾松改造模式Ⅰ,凋落物拦蓄地表径流功能优于马尾松改造模式Ⅰ.马尾松改造模式Ⅰ、马尾松改造模式Ⅱ和马尾松自然更新模式Ⅲ凋落物最大持水量仅为其0～20 cm土壤最大持水量的2.26％、3.02％和3.28％.研究结果为低效马尾松人工林近自然改造、可持续经营及森林生态服务功能评估提供理论依据.To evaluate the effects of different vegetation restoration of Pinus massoniana on the water-holding capacities of soil and litter in southern subtropical region of China. Three kinds of experimental forest belonging to under-story intereropping transformation （transformation model Ⅰ and transformation model Ⅱ ） and natural regeneration （natural regeneration Ⅲ） of low-benefit P. massoniana were selected and the water-holding capacities of soil and litter were measured. Soil bulk density, porosity and water-holding capacities of soil were not significant among three kinds of experimental forest. Effects of different vegetation restoration on soil bulk density, porosity and soil water holding capacity were not obvious. The maximum water-holding capacities and non-capillary water-holding capacities of soil in three stands followed the order of transformation model Ⅰ 〉 transformation model Ⅱ 〉 natural regeneration m of P. massoniana, the capillary water-holding capacities in three stands followed the order of transformation model Ⅱ 〉 natural regeneration Ⅲ 〉 transformation model I of R massoniana, while natural regeneration m 〉 transformation model Ⅱ 〉 transformation model I in field water-holding capacity of three stands. Litter biomasses were not significant among three kinds of experimental forest, and ranged from 13.74 to 18.56 t/hm^2. The maximum litter water-holding eapaeity, maximum retain eapaeity and effec.tive retain capacity of transformation model Ⅱ and natural regeneration m of P. massoniana were obviously higher than those of transformation model I , and impounding runoff funetions of transformation model Ⅱ and natural regeneration m of P. massoniana were obviously higher than that of transformation model Ⅰ . The maximum water holding capacities of litter layer of transformation model Ⅰ , transformation model Ⅱ and natural regeneration Ⅲ of P. massoniana were much smaller than those of the soil layer, which accounted for 2.26%, 3.02% and 3.28% of soil wate

关 键 词：不同植被恢复方式 低效马尾松人工林 土壤和凋落物持水 南亚热带 

分 类 号：S715.7[农业科学—林学]