不同人为干预强度下红壤侵蚀退化荒地生态系统碳库恢复的差异

Difference in Ecosystem Carbon Pools After Artificial Intervention on Red Eroded Wasteland

研究退化荒地森林恢复后生态系统有机碳的变化,可为原先低碳密度生态系统碳库的恢复提供理论和实践参考。研究红壤侵蚀退化形成的荒地(HD),以及在此基础上通过人为干预形成的木荷马尾松混交林(MM)、阔叶林(KY)、柑桔林(GJ)、封育林(FY),调查其地上、地下碳库和年均细根生物量。结果表明:木荷马尾松混交林(267.22t/hm^2)、阔叶林(233.48t/hm^2)、封育林(112.01t/hm^2)生态系统碳储量显著大于荒地(27.04t/hm^2),而柑桔林(84.16t/hm^2)与荒地之间无显著差异(p<0.05)。植物部分碳储量木荷马尾松混交林(187.88t/hm^2)、阔叶林(164.17t/hm^2)、柑桔林(15.24t/hm^2)、封育林(61.75t/hm^2)分别为荒地(4.31t/hm^2)的43.56,38.06,3.53,14.32倍。地下土壤部分(0—80cm)碳储量木荷马尾松混交林(79.34t/hm^2)、阔叶林(69.31t/hm^2)、柑桔林(68.93t/hm^2)、封育林(50.26t/hm^2)均显著高于对照(22.73t/hm^2)(p<0.05)。混交林(112.15g/m^2)、阔叶林(88.71g/m^2)、柑桔林(257.70g/m^2)、封育林(211.21g/m^2)年均细根生物量分别为荒地(92.33g/m^2)的1.21,0.96,2.79,2.29倍,细根生物量与土壤有机碳显著相关(p<0.05)。不同森林恢复类型生态系统、地上和地下碳积累的速率分别变化在2.04~8.58,0.39~6.56,0.98~2.02tC/(hm^2·a)范围。表明强力的人为干预有助于红壤侵蚀退化荒地生态系统碳库的快速增加。

We investigated above- and below-ground carbon pools in wasteland on a slightly eroded red soil （HD）, four artificial plantations, Schima superba and Pinus massoniana mixed forest （MM）, Broad-leaved forest （CK）, Citrus reticulata forest （GJ） and closed forest （FY） that had been established on HD in 1984 in the subtropical China. The ecosystem carbon pool in MM （267.22 t/hm^2）, KY （233.48 t/hm^2）, FY （112.01 t/hm^2） was significantly higher than in HD （27.04 t/hm^2） ,but there was no significantly difference between GJ （84.16 t/hm^2） and HD （/）%0.05）. The plant carbon pool in MM （187.88 t/hm^2）, KY （164.17 t/hm^2）,respectively. The soil carbon pool in MM （79. 34 t/hm^2）, KY （69. 31 t/hm^2）, GJ （68. 93 t/hm^2）, FY （50.26 t/hm^2） was significantly higher than in HD （22.73 t/hm^2） （p〈0.05）. The annual fine root biomass in MM （112.15 g/m^2）, KY （88.71 g/m^2）,GJ （257.70 g/m^2）, FY （211.21 g/m^2） was 1.21,0.96,2.79, 2.29 times as in HD （92.33 g/m^2） respectively,which was significantly correlative with soil organic carbon density in the same soil horizon （p〈0.05）. The mean accumulation rates of ecosystem, above- and below- ground carbon pools in different restored forests range 2.04-8.58,0.39-6.56,0.98-2.02 t C/（hm^2·a） respectively. It indicated that forceful artificial intervention maybe successful management practices to achieve rapid carbon accumulation on red eroded wasteland.