河北省太行山区3种人工水土保持林枯落物及土壤水文效应

Water-holding Capacity of Litter and Soil in Three Kinds of Soil and Water Conservation Forests in Taihang Mountains of Hebei Province

[目的]揭示人工水土保持林林下枯落物以及土壤持水特征,为太行山区水土保持林的建造和规划提供理论依据。[方法]运用烘干法,室内浸泡法,环刀法等得出不同林分林下枯落物蓄积量、持水量、吸水速率、最大持水能力和拦蓄量,比较了不同林分枯落物和土壤的持水能力。[结果]枯落物总储量范围为9.96~19.19t/hm2,表现为栓皮栎林总储量最大,荒坡总储量最小。枯落物最大持水量变化范围为23.76~66.72t/hm2,栓皮栎—侧柏混交林最大,荒坡最小。栓皮栎—侧柏混交林有效拦蓄量可达51.50t/hm2,在各林分中最大;荒坡有效拦蓄量为19.55t/hm2,在各林分中最小。枯落物持水量、吸水速率均与浸泡时间呈相关关系,前者为对数关系(R>0.97),后者为幂函数关系(R>0.98)。各林分土壤容重均值介于1.14~1.55g/cm3,总孔隙度介于38.62%~43.76%。各林分土壤有效持水量表现为:刺槐林>栓皮栎—侧柏混交林>栓皮栎林>荒坡,其中刺槐林最大(为106.85t/hm2),荒坡最小(为89.37t/hm2)。[结论]水土保持林持水能力远大于荒坡。

[Objective]The objective of this study is to investigate the water-holding capacity of litter and soil and to provide support for planning and planting soil and water conservation forests in Taihang Mountains.[Methods]Drying method,indoor soaking and cutting ring method were used to determine the water holding capacity by litter and soil in different kinds of forest stands.[Results]The total storage by litter ranged from9.96t/hm^2 to 19.19t/hm^2.The maximum water-holding volume of different forests was about 23.76t/hm^2 to 66.72t/hm^2,the order was QuercusvariabilisandPlatycladusorientalis mixed forest〉Q.variabilis forest〉Robinia pseudoacacia forest〉controlled forestland.The maximum effective retaining water of litter occured in Q.variabilis and P.orientalis mixed forest while the minimum in controlled forestland.The water-holding capacity of litters and immersion time had visible logarithmic relationship（R〉0.97）,whereas the litter absorption rate and immersion time followed an exponential relationship（R〉0.98）.Soil bulk desity was about 1.14g/cm^3 to 1.55g/cm^3,the total porosity ranged from 38.62%to 43.76%.The order of effective water-holding capacity of soil in these forests was R.pseudoacacia forest〉Q.variabilis and P.orien-talis mixed forest〉Q.variabilis forest controlled forestland（maximum in R.pseudoacacia106.85t/hm^2,while minimum in controlled forest land 89.37t/hm^2）.[Conclusion]The water holding capacity of forest lands was much better than controlled forestland.