草业学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (1): 55-65.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2024134
肖海1,2,3(), 陈珠宝1, 夏振尧1,2,3, 朱庆文1, 刘德玉1, 向瑞1, 张伦1,2,3()
收稿日期:
2024-04-22
修回日期:
2024-06-05
出版日期:
2025-01-20
发布日期:
2024-11-04
通讯作者:
张伦
作者简介:
E-mail: lunz@ctgu.edu.cn基金资助:
Hai XIAO1,2,3(), Zhu-bao CHEN1, Zhen-yao XIA1,2,3, Qing-wen ZHU1, De-yu LIU1, Rui XIANG1, Lun ZHANG1,2,3()
Received:
2024-04-22
Revised:
2024-06-05
Online:
2025-01-20
Published:
2024-11-04
Contact:
Lun ZHANG
摘要:
波浪侵蚀是三峡库区消落带的主要侵蚀类型,植被、碎石均可有效的控制波浪侵蚀,但是碎石-植被协同作用下对波浪侵蚀的影响尚不清楚。本研究通过设置3种狗牙根覆盖度和9种碎石条件,以裸坡为对照,利用波浪冲刷试验分析不同条件下波压力和波浪侵蚀率,揭示碎石单一因素、植被单一因素和碎石-植被协同作用下对波浪侵蚀的影响。研究结果表明:碎石覆盖单一因素可有效消能26.49%~86.52%、减蚀8.70%~73.91%,波压力、侵蚀率随碎石粒径减小、覆盖厚度增加而减小。植被覆盖单一因素可有效消能4.10%~46.36%、减蚀19.56%~77.17%,波压力、侵蚀率随覆盖度增加而减小。碎石-植被协同措施消能减蚀效果优于单一措施,碎石-植被协同作用可有效消能28.95%~94.74%、减蚀28.20%~80.43%,协同措施下波压力、侵蚀率随碎石粒径的增大而增加却随碎石覆盖厚度、狗牙根覆盖度的增大而减小,在碎石粒径5~10 mm、碎石覆盖厚度60 mm、狗牙根覆盖度60%~70%时效果最好。多因素方差分析表明协同措施中波压力、侵蚀率的减少是碎石覆盖和植被覆盖的综合作用结果,其中对波压力的影响程度为碎石覆盖厚度>碎石粒径>植被覆盖度,而对波浪侵蚀率的影响程度为植被覆盖度>碎石层厚度>碎石粒径。本研究表明碎石-植被协同措施能有效达到消能减蚀的作用,可以作为岸坡土体波浪侵蚀控制的可持续性生态友好型的治理技术。该研究结果可以为消落带生态治理与生态重建实践提供指导和借鉴。
肖海, 陈珠宝, 夏振尧, 朱庆文, 刘德玉, 向瑞, 张伦. 碎石及狗牙根覆盖对坡面波浪侵蚀影响研究[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(1): 55-65.
Hai XIAO, Zhu-bao CHEN, Zhen-yao XIA, Qing-wen ZHU, De-yu LIU, Rui XIANG, Lun ZHANG. Wave dissipation and erosion reduction under the combined effect of gravel and Cynodon dactylon cover[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2025, 34(1): 55-65.
图2 单一措施中不同碎石覆盖处理对波压力和侵蚀率的影响CK: 裸坡Bare slope; T1, T2, T3:碎石覆盖厚度分别为20、40和60 mm The gravel cover thickness are 20, 40 and 60 mm, respectively; S1, S2, S3: 碎石粒径分别为5~10 mm、10~15 mm和15~20 mm The particle sizes of the gravel are 5-10 mm, 10-15 mm and 15-20 mm; 1#: 传感器位于水位以下The sensor is located below the water level; 2#: 传感器位于30 cm水位处The sensor is located at the water level of 30 cm; 3#: 传感器位于水位以上The sensor is located above the water level. 不同大写字母表示CK及相同碎石覆盖厚度不同碎石粒径下差异显著,不同小写字母表示CK及相同碎石粒径不同碎石覆盖厚度下差异显著(P<0.05)。下同。Different capital letters indicate the significance differences among CK and different gravel particle sizes under the same gravel coverage thickness, and different lowercase letters indicate the significance CK and differences among different gravel coverage thicknesses under the same gravel particle size (P<0.05). The same below.
Fig.2 Effect of different gravel cover treatments on wave pressure and wave erosion rate in single measure
图3 单一措施中不同狗牙根覆盖处理对波压力和侵蚀率的影响不同大写字母表示不同植物覆盖度下差异显著(P<0.05)。Different uppercase letters indicate significant differences among different plant coverages (P<0.05). C1, C2, C3分别表示狗牙根覆盖度为20%~30%、40%~50%和60%~70%。C1, C2, C3 represent C. dactylon coverage are 20%-30%, 40%-50% and 60%-70%, respectively. 下同The same below.
Fig.3 Effect of different C. dactylon cover treatments on wave pressure and wave erosion rate in single measure
图4 协同措施中不同碎石-狗牙根覆盖处理对波压力和侵蚀率的影响
Fig.4 Effect of different gravel-C. dactylon cover treatments on wave pressure and wave erosion rate in synergistic measures
项目Item | 指标Indicators | T | S | C | T×S | T×C | C×S | T×C×S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1#波压力 1# wave pressure | F值F value | 554.09 | 383.14 | 313.38 | 5.58 | 1.38 | 1.35 | 6.06 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.27 | 0.89 | 0.75 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 43.77 | 30.26 | 24.75 | 0.44 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.48 | |
2#波压力 2# wave pressure | F值F value | 314.61 | 223.68 | 177.43 | 7.44 | 2.69 | 1.04 | 1.08 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.40 | 0.41 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 43.16 | 30.68 | 24.34 | 1.02 | 0.37 | 0.14 | 0.15 | |
3#波压力 3# wave pressure | F值F value | 529.75 | 433.11 | 353.24 | 5.90 | 8.74 | 1.47 | 0.67 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.42 | 0.97 | 0.71 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 39.71 | 32.47 | 26.48 | 0.44 | 0.66 | 0.11 | 0.05 | |
侵蚀率 Erosion rate | F值F value | 233.98 | 43.97 | 252.98 | 1.14 | 10.00 | 8.75 | 3.02 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.35 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 42.17 | 7.92 | 45.59 | 0.21 | 1.80 | 1.58 | 0.54 |
表1 各因子对波压力、侵蚀率影响的多因素方差分析
Table 1 Multivariate analysis of variance of the influence of each factor on wave pressure and wave erosion rate
项目Item | 指标Indicators | T | S | C | T×S | T×C | C×S | T×C×S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1#波压力 1# wave pressure | F值F value | 554.09 | 383.14 | 313.38 | 5.58 | 1.38 | 1.35 | 6.06 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.27 | 0.89 | 0.75 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 43.77 | 30.26 | 24.75 | 0.44 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.48 | |
2#波压力 2# wave pressure | F值F value | 314.61 | 223.68 | 177.43 | 7.44 | 2.69 | 1.04 | 1.08 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.40 | 0.41 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 43.16 | 30.68 | 24.34 | 1.02 | 0.37 | 0.14 | 0.15 | |
3#波压力 3# wave pressure | F值F value | 529.75 | 433.11 | 353.24 | 5.90 | 8.74 | 1.47 | 0.67 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.42 | 0.97 | 0.71 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 39.71 | 32.47 | 26.48 | 0.44 | 0.66 | 0.11 | 0.05 | |
侵蚀率 Erosion rate | F值F value | 233.98 | 43.97 | 252.98 | 1.14 | 10.00 | 8.75 | 3.02 |
P值P value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.35 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 42.17 | 7.92 | 45.59 | 0.21 | 1.80 | 1.58 | 0.54 |
1 | Zhou Y J, Qiu J X, Wang J, et al. Assessment of eco-environmental vulnerability of water-level fluctuation belt in Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(24): 6726-6733. |
周永娟, 仇江啸, 王姣, 等. 三峡库区消落带生态环境脆弱性评价. 生态学报, 2010, 30(24): 6726-6733. | |
2 | He X B, Bao Y H. Research advances on soil erosion and ecological restoration in the riparian zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 17(4): 160-168. |
贺秀斌, 鲍玉海. 三峡水库消落带土壤侵蚀与生态重建研究进展. 中国水土保持科学, 2019, 17(4): 160-168. | |
3 | Ye C, Li S Y, Zhang Y L, et al. Assessing soil heavy metal pollution in the water-level-fluctuation zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir, China. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2011, 191(1): 366-372. |
4 | Vietz G J, Lintern A, Webb J A, et al. River bank erosion and the influence of environmental flow management. Environmental Management, 2018, 61(3): 454-468. |
5 | Liu X H, Chen Y, Yan Z H, et al. The effects of grass hedgerow roots on shear strength and scouring resistance of root-soil complexes in the purple soil region. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(11): 98-107. |
刘枭宏, 谌芸, 颜哲豪, 等. 紫色土区草篱根系对其根-土复合体抗剪和抗冲性能的影响. 草业学报, 2021, 30(11): 98-107. | |
6 | Zhao Y R, Cao Y X, Yang C C, et al. Hydrological effects of highway vegetation slope model under artificial rain conditions. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2024, 33(3): 24-33. |
赵娅如, 曹雲翔, 杨成参, 等. 人工降雨条件下高速公路植被边坡模型水文效应测试. 草业学报, 2024, 33(3): 24-33. | |
7 | Bao Y H. Characteristics of soil erosion in water level fluctuating zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir. Chengdu: Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2009. |
鲍玉海. 三峡水库消落带土壤侵蚀特征研究. 成都: 中国科学院水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所, 2009. | |
8 | Beeson C, Doyle P. Comparison of bank erosion at vegetated and no-vegetated channel bends. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 1995, 31(6): 983-990. |
9 | Cui M, Liu C S, Chen X M, et al. Research on effect of anti-erosion by planting vetivers in Donggang Lake shore. Engineering Journal of Wuhan University, 2017, 50(4): 531-535. |
崔敏, 刘川顺, 陈曦濛, 等. 东港湖岸种植香根草抵抗波浪侵蚀的效应研究. 武汉大学学报(工学版), 2017, 50(4): 531-535. | |
10 | Zhong R H, He X B, Bao Y H, et al. Role of Cynodon dactylon L. and Hemarthria altissima in wave attenuation and erosion control. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2015, 31(2): 133-140. |
钟荣华, 贺秀斌, 鲍玉海, 等. 狗牙根和牛鞭草的消浪减蚀作用. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(2): 133-140. | |
11 | Zhang X B. Thinking about geomorphologic evolution of slopes in hydro-fluctuation belt of Three Gorges Reservoir. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2009, 29(3): 1-4, 9. |
张信宝. 关于三峡水库消落带地貌变化之思考. 水土保持通报, 2009, 29(3): 1-4, 9. | |
12 | Wang J, Zhao W W, Liu Y, et al. Effects of plant functional traits on soil conservation: a review. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(9): 3355-3364. |
王晶, 赵文武, 刘月, 等. 植物功能性状对土壤保持的影响研究述评. 生态学报, 2019, 39(9): 3355-3364. | |
13 | Ding J, Dong Y F. Characteristics of wave-structure interaction of PBA revetment. Port & Waterway Engineering, 2022(4): 21-24, 75. |
丁洁, 董永福. 聚氨酯碎石护坡波浪作用特性. 水运工程, 2022(4): 21-24, 75. | |
14 | Wang Z, Gu B W, Yuan Q, et al. Wave dissipation performance of granular media based on three-dimensional meso-model. IEEE Sensors Journal, 2021, 21(14): 15607-15613. |
15 | Yuan Q, Kong X Z, Zhang J H, et al. Three-dimensional mesoscopic modelling of shock wave propagation and attenuation in gravel granular filter. Powder Technology, 2021, 394: 838-852. |
16 | Cai Y K, Li Y, Feng H. Effects of gravel-sand mulching degree and size on soil moisture evaporation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2014, 28(6): 273-277, 297. |
蔡永坤, 李毅, 冯浩. 不同砂石覆盖度和粒径对土壤水分蒸发的影响. 水土保持学报, 2014, 28(6): 273-277, 297. | |
17 | Wu D, Feng W B, Shi Q L. A physical model study of the effect of the flexible vegetation on wave height attenuation and along the way of flow structure. Yellow River, 2014, 36(12): 79-81, 84. |
吴迪, 冯卫兵, 石麒琳. 柔性植物消浪及沿程阻流特性试验研究. 人民黄河, 2014, 36(12): 79-81, 84. | |
18 | Editorial Committee of Flora of China, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Flora of China. Beijing: Science Press, 1996. |
中国科学院中国植物志编委会. 中国植物志. 北京: 科学出版社, 1996. | |
19 | Hong M, Guo Q S, Nie B H, et al. Responses of Cynodon dactylon population in hydro-fluctuation belt of Three Gorges Reservoir area to flooding-drying habitat change. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2011, 22(11): 2829-2835. |
洪明, 郭泉水, 聂必红, 等. 三峡库区消落带狗牙根种群对水陆生境变化的响应. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(11): 2829-2835. | |
20 | Chen S H, Xie Z K, Wang Y J, et al. Moisture storage effect of gravel mulch with different grain size on watermelon field. Journal of Desert Research, 2005, 25(3): 433-436. |
陈士辉, 谢忠奎, 王亚军, 等. 砂田西瓜不同粒径砂砾石覆盖的水分效应研究. 中国沙漠, 2005, 25(3): 433-436. | |
21 | Wu L, Mu X M, Gao P, et al. Effects of vegetation coverage on runoff and sediment yield in the loess plateau. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 26(6): 133-138, 144. |
吴蕾, 穆兴民, 高鹏, 等. 黄土高原地区植被盖度对产流产沙的影响. 水土保持研究, 2019, 26(6): 133-138, 144. | |
22 | Tianjin Research Institute for Water Transport Engineering, M.O.T. Technical code of modelling test for port and waterway engineering, JTS/T 231-2021. Beijing: China Communication Press, 2021. |
交通运输部天津水运工程科学研究所. 水运工程模拟试验技术规范, JTS/T 231-2021. 北京: 人民交通出版社, 2021. | |
23 | Tang M, Yang C H, Lei B. Spatial distribution investigation on the water-level-fluctuating zone slopes in Three Gorges Reservoir Areas based on GIS. Environment and Ecology in the Three Gorges, 2013, 35(3): 8-10, 20. |
唐敏, 杨春华, 雷波. 基于GIS的三峡水库不同坡度消落带分布特征. 三峡环境与生态, 2013, 35(3): 8-10, 20. | |
24 | Fu X H, Wang S, Tang D D, et al. Study on the characteristics of near-shore waves in the typical section of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area: A case study of Daning river. Pearl River, 2020, 41(6): 32-38. |
付旭辉, 王硕, 唐定丹, 等. 三峡库区典型河段近岸波浪特征研究——以巫山大宁河为例. 人民珠江, 2020, 41(6): 32-38. | |
25 | Liang S, Sun Z, Chang Y, et al. Evolution characteristics and quantization of wave period variation for breaking waves. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2020, 32(2): 1-14. |
26 | Wang L, Chen Y S, Wang S M, et al. Prediction method of wave-induced erosion range on soil bank slopes based on energy conservation theory. Advanced Engineering Sciences, 2023, 55(5): 169-180. |
王力, 陈玙珊, 王世梅, 等. 基于能量守恒理论的波浪侵蚀土质岸坡范围预测方法. 工程科学与技术, 2023, 55(5): 169-180. | |
27 | Wang L, Li Q L, Chen Y, et al. Model test study on wave-induced erosion on gravelly soil bank slope. Natural Hazards, 2023, 119(3): 1665-1682. |
28 | Li W C, Ma D X, Jia Z J, et al. Soil environmental effects of gravel-sand mulched field: research progress and prospects. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, 2024, 46(2): 278-288. |
李王成, 马东祥, 贾振江, 等. 砾石覆盖下的农田土壤环境效应: 研究进展与展望. 江西农业大学学报, 2024, 46(2): 278-288. | |
29 | Foss O, Blenkinsopp C E, Bayle P M, et al. Comparison of dynamic cobble berm revetments with differing gravel characteristics. Coastal Engineering, 2023, 183: 104312. |
30 | Liang H R, Yu X X, Fan D X, et al. Effect of gravel-sand mulching on slope runoff and sediment yield. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2014, 28(3): 57-61. |
梁洪儒, 余新晓, 樊登星, 等. 砾石覆盖对坡面产流产沙的影响. 水土保持学报, 2014, 28(3): 57-61. | |
31 | Michele S, Nobuhisa K. Remaining capacity of low-crested rubble mounds damaged by breaking waves in surf zone. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 2022, 148(6): 1-15. |
32 | Tang S Q, She D L. Synergistic effects of rock fragment cover and polyacrylamide application on erosion of saline-sodic soils. Catena, 2018, 171: 154-165. |
33 | Kervroëdan L, Armand R, Rey F, et al. Trait-based sediment retention and runoff control by herbaceous vegetation in agricultural catchments: a review. Land Degradation Development, 2021, 32(3): 1077-1089. |
34 | Yu F, Wang D C, Sun W P, et al. Impacts of grass planting density and components on overland flow hydraulics and soil loss. Land Degradation & Development, 2023, 34(1): 234-249. |
35 | Xiao H, Liu D Y, Gao F, et al. Evaluating the influence of Cynodon dactylon on the wave force and wave erosion in the water-level fluctuation zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Ecological Engineering, 2024, 202: 107233. |
36 | Cao Y Y, Su X M, Zhou Z C, et al. Spatial differences in, and factors influencing, the shear strength of typical herb root-soil complexes in the loess plateau of China. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2023, 32(5): 94-105. |
曹玉莹, 苏雪萌, 周正朝, 等. 黄土高原典型草本植物根-土复合体抗剪性能的空间差异性及其影响因素研究. 草业学报, 2023, 32(5): 94-105. | |
37 | Wei Y, Liu Y B, Liu X H, et al. Study on shear strength of root-soil composite of Dolichos lablab and Medicago sativa in purple soil region. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2023, 32(8): 82-90. |
魏艳, 刘有斌, 刘枭宏, 等. 紫色土区拉巴豆和紫花苜蓿根-土复合体抗剪性能研究. 草业学报, 2023, 32(8): 82-90. | |
38 | Zhu Z H, Chen Z L, Li L, et al. Response of dominant plant species to periodic flooding in the riparian zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir (TGR), China. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 747: 141101. |
39 | Liu D D, She D L. Can rock fragment cover maintain soil and water for saline-sodic soil slopes under coastal reclamation? Catena, 2017, 151: 213-224. |
[1] | 李硕, 李培英, 孙宗玖, 李雯. 基于转录组测序的狗牙根抗旱根系关键代谢途径分析[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(4): 186-198. |
[2] | 喻启坤, 李雯, 汤丽斯, 韩宇, 李培英, 孙宗玖. 狗牙根叶片相对含水量高光谱反演估算[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(12): 59-72. |
[3] | 朱城强, 温绍福, 江润海, 张梅, 蔡治宏, 何玥琛, 陈鑫, 侯秀丽. 铅胁迫下吲哚乙酸对狗牙根铅累积及生理特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(10): 96-107. |
[4] | 张一龙, 李雯, 喻启坤, 李培英, 孙宗玖. 狗牙根叶与根氮代谢对不同干旱胁迫的响应机制[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(7): 175-187. |
[5] | 张一龙, 喻启坤, 李雯, 李培英, 孙宗玖. 不同抗旱性狗牙根地上地下表型特征及内源激素对干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(3): 163-178. |
[6] | 曾令霜, 李培英, 孙宗玖, 孙晓梵. 两类新疆狗牙根抗旱基因型抗氧化酶保护系统及其基因表达差异分析[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(7): 122-132. |
[7] | 孙晓梵, 张一龙, 李培英, 孙宗玖. 不同施氮量对干旱下狗牙根抗氧化酶活性及渗透调节物质含量的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(6): 69-78. |
[8] | 卫宏健, 丁杰, 张巨明, 杨文, 王咏琪, 刘天增. 践踏胁迫下狗牙根草坪土壤真菌群落结构的变化特征[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(4): 102-112. |
[9] | 任雪锋, 邓亚博, 臧国长, 郑轶琦. 基于SSR标记的河南省狗牙根遗传多样性及群体遗传结构分析[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(3): 60-70. |
[10] | 赵欣桐, 陈晓东, 李子吉, 张巨明, 刘天增. 植物内生肠杆菌对狗牙根耐盐性的调控研究[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(9): 127-136. |
[11] | 曾令霜, 李培英, 孙晓梵, 孙宗玖. 新疆不同生境狗牙根种质抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(8): 155-169. |
[12] | 张金羽, 周忠泽, 叶晓馨. 陌上菅对三种禾本科植物的化感潜势研究[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(3): 103-111. |
[13] | 李晓雪, 李昌晓, 宋虹, 袁中勋. 水淹和密度配置对牛鞭草与狗牙根扦插苗光合作用的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(2): 197-206. |
[14] | 杨文航, 任庆水, 秦红, 宋虹, 袁中勋, 李昌晓. 三峡库区消落带不同海拔狗牙根草地土壤微生物生物量碳氮磷含量特征[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(2): 57-68. |
[15] | 舒必超, 杨勇, 刘雪勇, 蒋元利, 向佐湘, 胡龙兴. 低温胁迫对狗牙根生理及基因表达的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(11): 106-119. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||