Effects of different exclosure management on soil and plant characteristics of sandy grassland

Abstract

Abstract: To discuss the restoration of soil and plant of degraded sandy grassland, 19-year-old exclosure (19-year-old artificial restoration), 19-year-old exclosure (5-year-old artificial restoration), 10-year-old exclosure (natural restoration) sandy grassland were chosen to be the study subjects. Combining field survey with laboratory experiments, the influence of different exclosure management on soil physicochemical properties and plant characteristics of sandy grassland were researched taking, the mobile sand as the control. 1) Compared with the mobile sand, the plant height, density, crown diameter, coverage, biomass and soil nutrient of 19-year-old exclosure (19-year-old artificial restoration) sandy grassland increased, while soil bulk density, sand (0.05~2 mm) content of the surface layer (0~20 cm) decreased. The plants and soil gradually formed an interaction system with restoration of degraded sandy grassland. 2) The effects of slope on soil physicochemical properties and plant characteristics of exclosure were more significant than mobile sand (P<0.05). In the enclosed lands, SOC, TN, TP, and TK, available N, available P and available K increased from upper slope to foot slope. 3) The exclosure sandy grassland (artificial restoration) had better improvement on soil physicochemical properties and plant characteristics compared to sandy grassland restored by only natural force. It is an appropriate method for recovery of degraded sandy grassland in northern China.

CLC Number:

S812.2

WANG Hui, WANG Hui, HUANG Rong, MA Wei-wei. Effects of different exclosure management on soil and plant characteristics of sandy grassland[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(6): 15-22.

References

[1] Meissner R A, Facelli J M. Effects of sheep exclusion on the soil seed bank and annual vegetation in chenopod shrublands of South Australia[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,1999, 42(2): 117-128.
[2] 王彦荣, 曾彦军, 付华, 等. 过牧及封育对红砂荒漠植被演替的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2002, 22(4): 321-327.
[3] 周华坤, 周立, 刘伟, 等. 封育措施对退化与未退化矮嵩草草甸的影响[J]. 中国草地, 2003, 25(5): 15-22.
[4] 闫玉春, 唐海萍, 辛晓平, 等. 围封对草地的影响研究进展[J]. 生态学报, 2009, 29(9): 5039-5046.
[5] 张奎壁, 邹受益. 治沙原理与技术[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 1989: 35-44.
[6] 黄培祐. 干旱区免灌植被及其恢复[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002: 30-90.
[7] 赵丽娅, 赵哈林. 我国沙漠化过程中的植被演替研究概述[J]. 中国沙漠, 2000, 20(增刊): 7-14.
[8] 陈四清, 崔骁勇, 周广胜, 等. 内蒙古锡林河流域大针茅草原土壤呼吸和凋落物分解的CO₂排放速率研究[J]. 植物学报, 1999, 41(6): 645-650.
[9] 王娓, 郭继勋. 东北松嫩平原羊草群落的土壤呼吸与枯枝落叶分解释放CO₂贡献量[J]. 生态学报, 2002, 22(5): 655-660.
[10] 左万庆, 王玉辉, 王风玉, 等. 围栏封育措施对退化羊草草原植物群落特征影响研究[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(3): 12-19.
[11] 邹雨坤, 张静妮, 杨殿林, 等. 不同利用方式下羊草草原土壤生态系统微生物群落结构的PLFA分析[J]. 草业学报, 2011, 20(4): 27-33.
[12] 苏永中, 赵哈林, 文海燕. 退化沙质草地开垦和封育对土壤理化性状的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2002, 16(4): 5-8.
[13] 曹子龙, 郑翠玲, 赵廷宁, 等. 围封草地“种子岛”效应对周围沙化草地土壤种子库的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2006, 20(3): 197-200.
[14] 任继周, 梁天刚, 林慧龙, 等. 草地对全球气候变化的响应及其碳汇潜势研究[J]. 草业学报, 2011, 20(2): 1-22.
[15] 常兆丰, 韩福贵, 仲生年, 等. 民勤荒漠草场植物群落自然更新和退化演替初探[J]. 草业科学, 2008, 25(8): 10-13.
[16] 赵哈林, 赵学勇, 张铜会, 等. 科尔沁沙地沙漠化过程及其恢复机理[M]. 北京: 海洋出版社, 2003.
[17] 王启基, 周兴民, 沈振西, 等. 不同调控策略下退化草地植物群落结构及其多样性分析[A]. 中国科学院海北高寒草甸生态系统定位研究站. 高寒草甸生态系统(第4集)[C]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1995: 269-280.
[18] 陈生云, 刘文杰, 叶柏生, 等. 疏勒河上游地区植被物种多样性和生物量及其与环境因子的关系[J]. 草业学报, 2011, 20(3): 70-83.
[19] 苏永中, 赵哈林. 持续放牧和围封对科尔沁退化沙地草地碳截存的影响[J]. 环境科学, 2003, 24(4): 23-28.
[20] 单贵莲, 徐柱, 宁发, 等. 围封年限对典型草原植被与土壤特征的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(2): 3-10.
[21] 李新荣, 张志山, 王新平, 等. 干旱区土壤-植被系统恢复的生态水文学研究进展[J]. 中国沙漠, 2009, 29(5): 845-852.
[22] Li X R, Kong D S, Tan H J, et al. Changes in soil and in vegetation following stabilisation of dune in sout- heastern fringe of the Tengger Desert, China[J]. Plant and Soil, 2007, 300: 221-231.
[23] 张强, 赵雪, 赵哈林. 中国沙区草地[M]. 北京: 气象出版社, 1998: 1-2.
[24] 王辉, 孙栋元, 刘丽霞, 等. 干旱荒漠区沙蒿种群根系生态特征研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2007, 21(1): 99-102.
[25] 中国科学院南京土壤研究所. 土壤理化分析[M]. 上海: 上海科技出版社, 1978: 7-59.
[26] 严旭升. 土壤肥力研究方法[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1988.
[27] 孙鸿烈, 刘光崧. 土壤理化分析与剖面描述[M]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 1996.
[28] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[29] Lal R. Soil erosion impact on agronomic productivity and environment quality[J]. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 1998, 17: 319-464.
[30] Lowery B, Swan J, Schumacher T, et al. Physical properties of selected soils by erosion class[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 1995, 50: 306-311.
[31] Allington G R H, Valone T J. Reversal of desertification: the role of physical and chemical soil properties[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 2010, 74: 973-977.
[32] Wolde M, Veldkamp E, Mitiku H, et al. Effectiveness of exclosures to restore degraded soils as a result of overgrazing in Tigray, Ethiopia[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 2007, 69: 270-284.
[33] 刘忠宽, 汪诗平, 陈佐忠, 等. 不同放牧强度草原休牧后土壤养分和植物群落变化特征[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(6): 2048-2056.
[34] 傅华, 陈亚明, 王彦荣, 等. 阿拉善主要草地类型土壤有机碳特征及其影响因素[J]. 生态学报, 2004, 24(3): 469-476.
[35] 文海燕, 赵哈林. 退化沙质草地植被与土壤分布特征及相关分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2004, 21(1): 76-80.
[36] Agustin R, Adrian E. Small scale spatial soil-plant relationship in semiarid gypsum environments[J]. Plant and Soil, 2000, 220: 139-150.
[37] 孙栋元, 王辉, 马仲武, 等. 干旱荒漠区封育沙地土壤水分变化研究[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2007, 22(2): 49-53.