Analysis of Physical and Chemical Soil Properties of Larch Plantations With Different Afforestation Densities in North China

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2018.06.017

Abstract

Abstract:

In the Chifeng Saihanwula Integrated Shelter Forest Demonstration Base established by Inner Mongolia Agricultural University and Inner Mongolia Hesheng Ecological Science and Technology Researcher Co.,Ltd.,the Larch plantations with different stand densities (1 407,1 675,2 680 plants/hm²) were taken as the research object.Three standard plots each were set up the soil stratified,and the physical and chemical properties of the soil measured indoors.The results showed that the soil physical and chemical properties of Larix principis-rupprechtii plantations with different afforestation densities were significantly different.When the stand density was 1 407 plants/hm²,the soil bulk density was the smallest (0.97),the total porosity (62.6%) and the water content (14.75%) were the largest.The accumulation process of organic matter was slow and there was no significant change,However,the contents of total N (110.06g/kg),effective P(0.57g/kg) and effective K(29.11g/kg) in the topsoil were highest at the stand density of 1 407 plants/hm ².

Key words: Larix principis-rupprechtii, plantation, stand density, physical and chemical soil properties, forest growth

CLC Number:

S714.2

FENG Qianqian, TIE Ying, ZHOU Mei, XIANG Changlin, WU Yiheng. Analysis of Physical and Chemical Soil Properties of Larch Plantations With Different Afforestation Densities in North China[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2018, (6): 106-110.

Figures/Tables 3

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

References 14

[1]	曾小梨, 薛立, 刘斌, 等. 不同密度红苞木幼林的土壤理化性质研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2010,30(05):43-45.
[2]	王彦辉. 面向21世纪的林业—可持续发展全球战略下的林业科学技术[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 1998: 456-471.
[3]	温佐吾, 谢双喜, 周运超, 等. 造林密度对马尾松林分生长木材造纸特性及经济效益的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2000,36(S1):36-43.
[4]	何艺玲, 傅懋毅. 人工林林下植被的研究现状[J]. 林业科学研究, 2002,15(6):727-733.
[5]	盛炜彤. 杉木林的密度管理与长期生产力研究[J]. 林业科学, 2001,37(5):2-9.
[6]	康冰, 刘世荣, 蔡道雄, 等. 马尾松人工林林分密度对林下植被及土壤性质的差异[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009,20(10):2323-2331.
[7]	周树平, 梁坤南, 杜健, 李碧均, 周再知, 黄桂华. 不同密度柚木人工林林下植被及土壤理化性质的研究[J]. 植物研究, 2017,37(2):200-210.
[8]	李国雷, 刘勇, 吕瑞恒, 等. 华北落叶松人工林密度调控对林下植被发育的作用过程[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2009,31(1):19-24.
[9]	哈琴, 王明玖, 常国军, 等. 赛罕乌拉国家级自然保护区不同草地类型植被碳密度及其分配[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2013,27(4):41-46.
[10]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[11]	郑纪勇, 邵明安, 张兴昌. 黄土区坡面表层土壤容重和饱和导水率空间变异特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2004,18(3):53-56.
[12]	潘湘海. 塞罕坝华北落叶松人工林土壤水分的研究[J].河北林业科技, 2002(5):7.
[13]	徐成立, 翟洪波, 李吉跃, 等. 油松栓皮栎混交林林分合理密度探讨[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2005,33(S1):23-25.
[14]	GB/T 15776-2016,造林技术规程[S].

造林密度/ (株/hm²)	海拔 /m	平均胸径 /cm	平均高度 /m	株行距/ (m×m)	带宽 /m
1407	1146.6	5.35	6.1	5×1.5	0
1675	1130.6	5.16	4.8	2×1.5	4
2680	1099.8	5.11	4.6	2×1.5	25

造林密度/ (株/hm²)	测定指标	土壤深度/cm
造林密度/ (株/hm²)	测定指标	0~10	10~20	20~30	30~40	40~50
1407	容重(g/cm³)	0.97±0.19a	1.04±0.12a	1.06±0.04a	1.13±0.08a	1.17±0.06a
	总孔隙度(%)	62.6±7.86a	60.28±3.61a	58.47±1.30a	55.22±5.17a	54.09±2.2a
	土壤含水量(%)	14.73±0.52a	14.45±0.50a	14.11±0.39a	12.08±0.48a	12.23±0.81a
1675	容重(g/cm³)	1.14±0.06a	1.17±0.07a	1.19±0.03a	1.30±0.13a	1.32±0.13a
	总孔隙度(%)	54.53±1.95b	52.51±5.07b	52.18±4.33b	49.75±4.7a	47.43±7.21a
	土壤含水量(%)	13.33±1.46b	13.04±0.11a	12.36±0.54a	12.32±8.42a	11.89±0.22a
2680	容重(g/cm³)	1.15±0.04a	1.25±0.05b	1.41±0.13b	1.42±0.08b	1.53±0.19a
	总孔隙度(%)	56.46±3.54b	48.51±1.33b	44.23±4.87b	44.39±2.28a	40.18±7.04a
	土壤含水量(%)	12.58±0.56c	11.42±0.80b	10.79±0.92b	9.88±0.50b	9.40±0.60a

造林密度/ (株/hm²)	测定指标	土壤深度/cm
造林密度/ (株/hm²)	测定指标	0~10	10~20	20~30	30~40	40~50
1407	有机质(g/kg)	110.06±24.80a	91.72±21.01a	77.96±19.86a	61.22±12.55a	44.25± 6.01a
	全N(g/kg)	4.80± 1.30a	4.50± 0.50a	3.50± 2.20a	2.30± 4.04a	0.90± 0.93a
	速效P(g/kg)	0.57± 0.02a	0.29± 0.02a	0.24± 0.12a	0.30± 0.27a	0.18± 0.004a
	速效K(g/kg)	29.11± 5.61a	24.71± 8.81a	16.85± 2.60a	14.32± 0.92a	14.45± 1.40a
1675	有机质(g/kg)	133.22±12.88a	96.76±18.98a	61.68±13.66a	50.21±13.29a	43.57±18.16a
	全N(g/kg)	4.50± 0.40b	4.20± 2.40a	2.70± 0.70a	2.10± 0.20a	0.60± 0.47a
	速效P(g/kg)	1.18± 0.02a	0.37± 0.05a	0.55± 0.06b	0.95± 0.06b	0.44± 0.04b
	速效K(g/kg)	23.78± 2.80a	20.45± 4.77a	16.32± 2.20a	13.79± 0.40a	13.25± 0.23a
2680	有机质(g/kg)	119.00±11.07a	104.79±11.43a	83.23± 9.56a	71.31±11.35a	61.91± 5.19a
	全N(g/kg)	4.10± 1.30c	3.80± 1.90a	3.00± 0.40a	1.80± 0.14a	0.80± 0.40a
	速效P(g/kg)	0.15± 1.06a	0.34± 0.61a	0.24± 0.12b	0.52± 0.08b	0.35± 0.05c
	速效K(g/kg)	21.78±13.09a	14.05± 1.89a	12.72± 0.61a	12.59± 2.50a	11.79± 0.40a

[1]	YE Peixia, LUO Kai, SHEN Zhenhai, JIN Shanshan, ZHOU Mengli, YAN Dongfeng. Health assessment of Robinia pseudoacacia plantations in the Henan Old Yellow River Course area using PLS-SEM Model [J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2025, 0(3): 127-138.
[2]	ZHAO Zhigang, LI Zhaojia, LIU Shangbo, ZHANG Ganglong, KANG Qiaoling, HAO Jian. Stand growth differentiation process and exploration of management strategies of Erythrophleum fordii plantations [J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2025, 0(2): 133-140.
[3]	GAO Yue, MENG Zhongju, YANG Yi, XIN Jing, MI Hongzhuo, WANG Zhiqiang. The Influence of the Planting Patterns of Forest Shelterbelts along the Yellow River in the Hobq Desert on Under-forest Vegetation Diversity [J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2024, 0(6): 81-90.
[4]	GAO Yonglong, LAI Guanghui, WANG Yuerong, WANG Huan, ZHANG Yiming, SHI Shaowei, ZHANG Lianjin. Growth Model of Carbon Storage in Pinus tabuliformis Plantation Based on National Forest Inventory Data [J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2024, 0(3): 79-87.
[5]	BAI Xingwen, BU Rigude, HONG Guangyu, LI Wei, SHAO Feizhou, ZHANG Lei. Soil Moisture Characteristics and Its Response to Precipitation of Typical Plantation in Mu Us Sandy Land [J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2023, 0(6): 52-60.
[6]	WANG Xiaohan, HE Xiao, SHI Jingning. Economic Analysis on Optimal Rotation Period of Larix principis-rupprechtii under Climate Change Scenarios [J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2023, 0(5): 40-47.
[7]	LI Zhongmu, NIE Kaihong, TIAN Dengjuan, LIU Shenghong, LU Sai, LI Genqian. Ecological Stoichiometry Characteristics of C,N and P of Different Components in Premature Aging Plantation Forests of Hippophae rhamnoides ssp.sinensis [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2023, 0(4): 62-70.
[8]	LI Siying, GUO Haotian, CHEN Xiaowei, ZHOU Mengli, JIN Shanshan, YAN Dongfeng. Spatial Distribution Characteristics of Soil Organic Carbon in Quercus variabilis Plantation and Its Influencing Factors [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2023, 0(4): 80-89.
[9]	LI Lianqiang. Species Composition and Community Characteristics of Close-to-Nature Managed Pinus koraiensis Plantation Forests in the Mountainous Area of Liaodong Peninsula [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2023, 0(4): 90-97.
[10]	LI Xiaoyang, MA Xiuzhi, YANG Yupei, LI Changsheng. Diurnal Variation of Soil N₂O Emission Fluxes and Its Influencing Factors in Pinus tabulaeformis Plantation [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2023, 0(2): 88-95.
[11]	HE Bin, LI Qing, LI Wangjun, ZOU Shun, BAI Xiaolong, FENG Tu. Soil Nutrient and C:N:P Stoichiometry of Different Aged Pinus armandii Plantations [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2023, 0(1): 71-79.
[12]	JIN Zhonghao, LIU Guoliang, XIAO Wenfa, YU Xin, ZENG Wenjie, YANG Xinyu, CHENG Fushan, ZHU Jianhua. Exploration of Forest Land Use Planning in Papua New Guinea Based on the FSOS Model [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2022, 0(zk1): 135-140.
[13]	WANG Xu, ZHANG Xueli, ZHANG Risheng, CHI Linlin, XIAO Wei, WANG Cuiping. Effects of Pinus sylvestris Plantation on Dust Fall in Horqin Sandy Land [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2022, 0(6): 109-116.
[14]	WANG Xiaoyang, JIANG Youyi, LI Xiao, HU Yaxuan, ZHANG Jiazheng, LIU Bowei. A Multi-Temporal and Multi-Feature Larch Plantation Extraction Study Based on GF-1 Images [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2022, 0(4): 109-118.
[15]	FU Zhigao, WANG Zhilong, XIAO Yihua, XU Han, SHI Xin. Characteristics of Understory Forest Fuels in Typical Plantations in Northern Guangdong Province [J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2022, 0(4): 61-71.