Wind erosion and deposition features on surfaces under different coverage of Alhagi sparsifolia community throughout its growing season were studied by field observation. The results indicated that during the period that Alhagi sparsifolia community grew from the primary stage to the stationary stage, the vegetation coverage whose planting density was 0.2 m-2 increased from 3.09% to 34.42% and it varied from 3.18% to 22.66% when the density was 0.18 m-2, and the sand control effect of the former was better than that of the latter; Both of the two showed severe wind erosion in the early days of the plant's growth, however, wind deposition was in charge of every observation stage after that, and net erosion and deposition amount per unit area increased first then tended to be steady with time; Bare sandy surface was mainly exposed to wind erosion; The vegetation coverage increased from 0.44% to 20.30% when the planting density was 0.1 m-2, and the surface under which showed more serious wind erosion partially than the bare sandy surface did, and its erosion amount per unit area increased with time; Wind deposition obviously occurred in the internal of the community whose coverage was larger as well as leeward side of the plant, on the contrary, and the windward side on the periphery of the community and surface under a smaller vegetation coverage usually showed severe wind erosion; Sand control should be especially focused on the primary stage of the plant's growth after it is all cut and the area where the vegetation coverage is smaller.
[1] Yan Y,Xu X,Xin X,et al.Effect of vegetation coverage on aeolian dust accumulation in a semiarid steppe of northern China[J].Catena,2011,87(3):351-356.
[2] Li X Y,Liu L Y,Wang J H.Wind tunnel simulation of aeolian sandy wind erodibility under human disturbance[J].Geomorphology,2004,59(1):3-11.
[3] 董治宝,陈渭南.植被对土壤风蚀影响作用的实验研究[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报,1996,2(2):1-8.
[4] Wolfe S A,Nickling W G.The protective role of sparse vegetation in wind erosion[J].Progress in Physical Geography,1993,17:50-50.
[5] 董治宝,陈渭南,董光荣,等.植被对风沙土风蚀作用的影响[J].环境科学学报,1996,16(4):437-443.
[6] Marshall J K.Drag measurements in roughness arrays of varying density and distribution[J].Agricultural Meteorology,1971,8:269-292.
[7] Wooding R A,Bradley E F,Marshall J K.Drag due to regular arrays of roughness elements of varying geometry[J].Boundary-Layer Meteorology,1973,5(3):285-308.
[8] 黄富祥,王明星,王跃思.植被覆盖对风蚀地表保护作用研究的某些新进展[J].植物生态学报,2002,26(5):627-633.
[9] 张华,李锋瑞,伏乾科,等.沙质草地植被防风抗蚀生态效应的野外观测研究[J].环境科学,2004,25(2):119-124.
[10] 赵彩霞,郑大玮,何文清.植被覆盖度的时间变化及其防风蚀效应[J].植物生态学报,2005,29(1):68-73.
[11] 贺山峰,蒋德明.植被的防治风蚀作用[J].生态学杂志,2007,26(5):743-748.
[12] 唐艳,刘连友,屈志强,等.植物阻沙能力研究进展[J].中国沙漠,2011,31(1):43-48.
[13] 毛东雷,雷加强,曾凡江,等.新疆策勒沙漠-绿洲过渡带不同下垫面地表蚀积变化特征[J].中国沙漠,2014,34(4):961-969.
[14] 王仁德,邹学勇,赵婧妍,等.北京市平原区农田土壤蚀积特征分析[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(1):20-24.
[15] 穆桂金,贺俊霞,雷加强,等.再议绿洲-沙漠过渡带[J].干旱区地理,2013,36(2):195-202.
[16] 李小明,张希明.策勒绿洲边缘自然植被恢复重建的盖度指标[J].干旱区研究,2002,19(2):12-16.
[17] 王雪芹,胡永锋,杨东亮,等.绿洲-沙漠过渡带骆驼刺群落的防风阻沙作用[J].干旱区地理,2011,34(6):919-925.
[18] 韩章勇,王雪芹,杨帆,等.策勒绿洲-沙漠过渡带两个建群种阻沙能力对比研究[J].干旱区研究,2013,30(004):659-665.
[19] 毛东雷,雷加强,李生宇.新疆策勒绿洲-沙漠过渡带地表沙物质理化性质空间差异[J].中国沙漠,2015,35(1):136-144.
[20] 邢文娟,雷加强,王海峰,等.荒漠-绿洲过渡带风况及输沙势分析——以策勒县为例[J].干旱区研究,2008,25(6):894-898.
[21] 钱亦兵,张希明.塔克拉玛干沙漠南缘绿洲沙物质粒度特征[J].中国沙漠,1995,15(2):131-135.
[22] Belnap J.Biological wind crusts and wind erosion[M]//Biological Wind Crusts:Structure,Function,and Management[M].Berlin,Germany:Springer Heidelberg,2003:339-347.
[23] Bressolier C,Thomas Y F.Studies on wind and plant interactions on French Atlantic coastal dunes[J].Journal of Sedimentary Research,1977,47(1):331-338.
[24] 尚润阳,祁有祥,赵廷宁,等.植被对风及土壤风蚀影响的野外观测研究[J].水土保持研究,2006,13(4):37-39.
[25] 张春来,邹学勇,董光荣,等.植被对土壤风蚀影响的风洞实验研究[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(3):31-33.
[26] 杨文斌,卢琦,吴波,等.低覆盖度不同配置灌丛内风流结构与防风效果的风洞实验[J].中国沙漠,2007,27(5):791-796.
[27] 杨文斌,董慧龙,卢琦,等.低覆盖度固沙林的乔木分布格局与防风效果[J].生态学报,2011,31(17):5000-5008.
[28] 杨文斌,赵爱国,王晶莹,等.低覆盖度沙蒿群丛的水平配置结构与防风固沙效果研究[J].中国沙漠,2006,26(1):108-112.
[29] 梁海荣,王晶莹,卢琦,等.低覆盖度乔木两种分布格局内风速流场和防风效果风洞实验[J].中国沙漠,2009,29(6):1021-1028.
甘公网安备 62010202000688号