Morphology and sediment characterization of a scrub sandpile in Caragana tibetica

doi:10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2023.00097

Journal of Desert Research ›› 2024, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (2): 185-195.DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2023.00097

Morphology and sediment characterization of a scrub sandpile in Caragana tibetica

Min Han¹(), Yong Gao¹(), Minghui He¹, Ru Yan², Fang Bai², Wenyuan Yang¹, Xiaole Li³^,⁴, Xiaoman Yuan¹, Juan Yang¹

^1.College of Desert Governance，Inner Mongolia Agricultural University，Hohhot 010018，China
^2.Darhan Muminggan Joint Banner Forestry and Grassland Workstation，Darhan Muminggan Joint Banner 014500，Inner Mongolia，China
^3.Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources，Chinese Academy of Sciences，Lanzhou 730000，China
^4.University of Chinese Academy of Sciences，Beijing 100049，China

Received:2023-08-07 Revised:2023-11-14 Online:2024-03-20 Published:2024-03-19
Contact: Yong Gao

Abstract

Abstract:

To study the coupling relationship between the sedimentary characteristics of the sand pile and the morphology of the thicket of Caragana tibetica at each stage of evolution， to analyze the changes of the sand pile of the thicket of Caragana tibetica over time， to elucidate the correlation between the thicket and the sand pile as well as the characteristics of the sand pile surface sediment at each stage of evolution， and to reveal the changes of the sand pile and its sand-blocking ability of the thicket in the course of the development of the thicket of Caragana tibetica. The sandpile changes during the development of the Tibetan mallow scrub and its ability to block the sand. Based on the field survey， three typical thickets of the sandpile of Tibetan mallow scrub at different stages of evolution （developmental stage， stabilization stage and activation stage） were selected from the sample site， and the morphometric parameters of the thickets and the sandpile were measured to study the correlation between the sandpile and the Tibetan mallow scrub， and then the sediment characteristics were analyzed through the sampling of different parts of the sediments. The results showed that the morphology of the sandpile of the Tibetan Jindjir scrub was mostly oval， and the long axis （L_d）， short axis （W_d）， height （H_d）， horizontal scale （HC）， bottom area （S_d） and volume （V_d） of the sandpile of the Tibetan Jindjir scrub at each stage of the evolution showed the stage of activation>stabilization>development. The overall grain size content of the sand pile sediments in the development stage was intermediate； the fine sand and powder grain content at the top of the scrub slope in the stabilization stage was higher， showing a gradual increase； the particle content in the activation stage was high， and the peak value from the bottom of the windward slope - the top of the slope - the bottom of the leeward slope was showing a trend of increasing and then decreasing， which indirectly reflected the interception effect of the scrub sandpile on the sand particles. The correlation between scrub morphology and each parameter of the sand pile sediment was greatest in the stabilization stage， indicating that between scrub and sediment due to the oval shape of the scrub， the surface sediment indicated that with the evolutionary stage， its scrub had the strongest sand fixation capacity in the stabilization stage. The morphology of Tibetan brook trout is not strongly correlated with each parameter of sand pile sediments during the developmental stage due to the small size of the scrub. The correlation between the scrub and the sediments became more and more unstable as the evolutionary process progressed.

Key words: Caragana tibetica, scrub and nebkhas, evolutionary stage, morphological characteristics, soil grain size composition

CLC Number:

P931.3

Min Han, Yong Gao, Minghui He, Ru Yan, Fang Bai, Wenyuan Yang, Xiaole Li, Xiaoman Yuan, Juan Yang. Morphology and sediment characterization of a scrub sandpile in Caragana tibetica[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(2): 185-195.

Figures/Tables 8

References 24

1	Wang X， Zhang C， Zhang J，et al.Nebkha formation： implications for reconstructing environmental changes over the past several centuries in the Ala Shan Plateau，China［J］.Palaeogeography，Palaeoclimatology，Palaeoecology，2010，297（3）：697-706.
2	Lang L， Wang X， Hasi E，et al.Nebkha （coppice dune） formation and significance to environmental change reconstructions in arid and semiarid areas［J］.Journal of Geographical Sciences，2013，23（2）：344-358.
3	张梅.毛乌素沙地藏锦鸡儿灌丛沙堆形态特征［J］.长春师范大学学报（自然科学版），2019，38（6）：72-78.
4	Zhang P， Yang J， Zhao L，et al.Effect of Caragana tibetica nebkhas on sand entrapment and fertile islands in steppe-desert ecotones on the Inner Mongolia Plateau，China［J］.Plant and Soil，2011，347（1/2）：79-90.
5	杜建会，严平，俄有浩.甘肃民勤不同演化阶段白刺灌丛沙堆分布格局及特征［J］.生态学杂志，2007，26（8）：1165-1170.
6	董雪，郝玉光，辛智鸣，等.浑善达克沙地3种典型灌丛固沙能力的比较研究［J］.林业科学研究，2020，33（1）：76-83.
7	支莹，刘树林，康文平，等.浑善达克沙地锦鸡儿属（Caragana）灌丛沙堆形态特征研究［J］.干旱区地理，2021，44（5）：1438-1448.
8	樊婷，张存厚，张德广，等.内蒙古自治区达茂旗荒漠草原土壤水分对降水的响应［J］.水土保持通报，2020，40（1）：72-77.
9	张存厚，崔崴，越昆，等.干旱半干旱区土壤水分对降水的脉动响应：以荒漠草原达茂旗为例［J］.干旱气象，2023，41（2）：260-267.
10	党晓宏，魏亚娟，汪季.不同生境白刺（Nitraria tangutorum）灌丛沙堆形态特征［J］.干旱区研究，2019，36（1）：1-9.
11	Li Z Z， Wu S L， Chen S J，et al.Biogeomorphologic features and growth process of Tamarix nabkhas in Hotan River Basin，Xinjiang［J］.Journal of Geographical Sciences，2010（2）：205-218.
12	Folk R L， Ward W C.Brazos River Bar：a study in the significance of grain size parameters［J］.Journal of Sedimentary Search，1957，27（1）：3-26.
13	Wentworth C K.A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments［J］.The Journal of Geology，1922，30（5）：377-392.
14	孙涛，贾志清，钱雅玲，等.民勤荒漠-绿洲过渡带不同发育阶段白刺灌丛沙堆的防风固沙功能分析［J］.云南农业大学学报（自然科学），2019，34（4）：713-724.
15	左合君，杨阳，张宏飞，等.阿拉善戈壁区白刺灌丛沙堆形态特征研究［J］.水土保持研究，2018，25（1）：263-269.
16	罗维成，赵文智，任珩，等.不同气候区灌丛沙堆形态及土壤养分积累特征［J］.中国沙漠，2021，41（2）：191-199.
17	Cabrera-Vega L L， Cruz-Avero N， Hernández-Calvento L H A I，et al. Morphological changes in dunes as an indicator of anthropogenic interferences in arid dune fields［J］.Coastal Education and Research Foundation，2013（8）：1-12.
18	张海娜，鲁向晖，黄国敏，等.鄱阳湖沙地蔓荆灌丛沙堆形态特征及空间分布格局［J］.生态学报，2019，39（14）：5252-5260.
19	张璞进，杨劼，宋炳煜，等.藏锦鸡儿群落土壤资源空间异质性［J］.植物生态学报，2009，33（2）：338-346.
20	迟旭，崔向新，党晓宏，等.吉兰泰盐湖绿洲柽柳灌丛生长与沙堆形态特征的关系［J］.西北农林科技大学学报（自然科学版），2022，50（3）：49-58.
21	高永，丁延龙，汪季，等.不同植物灌丛沙丘表面沉积物粒度变化及其固沙能力［J］.农业工程学报，2017，33（22）：135-142.
22	谭凤翥，王雪芹，王海峰，等.柽柳灌丛沙堆及丘间地蚀积分布随背景植被变化的风洞实验［J］.干旱区地理，2018，41（1）：56-65.
23	丁延龙.白刺灌丛沙堆演化对地表蚀积的影响及其作用机制［D］.呼和浩特：内蒙古农业大学， 2019.
24	李小乐，魏亚娟，党晓宏，等.红砂灌丛沙堆土壤粒度组成及养分积累特征［J］.干旱区研究，2022，39（3）：933-942.

演化阶段	项目	形态参数
演化阶段	项目	L_g/cm	W_g/cm	H_g/cm	L_d/cm	W_d/cm	H_d/cm	L_y/cm	L_b/cm	HC/cm	S_d/cm²	V_d/cm³	S_g/cm²
发育阶段n=150株	最大值	118.5	117.3	19.9	86.3	70.5	13.2	47.3	39.5	78.2	3 010.8	10 033.3	337.5
	最小值	23.7	25.3	4.8	10.7	8.4	3.2	5.4	4.7	10.4	50.6	50.3	333.5
	均值±标准误差	51.9±19.1^c	51.4±19.6^c	16.2±2.7^c	39.3±7.6^b	51.5±17.3^a	8.1±0.8^b	28.7±9.5^c	20.4±6.3^c	35.9±11.9^c	702.1±481.4^c	2 073.4±1 770.1^c	1 500.8±1 257.1^c
	变异系数	2.7	2.6	6.1	0.2	0.3	0.1	0.3	0.3	0.3	0.7	0.9	1.2
稳定阶段n=112株	最大值	177.6	176.4	24.8	110.3	95.7	17.5	56.1	50.7	96.5	4 565.5	16 738.3	13 186.5
	最小值	25.4	30.6	20.1	15.6	15.3	5.8	8.5	7.1	18.5	157.5	472.5	375.5
	均值±标准误差	71.8±28.2^b	70.1±25.6^b	22.1±3.7^b	67.4 ±24.3^a	71.7±24.8^a	10.8±0.5^a	32.4±11.8^b	27.9±8.7^b	46.2±14.8^b	1 153.5±760.9^b	4 661.7±3 247.8^b	2 835.6±2 320.4^b
	变异系数	2.5	2.8	5.9	0.4	0.4	0.1	0.4	0.3	0.3	0.7	0.7	1.2
活化阶段n=100株	最大值	202.6	231.5	89.2	174.2	178.1	47.5	90.3	83.2	190.2	17 922.5	179 220.1	23 331.5
	最小值	31.9	29.6	25.4	20.7	16.3	13.4	10.6	5.6	24.6	283.5	1 228.5	449.5
	均值±标准误差	82.2±32.7^a	84.9±34.7^a	31.1±8.4^a	82.1±7.4^a	84.8±8.5^a	11.1±1.1^a	50.2±23.2^a	42.8±16.4^a	72.7±29.5^a	3 031.1±2 815.9^a	21 814.9±26 636.1^a	3 992.7±3 452.8^a
	变异系数	2.5	2.4	3.7	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.5	0.4	0.4	0.9	1.2	1.2

演化阶段	项目	形态参数
演化阶段	项目	L_g/cm	W_g/cm	H_g/cm	L_d/cm	W_d/cm	H_d/cm	L_y/cm	L_b/cm	HC/cm	S_d/cm²	V_d/cm³	S_g/cm²
发育阶段n=150株	最大值	118.5	117.3	19.9	86.3	70.5	13.2	47.3	39.5	78.2	3 010.8	10 033.3	337.5
	最小值	23.7	25.3	4.8	10.7	8.4	3.2	5.4	4.7	10.4	50.6	50.3	333.5
	均值±标准误差	51.9±19.1^c	51.4±19.6^c	16.2±2.7^c	39.3±7.6^b	51.5±17.3^a	8.1±0.8^b	28.7±9.5^c	20.4±6.3^c	35.9±11.9^c	702.1±481.4^c	2 073.4±1 770.1^c	1 500.8±1 257.1^c
	变异系数	2.7	2.6	6.1	0.2	0.3	0.1	0.3	0.3	0.3	0.7	0.9	1.2
稳定阶段n=112株	最大值	177.6	176.4	24.8	110.3	95.7	17.5	56.1	50.7	96.5	4 565.5	16 738.3	13 186.5
	最小值	25.4	30.6	20.1	15.6	15.3	5.8	8.5	7.1	18.5	157.5	472.5	375.5
	均值±标准误差	71.8±28.2^b	70.1±25.6^b	22.1±3.7^b	67.4 ±24.3^a	71.7±24.8^a	10.8±0.5^a	32.4±11.8^b	27.9±8.7^b	46.2±14.8^b	1 153.5±760.9^b	4 661.7±3 247.8^b	2 835.6±2 320.4^b
	变异系数	2.5	2.8	5.9	0.4	0.4	0.1	0.4	0.3	0.3	0.7	0.7	1.2
活化阶段n=100株	最大值	202.6	231.5	89.2	174.2	178.1	47.5	90.3	83.2	190.2	17 922.5	179 220.1	23 331.5
	最小值	31.9	29.6	25.4	20.7	16.3	13.4	10.6	5.6	24.6	283.5	1 228.5	449.5
	均值±标准误差	82.2±32.7^a	84.9±34.7^a	31.1±8.4^a	82.1±7.4^a	84.8±8.5^a	11.1±1.1^a	50.2±23.2^a	42.8±16.4^a	72.7±29.5^a	3 031.1±2 815.9^a	21 814.9±26 636.1^a	3 992.7±3 452.8^a
	变异系数	2.5	2.4	3.7	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.5	0.4	0.4	0.9	1.2	1.2

		L_d	W_d	H_d	L_g	W_g	H_g	HC	S_d	V_d	S_g
发育阶段	L_d	1
	W_d	0.697^**	1
	H_d	0.444^**	0.484^**	1
	L_g	0.471^**	0.433^**	0.103	1
	W_g	0.380^**	0.420^**	0.048	0.892^**	1
	H_g	0.480^**	0.561^**	0.761^**	0.236^**	0.263^**	1
	HC	0.922^**	0.921^**	0.504^**	0.491^**	0.434^**	0.559^**	1
	S_d	0.913^**	0.884^**	0.440^**	0.463^**	0.420^**	0.493^**	0.975^**	1
	V_d	0.866^**	0.828^**	0.649^**	0.388^**	0.338^**	0.555^**	0.919^**	0.943^**	1
	S_g	0.377^**	0.400^**	0.034	0.944^**	0.959^**	0.188^*	0.422^**	0.418^**	0.341^**	1
稳定阶段	L_d	1
	W_d	0.667^**	1
	H_d	0.198^*	0.351^**	1
	L_g	0.300^**	0.088	-0.372^**	1
	W_g	0.166^*	0.098	-0.394^**	0.861^**	1
	H_g	0.198^*	0.351^**	1.000^**	-0.372^**	-0.394^**	1
	HC	0.076	0.147	0.296^**	0.065	0.105	0.296^**	1
	S_d	0.921^**	0.905^**	0.297^**	0.218^*	0.146	0.297^**	0.120	1
	V_d	0.931^**	0.843^**	0.233^**	0.272^**	0.184^*	0.233^**	0.084	0.974^**	1
	S_g	0.889^**	0.838^**	0.471^**	0.145	0.059	0.471^**	0.164^*	0.947^**	0.954^**	1
活化阶段	L_d	1
	W_d	0.837^**	1
	H_d	0.182^*	0.139	1
	L_g	0.580^**	0.505^**	0.056	1
	W_g	0.528^**	0.559^**	0.029	0.899^**	1
	H_g	0.206^*	0.151	0.961^**	0.199^*	0.167^*	1
	HC	0.956^**	0.961^**	0.167^*	0.565^**	0.567^**	0.186^*	1
	S_d	0.922^**	0.937^**	0.198^*	0.577^**	0.599^**	0.228^*	0.970^**	1
	V_d	0.869^**	0.893^**	0.342^**	0.546^**	0.583^**	0.367^**	0.920^**	0.974^**	1
	S_g	0.592^**	0.599^**	0.080	0.935^**	0.948^**	0.218^*	0.622^**	0.679^**	0.674^**	1

		L_d	W_d	H_d	L_g	W_g	H_g	HC	S_d	V_d	S_g
发育阶段	L_d	1
	W_d	0.697^**	1
	H_d	0.444^**	0.484^**	1
	L_g	0.471^**	0.433^**	0.103	1
	W_g	0.380^**	0.420^**	0.048	0.892^**	1
	H_g	0.480^**	0.561^**	0.761^**	0.236^**	0.263^**	1
	HC	0.922^**	0.921^**	0.504^**	0.491^**	0.434^**	0.559^**	1
	S_d	0.913^**	0.884^**	0.440^**	0.463^**	0.420^**	0.493^**	0.975^**	1
	V_d	0.866^**	0.828^**	0.649^**	0.388^**	0.338^**	0.555^**	0.919^**	0.943^**	1
	S_g	0.377^**	0.400^**	0.034	0.944^**	0.959^**	0.188^*	0.422^**	0.418^**	0.341^**	1
稳定阶段	L_d	1
	W_d	0.667^**	1
	H_d	0.198^*	0.351^**	1
	L_g	0.300^**	0.088	-0.372^**	1
	W_g	0.166^*	0.098	-0.394^**	0.861^**	1
	H_g	0.198^*	0.351^**	1.000^**	-0.372^**	-0.394^**	1
	HC	0.076	0.147	0.296^**	0.065	0.105	0.296^**	1
	S_d	0.921^**	0.905^**	0.297^**	0.218^*	0.146	0.297^**	0.120	1
	V_d	0.931^**	0.843^**	0.233^**	0.272^**	0.184^*	0.233^**	0.084	0.974^**	1
	S_g	0.889^**	0.838^**	0.471^**	0.145	0.059	0.471^**	0.164^*	0.947^**	0.954^**	1
活化阶段	L_d	1
	W_d	0.837^**	1
	H_d	0.182^*	0.139	1
	L_g	0.580^**	0.505^**	0.056	1
	W_g	0.528^**	0.559^**	0.029	0.899^**	1
	H_g	0.206^*	0.151	0.961^**	0.199^*	0.167^*	1
	HC	0.956^**	0.961^**	0.167^*	0.565^**	0.567^**	0.186^*	1
	S_d	0.922^**	0.937^**	0.198^*	0.577^**	0.599^**	0.228^*	0.970^**	1
	V_d	0.869^**	0.893^**	0.342^**	0.546^**	0.583^**	0.367^**	0.920^**	0.974^**	1
	S_g	0.592^**	0.599^**	0.080	0.935^**	0.948^**	0.218^*	0.622^**	0.679^**	0.674^**	1

演化阶段		黏粒	粉粒	极细砂	细砂	中砂	粗砂
发育阶段	L_g	0.057	-0.227	-0.179	-0.086	0.310^*	0.176
	W_g	-0.034	-0.201	-0.159	-0.084	0.296^*	0.207
	H_g	-0.175	-0.242	0.102	0.237^*	0.165	0.127
	S_g	-0.018	-0.223	-0.168	-0.057	0.301^*	0.208
稳定阶段	L_g	-0.287	-0.421	0.007	0.121	0.490^**	0.357^**
	W_g	-0.153	-0.049	-0.198	-0.159	0.169	0.125
	H_g	0.099^*	0.392^**	-0.215	-0.295	-0.337	-0.206
	S_g	-0.252	-0.233	-0.151	-0.069	0.360^**	0.263
活化阶段	L_g	-0.028	0.096^*	0.026	0.061	-0.103	-0.194
	W_g	-0.135	-0.069	0.034	0.182^*	0.050	-0.043
	H_g	-0.032	0.081	0.018	0.093^*	-0.090	-0.236
	S_g	-0.044	0.102^*	-0.002	0.044	-0.098	-0.172

Morphology and sediment characterization of a scrub sandpile in Caragana tibetica

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 8

References 24

Related Articles 6

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	Luo Haiyan, Lai Fengbing, Chen Yujiang, Zhu Xuan. Morphological Characteristics and Spatial Distribution of Root Canal Gravel in Belikom Desert, Taklimakan [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2019, 39(6): 200-208.
[2]	Fang Chao, Yuan Ziqiang, Liu Xuewei, Pei Jiuying, Zhao Dongmin, Ye Jiansheng. Effects of Slope on Soil Properties and the Interaction of Caragana tibetica Shrub Species in Loess Plateau of China [J]. JOURNAL OF DESERT RESEARCH, 2015, 35(6): 1607-1611.
[3]	Chen Dong, Zhang Yuqing, Wu Bin, Qin Shugao, Zhang Jutao, Gao Hao. The Morphological Characteristics of Artemisia ordosica Nebkhas at Different Evolvement Stages in Southern Margin of the Mu Us Desert [J]. JOURNAL OF DESERT RESEARCH, 2015, 35(3): 565-572.
[4]	Lai Fengbing, Sun Hu, Zhang Zhanhe, Chen Shujiang, Huang Tiecheng, Mao Donglei. Morphological Characteristics and Spatial Pattern of Populus euphratica Nebkhas to the West of the Hotan River in the Taklimakan Desert [J]. JOURNAL OF DESERT RESEARCH, 2015, 35(2): 284-293.
[5]	Gao Yong, Dang Xiaohong, Yu Yi, Wang Ji, Wang Shan, Yuan Weijie, Zhang Xiwei. Nabkha Morphological Characteristics and Sand Fixing Capacity of Artemisia sphaerocphala in the Southeastern Edge of the Ulan Buh Desert [J]. JOURNAL OF DESERT RESEARCH, 2015, 35(1): 1-7.
[6]	ZHANG Jin-xin, WU Bo, ZHU Ya-juan, LU Qi, LI Yong-hua. Responses of Nitraria tangutorum Branch Morphology to Increased Rainfall in Minqin, Gansu Province [J]. JOURNAL OF DESERT RESEARCH, 2012, 32(3): 709-716.