Soil water infiltration characteristics and model suitability of plantations in the Qilian Mountains

doi:10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2025.00347

Journal of Desert Research ›› 2026, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (1): 130-139.DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2025.00347

Soil water infiltration characteristics and model suitability of plantations in the Qilian Mountains

Yuan Gao¹^,²^,³(), Longfei Chen³, Zhibin He³(), Yousan Li¹, Shuang Li²

^1.Observation Station of Subalpine Ecology Systems in the Middle Qilian Mountains，Xining 810000，China
^2.School of Humanities，Shaanxi University of Technology，Hanzhong 723001，Shaanxi，China
^3.Linze Inland River Basin Research Station，Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources，Chinese Academy of Sciences，Lanzhou 730000，China

Received:2025-11-23 Revised:2025-12-25 Online:2026-01-20 Published:2026-03-09
Contact: Zhibin He

Abstract

Abstract:

To reveal the differences in soil water infiltration characteristics and driving mechanisms under various sites of plantation in the Qilian Mountains， five sample plots were selected， namely Biandukou （BDK）， Dachaigou North （DCGB）， Dachaigou South （DCGN）， Shibalipu （SBLP）， and Dahuangshan （DHS）. Meanwhile， field investigations and laboratory ring-infiltrometer experiments were conducted， coupled with comprehensive analyses of soil physicochemical properties. Furthermore， three infiltration models were employed to simulate and evaluate the applicability for each plot. The results demonstrated that：（1） The soil infiltration rates across all plots followed a consistent pattern： an initial rapid decay， followed by a fluctuating decrease， and final stabilization. The stable infiltration rates ranked as DHS （5.16 mm·min^-1） > SBLP （2.4 mm·min^-1） >DCGN （2.18 mm·min^-1）> BDK （1.63 mm·min^-1）> DCGB （1.24 mm·min^-1）. The total cumulative infiltration at DHS was 3.6 times that of DCGB. （2） Soil bulk density， total porosity， soil organic carbon， and sand content were identified as the core driving factors influencing infiltration performance （P<0.01）. Stand structure （stand age， planting density） and site characteristics （land use history， disturbance intensity） jointly regulated the spatial pattern of infiltration by changing the connectivity of soil pores. （3） Compared with the Philip and Horton model， the Kostiakov model had the highest simulation accuracy for soil water infiltration across all plots （R²≥0.89）， and was more suitable for describing the soil water infiltration characteristics in the study area. The study aims to provide a theoretical foundation and practical guidance for the scientific planning of “water-based afforestation” and the optimization of eco-hydrological functions for plantations in the Qilian Mountains.

Key words: Qilian Mountains, plantation, stand conditions, soil water infiltration, soil properties

CLC Number:

Yuan Gao, Longfei Chen, Zhibin He, Yousan Li, Shuang Li. Soil water infiltration characteristics and model suitability of plantations in the Qilian Mountains[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2026, 46(1): 130-139.

Figures/Tables 7

References 43

[1]	Bogena H R， Huisman J A， Baatz R，et al.Accuracy of the cosmic-ray soil water content probe in humid forest ecosystems：the worst case scenario［J］.Water Resources Research，2013，49（9）：5778-5791.
[2]	Zhao M， Geruo A， Zhang J E，et al.Ecological restoration impact on total terrestrial water storage［J］.Nature Sustainability，2021，4（1）：56-62.
[3]	Gao Y， He Z B， Zhu X，et al.Light thinning can improve soil water availability and water holding capacity of plantations in alpine mountains［J］.Frontiers in Plant Science，2022，13：1032057.
[4]	Mongil-Manso J， Jiménez-Ballesta R， Navarro-Hevia J，et al.Soil infiltration rates in mediterranean mountain areas：relationship with soil properties and different land-use［J］.European Journal of Forest Research，2025，144（2）：295-309.
[5]	杨梦格，邓莹莹，雷震，等.桂北地区不同林龄杉木人工林土壤基质入渗变化及影响因素［J］.应用生态学报，2024，35（4）：1007-1015.
[6]	尹霞，李冬梅，李易，等.灌丛化对高寒草甸土壤水力性质的影响［J］.水土保持学报，2022，36（5）：121-129.
[7]	张润霞，赵学勇，李晶，等.干旱荒漠区土地利用方式快速转变对土壤入渗性能的影响［J］.中国沙漠，2020，40（4）：146-153.
[8]	Luke S H， Luckai N J， Burke J M，et al.Riparian areas in the Canadian boreal forest and linkages with water quality in streams［J］.Environmental Reviews，2007，15：79-97.
[9]	Holzman M， Srivastava A， Rivas R，et al.Evaluating the relationship between vegetation status and soil moisture in semi-arid woodlands，Central Australia，using daily thermal，vegetation index，and reflectance data［J］.Remote Sensing，2025，17（4）：29-36.
[10]	Qiu D X， Xu R R， Gao P，et al.Effect of vegetation restoration type and topography on soil water storage and infiltration capacity in the Loess Plateau，China［J］.Catena，2024，241：108079.
[11]	郭忠升，邵明安.半干旱区人工林地土壤入渗过程分析［J］.土壤学报，2009，46（5）：953-958.
[12]	喻阳华，杨苏茂.水源涵养林结构配置研究进展［J］.世界林业研究，2016，29（4）：19-24.
[13]	孙程鹏，赵文智.土地利用对河西走廊荒漠绿洲区土壤入渗的影响［J］.中国沙漠，2021，41（6）：148-156.
[14]	陈龙飞.祁连山区典型植被土壤有机碳对气候变化及人为干扰的响应机制［D］.北京：中国科学院大学，2016.
[15]	朱喜，何志斌，杜军，等.间伐对祁连山青海云杉人工林土壤水分的影响［J］.林业科学研究，2015，28（1）：55-60.
[16]	何芳兰，徐先英，尉秋实，等.祁连山青海云杉人工林与天然林群落结构特征及物种多样性比较研究［J］.西北林学院学报，2016，31（5）：1-7.
[17]	Chen L F， He Z B， Wu X R，et al.Linkages between soil respiration and microbial communities following afforestation of alpine grasslands in the northeastern Tibetan Plateau［J］.Applied Soil Ecology，2021，161：103882.
[18]	成彩霞，张学龙，刘占波，等.祁连山西水林区土壤水分物理性质特征分析［J］.内蒙古农业大学学报（自然科学版），2007，2（4）：33-38.
[19]	杨文娟，王彦辉，赵永宏.祁连山区青海云杉林空间分布特征及其水文影响［M］.北京：科学出版社，2020.
[20]	姜林，李珊珊，耿增超，等.祁连山西水林区土壤发生特性及系统分类［J］.生态学杂志，2013，32（5）：1118-1126.
[21]	Bradstreet R B.Kjeldahl method for organic nitrogen［J］.Analytical Chemistry，1954，26（1）：185-187.
[22]	Robinson J B D.Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility：A Handbook of Methods［M］.London，UK：Cambridge University Press，1994.
[23]	阿茹·苏里坦，常顺利，张毓涛.天山林区不同群落土壤水分入渗特性的对比分析与模拟［J］.生态学报，2019，39（24）：9111-9118.
[24]	中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 岩土工程监测规范：［S］.北京：中国建筑工业出版社，2014.
[25]	Horton R E.An approach toward a physical interpretation of infiltration capacity［J］.Soil science Society of America Proceedings，1940，5（3）：399-417.
[26]	Kostiakov A N.On the dynamics of the coefficient of water-percolation in soils and on the necessity of studying it from a dynamic point of view for purposes of amelioration［J］.Trans 6th Cong International Soil Science，Russian Part A，1932：17-21.
[27]	陈力，顾迎春，杨柳，等.土壤大孔隙流研究进展与展望［J/OL］.农业环境科学学报，1-14［2025-12-21］..
[28]	Philip J R.The theory of infiltration：4.sorptivity and algebraic infiltration equations［J］.Soil Science，1957，84（3）：257-264.
[29]	Zhu Y， Sun L， Jamshidi A H，et al.Effect of forest conversion on soil water infiltration in the Dabie Mountainous area，China［J］.Journal of Hydrology Regional Studies，2025，59：102351.
[30]	徐建明.土壤学［M］.北京：中国农业出版社，2019.
[31]	丁全定，刘锦乾，付作霖，等.白龙江上游主要灌丛土壤入渗性能分异性［J］.广西林业科学，2017，46（3）：303-307.
[32]	Jia Z J， Weng B S， Yan D H，et al.The effects of different factors on soil water infiltration properties in High Mountain Asia：a meta-analysis［J］.Catena，2024，234：107583.
[33]	Beven K， Germann P.Macropores and water flow in soils［J］.Water Resources Research，1982，18（5）：1311-1325.
[34]	李卓，刘永红，杨勤.土壤水分入渗影响机制研究综述［J］.灌溉排水学报，2011，30（5）：124-130.
[35]	王迪，赵锦梅，雷隆举，等.祁连山东段高寒植被类型对土壤理化特征的影响［J］.水土保持通报，2021，41（1）：35-40.
[36]	安韶山，胡洋，王宝荣.黄土高原植被恢复中土壤有机碳稳定机制研究进展［J］.应用生态学报，2024，35（9）：2413-2422.
[37]	王峰，石辉.林地土壤性质空间变异性与土壤入渗过程的研究［J］.水土保持通报，2007，2（1）：15-19.
[38]	Cui Z， Wu G L， Huang Z，et al.Fine roots determine soil infiltration potential than soil water content in semi-arid grassland soils［J］.Journal of Hydrology，2019，578：12403.
[39]	Zhang Y H， Niu J Z， Zhang M X，et al.Interaction between plant roots and soil water flow in response to preferential flow paths in northern China［J］.Land Degradation Development，2017，28（2）：648-663.
[40]	周宏.祁连山浅山区青海云杉人工林与天然林水文过程研究评述［J］.林业与环境科学，2024，40（3）：1-8.
[41]	朱喜，何志斌，赵文智，等.一种基于土壤水分的山区人工林抚育管理方法：CN112868489B［P/OL］.2023-08-25.
[42]	刘效东，张卫强，冯英杰，等.森林生态系统水源涵养功能研究进展与展望［J］.生态学杂志，2022，41（4）：784-791.
[43]	吕一河，胡健，孙飞翔，等.水源涵养与水文调节：和而不同的陆地生态系统水文服务［J］.生态学报，2015，35（15）：5191-5196.

样地	群落类型	坡向	海拔/m	坡度/（°）	土地利用历史背景	林龄 /a	林分密度/（株·hm^-2）	胸径/cm	树高 /m
扁都口（BDK）	青海云杉纯林	半阳坡	2 830	20.2	山麓草地围栏人工林	12	2 866±8	3.8±0.2	1.49±0.8
打柴沟北（DCGB）	青海云杉×沙棘	阳坡	2 776	23.4	阳坡草地围栏后种植人工林	13	1 833±11	3.3±0.3	1.38±0.2
打柴沟南（DCGN）	青海云杉纯林	半阳坡	2 748	19.2	阴坡草地围栏后种植人工林	12	1 756±19	2.74±0.4	1.4±0.2
十八里铺（SBLP）	青海云杉×马尾松	半阳坡	2 680	27.6	退耕后种植人工林	8	1 342±8	2.9±0.2	1.92±0.65
大黄山（DHS）	青海云杉纯林	阳坡	2 841	16.2	自然保护区，封禁后人工林	46	689±16	9.9±0.23	11.9±1.24

样地	群落类型	坡向	海拔/m	坡度/（°）	土地利用历史背景	林龄 /a	林分密度/（株·hm^-2）	胸径/cm	树高 /m
扁都口（BDK）	青海云杉纯林	半阳坡	2 830	20.2	山麓草地围栏人工林	12	2 866±8	3.8±0.2	1.49±0.8
打柴沟北（DCGB）	青海云杉×沙棘	阳坡	2 776	23.4	阳坡草地围栏后种植人工林	13	1 833±11	3.3±0.3	1.38±0.2
打柴沟南（DCGN）	青海云杉纯林	半阳坡	2 748	19.2	阴坡草地围栏后种植人工林	12	1 756±19	2.74±0.4	1.4±0.2
十八里铺（SBLP）	青海云杉×马尾松	半阳坡	2 680	27.6	退耕后种植人工林	8	1 342±8	2.9±0.2	1.92±0.65
大黄山（DHS）	青海云杉纯林	阳坡	2 841	16.2	自然保护区，封禁后人工林	46	689±16	9.9±0.23	11.9±1.24

样地	土壤深度/cm	容重/（g·cm^-3）	pH	土壤有机质/（g·kg^-1）	土壤全氮/（g·kg^-1）	初始含水量/%	总孔隙度/%	毛管孔隙度/%	土壤质地/%
样地	土壤深度/cm	容重/（g·cm^-3）	pH	土壤有机质/（g·kg^-1）	土壤全氮/（g·kg^-1）	初始含水量/%	总孔隙度/%	毛管孔隙度/%	黏粒	粉粒	砂粒
扁都口（BDK）	0~10	0.96	8.08	92.83	5.84	14.77	58.33	55.23	14.04	67.50	18.47
	10~20	1.01	8.38	67.35	4.20	20.52	59.01	56.51	9.43	65.24	25.33
	20~40	1.11	8.49	51.18	3.17	20.12	57.36	54.64	15.28	69.26	15.46
	40~60	1.12	8.56	38.14	2.15	17.80	56.67	52.73	17.23	68.47	14.30
	60~80	1.14	8.81	29.17	1.67	17.20	55.33	52.43	18.62	70.24	11.14
打柴沟北(DCGB)	0~10	1.26	8.62	19.11	1.15	23.02	50.33	48.35	11.56	61.50	26.94
	10~20	1.26	8.97	17.34	0.99	22.38	47.33	45.56	14.35	66.27	19.38
	20~40	1.33	9.38	11.21	0.65	19.46	40.32	38.23	16.27	64.89	18.84
	40~60	1.35	9.38	8.75	0.49	19.40	44.36	42.69	18.42	64.76	16.83
	60~80	1.47	9.53	4.95	0.29	13.45	36.33	34.90	19.12	66.91	13.97
打柴沟南(DCGN)	0~10	1.04	8.19	58.41	3.56	23.55	55.64	53.56	6.80	54.13	39.06
	10~20	1.13	8.31	45.10	2.75	25.72	55.06	54.59	8.88	59.72	31.41
	20~40	1.21	8.51	33.41	1.99	21.85	53.67	51.95	10.35	62.27	27.37
	40~60	1.26	8.82	18.52	1.14	10.82	50.32	47.62	12.08	63.01	24.91
	60~80	1.33	9.14	9.91	0.58	8.16	50.43	48.06	13.51	61.87	24.63
十八里铺(SBLP)	0~10	1.03	8.26	52.13	4.62	12.36	51.63	48.83	11.36	65.25	23.39
	10~20	1.09	8.38	46.32	3.02	18.53	49.20	46.51	18.34	69.36	12.30
	20~40	1.28	8.75	20.18	2.31	17.81	19.06	48.85	20.68	68.57	10.75
	40~60	1.39	9.02	16.53	2.16	16.35	46.38	44.96	19.28	68.46	12.26
	60~80	1.56	9.16	14.46	0.91	11.76	40.94	36.28	19.36	72.29	8.35
大黄山(DHS)	0~10	0.87	7.55	63.03	4.02	17.42	62.50	58.16	14.26	41.48	44.26
	10~20	0.93	7.90	53.57	3.61	18.83	60.76	58.34	14.11	40.60	45.29
	20~40	0.94	7.95	46.56	3.37	18.08	63.76	55.81	13.53	40.33	46.14
	40~60	0.92	7.23	39.26	2.80	13.28	66.10	53.04	13.91	40.39	45.70
	60~80	0.99	8.49	30.98	2.25	10.26	57.56	51.68	15.77	38.58	45.65

样地	土壤深度/cm	容重/（g·cm^-3）	pH	土壤有机质/（g·kg^-1）	土壤全氮/（g·kg^-1）	初始含水量/%	总孔隙度/%	毛管孔隙度/%	土壤质地/%
样地	土壤深度/cm	容重/（g·cm^-3）	pH	土壤有机质/（g·kg^-1）	土壤全氮/（g·kg^-1）	初始含水量/%	总孔隙度/%	毛管孔隙度/%	黏粒	粉粒	砂粒
扁都口（BDK）	0~10	0.96	8.08	92.83	5.84	14.77	58.33	55.23	14.04	67.50	18.47
	10~20	1.01	8.38	67.35	4.20	20.52	59.01	56.51	9.43	65.24	25.33
	20~40	1.11	8.49	51.18	3.17	20.12	57.36	54.64	15.28	69.26	15.46
	40~60	1.12	8.56	38.14	2.15	17.80	56.67	52.73	17.23	68.47	14.30
	60~80	1.14	8.81	29.17	1.67	17.20	55.33	52.43	18.62	70.24	11.14
打柴沟北(DCGB)	0~10	1.26	8.62	19.11	1.15	23.02	50.33	48.35	11.56	61.50	26.94
	10~20	1.26	8.97	17.34	0.99	22.38	47.33	45.56	14.35	66.27	19.38
	20~40	1.33	9.38	11.21	0.65	19.46	40.32	38.23	16.27	64.89	18.84
	40~60	1.35	9.38	8.75	0.49	19.40	44.36	42.69	18.42	64.76	16.83
	60~80	1.47	9.53	4.95	0.29	13.45	36.33	34.90	19.12	66.91	13.97
打柴沟南(DCGN)	0~10	1.04	8.19	58.41	3.56	23.55	55.64	53.56	6.80	54.13	39.06
	10~20	1.13	8.31	45.10	2.75	25.72	55.06	54.59	8.88	59.72	31.41
	20~40	1.21	8.51	33.41	1.99	21.85	53.67	51.95	10.35	62.27	27.37
	40~60	1.26	8.82	18.52	1.14	10.82	50.32	47.62	12.08	63.01	24.91
	60~80	1.33	9.14	9.91	0.58	8.16	50.43	48.06	13.51	61.87	24.63
十八里铺(SBLP)	0~10	1.03	8.26	52.13	4.62	12.36	51.63	48.83	11.36	65.25	23.39
	10~20	1.09	8.38	46.32	3.02	18.53	49.20	46.51	18.34	69.36	12.30
	20~40	1.28	8.75	20.18	2.31	17.81	19.06	48.85	20.68	68.57	10.75
	40~60	1.39	9.02	16.53	2.16	16.35	46.38	44.96	19.28	68.46	12.26
	60~80	1.56	9.16	14.46	0.91	11.76	40.94	36.28	19.36	72.29	8.35
大黄山(DHS)	0~10	0.87	7.55	63.03	4.02	17.42	62.50	58.16	14.26	41.48	44.26
	10~20	0.93	7.90	53.57	3.61	18.83	60.76	58.34	14.11	40.60	45.29
	20~40	0.94	7.95	46.56	3.37	18.08	63.76	55.81	13.53	40.33	46.14
	40~60	0.92	7.23	39.26	2.80	13.28	66.10	53.04	13.91	40.39	45.70
	60~80	0.99	8.49	30.98	2.25	10.26	57.56	51.68	15.77	38.58	45.65

地点	Philip模型			Kostiakov模型			Horton模型
地点	I_s	k	R²	A	B	R²	I_s	I_i-I_s	c	R²
扁都口（BDK）	1.63	7.48	0.76	10.84	0.52	0.94	1.63	8.20	0.12	0.88
打柴沟北（DCGB）	1.24	3.70	0.73	6.26	0.52	0.89	1.24	4.71	0.14	0.72
打柴沟南（DCGN）	2.18	8.43	0.81	12.46	0.48	0.97	2.18	7.46	0.11	0.82
十八里铺（SBLP）	2.40	10.05	0.83	13.77	0.43	0.96	2.40	8.44	0.08	0.91
大黄山（DHS）	5.16	11.42	0.68	19.64	0.41	0.92	5.16	10.50	0.12	0.88

Soil water infiltration characteristics and model suitability of plantations in the Qilian Mountains

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 43

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

影响因子	初始入渗率	稳定入渗率	平均入渗率
容重	-0.72^**	-0.68^**	-0.70^**
pH	-0.35^*	-0.30^*	-0.33^*
土壤有机碳	0.65^**	0.60^**	0.63^**
土壤全氮	0.58^**	0.53^**	0.56^**
初始含水量	-0.28^*	-0.25^*	-0.27^*
总孔隙度	0.63^**	0.57^**	0.60^**
毛管孔隙度	0.25	0.20	0.23
黏粒	-0.60^**	-0.55^**	-0.58^**
粉粒	-0.45^*	-0.40^*	-0.43^*
砂粒	0.55^**	0.50^**	0.53^**

[1]	Chuan Wang, Rui He, Wenzhi Zhao, Yongyong Zhang. Response of vegetation ecological quality to temperature and precipitation in the Qilian Mountains in 2001-2024 [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2026, 46(1): 121-129.
[2]	Ziting Wang, Jiliang Liu, Yongzhong Luo, Quanlin Ma, Xiaogan Zhou, Xin Luo, Wenzhen Zong. Long-*term effects of Haloxylon ammodendron* plantations on topsoil carbon， nitrogen， phosphorus stoichiometry and stocks in the desert-oasis ecotone** [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(5): 241-252.
[3]	Zongxi Che, Chengbing Gao, Zonghuan Che, Ling Wang, Tong Zhu, Hua Di, Junhui Li. Characteristics of water conservation function of Picea crassifolia forest in the Qilian Mountains [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(5): 301-307.
[4]	Xiaogan Zhou, Yongzhong Luo, Quanlin Ma, Jiliang Liu, Jialong Ren, Ziting Wang, Qihan Yan, Chang Qin, Jiaqi Zhai. Long-term effects of the introduction of Haloxylon ammodendron on desert soil characteristics [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(5): 68-77.
[5]	Wenjie Cao, Yun Chen, Yuqiang Li, Xuyang Wang, Xiangwen Gong, Zichen Guo. Impact of long-term enclosure of severely desertified grasslands on plant communities in the Horqin Sandy Land [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(4): 262-271.
[6]	Jiliang Liu, Yilin Feng, Yongzhen Wang, Chengchen Pan, Tianling Bao, Jialong Ren, Wenzhi Zhao. Effects of restoration of artificial sand-fixing vegetation on the diversity of reptiles and mammals in the middle reaches of the Heihe River Basin [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(6): 167-177.
[7]	Bingbing Chen, Yingchun Ge, Zhonghang Song, Xiangnan Wu, Yu Ai, Ying Yang, Shengtang Wang, Yushuo Liu. Spatio-temporal evolution and driving forces of ecological quality in Qilian Mountains [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(6): 258-267.
[8]	Xiaoyan Li, Guangchao Cao, Zongyan Chen, Jie Yuan, Ziting Sun, Jianting Tang. Spatial-temporal characteristics and influencing factors of land surface temperature on the southern slope of Qilian Mountains from 2001 to 2022 [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(5): 84-94.
[9]	Fangjiao An, Yongzhong Su, Ziru Niu, Tingna Liu. Evolution of soil nematode community after establishment of Haloxylon ammodendron plantations in an arid desert-oasis ecotone [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(2): 133-142.
[10]	Hongling Yang, Bo Yao, Yongzhong Su, Yulin Li. Distribution pattern of soil physical and chemical properties of plantation forest in northern agro-pastoral ecotone [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(2): 283-294.
[11]	Xia Li, Bao Yang. Dynamic downscaling simulation of temperature and precipitation in the Qilian Mountains and its surrounding areas [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(1): 61-74.
[12]	Xiaoxia Sun, Yilin Feng, Yongzhen Wang, Weicheng Luo, Jingyi Yang, Hongliang Shi, Jiliang Liu. Response of ground beetle diversity to coal mine restoration in Dongdahe forest area of the Qilian Mountains [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2023, 43(6): 176-186.
[13]	Chenyu An, Rende Wang, Haitao Zhou, Qing Li, Xinjun Zhang, Chunping Chang, Zhongling Guo, Jifeng Li. Effect of no-tillage in autumn on farmland wind erosion and soil properties in Bashang district [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2022, 42(2): 95-103.
[14]	Haohai Su, Xiaofang Zhang, Yalin Niu, Hairu Wang, Jianjun Cao. Effects of altitude on leaf ecological stoichiometry of Stellera chamaejasme in the Qilian Mountains [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2021, 41(6): 205-212.
[15]	Fangjiao An, Yongzhong Su, Ziru Niu, Tingna Liu. Effects of fine particulate matter input on soil carbon and nitrogen accumulation after establishment of Haloxylon ammodendron plantations on shifting sand dunes in arid area [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2021, 41(5): 147-156.