植物措施对沙漠光伏电站土壤的改良效应

doi:10.13304/j.nykjdb.2022.0305

中国农业科技导报 ›› 2023, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (10): 182-188.DOI: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2022.0305

• 生物制造资源生态 • 上一篇

植物措施对沙漠光伏电站土壤的改良效应

贾瑞庭¹^,²(), 袁立敏¹^,², 蒙仲举³()

^1.内蒙古自治区林业科学研究院，内蒙古自治区沙地（沙漠）生态系统与生态工程重点实验室，沙地生物资源保护与培育国家林业局重点实验室，呼和浩特 010010
^2.内蒙古多伦浑善达克沙地生态系统国家定位观测研究站，内蒙古锡林郭勒 027300
^3.内蒙古农业大学沙漠治理学院，呼和浩特 010010

收稿日期:2022-04-14 接受日期:2022-06-30 出版日期:2023-10-15 发布日期:2023-10-27
通讯作者: 蒙仲举
作者简介:贾瑞庭 E-mail：jiaruiting@126.com；
基金资助:
内蒙古自治区科技成果转化项目(2020CG0066);内蒙古自治区科技攻关项目(2021GG0073);中央引导地方科技发展资金项目(20200223);国家重点研发计划项目(2016YFC0500908)

Effects of Plant Measures on Soil Improvement of Desert Photovoltaic Power Station

Ruiting JIA¹^,²(), Limin YUAN¹^,², Zhongju MENG³()

^1.Key Laboratory of State Forestry Administration on Sandy Land Biological Resources Conservation and Cultivation, Inner Mongolia Key Laboratory of Desert Ecological System, Inner Mongolia Academy of Forestry, Hohhot 010010, China
^2.Inner Mongolia Duolun Hunshandake Sand Ecosystem Research Station, Inner Mongolia Xilingol 027300, China
^3.College of Desert Control Science and Engineering, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010011, China

Received:2022-04-14 Accepted:2022-06-30 Online:2023-10-15 Published:2023-10-27
Contact: Zhongju MENG

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究植物措施对沙漠光伏电站土壤理化性质的影响，以电站内羊草、甘草、油蒿、花棒及沙障样地为研究对象，测定各样地土壤粒度、容重、孔隙度及养分指标。结果表明，研究区土壤细沙、中沙、极细沙3种主要粒级含量达90%以上，其中羊草措施<0.25 mm组分含量最高。0 —30 cm土层土壤容重为1.47~1.67 g·cm^-3，毛管孔隙度为14.53%~31.52%，均以沙障措施的土壤结构性最优。0 —30 cm土层羊草措施碱解氮、速效钾含量最高，甘草措施有机质含量最高，花棒措施速效磷含量最高。研究可为沙漠光伏电站生态保护修复提供理论依据。

关键词: 容重, 孔隙度, 养分, 光伏电站

Abstract:

In order to explore the effects of plant measures on soil physical and chemical properties of photovoltaic （PV） power station in desert， soil grain size， bulk density， porosity and nutrient indexes were determined with sample plots planted Leymus chinensis， Glycyrrhiza uralensis， Artemisia ordosica， Hedysarum scoparium and sand barrier in the power station， respectively. The results showed that the granularity content of fine sand， medium sand and extremely fine sand in the study area was over 90%， among them， the content of components <0.25 mm in Leymus chinensis measure was the highest. The soil bulk density of 0—30 cm layer ranged from 1.47 to 1.67 g·cm^-3， and the capillary porosity was 14.53%~31.52%. The soil structure of sand barrier was the best. In 0—30 cm soil layer， the contents of alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen and available potassium in Leymus chinensis， organic matter in Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch and available phosphorus in Hedysarum scoparium were the highest. The research results could provide theoretical basis for ecological protection and restoration of desert PV power stations.

Key words: bulk density, porosity, nutrients, photovoltaic power station

中图分类号:

S156

贾瑞庭, 袁立敏, 蒙仲举. 植物措施对沙漠光伏电站土壤的改良效应[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(10): 182-188.

Ruiting JIA, Limin YUAN, Zhongju MENG. Effects of Plant Measures on Soil Improvement of Desert Photovoltaic Power Station[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(10): 182-188.

图/表 6

参考文献 21

1	苗青青,石春艳,张香平.碳中和目标下的光伏发电技术[J].化工进展,2022,41(3):1125-1131.
	MIAO Q Q, SHI C Y, ZHANG X P. Photovoltaic technology under carbon neutrality [J]. Chem. Ind. Eng. Prog., 2022,41(3):1125-1131.
2	唐国栋,蒙仲举,高永,等.沙区光伏阵列对近地层风沙输移的干扰效应[J].农业工程学报,2021,37(13):101-110.
	TANG G D, MENG Z J, GAO Y, et al.. Interference effect of solar photovoltaic array on near surface aeolian sand transport in sandy areas [J]. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng., 2021, 37(13): 101-110.
3	王祯仪,汪季,高永,等.光伏电站建设对沙区生态环境的影响[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(1):191-196.
	WANG Z Y, WANG J, GAO Y, et al.. Impacts of photovoltaic power station construction on ecology environment in sandy area [J]. Bull. Soil Water Conserv., 2019,39(1):191-196.
4	袁方,张振师,卜崇峰,等.毛乌素沙地光伏电站项目区风速流场及风蚀防治措施[J].中国沙漠,2016,36(2):287-294.
	YUAN F, ZHANG Z S, BU C F, et al.. Wind speed flow field and wind erosion control measures at photovoltaic power plant project area in Mu Us sandy land [J]. J. Desert Res., 2016, 36(2): 287-294.
5	郭彩贇,韩致文,李爱敏,等.库布齐沙漠110MW光伏基地次生风沙危害的动力学机制[J].中国沙漠, 2018,38(2):225-232.
	GUO C Y, HAN Z W, LI A M, et al.. Dynamic mechanism research on the secondary blown sand disaster in the 110 MW photovoltaic arrays of the hobq desert [J]. J. Desert Res., 2018,38(2):225-232.
6	唐国栋.沙区光伏阵列地表形变规律及其动力学机制[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2021.
	TANG G D. Study on the solar photovoltaic array surface geomorphology development characteristics and dynamic mechanism in desert area [D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2021.
7	杨世荣.库布齐沙漠光伏电站风沙运动及蚀积特征研究[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2019.
	YANG S R. Study on wind-blown movement and erosion characteristics of kubuqi desert photovoltaic power station [D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2019.
8	石涛.光伏电站芦苇沙障防风固沙效益研究[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2020.
	SHI T. Study on wind-prevention and sand-fixing benefits of reed sand barrier in the photovoltaic plant [D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2020.
9	袁方.西北风沙区光伏电站施工迹地工程措施的风蚀防治效益及其机理研究[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2016.
	YUAN F. Study of the effectiveness and mechanism of wind Erosion control of engineering measures of photovoltaic constructing land in northwest sandstorm area [D]. Yangling: Northwest A&F University, 2016.
10	肖南,董治宝,南维鸽,等.1957—2014年库布齐沙漠地面风场特征[J].中国沙漠,2018,38(3):628-636.
	XIAO N, DONG Z B, NAN W G, et al.. Characteristics of surface wind field in the Hobq desert from 1957 to 2014 [J]. J. Desert Res., 2018,38(3):628-636.
11	高广磊,丁国栋,赵媛媛,等.生物结皮发育对毛乌素沙地土壤粒度特征的影响[J].农业机械学报,2014,45(1):115-120.
	GAO G L, DING G D, ZHAO Y Y, et al.. Effects of biological soil crusts on soil particle size characteristics in Mu US Sandland [J]. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng., 2014,45(1):115-120.
12	鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].3版. 北京:中国农业出版社,2000:1-495.
13	黄博.毛乌素沙地东南缘典型植物群落下土壤理化性质分析[D].西安:西安科技大学,2020.
	HUANG B. Analysis of soil physical and chemical properties under typical plant communities in the southeast of mu us sandy land [D]. Xi’an: Xi’an University of Science and Technology, 2020.
14	沙国良,魏天兴,陈宇轩,等.黄土高原丘陵区典型植物群落土壤粒径分布特征[J].干旱区地理,2022, 45(4):1224 -1234.
	SHA G L, WEI T X, CHEN Y X, et al.. Characteristics of soil particle size distribution of typical plant communities on the hilly areas of Loess Plateau [J]. Arid Land Geogr., 2022, 45(4):1224 -1234 .
15	杨世荣,蒙仲举,党晓宏,等.库布齐沙漠生态光伏电站不同覆盖类型下土壤粒度特征[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(1):112-118.
	YANG S R, MENG Z J, DANG X H, et al.. Grain size characteristics of surface sediments of Eco-Photovoltaic power station in Kubuqi desert [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2020,27(1):112-118.
16	毛丽,苏志珠,王国玲,等.毛乌素沙地不同土地利用类型的土壤粒度及有机质特征[J].干旱区研究,2019,36(3):589-598.
	MAO L, SU Z Z, WANG G L, et al.. Soil particle size and organic matter content of different land use types in the Mu Us sandland [J]. Arid Zone Res., 2019,36(3):589-598.
17	陈闻,杨晶晶,袁媛,等.毛乌素沙地人工固沙植被的土壤养分效应[J].干旱区研究,2020,37(6):1447-1456.
	CHEN W, YANG J J, YUAN Y, et al.. Effects of artificial sand-fixing vegetation on soil nutrients in Mu Us sandy land [J]. Arid Zone Res., 2020,37(6):1447-1456.
18	程洪,谢涛,唐春,等.植物根系力学与固土作用机理研究综述[J].水土保持通报,2006,26(1):97-102.
	CHENG H, XIE T, TANG C, et al.. Overview of mechanism of plant roots improving soil reinforcement and slope stabilization [J]. Bull. Soil Water Conserv., 2006, 26(1):97-102.
19	徐永刚,马强,周桦,等.秸秆还田与深松对土壤理化性状和玉米产量的影响[J].土壤通报,2015,46(2):428-432.
	XU Y G, MA Q, ZHOU Y, et al.. Effects of straw returning and deep loosening on soil physical and chemical properties and maize yields [J]. Soil Bull.,2015,46(2):428-432.
20	何丽娟,蒙仲举,党晓宏,等.种植甘草对风沙土机械组成与养分的影响[J].中国农业科技导报,2022,24(2):169-176.
	HE L J, MENG Z J, DANG X H, et al.. Effects of planting glycyrrhiza uralensis on mechanical composition and nutrients of aeolian sandy soil [J]. J. Agric. Sci. Technol.,2022,24(2):169-176.
21	施明,王锐,孙权,等.腾格里沙漠边缘区植被恢复与土壤养分变化研究[J].水土保持通报,2013,33(6):107-111.
	SHI M, WANG R, SUN Q, et al.. Vegetation restoration and soil nutrient changes in edge of tengger desert [J]. Bull. Soil Water Conserv., 2013,33(6):107-111.

经营措施 Business measure	种植时间 Planting time	盖度 Coverage/%	株高 Plant height/cm	冠幅 Crown width/（cm×cm）	其他物种 Other plant species	结皮厚度 Soil crust/cm
羊草 Leymus chinensis	2016	8	63			1.46
甘草 Glycyrrhiza uralensis	2016	40	11		雾滨黎、沙米 Bassia dasyphylla，Agriophyllum squarrosum	1.32
油蒿 Artemisia ordosica	2016	6	145	150×132	沙米Agriophyllum squarrosum
花棒 Hedysarum scoparium	2016	75	131	91×80	杨柴、柠条、沙打旺Corethrodendron fruticosum var，Caragana korshinskii，Astragalus laxmannii	1.27
沙障 Sand barrier	2019

经营措施 Business measure	种植时间 Planting time	盖度 Coverage/%	株高 Plant height/cm	冠幅 Crown width/（cm×cm）	其他物种 Other plant species	结皮厚度 Soil crust/cm
羊草 Leymus chinensis	2016	8	63			1.46
甘草 Glycyrrhiza uralensis	2016	40	11		雾滨黎、沙米 Bassia dasyphylla，Agriophyllum squarrosum	1.32
油蒿 Artemisia ordosica	2016	6	145	150×132	沙米Agriophyllum squarrosum
花棒 Hedysarum scoparium	2016	75	131	91×80	杨柴、柠条、沙打旺Corethrodendron fruticosum var，Caragana korshinskii，Astragalus laxmannii	1.27
沙障 Sand barrier	2019

经营措施 Business measures	极粗沙 Very coarse sand	粗沙 Coarse sand	中沙 Medium sand	细沙 Fine sand	极细沙 Very finesand	黏粉粒 Sticky powder
羊草 Leymus chinensis	0.23±0.05 c	0.76±0.06 c	1.96±0.01 e	76.04±0.19 d	18.30±0.21 a	2.71±0.06 b
甘草 Glycyrrhiza uralensis	1.03±0.04 a	5.57±0.03 a	7.86 ±0.19 d	72.37±0.13 e	9.96±0.14 b	3.22±0.01 a
油蒿 Artemisia ordosica	0.00±0.00 d	0.01±0.01 d	9.78±0.90 c	85.64±0.86 a	4.31±0.04 c	0.27±0.03 d
花棒 Hedysarum scoparium	0.32±0.01 b	0.96±0.01 b	11.39±0.97 b	82.27±0.56 c	3.53±0.31 d	1.53±0.14 c
沙障 Sand barrier	0.00±0.00 d	0.01±0.00 d	13.89±0.22 a	83.46±0.22 b	2.47±0.16 e	0.17±0.03 d

经营措施 Business measures	极粗沙 Very coarse sand	粗沙 Coarse sand	中沙 Medium sand	细沙 Fine sand	极细沙 Very finesand	黏粉粒 Sticky powder
羊草 Leymus chinensis	0.23±0.05 c	0.76±0.06 c	1.96±0.01 e	76.04±0.19 d	18.30±0.21 a	2.71±0.06 b
甘草 Glycyrrhiza uralensis	1.03±0.04 a	5.57±0.03 a	7.86 ±0.19 d	72.37±0.13 e	9.96±0.14 b	3.22±0.01 a
油蒿 Artemisia ordosica	0.00±0.00 d	0.01±0.01 d	9.78±0.90 c	85.64±0.86 a	4.31±0.04 c	0.27±0.03 d
花棒 Hedysarum scoparium	0.32±0.01 b	0.96±0.01 b	11.39±0.97 b	82.27±0.56 c	3.53±0.31 d	1.53±0.14 c
沙障 Sand barrier	0.00±0.00 d	0.01±0.00 d	13.89±0.22 a	83.46±0.22 b	2.47±0.16 e	0.17±0.03 d

土层深度 Soil depth/cm	羊草 Leymus chinensis	甘草 Glycyrrhiza uralensis	油蒿 Artemisia ordosica	花棒 Hedysarm scopariu	沙障 Sand barrier
0—5	1.61 a	1.57 a	1.57 a	1.61 a	1.56 a
5—10	1.66 a	1.56 b	1.54 b	1.57 b	1.47 c
10—20	1.62 a	1.63 a	1.65 a	1.59 ab	1.51 b
20—30	1.59 a	1.59 a	1.67 a	1.58 a	1.57 a

植物措施对沙漠光伏电站土壤的改良效应

Effects of Plant Measures on Soil Improvement of Desert Photovoltaic Power Station

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 21

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	张晨阳, 徐明岗, 王斐, 李然, 孙楠. 施用有机肥对我国大豆产量及土壤养分的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(8): 148-156.
[2]	杜彩艳, 鲁海燕, 熊艳竹, 孙曦, 孙秀梅, 普继雄, 张乃明. 连续两年沼液与化肥配施对桃生长及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(8): 165-175.
[3]	肖锐, 谭璐, 吴亮, 张皓, 郭佳源, 杨海君. 镉胁迫下地肤根际与非根际土壤微生物群落结构及多样性[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(8): 203-215.
[4]	刘宏元, 周志花, 赵光昕, 王艳君, 王娜娜. 改性纤维素对旱稻萌发和旱地土壤性质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(5): 168-175.
[5]	姚佳, 刘加欣, 苏焱, 苏小娟. 烟杆炭配施氮肥对玉米苗期生长及土壤特性的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(3): 140-151.
[6]	聂婷婷, 董乙强, 杨合龙, 阿斯太肯·居力海提, 周时杰, 安沙舟. 围栏封育对蒿类荒漠植物-土壤碳氮磷化学计量特征的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(3): 178-187.
[7]	郑云珠, 孙树臣. 秸秆生物炭和秸秆对麦玉轮作系统土壤养分及作物产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(2): 152-162.
[8]	卢闯, 胡海棠, 覃苑, 淮贺举, 李存军. 基于无人机多光谱影像的春玉米田管理分区研究[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(9): 106-115.
[9]	魏全全, 高英, 芶久兰, 张萌, 饶勇, 杨斌, 凡迪, 冯文豪, 肖华贵. 播种量和播种方式对冬油菜养分吸收利用及产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(8): 182-191.
[10]	陈奎元, 刘卉, 丁伟. 草甘膦对大豆田土壤养分及其功能酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(5): 180-188.
[11]	何振嘉, 范王涛, 杜宜春, 王启龙. 基于土体有机重构的水肥耦合对土壤理化性质和水稻产量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(3): 176-185.
[12]	何丽娟, 蒙仲举, 党晓宏, 吕涛. 种植甘草对风沙土机械组成与养分的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(2): 169-176.
[13]	刘著文, 杨龙飞, 刘茂林, 贾国涛, 姚倩, 马一琼, 崔廷, 杨欣玲, 陈洋, 程良琨. 不同土壤改良剂对土壤养分及烤烟内在品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(11): 190-198.
[14]	柳渊博, 王静, 朱学杰, 蒋伟峰, 刘天, 张锦中, 李耀鑫, 符云鹏. 不同水肥管理模式对烤烟养分积累及烟叶品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2021, 23(9): 193-201.
[15]	杨梦宇1,张琦1*,袁振杨1,陈俊1,闫利2. 温室生草对南疆桃叶片、果实质量的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2021, 23(3): 178-185.