典型草原矿区排土场边坡不同治理模式的径流产沙特征

doi:10.13304/j.nykjdb.2023.0906

中国农业科技导报 ›› 2025, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (6): 184-194.DOI: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2023.0906

• 生物制造资源生态 • 上一篇

典型草原矿区排土场边坡不同治理模式的径流产沙特征

史鹏莉¹^,²^,³(), 刘艳萍²^,³, 郭建英²^,³(), 杨振奇²^,³, 范进昇⁴

^1.内蒙古农业大学沙漠治理学院，呼和浩特 010018
^2.中国水利水电科学研究院，内蒙古阴山北麓荒漠草原生态水文野外科学观测研究站，北京 100383
^3.水利部牧区水利科学研究所，呼和浩特 010020
^4.内蒙古锡林浩特市给排水有限责任公司，内蒙古锡林浩特 026000

收稿日期:2023-12-09 接受日期:2024-03-28 出版日期:2025-06-15 发布日期:2025-06-23
通讯作者: 郭建英
作者简介:史鹏莉 E-mail：657988571@qq.com；
基金资助:
内蒙古自治区科技兴蒙行动重点专项(2022EEDSKJXM005);内蒙古自治区科技重大专项(2020ZD0020)

Characteristics of Runoff and Sediment Yield of Different Treatment Modes of Dump Slope in Typical Grassland Mining Area

Pengli SHI¹^,²^,³(), Yanping LIU²^,³, Jianying GUO²^,³(), Zhenqi YANG²^,³, Jinsheng FAN⁴

^1.School of Desert Control，Inner Mongolia Agricultural University，Hohhot 010018，China
^2.Field Scientific Observation and Research Station of Desert Grassland Ecology and Hydrology at the North Foot of Yinshan Mountain in Inner Mongolia，China Academy of Water Resources and Hydropower，Beijing 100383，China
^3.Institute of Water Resources for Pastoral Area，Ministry of Water Resources，Hohhot 010020，China
^4.Inner Mongolia Xilinhot City Water Supply and Drainage Limited Liability Company，Inner Mongolia Xilinhot 026000，China

Received:2023-12-09 Accepted:2024-03-28 Online:2025-06-15 Published:2025-06-23
Contact: Jianying GUO

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为分析典型草原矿区排土场边坡不同治理模式的径流和产沙特征，以锡林郭勒盟贺斯格乌拉南露天煤矿为研究对象，设置混草（HC）、混草+灌木（HCG）、混草+菱形网格整地（HCS）、混草+品字形整地（HCP）、混草+行带状整地（HCH）、裸坡（CK）6种处理，运用K-均值聚类法，划分研究区降雨类型，结合径流小区2021—2023年15场天然降雨的径流、产沙数据，分析不同治理模式的产流产沙特征及其对降雨的响应。结果表明，以降雨历时、降雨量和降雨强度为特征指标，侵蚀性降雨可分为3种类型，其中雨型Ⅰ表现为历时短、降雨量小、降雨强度大；雨型Ⅱ表现为历时中、降雨量中、降雨强度中；雨型Ⅲ表现为历时长、降雨量大、降雨强度小。各类型治理措施的累积径流量随着降雨类型的变化并无统一规律，其中，HC处理在雨型Ⅰ时的径流量最少，为36.15 L；HCS处理在雨型Ⅱ、Ⅲ时的径流量最少，分别为36.14、23.15 L。在单一植被措施下，HC处理的累积径流量和产沙量显著低于HCG处理；在复合模式下，HCS处理的径流量和产沙量显著低于其他处理。总体而言，各治理措施的多年累积径流量、产沙量呈现为HCS<HCH<HCP<HCG<HC<CK。降雨量是影响径流量与产沙量最显著的降雨指标，不同治理处理的径流量、产沙量对各降雨参数的响应特征不同。减流、减沙效果最好的HCS处理，受降雨影响最小，CK的径流量和产沙量受降雨影响最大。以上结果表明，布设治理措施均可有效防治排土场边坡的水土流失问题，其中布设混草+菱形网格整地措施的减流、减沙效果最优。

关键词: 草原矿区, 侵蚀性降雨, 径流, 产沙, 侵蚀调控

Abstract:

In order to analysis the characteristics of runoff and sediment yield under different management modes of dump slope in typical grassland mining area， the Hesigewulanan open-pit coal mine in Xilinguole League was taken as the research object. 6 treatments were set up， including mixed grass （HC）， mixed grass+shrub （HCG）， mixed grass+diamond grid land preparation （HCS）， mixed grass+pin-shaped land preparation （HCP）， mixed grass+strip land preparation （HCH） and bare slope （CK）. The K-means clustering method was used to divide the rainfall types in the study area. Combined with the runoff and sediment yield data of 15 natural rainfalls in runoff plots from 2021 to 2023， the characteristics of runoff and sediment yield under different management modes and their response to rainfall were analyzed. The results showed that， taking rainfall duration， rainfall and rainfall intensity as characteristic indexes， erosive rainfall could be divided into 3 types of rain， rain type Ⅰ showed short rainfall duration， small rainfall， heavy rainfall intensity， rain type Ⅱ showed medium rainfall duration， medium rainfall， medium rainfall intensity， rain type Ⅲ showed long rainfall duration， large rainfall， small rainfall intensity. There was no uniform rule for the cumulative runoff of various types of control measures with the change of rainfall type. Among them， HC had the least runoff in rain type I with 36.15 L， and HCS had the least runoff in rain type Ⅱ and Ⅲ with 36.14 and 23.15 L， respectively. Under single vegetation measure， the runoff and sediment yield of HC treatment were significantly less than those of HCG treatment， and under composite modes， the runoff and sediment yield of HCS treatment were significantly less than those of other treatments. In general， the multi-year cumulative runoff and sediment yield of various types of control measures showed HCS<HCH<HCP<HCG<HC<CK. The rainfall was the most significant index affecting runoff and sediment yield. The response characteristics of runoff and sediment yield in different treatments to various rainfall parameters were different. The HCS treatment had the best effect of runoff and sediment reduction and least affected by rainfall， while the runoff and sediment yield of CK were significantly affected by rainfall. Above results indicated that the layout of control measures could effectively prevent and control the soil and water loss of the dump slope. The layout of mixed grass+diamond grid land preparation measures had the best effect on reducing the runoff and sediment.

Key words: steppe mining area, erosive rainfall, runoff, sediment, erosion control

中图分类号:

S157.1

史鹏莉, 刘艳萍, 郭建英, 杨振奇, 范进昇. 典型草原矿区排土场边坡不同治理模式的径流产沙特征[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2025, 27(6): 184-194.

Pengli SHI, Yanping LIU, Jianying GUO, Zhenqi YANG, Jinsheng FAN. Characteristics of Runoff and Sediment Yield of Different Treatment Modes of Dump Slope in Typical Grassland Mining Area[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2025, 27(6): 184-194.

图/表 10

参考文献 31

1	张庆,刘璐瑶,徐雪,等.内蒙古草原家庭牧场可持续发展研究[J].草业学报,2021,30(9):168-181.
	ZHANG Q, LIU L Y, XU X, et al.. Sustainable development of family ranches in the Inner Mongolian grassland [J]. Acta Pratac. Sin., 2021,30(9):168-181.
2	翟娜.季节性轮牧和刈割对内蒙古典型草原土壤线虫的影响[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古师范大学,2019.
	ZHAI N. Effects of seasonal rotational grazing and mowing on soil nematodes in typical grasslands of Inner Mongolia [D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Normal University, 2019.
3	杨天成,李晓佳.不同草地利用方式对内蒙古典型草原群落特征及草地健康的影响[J].草业科学,2022,39(5):841-849.
	YANG T C, LI X J. Effects of land use patterns on community characteristics and grassland health in Inner Mongolia [J]. Pratac. Sci., 2022,39(5):841-849.
4	魏忠义,白中科.露天矿大型排土场水蚀控制的径流分散概念及其分散措施[J].煤炭学报,2003,28(5):486-490.
	WEI Z Y, BAI Z K.The concept and measures of runoff-dispersing on water erosion control in the large dump of opencast mine [J]. J. China Coal Soc., 2003,28(5):486-490.
5	史倩华,李垚林,王文龙,等.不同植被措施对露天煤矿排土场边坡径流产沙影响[J].草地学报,2016,24(6):1263-1271.
	SHI Q H, LI Y L, WANG W L, et al.. Effects of different re-vegetation measures on runoff and sediment yielding of dump side slopes in open pit mine [J]. Acta Agrestia Sin., 2016, 24(6):1263-1271.
6	王彤彤.露天煤矿排土场植被恢复植物筛选及土壤适应性研究[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2022.
	WANG T T. Study on plant selection and adaptability of plants to soil on restoration in open pit coal mine waste dump [D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2022.
7	王尚义,石瑛,牛俊杰,等.煤矸石山不同植被恢复模式对土壤养分的影响:以山西省河东矿区1号煤矸石山为例[J].地理学报,2013,68(3):372-379.
	WANG S Y, SHI Y, NIU J J,et al..Influence of vegetation restoration models on soil nutrient of coal gangue pile:a case study of No.1 Coal Gangue Pile in Hedong,Shanxi [J]. Acta Geogr. Sin., 2013,68(3):372-379.
8	薛东明,郭小平,张晓霞.干旱矿区排土场不同边坡生态修复模式下减流减沙效益[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(6):15-21, 30.
	XUE D M, GUO X P, ZHANG X X.Runoff and sediment reduction under different slope ecological restoration modes of waste dump in arid mining area [J]. J. Soil Water Conserv., 2021,35(6):15-21, 30.
9	郭建英,李锦荣,何京丽,等.典型草原煤矿排土场边坡不同治理措施次降雨水蚀过程分析[J].水土保持研究,2017,24(5):1-5, 13.
	GUO J Y, LI J R, HE J L,et al..Analysis on water erosion process caused by secondly rainfall under different slope treatment measures at dump site in typical steppe [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2017,24(5):1-5, 13.
10	田秀民,马春霞,鲁旭东,等.微地形重塑对大型排土场平台水沙及植被的影响[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(3):74-82.
	TIAN X M, MA C X, LU X D, et al.. Impact of microtopographic reconstruction on runoff and sediment yield and vegetation of large waste dump platform [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2021,28(3):74-82.
11	苏银萍.改良剂及肥料对短毛蓼修复Mn污染土壤效率的影响[D].桂林:广西师范大学,2014.
	SU Y P. Effects of the amendments and fertilizer on the repair efficiency of polygonum pubescens Blume in Mn contaminated soils [D]. Guilin: Guangxi Normal University, 2014.
12	候月卿,赵立欣,孟海波,等.生物炭和腐植酸类对猪粪堆肥重金属的钝化效果[J].农业工程学报,2014,30(11):205-215.
	HOU Y Q, ZHAO L X, MENG H B, et al.. Passivating effect of biochar and humic acid materials on heavy metals during composting of pig manure [J]. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng., 2014,30(11):205-215.
13	李政,胡桂清,瞿涛,等.伊犁河谷不同管理草地产流产沙对降雨与土壤类型的响应[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(5):62-69.
	LI Z, HU G Q, QU T, et al..Responses of runoff and sediment yield to rainfall,soil types under different managed grasslands in Yili valley [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2022,29(5):62-69.
14	杜映妮,周怡雯,李朝霞,等.丹江口库区不同降雨类型下典型植被措施的水土保持效应[J].水土保持学报,2023,37(2):51-57, 66.
	DU Y N, ZHOU Y W, LI C X, et al.. Effects of typical vegetation measures on soil and water conservation under different rainfall regimes in Danjiangkou reservoir area [J]. J. Soil Water Conserv., 2023,37(2):51-57, 66.
15	李勉,姚文艺,史学建.淤地坝拦沙减蚀作用与泥沙沉积特征研究[J].水土保持研究,2005,12(5):107-111.
	LI M, YAO W Y, SHI X J. Study on the effect of silt dams for conserving soil and water and its sedimentation characteristic [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2005,12(5):107-111.
16	武志强,付福林,张锐.川掌沟流域治沟骨干工程建设的重大作用[J].中国水土保持,2000(6):41-42.
	WU Z Q, FU F L, ZHANG R. The important role of key dam construction in Chuanzhanggou watershed [J]. Soil Water Conserv. China, 2000(6):41-42.
17	曾茂林,朱小勇,康玲玲,等.水土流失区淤地坝的拦泥减蚀作用及发展前景[J].水土保持研究,1999,6(2):126-133.
	ZENG M L, ZHU X Y, KANG L L, et al.. Effects of sediment reduction and erosion control and development prospects of warping dam in water and soil loss areas [J]. Res.Soil Water Conserv., 1999,6(2):126-133.
18	李景宗,刘立斌.近期黄河潼关以上地区淤地坝拦沙量初步分析[J].人民黄河,2018,40(1):1-6.
	LI J Z, LIU L B. Analysis on the sediment retaining amount by warping dams above Tongguan section of the Yellow River in recent years [J]. Yellow River, 2018,40(1):1-6.
19	杨振奇,郭建英,秦富仓,等.天然降雨条件下裸露砒砂岩区人工植被的减流减沙效应[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(1):100-104, 112.
	YANG Z Q, GUO J Y, QIN F C, et al.. Effects of artificial vegetation on runoff and sediment reduction by in exposed feldspathic sandstone region under natural rainfall [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2022,29(1):100-104, 112.
20	曹美晨,辛艳,任正龑,等.半干旱黄土丘陵沟壑区不同土地利用坡面的降雨侵蚀特征[J].泥沙研究, 2022,47(6):43-50.
	CAO M C, XIN Y, REN Z Y, et al.. Characteristics of rainfall erosion on different land use slopes in semi-arid loess hilly and gully region [J]. J. Sediment Res., 2022,47(6):43-50.
21	陈洋,张海东,于东升,等.南方红壤区植被结构类型与降雨模式对林下水土流失的影响[J].农业工程学报,2020,36(5):150-157.
	CHEN Y, ZHANG H D, YU D S, et al.. Effects of vegetation structure types and rainfall patterns on soil and water loss of understory vegetation in red soil areas of South China [J]. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng., 2020,36(5):150-157.
22	杨波,王文龙,郭明明,等.矿区排土场边坡不同植被配置模式的控蚀效益研究[J].土壤学报,2019,56(6):1347-1358.
	YANG B, WANG W L, GUO M M, et al.. Erosion-controlling effects of revegetation on slope of refuse dump in mining area relative to vegetation pattern [J]. Acta Pedol. Sin., 2019,56(6):1347-1358.
23	李鹏飞.基于无人机遥感的排土(矸)场立地对植被盖度影响研究[D].北京:北京林业大学, 2020.
	LI P F. Influence study of sites on vegetation coverage in dumps and gangue fields based on UAV remote sensing technology [D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2020.
24	MAITI S K. Bioreclamation of coalmine overburden dumps:with special empasis on micronutrients and heavy metals accumulation in tree species [J]. Environ. Monit. Assess., 2007,125(1/2/3):111-122.
25	郭建英,何京丽,李锦荣,等.典型草原大型露天煤矿排土场边坡水蚀控制效果[J].农业工程学报,2015,31(3):296-303.
	GUO J Y, HE J L, LI J R, et al.. Effects of different measures on water erosion control of dump slope at opencast coal mine in typical steppe [J]. Trans. Chin.Soc. Agric. Eng., 2015,31(3):296-303.
26	秦伟,左长清,晏清洪,等.红壤裸露坡地次降雨土壤侵蚀规律[J].农业工程学报,2015,31(2):124-132.
	QIN W, ZUO C Q, YAN Q H, et al.. Regularity of individual rainfall soil erosion in bare slope land of red soil [J]. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng., 2015,31(2):124-132.
27	邓羽松,丁树文,刘辰明,等.鄂东南花岗岩崩岗崩壁土壤水分特征研究[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(4):132-137.
	DENG Y S, DING S W, LIU C M, et al.. Soil moisture characteristics of collapsing gully wall in granite area of southeastern Hubei [J]. J. Soil Water Conserv., 2015,29(4):132-137.
28	游微,樊军,魏修彬,等.粗质地土壤坡度和前期含水量对土壤侵蚀的影响[J].水土保持学报,2017,31(4):18-24.
	YOU W, FAN J, WEI X B, et al.. Effect of soil slope and antecedent soil water content on soil erosion in coarse texture soil [J]. J. Soil Water Conserv., 2017,31(4):18-24.
29	邵奕铭,高光耀,刘见波,等.自然降雨下黄土丘陵区草灌植物垂直覆盖结构的减流减沙效应[J].生态学报,2022,42(1):322-331.
	SHAO Y M, GAO G Y, LIU J B, et al.. Effects of vertical cover structure of grass and shrub on reducing runoff and soil loss under natural rainfall in the loess hilly region [J]. Acta Ecol. Sin., 2022,42(1):322-331.
30	张哲,方政,董智,等.鲁中南山区侵蚀性降雨及典型作物对坡面产流产沙影响研究[J].西南大学学报(自然科学版),2024,46(1):69-76.
	ZHANG Z, FANG Z, DONG Z, et al.. Effects of erosive rainfall and typical crops on slope runoff and sediment yield in mountainous area of central-south of Shandong province [J]. J. Southwest Univ. (Nat. Sci.), 2024,46(1):69-76.
31	张春霞,董智,高波,等.侵蚀性雨型分类及不同植被类型对棕壤坡面土壤侵蚀的影响[J].水土保持研究,2023,30(2):36-41, 49.
	ZHANG C X, DONG Z, GAO B, et al.. Effects of erosive rainfall patterns and different vegetation types on soil erosion in slope with brown soil [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2023,30(2):36-41, 49.

降雨类型 Rainfall type	频次 Frequency	参数 Parameter	降雨历时 Rainfall duration/min	降雨量 Rainfall/mm	降雨强度 Rainfall intensity/（mm·h^-1）	I₃₀/ （mm·h^-1）	降雨侵蚀力R/ （mJ·mm·hm^-2·h^-1）
Ⅰ	84	平均Mean	251.05	7.05	1.89	6.85	46.62
		最小值Min	60	0.13	0.14	0.22	0.01
		P25	120	3.21	0.85	2.88	1.58
		中位数Median	240	4.67	1.31	4.16	3.74
		P75	360	7.26	2.30	7.84	14.51
		最大值Max	480	78.18	9.77	63.55	1 369.80
Ⅱ	54	平均Mean	761.11	11.11	0.88	6.98	33.14
		最小值Min	540	2.81	0.18	1.50	1.04
		P25	600	5.67	0.55	3.18	3.79
		中位数Median	720	8.48	0.68	5.06	8.79
		P75	900	12.88	1.13	8.25	29.12
		最大值Max	1 200	30.36	2.97	38.28	499.64
Ⅲ	19	平均Mean	1 762.11	20.21	0.70	7.63	43.19
		最小值Min	1 380	9.34	0.33	1.77	2.98
		P25	1 500	15.69	0.50	4.18	11.99
		中位数Median	1 740	19.38	0.64	5.44	28.35
		P75	1 980	24.95	0.85	11.95	67.56
		最大值Max	2 400	33.52	1.29	19.97	131.34

降雨类型 Rainfall type	频次 Frequency	参数 Parameter	降雨历时 Rainfall duration/min	降雨量 Rainfall/mm	降雨强度 Rainfall intensity/（mm·h^-1）	I₃₀/ （mm·h^-1）	降雨侵蚀力R/ （mJ·mm·hm^-2·h^-1）
Ⅰ	84	平均Mean	251.05	7.05	1.89	6.85	46.62
		最小值Min	60	0.13	0.14	0.22	0.01
		P25	120	3.21	0.85	2.88	1.58
		中位数Median	240	4.67	1.31	4.16	3.74
		P75	360	7.26	2.30	7.84	14.51
		最大值Max	480	78.18	9.77	63.55	1 369.80
Ⅱ	54	平均Mean	761.11	11.11	0.88	6.98	33.14
		最小值Min	540	2.81	0.18	1.50	1.04
		P25	600	5.67	0.55	3.18	3.79
		中位数Median	720	8.48	0.68	5.06	8.79
		P75	900	12.88	1.13	8.25	29.12
		最大值Max	1 200	30.36	2.97	38.28	499.64
Ⅲ	19	平均Mean	1 762.11	20.21	0.70	7.63	43.19
		最小值Min	1 380	9.34	0.33	1.77	2.98
		P25	1 500	15.69	0.50	4.18	11.99
		中位数Median	1 740	19.38	0.64	5.44	28.35
		P75	1 980	24.95	0.85	11.95	67.56
		最大值Max	2 400	33.52	1.29	19.97	131.34

年份Year	径流量Runoff yield/L	产沙量Sediment yield/G
2021	201.43±1.49 a	828.03±3.73 a
2022	35.35±0.78 b	179.57±3.42 b
2023	31.36±1.46 c	115.18±2.63 c

年份Year	径流量Runoff yield/L	产沙量Sediment yield/G
2021	201.43±1.49 a	828.03±3.73 a
2022	35.35±0.78 b	179.57±3.42 b
2023	31.36±1.46 c	115.18±2.63 c

指标Index	降雨历时Rainfall duration	降雨强度Rainfall intensity	I₃₀	降雨动能E	降雨侵蚀力R	径流量Runoff yield	产沙量Sediment yield
降雨量Rainfall	0.88^**	0.20	0.87^**	0.99^**	0.92^**	0.80^**	0.82^**
降雨历时Rainfall duration		-0.10	0.66^**	0.83^**	0.71^**	0.57^*	0.67^**
降雨强度Rainfall intensity			0.40	0.23	0.25	0.28	0.18
最大30 min降雨强度I₃₀				0.92^**	0.94^**	0.72^**	0.62^*
降雨动能E			.		0.97^**	0.79^**	0.78^**
降雨侵蚀力R						0.77^**	0.76^**
径流量Runoff							0.86^**

典型草原矿区排土场边坡不同治理模式的径流产沙特征

Characteristics of Runoff and Sediment Yield of Different Treatment Modes of Dump Slope in Typical Grassland Mining Area

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 31

相关文章 2

编辑推荐

Metrics

处理Treatment	指标 Index	降雨量 Rainfall	降雨历时 Rainfall duration	降雨强度 Rain intensity	最大30 min雨强I₃₀	降雨动能E	降雨侵蚀力R	径流量 Runoff yield	泥沙量 Sediment yield
HC	径流量 Runoff yield	0.85^**	0.70^**	0.18	0.74^**	0.86^**	0.82^**	—	—
HC	产沙量 Sediment yield	0.72^**	0.62^*	0.11	0.52^*	0.68^**	0.66^**	0.78^**
HCG	径流量 Runoff yield	0.80^**	0.64^**	0.21	0.73^**	0.82^**	0.80^**	—	—
HCG	产沙量 Sediment yield	0.73^**	0.63^*	0.16	0.57^*	0.69^**	0.70^**	0.68^**	—
HCS	径流量 Runoff yield	0.33	0.13	0.20	0.39	0.33	0.32	—	—
HCS	产沙量 Sediment yield	0.61^*	0.35	0.24	0.57^*	0.64^*	0.71^**	0.54^*	—
HCP	径流量 Runoff yield	0.64^*	0.31	0.43	0.63^*	0.63^*	0.61^*	—	—
HCP	产沙量 Sediment yield	0.73^**	0.59^*	0.19	0.52^*	0.68^**	0.65^**	0.67^**	—
HCH	径流量 Runoff yield	0.57^*	0.31	0.25	0.55^*	0.57^*	0.55^*	—	—
HCH	产沙量 Sediment yield	0.78^**	0.68^**	0.16	0.54^*	0.76^**	0.69^**	0.42	—
CK	径流量 Runoff yield	0.87^**	0.70^**	0.23	0.70^**	0.85^**	0.81^**	—	—
CK	产沙量 Sediment yield	0.84^**	0.66^**	0.20	0.65^**	0.82^**	0.80^**	0.95^**	—

[1]	梁美霞, 章鑫强, 林炳青. 南方红壤侵蚀流域不同情景措施的减沙效应模拟[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2024, 26(10): 177-185.
[2]	张丽娟, 秦宇坤, 程慧煌, 李永旗, 罗海华. 鄱阳湖区赣北棉田地表径流氮磷流失特征研究[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2022, 24(6): 166-175.