Simulation of Sediment Reduction Effect Under Different Scenarios in Red Soil Erosion Watershed in South China

doi:10.13304/j.nykjdb.2023.0261

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to reveal the sediment reduction effect of different scenario measures in southern red soil erosion watershed and realize regional sustainable development， a typical granite red soil erosion watershed in southern China （Zhuxi watershed， Chiangting， Fujian） was selected as the study area. Based on the soil and water assessment tool（SWAT）model， the sediment production and drainage conditions in the watershed were simulated， and the sediment reduction effects of different scenarios were quantified through different soil and water conservation measures and different land use adjustment scenarios. The results showed that the simulation reached the precision level required by the SWAT model and the average annual runoff volume and amount of sediment in the Zhuxi watershed from 2013 to 2017 were 4.793×10⁷ m³ and 1.037×10⁷ kg， respectively. Under scenarios simulation， the“compound”measure of mixed tree， shrub and grass and the measure of grassing the whole slope could improve the vegetation coverage and reduce the sediment loss more effectively. Moreover， the average annual sediment reduction rate per unit area reached 3.49% under different land use modes. Above results could provide reference for the ecological restoration measures of sediment control in red soil erosion watershed.

Key words: SWAT model, sediment simulation, soil and water conservation measures, land use, red soil erosion watershed

摘要：

为揭示南方红壤侵蚀流域不同情景措施的减沙效应，实现区域可持续发展，采用SWAT（soil and water assessment tool）模型模拟方法，以南方典型花岗岩红壤侵蚀流域——福建长汀朱溪流域为研究区域，在模拟该流域产流产沙状况的基础上，通过不同水土保持措施和不同土地利用方式调整的情景设置，量化分析不同情景措施对该流域的减沙效应。结果表明，SWAT模型的模拟效果能达到模型要求的精度，2013—2017年朱溪流域年均径流量和年均泥沙量分别为4.793×10⁷ m³和1.037×10⁷ kg。乔灌草混交和全坡面种草措施能有效提高植被覆盖度，减沙效果优越；不同土地利用方式下模拟得到朱溪流域单位面积年均减沙率为3.49%。以上研究结果可为红壤侵蚀流域泥沙阻控的生态恢复措施提供决策参考。

关键词: SWAT模型, 产沙模拟, 水土保持措施, 土地利用, 红壤侵蚀流域

CLC Number:

S154.1

Meixia LIANG, Xinqiang ZHANG, Bingqing LIN. Simulation of Sediment Reduction Effect Under Different Scenarios in Red Soil Erosion Watershed in South China[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2024, 26(10): 177-185.

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.

Figures/Tables 9

References 25

1	WANGPIMOOL W, PONGPUT K, SUKVIBOOL C, et al.. The effect of reforestation on stream flow in Upper Nan river basin using soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) model [J]. Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res., 2013, 1(2): 53-63.
2	ERTSEN A C D. Ecohydrological impact-assessment modeling: an example for terrestrial ecosystems in Noord-Holland, the Netherlands [J]. Environ. Model. Assess., 1999, 4(1): 13-22.
3	宋艳华, 马金辉. SWAT模型辅助下的生态恢复水文响应——以陇西黄土高原华家岭南河流域为例[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(2): 636-644.
	SONG Y H, MA J H. SWAT-aided research on hydrological responses to ecological restoration:a case study of the Nanhe river basin in Huajialing of Longxi Loess Plateau [J]. Acta Ecol. Sin., 2008, 28(2): 636-644.
4	郝芳华, 陈利群, 刘昌明, 等. 土地利用变化对产流和产沙的影响分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2004, 18(3): 5-8.
	HAO F H, CHEN L Q, LIU C M, et al.. Impact of land use change on runoff and sediment yield [J]. J. Soil Water Conserv., 2004, 18(3): 5-8.
5	田晶, 郭生练, 刘德地, 等. 气候与土地利用变化对汉江流域径流的影响[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(11): 2307-2318.
	TIAN J, GUO S L, LIU D D, et al.. Impacts of climate and land use/cover changes on runoff in the Hanjiang river basin [J]. Acta Geogr. Sin., 2020, 75(11): 2307-2318.
6	张青青, 陈志强, 陈志彪, 等. 南方典型红壤区不同水保措施下坡面产流产沙及稀土迁移特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2018, 32(1): 46-53, 58.
	ZHANG Q Q, CHEN Z Q, CHEN Z B, et al.. Characteristics of slope runoff and sediment yield and REEs migrations under different soil and water conservation measures in a typical red soil region of southern China [J]. J. Soil Water Conserv., 2018, 32(1): 46-53, 58.
7	符素华, 刘宝元, 路炳军, 等. 官厅水库上游水土保持措施的减水减沙效益[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2009, 7(2): 18-23.
	FU S H, LIU B Y, LU B J, et al.. Effect of soil conservation practice on runoff and sediment in upper reach of Guanting reservoir [J]. Sci. Soil Water Conserv., 2009, 7(2): 18-23.
8	陈志彪. 花岗岩侵蚀山地生态重建及其生态环境效应[D]. 福州:福建师范大学, 2005.
	CHEN Z B. Rehabilitation of eroded granite mountainous and its eco-environmental effects [D]. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University, 2005.
9	胡沁梅, 谢炎敏. 长汀县水土保持措施下径流小区的产流产沙及其对降水量和植被覆盖度的响应[J]. 亚热带水土保持, 2020, 32(3): 15-19.
	HU Q M, XIE Y M. Runoff and sediment yield and their response to precipitation and vegetation coverage in runoff plots under soil and water conservation measures in Changting county [J]. Subtrop. Soil Water Conserv., 2020, 32(3): 15-19.
10	BENAMAN J, SHOEMAKER C A, HAITH D A. Calibration and validation of soil and water assessment tool on an agricultural watershed in upstate New York [J]. J. Hydrol. Eng., 2005, 10(5): 363-374.
11	陈媛, 郭秀锐, 程水源, 等. 基于SWAT模型的三峡库区流域污染物来源分析及重点控制区域识别[J]. 北京工业大学学报, 2013, 39(5): 761-768.
	CHEN Y, GUO X R, CHENG S Y, et al.. Pollutant source analysis and identification of prior control areas in Three Gorges reservoir based on SWAT model [J]. J. Beijing Univ. Technol., 2013, 39(5): 761-768.
12	陈正发. 基于RUSLE模型的重庆市土壤流失方程研究[D]. 重庆:西南大学, 2011.
	CHEN Z F. Research on soil loss equation of Chongqing city basd on reversied univers soil loss equation (RUSLE) [D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2011.
13	蔡崇法, 丁树文, 史志华, 等. 应用USLE模型与地理信息系统IDRISI预测小流域土壤侵蚀量的研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2000, 14(2): 19-24.
	CAI C F, DING S W, SHI Z H, et al.. Study of applying USLE and geographical information system IDRISI to predict soil erosion in small watershed [J]. J. Soil Water Conserv., 2000, 14(2): 19-24.
14	王潇, 刘汉湖, 吴冰. 四川境内赤水河流域上中游水土流失时空变化研究[J]. 河南理工大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 38(3): 70-80.
	WANG X, LIU H H, WU B. Study on the temporal and spatial variations of soil erosion in the upper and middle reaches of the Chishui river basin in Sichuan [J]. J. Henan Polytechnic Univ. (Nat. Sci.), 2019, 38( 3) : 70-80.
15	杨子生. 滇东北山区坡耕地土壤侵蚀的水土保持措施因子[J]. 山地学报, 1999, 17(): 22-24.
	YANG Z S. The factor of soil and water conservation measures of soil erosion on sloping cultivated land in the northeast mountain region of Yunnan province [J]. J. Mountain Sci., 1999, 17(S1): 22-24.
16	秦志佳. 基于遥感调查和RUSLE模型的贵州省土壤侵蚀对比研究[D]. 贵阳:贵州师范大学, 2017.
	QIN Z J. Comparative study of soil erosion in Guizhou province based on remote sensing survey and RUSLE model [D]. Guiyang: Guizhou Normal University, 2017.
17	VIOLA M R, MELLO C R, BESKOW S, et al.. Impacts of land-use changes on the hydrology of the Grande River Basin Headwaters, Southeastern Brazil [J]. Water Resour. Manage., 2014, 28(13): 4537-4550.
18	DU J, RUI H, ZUO T, et al.. Hydrological simulation by SWAT model with fixed and varied parameterization approaches under land use change [J]. Water Resour. Manage., 2013, 27(8): 2823-2838.
19	HOU W, GAO J. Simulating runoff generation and its spatial correlation with environmental factors in Sancha river basin: the southern source of the Wujiang river [J]. J. Geogr. Sci., 2019, 29(3): 432-448.
20	BAI L Y, CHEN Z Q, CHEN Z B. Soil fertility self-development under ecological restoration in the Zhuxi watershed in the red soil hilly region of China [J]. J. Mountain Sci., 2014, 11(5): 1231-1241.
21	CHEN Z Q, CHEN Z B, XIE Y M, et al.. Stoichiometric mechanisms of Dicranopteris dichotoma growth and resistance to nutrient limitation in the Zhuxi watershed in the red soil hilly region of China [J]. Plant Soil, 2016, 398(1): 367-379.
22	陈志彪, 陈志强, 岳辉. 花岗岩红壤侵蚀区水土保持综合研究——以福建省长汀朱溪小流域为例[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2013:1-276.
23	高泗强, 刘琪, 罗歆. 基于RUSLE 模型的重庆土地利用变化及土壤侵蚀特征分析[J]. 中国水土保持,2022(11):32-36.
	GAO S Q, LIU Q, LUO X. Land use change and soil erosion characteristics in Chongqing based on RUSLE model [J]. Soil Water Conserv. China, 2022(11):32-36.
24	张洋,李鹏,马文东, 等.黄河上游西柳沟流域土壤侵蚀对土地利用变化响应[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(5):70-76, 84.
	ZHANG Y, LI P, MA W D, et al.. Research on the response of soil erosion to land use change in Xiliugou watershed of the upper Yellow river [J]. Res. Soil Water Conserv., 2022, 29(5):70-76, 84.
25	何卿姮. 基于SWAT模型的南流江流域上游段土地利用变化及农业面源污染响应研究[D]. 南宁:广西大学,2022.
	HE Q H. Land-use change and response of agricultural non-point source pollution in the upper reaches of Nanliu river basin based on SWAT model [D]. Nanning: Guangxi University, 2022.

径流小区Runoff plot	植被覆盖度 Vegetation coverage/%						C值 C value
径流小区Runoff plot	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	平均值Average value	C值 C value
裸地Bare area	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.71	0.85	0.31	0.830
全坡面种草 Grass the whole slope	85.00	85.80	90.00	70.08	74.00	80.98	0.000
果园改造 Orchard renovation	85.00	68.10	70.00	62.75	62.88	69.75	0.020
乔草混交 Mixed tree and grass	90.00	48.30	50.00	65.58	64.58	63.69	0.030
乔灌草混交 Mixed tree， shrub and grass	90.00	68.40	70.00	77.90	77.30	76.72	0.003
纯乔木林Pure forest	85.00	58.90	60.00	71.20	68.90	68.80	0.020

径流小区Runoff plot	植被覆盖度 Vegetation coverage/%						C值 C value
径流小区Runoff plot	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	平均值Average value	C值 C value
裸地Bare area	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.71	0.85	0.31	0.830
全坡面种草 Grass the whole slope	85.00	85.80	90.00	70.08	74.00	80.98	0.000
果园改造 Orchard renovation	85.00	68.10	70.00	62.75	62.88	69.75	0.020
乔草混交 Mixed tree and grass	90.00	48.30	50.00	65.58	64.58	63.69	0.030
乔灌草混交 Mixed tree， shrub and grass	90.00	68.40	70.00	77.90	77.30	76.72	0.003
纯乔木林Pure forest	85.00	58.90	60.00	71.20	68.90	68.80	0.020

年份 Year	裸地 Bare area	全坡面种草 Grass the whole slope	果园改造 Orchard renovation	乔草混交 Mixed tree and grass	乔灌草混交 Mixed tree， shrub and grass	纯乔木林 Pure forest
2007	172.42	55.27	110.52	76.42	57.11	128.09
2008	119.93	17.11	48.76	7.84	5.55	48.81
2009	115.67	15.18	35.50	14.48	6.97	26.00
2010	106.71	10.07	16.59	6.32	4.05	17.25
2012	136.10	0.29	5.22	－	－	－
2013	74.60	－	－	－	－	－
2014	30.96	0.47	1.60	4.15	1.11	2.56
2015	43.34	0.76	0.68	0.99	0.64	0.84
2016	113.42	0.93	0.51	0.60	0.27	0.53
2017	21.90	0.32	0.20	0.23	0.13	0.20
平均值 Average value	93.51	10.04	21.96	11.10	7.58	22.43
P值P value	1.00	0.11	0.24	0.12	0.08	0.24

年份 Year	裸地 Bare area	全坡面种草 Grass the whole slope	果园改造 Orchard renovation	乔草混交 Mixed tree and grass	乔灌草混交 Mixed tree， shrub and grass	纯乔木林 Pure forest
2007	172.42	55.27	110.52	76.42	57.11	128.09
2008	119.93	17.11	48.76	7.84	5.55	48.81
2009	115.67	15.18	35.50	14.48	6.97	26.00
2010	106.71	10.07	16.59	6.32	4.05	17.25
2012	136.10	0.29	5.22	－	－	－
2013	74.60	－	－	－	－	－
2014	30.96	0.47	1.60	4.15	1.11	2.56
2015	43.34	0.76	0.68	0.99	0.64	0.84
2016	113.42	0.93	0.51	0.60	0.27	0.53
2017	21.90	0.32	0.20	0.23	0.13	0.20
平均值 Average value	93.51	10.04	21.96	11.10	7.58	22.43
P值P value	1.00	0.11	0.24	0.12	0.08	0.24

[1]	Yun LI, Changlian LUO, Hongqi WU, Zhongping CHAI, Jiandong SHENG, Lei FENG. Land Cover Change in Aksu Region of Xinjiang from 2000 to 2020 [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2024, 26(8): 172-179.
[2]	WANG Jiayuan1, QIN Fucang1*, YANG Zhenqi2, REN Xiaotong1, FANG Fei3, ZHANG Ying4. Characteristics of Soil Animal Communities Under Different Land Use in Gully Area of Loess Plateau [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2021, 23(3): 156-165.
[3]	QIN Fucang, NIU Xiaole, YANG Zhenqi, MA Xin, REN Xiaotong. Effects of Topographic Factors and Land Use on the Spatial Variability of Soil Nutrients in Maoshan Watershed [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2020, 22(6): 138-148.
[4]	CHEN Longjiang1, LUO Haibo1*, ZHAO Qianyu2, JIANG Guanxu1. Adjustment of Primary Farmland Based on GIS —&mdash\|A Case Study of Guanling County, Guizhou Province [J]. , 2013, 15(1): 84-90.
[5]	HUANG Xiao-lei1, LIU Dong-yun2, FENG Zhong-ke1*, QIU Qi1, MIAO Jie1. Prediction Study on Tianjin Land-use based on CA-Markov Model [J]. , 2012, 14(5): 84-89.
[6]	LIANG Xue-qing, WU Ling, HUANG Hui-ling . Reviews and Prospects of Land use Planning in Recent 50 Years in China [J]. , 2005, 7(3): 13-16.