干旱矿区排土场边坡生态修复模式对植被-土壤有机碳密度影响
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

北京林业大学

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

S157.2

基金项目:

国家重点研发计划项目”矿区生态修复与生态安全保障技术集成示范研究”(2017YFC0504406);内蒙古自治区科技重大专项”内蒙古典型矿区差异化修复治理模式与解决方案研究”(2020ZD0021)


Effects of Ecological Restoration Models on Vegetation-Soil Organic Carbon Density in the Slopes of Dumps in Arid Mining Areas
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    [目的]为探究不同生态修复技术模式对干旱矿区排土场边坡生态修复模式对植被土壤有机碳密度影响,分析经过生态修复后的排土场有机碳变化状况,为选择低碳和环保且符合国家生态文明建设与可持续发展的生态修复技术模式及生态恢复效果的监测提供科学的参考依据。[方法]本研究选取内蒙古乌海市示范工程蒙泰、新星、棋丰三个露天煤矿生态修复排土场边坡植被和土壤为研究对象,通过野外采样与室内实验结合,分析植被碳密度、土壤理化因子和土壤碳密度,以及植被指标与土壤因子的相关性,为生态修复技术,提升矿区碳汇能力提供理论依据。[结果]:(1)随着修复年限的增加,植被有机碳密度呈递增趋势,在2年到5年间,增长率处于31.91%~45.62%之间,5年到8年处于11.80%~36.67%之间。土壤有机碳含量及密度也呈增长的趋势,在2到5年间,土壤有机碳密度增长率在15.55%~91.28%之间,5年到8年增长率在0.4%~11.70%之间;(2)生态棒修复技术模式在干旱矿区排土场对于改善土壤及植被有机碳积累状况效果最好,修复8年土壤有机碳密度达到最大,为66.70 t·hm-2,植被有机碳密度达到1.85 t·hm-2,植物篱修复技术模式的修复效果相比最差,修复8年土壤有机碳密度仅为37.36 t·hm-2,植物有机碳密度为1.48 t·hm-2,生态修复5年时,砾石压盖和铁丝石笼的植被-土壤有机碳密度分别为45.84 t·hm-2,44.98 t·hm-2。[结论] 在生态修复不超过8年的情况下,这7种生态修复技术模式修复后的植被+土壤有机碳密度随修复年限增加而增加,在修复8年时达到最大值,固碳效果明显。植物篱-生态袋截排水技术-播种-喷灌修复技术模式相比之下修复效果最差,生态棒-生态袋截排水技术-播种-喷灌、砾石压面-生态袋截排水技术-播种-喷灌、石笼水平拦挡-生态袋截排水技术-播种-喷灌这三种修复技术模式为低碳环保修复技术模式,固碳效果良好,适合推广应用,同时在修复前期,应注意土壤改良及施肥养护工作。

    Abstract:

    [Objective] This study investigated the effects of various ecological restoration technology models on plant and soil organic carbon density in the slopes of dumps in arid mining areas. It analyzed changes in organic carbon after ecological restoration, aiming to provide a scientific basis for selecting low-carbon, environmentally friendly restoration models. These models should align with national goals for ecological civilization and sustainable development, as well as support the monitoring of restoration outcomes. [Method] This study focused on vegetation and soil from the slopes of ecological restoration dumps at three open-pit coal mines (Mengtai, Xinxing, and Qifeng) in Wuhai City, Inner Mongolia. Through a combination of field sampling and laboratory experiments, the research analyzed vegetation organic carbon density, soil physicochemical properties, soil organic carbon density, and the correlations between vegetation indicators and soil factors. The aim was to provide a theoretical foundation for ecological restoration technologies and enhance the carbon sink capacity of mining areas. [Results] (1) As restoration years increased, vegetation organic carbon density showed an upward trend. Between 2 and 5 years, the growth rate ranged from 31.91% to 45.62%, while between 5 and 8 years, it ranged from 11.80% to 36.67%. Similarly, soil organic carbon content and density also exhibited an increasing trend. Between 2 and 5 years, the growth rate of soil organic carbon density ranges from 15.55% to 91.28%, and between 5 and 8 years, it ranges from 0.4% to 11.70%. (2) The ecological bar restoration technology model was the most effective for enhancing soil and vegetation organic carbon accumulation in dumps in arid mining areas. After 8 years of restoration, the soil organic carbon density reached a maximum of 66.70 t·hm?2, and the vegetation organic carbon density reached 1.85 t·hm?2. In contrast, the plant hedge restoration technology model was the least effective, with a soil organic carbon density of only 37.36 t·hm?2 and vegetation organic carbon density of 1.48 t·hm?2 after 8 years of restoration. After 5 years of ecological restoration, the vegetation-soil organic carbon densities for the gravel cover and wire stone cage models were 45.84 t·hm?2 and 44.98 t·hm?2, respectively. [Conclusion] Under the condition that the ecological restoration did not exceed 8 years, the soil-vegetation organic carbon density increased with the duration of restoration across the 7 ecological restoration technology models. The maximum value was achieved after 8 years of restoration, demonstrating a clear carbon sequestration effect. Among the different technologies, the hedge + ecological bag interception+ drainage technology+ sowing + sprinkler irrigation restoration method exhibited the least effective remediation..The three restoration technology models—ecological bar + ecological bag drainage interception + seeding + sprinkling irrigation; gravel cover + ecological bag drainage interception + seeding + sprinkling irrigation; and stone cage horizontal barriers + ecological bag drainage interception + seeding + sprinkling irrigation— were low-carbon and environmentally friendly technologies with excellent carbon sequestration effects. These models are suitable for broader application. Additionally, in the early stages of restoration, attention should be given to soil improvement and fertilization maintenance.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2024-12-18
  • 最后修改日期:2025-02-17
  • 录用日期:2025-02-18
  • 在线发布日期:
  • 出版日期: