|
| 基于CSLE模型全覆盖和抽样调查法的天山北坡县域尺度土壤侵蚀计算方法的比较 |
| Comparing county-scale global coverage and sampling survey soil erosion estimation methods based on the CSLE model on the northern slopes of the Tianshan Mountain |
| 投稿时间：2021-04-09 |
| DOI：10.13254/j.jare.2021.0213 |
| 中文关键词: 天山北坡，土壤侵蚀估算，CSLE模型，全覆盖计算，抽样调查 |
| 英文关键词: northern slopes of the Tianshan Mountain, soil erosion estimation, CSLE model, global coverage calculation, sampling survey |
| 基金项目:新疆水土保持监督管理项目（213031003） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 903 |
| 全文下载次数: 764 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 为进一步探讨CSLE模型全覆盖和抽样调查法对估算区域土壤侵蚀的影响，明确天山北坡县域尺度适宜的抽样密度和土壤侵蚀推算方法，以天山北坡阜康市为例，开展水土流失类型区划分，基于CSLE模型全覆盖和0.25%、1%、4%三种抽样密度，采用栅格推算法分别对研究区土壤侵蚀进行估算，并对侵蚀强度面积和分布进行对比分析。结果表明：阜康市水土流失类型可划分为北部沙漠风力侵蚀主导区、中部山前冲积扇及倾斜平原风水复合侵蚀主导区、南部中低山丘陵水力侵蚀主导区及南部高山冻融侵蚀主导区等4个区。与4%抽样密度下推算的侵蚀面积相比，0.25%和1%抽样密度下平均相对差异分别为8.76%和28.99%；三种抽样密度下土壤侵蚀空间分布规律表现较为一致，轻度侵蚀主要在中部耕作区呈集中连片分布，中度侵蚀主要在植被盖度30%~60%、坡度8°~25°的区域分散分布。全覆盖计算的阜康市水土流失面积与三种抽样密度下推算面积相比均偏小。全覆盖推算侵蚀面积与0.25%、1%抽样密度下推算面积相差较大，分别偏小145.27 km2和114.32 km2，与4%抽样密度计算结果相比仅偏小8.64 km2。在天山北坡开展县域尺度土壤侵蚀调查工作时，若资源、资金等条件有限，需开展土壤侵蚀状况基础调查，0.25%抽样密度下采用栅格计算法即可满足要求；若进行土壤侵蚀定量分析，既要掌握土壤侵蚀模数，又要进行土壤侵蚀强度分级，可采用基于CSLE模型全覆盖计算方法，植被因子可采用高分卫片为基础，通过遥感影像提取并结合0.25%的分层系统抽样获取。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| To further explore the influence of the CSLE model and sampling survey method for estimating regional soil erosion, this study determined the suitable sampling density and soil erosion estimation method at the county scale on the northern slopes of the Tianshan Mountain as a way to provide technical data support for the dynamic monitoring of soil and water loss in Xinjiang. Taking Fukang, located on the northern slopes of the Tianshan Mountain as an example, the soil erosion types in the study area were divided and the intensity of the soil erosion was estimated using the grid extrapolation method based on the CSLE model and sampling density of 0.25%, 1% and 4%. The areas and distributions of erosion intensity were compared and analyzed. The results show that the soil and water loss can be divided into four categories in Fukang:Areas where northern desert wind erosion is dominant, middle piedmont alluvial fan where inclined plain windwater erosion is dominant, southern mid-low hills where hydraulic erosion is dominant, and high southern mountains where freeze-thaw erosion is dominant. Compared with erosion areas where the sampling density is 4%, the relative difference between areas with sampling density of 0.25% and 1% are 8.76% and 28.99%, respectively. The spatial distribution of the three sampling densities is relatively consistent, with moderate erosion being distributed mainly in regions where vegetation coverage and slope gradients range from 30%~60% and 8°~25°, respectively. The total area of soil and water loss of global coverage calculation in Fukang is smaller than those where the three sampling densities were measured. The erosion areas calculated using the full-cover method are 145.27 km2 and 114.32 km2 smaller than those determined using sampling densities of 0.25% and 1%, respectively, and only 8.64 km2 smaller than that calculated using the sampling density of 4%. If the resources and funds are limited, it will be necessary to conduct a basic investigation of soil erosion on the northern slopes of the Tianshan Mountain. The grid calculation method can meet the requirement at a sampling density of 0.25%. For quantitative analysis of soil erosion, both the soil erosion modulus and the soil erosion intensity can be classified using the CSLE model while vegetation factors can be extracted from remotely sensed images based on high-resolution satellite images at a stratified sampling rate of 0.25%. |
| HTML
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
