【摘要】：紅星農場隸屬于黑龍江農墾省北安分局,地勢為南高北低,中部和西部均為緩坡且坡長較長。該地區(qū)水資源補給主要是降雨,地表水利用率低,存在季節(jié)性干旱、漬澇與水土流失并存的問題。水土流失將導致坡耕地黑土層逐年變薄,地力減退,土壤肥力下降,作物產量明顯下降等不良結果,因此該地區(qū)農業(yè)生產受到降雨制約和水土流失嚴重的問題。針對以上問題,于2013年5月至9月在紅星農場徑流小區(qū)內選取了鼠道(SD)、鼠道+暗管(SA)、鼠道+壟向區(qū)田(SQ)、鼠道+暗管+壟向區(qū)田(SAQ)四種不同措施處理模式,并設順坡耕作方法設計對照小區(qū),即常規(guī)處理(CK)。研究了不同水土保持技術模式對不同土層深度、不同坡位的土壤水分、土壤容重、土壤持水性能等土壤性質指標的影響。以及多年水土流失治理后土壤團聚體、土壤有機質和土壤三相比的變化。并對不同技術模式條件下的表層土壤水分進行了模擬研究,提出了適合本地區(qū)的土壤水分預測模型。研究結果表明:(1)“鼠道+暗管+壟向區(qū)田”組合措施的除漬和保水效果均為良好。其他幾種模式的除漬效果也優(yōu)于常規(guī)。無論是坡上還是坡下,土壤水分的變異系數按數值大小的排列為SAQSASDSQCK。且這5種措施的土壤含水量變異系數Cv和土層深度的關系為土層越深,其變異系數值越小。即表層土壤含水量的變異系數比深層大。(2)各措施處理土壤容重均隨著土層深度的增加而呈逐漸增大,但不同的組合模式之間容重變化有差異。從不同措施處理的土壤容重平均值來看,“鼠道和壟向區(qū)田組合”、“鼠道”、“鼠道和暗管組合”,“鼠道、壟向區(qū)田和暗管”組合較常規(guī)分別減少了2.28%、1.54%、2.29%、3.37%。(3)從土壤水分特征曲線可以看出,“鼠道+暗管+壟向區(qū)田”組合的持水性能最好,各措施處理的持水性能依次為鼠道、暗管和壟向區(qū)田組合模式(SAQ)、鼠道和暗管組合模式(SA)、鼠道和壟向區(qū)田組合模式(SQ)、鼠道(SD)、常規(guī)(CK)。且各措施處理隨著土層深度增加,其持水性能越差。(4)通過六年的水土流失治理后,不同處理措施下的土壤有機質含量和常規(guī)處理比較發(fā)現,“鼠道、暗管和壟向區(qū)田”組合模式”的治理效果最佳。所研究的4種水土保持措施及組合均對土壤有機質有正面作用。差別程度因措施的不同而不同�！笆蟮�+暗管+壟向區(qū)田”組合模式”的有機質含量高于“鼠道+壟向區(qū)田”組合模式”,“鼠道+暗管”組合模式”的有機質高于“鼠道”處理。(5)將計算得到的土壤團聚體穩(wěn)定性評價指標進行對比研究發(fā)現,不同的處理措施對土壤團聚體的穩(wěn)定性亦產生了一定影響,和常規(guī)處理比較,其他4種水土保持模式的土壤團聚體穩(wěn)定性均較高。其穩(wěn)定性由大到小依次為“鼠道+暗管+壟向區(qū)田”“鼠道+暗管”“鼠道+壟向區(qū)田”“鼠道”“常規(guī)”。四種措施均可有效減少水土流失。有機質含量高的處理措施,其土壤團聚體穩(wěn)定性也較好。但二者卻并不是顯著的相關關系。(6)不同處理的固相容積的體積隨土層的加深而逐漸增大,而空氣體積隨耕層的加深而呈現下降的趨勢,“鼠道”、“鼠道+壟向區(qū)田”、“鼠道+暗管”、“鼠道+壟向區(qū)田+暗管”模式的土壤固相容積均明顯小于常規(guī)。說明各措施處理均有改善土壤通透性的作用。(7)將GM(1,1)-AR模型和AR模型模擬出的預測值對比,這兩種方式得到的預測值相差不大,且都能較準確的模擬和預測土壤含水量。GM(1,1)-AR模型和AR模型這兩種方法均可以用來描述水分的具體動態(tài)變化,在水分預測上有實際意義,可將其應用和推廣。不同坡耕地綜合治理技術模式的耕層土壤水分采用AR法模擬的預測值相對誤差分別為7.9%(CK)、9.7%(SD)、7.22%(SQ)、5.87%(SA)、3.6%(SAQ);采用GM(1,1)-AR法模擬的預測值相對誤差分別為2.77%(CK)、4.9%(SD)、4.7%(SQ)、1.6%(SA)、1.69%(SAQ)。二者平均相對誤差相差3.53%�；谛〔ǚ纸獾腉M(1,1)-AR模型的擬合和預測效果最優(yōu),但是該模型需要對數據拆分分別進行預測,運算過程繁瑣,預測結果需要疊加處理,沒有AR模型簡便,GM(1,1)-AR模型的運算難度明顯高于AR模型。在實際應用中,應對具體情況選擇適合的預測模型。
[Abstract]:The Red Star Farm is subordinate to the Beian Branch of the Heilongjiang Agricultural Reclamation, with the terrain being low, the middle and the west are gentle slope and the slope is long. The supply of water resources in the area is mainly rainfall, the utilization rate of surface water is low, and the problems of seasonal drought, waterlogging and water and soil loss exist. The soil and water loss will cause the black soil layer of the slope farmland to become thinner year by year, the soil fertility is reduced, the soil fertility is reduced, the crop yield is obviously reduced, and the like, and the agricultural production in the area is seriously affected by the rainfall and the water and soil loss. aiming at the above problems, four different treatment modes of the rat channel (SD), the mouse channel + dark tube (SA), the mouse channel + ridge-direction area field (SQ), the mouse channel + dark tube and the ridge-direction area field (SAQ) are selected in the runoff area of the red-star farm from May to September 2013, And a control cell, i.e., a conventional process (CK), is designed according to a slope cultivation method. The effects of different soil and water conservation technology patterns on soil moisture, soil bulk density and soil water holding performance of different soil and soil layers were studied. And the change of soil aggregate, soil organic matter and soil three after the multi-year water and soil erosion treatment. In this paper, the soil moisture of the surface layer under different technical modes is simulated and the soil moisture prediction model suitable for the region is put forward. The results of the study show that: (1) The removal and water-retaining effects of the "mouse channel + dark tube + ridge-to-region field"-combined measures are good. The stain removal effect of several other modes is also better than that of the conventional ones. The coefficient of variation of soil moisture is as follows: SAQSASDSQCK, whether on the slope or on the slope. The relationship between the coefficient of variation of soil moisture content and the depth of soil in the five measures is the deeper the soil layer, and the smaller the coefficient of variation. That is, the variation coefficient of water content of the surface soil is greater than that of the deep layer. (2) The soil bulk density of each measure is gradually increased with the increase of the depth of the soil layer, but the variation of the bulk density between different combined modes is different. The "Combination of the mouse track and the ridge-direction area", "mouse track", "the combination of the mouse track and the dark tube" and "mouse track, ridging field and dark tube" were reduced by 2.28%, 1.54%, 2.29% and 3.37%, respectively. (3) From the soil water characteristic curve, it can be seen that the water-holding performance of the "mouse channel + dark tube + ridge-to-region field" combination is the best, and the water-holding performance of each measure treatment is the combination mode (SAQ) of the mouse track, the dark tube and the ridge-direction area, the combination mode (SA) of the mouse track and the dark tube, the combination mode (SQ) of the mouse track and the ridge-direction area, Rat track (SD), routine (CK). And the water-holding performance is worse as the depth of the soil layer is increased. (4) after six years of water and soil loss treatment, the soil organic matter content and the conventional treatment under different treatment measures are found, The control effect of the combined mode of the mouse track, the dark tube and the ridge-to-land field is the best. The four kinds of water and soil conservation measures and the combination of the four soil and water conservation measures in the study have a positive effect on the soil organic matter. The difference of the difference is different from that of the measures. The organic matter content of the "mouse channel + dark tube + ridge-to-land field combined mode" is higher than that of the mouse channel + ridge-to-field "combination mode, and the organic matter in the mouse-channel + dark tube combination mode is higher than that of the mouse track". (5) The stability evaluation indexes of the soil aggregates obtained by the calculation are compared and studied, and the stability of the soil aggregates is also affected by different treatment measures, and the stability of the soil aggregates in the other four soil and water conservation modes is higher than that of the conventional treatment. The stability is as follows: rat track + dark tube + ridge-to-region field "mouse track + dark tube mouse track + ridge-to-region field" mouse track routine ". The four measures can effectively reduce the water and soil loss. The soil aggregate stability is also good in the treatment of high organic matter content. But the two are not a significant correlation. (6) The volume of the solid-phase volume of different treatment gradually increases with the deepening of the soil layer, and the volume of the air decreases with the deepening of the plowing layer, and the solid-phase volume of the soil in the "mouse track", the "mouse-channel + ridge-direction field", the "mouse channel + dark tube" and the "mouse channel + ridging area field + dark tube" mode is obviously less than that of the conventional. It is indicated that the treatment of each measure has the effect of improving the permeability of the soil. And (7) comparing the predicted values of the GM (1,1)-AR model and the AR model, the predicted values obtained in the two ways are not small, and the water content of the soil can be simulated and predicted more accurately. The two methods of GM (1,1)-AR model and AR model can be used to describe the specific dynamic changes of water, which is of practical significance in water prediction and can be applied and extended. The relative error of soil water by AR method was 7.9% (CK), 9.7% (SD), 7.22% (SQ), 5.87% (SA), 3.6% (SAQ), and the relative error of the predicted values simulated by GM (1,1)-AR method was 2.77% (CK), 4.9% (SD), 4.7% (SQ), 1.6% (SA) and 1.69% (SAQ) respectively. The average relative error of the two is 3.53%. The fitting and prediction of the GM (1,1)-AR model based on wavelet decomposition are the best, but the model needs to predict the data splitting separately, the operation process is complicated, the prediction result needs to be superposed, the AR model is simple and the operation difficulty of the GM (1,1)-AR model is obviously higher than the AR model. In the practical application, the appropriate prediction model should be selected for the specific situation.
【學位授予單位】：東北農業(yè)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：S157

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前8條

1 張鳳云;成雪峰;張恩和;;河西綠洲區(qū)保護性耕作對土壤微生物量C和有機質的影響[J];干旱地區(qū)農業(yè)研究;2007年04期

2 劉文飛;樊后保;;杉木人工林凋落物C,N,P歸還量對氮沉降的響應[J];林業(yè)科學;2011年03期

3 李琳琳;岳春芳;;基于SPSS軟件的土壤含水量預測分析[J];節(jié)水灌溉;2014年04期

4 王偉東,白曉娟;壟向區(qū)田技術[J];水利科技與經濟;2004年02期

5 李成亮,何圓球,林天;種植制度對地表徑流的影響[J];水土保持通報;2004年01期

6 張玉斌;曹寧;蘇曉光;許曉鴻;閆飛;楊振明;;吉林省低山丘陵區(qū)水土保持措施對土壤性質的影響[J];水土保持通報;2009年05期

7 李陽兵,魏朝富,謝德體,高明;巖溶山區(qū)植被破壞前后土壤團聚體穩(wěn)定性研究[J];中國農學通報;2005年10期

8 王樹聲;;鼠道加明溝排水防治漬害的效益[J];農田水利與小水電;1992年04期

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 戴智慧;貴州坡地黃壤水分時空變異特征研究[D];西南大學;2009年

，

本文編號：2478456