Evaluation of soil quality in different reclamation areas of Hequ open-pit mine dump
-
摘要: 露天矿开采效率高、成本低、生产安全、经济效益好，但也使得排土场土壤的结构和理化性质受到了影响，导致土壤养分流失，对土地资源造成一定程度的破坏。以河曲露天矿不同排土场土壤为研究对象，基于非线性隶属度函数方法和改进的内梅罗指数评价法，选取了5项养分指标对其土壤肥力质量水平进行综合评价。研究表明，河曲露天矿不同复垦区土壤肥力质量指数排序为4下(0.453)>1号(0.447)>2号(0.402)>3号(0.213)>4上(0.139)，即已复垦区的土壤质量水平要高于未复垦区的土壤质量水平；整体来看，土壤质量水平均处于中等偏下和较差水平，主要限制因子是有机质、碱解氮、有效磷，以及土壤酸碱度。本研究结果可为该地区后续土壤改良、提高土壤肥力及土壤可持续利用提供参考。Abstract: The open-pit mine has high mining efficiency, low cost, safe production and good economic benefits, but it also affects the structure and physical and chemical properties of the soil in the dump, resulting in the loss of soil nutrients and damage to land resources to a certain extent.Based on the nonlinear membership function method and the improved Nemero index evaluation method, five nutrient indexes were selected to comprehensively evaluate the soil fertility quality of Hequ open-pit mine.The research shows that the soil fertility quality index of different reclamation areas in Hequ open-pit mine is ranked as below 4(0.453)>1(0.447)>2(0.402)>3(0.213)>up 4(0.139), that is, the soil quality level of reclaimed area is higher than that of unreclaimed area.On the whole, the soil quality was at the lower or poor level, and the main limiting factors were organic matter, alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen, available phosphorus, and soil pH.The results of this study can provide reference for soil improvement, soil fertility improvement and soil sustainable utilization in this area.for soil improvement, soil fertility improvement and soil sustainable utilization in this area.
-
Key words:
- open pit dump /
- membership function /
- Nemerow index /
- evaluation of soil quality
-
图 4 各项土壤指标隶属度函数雷达图
Figure 4. Radar diagram of membership function of various soil indexes
表 1 土壤养分分级指标
Table 1. Classification index of soil nutrients
养分指标 极贫乏 贫乏 适量 较丰富 丰富 pH值 < 5.5 5.5~6.5 6.5~7.5 7.5~ 8.5 >8.5 有机质/(g·kg-1) < 6 6~10 10~20 20~30 >30 碱解氮/(mg·kg-1) < 30 30~60 60~90 90~120 >120 有效磷/(mg·kg-1) < 3 3~5 5~10 10~20 >20 速效钾/(mg·kg-1) < 30 30~50 50~100 100~ 150 >150 注：极贫乏、贫乏、适量、较丰富、丰富主要指养分指标，对应pH值表征的土壤酸碱度分别为酸、偏酸、适量、偏碱、碱。 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 土壤肥力指标统计
Table 2. Descriptive statistics of soil fertility indicators
排土场 参评指标 平均值 中值 最小值 最大值 标准差 变异系数/% 1号 pH值 8.29 8.32 8.14 8.47 0.13 1.57 有机质/(g·kg-1) 12.16 12.5 9.1 15.8 2.69 22.12 碱解氮/(mg·kg-1) 13.68 12.5 9.75 17.46 3.31 24.2 有效磷/(mg·kg-1) 8.33 8.14 6.83 10.07 1.22 14.6 速效钾/(mg·kg-1) 399 401 355 450 35.16 8.8 2号 pH值 8.49 8.43 8.34 8.82 0.19 2.24 有机质/(g·kg-1) 11.64 12.2 9.8 13.2 1.5 12.89 碱解氮/(mg·kg-1) 12.62 13.5 9.34 15.09 2.44 19.30 有效磷/(mg·kg-1) 7.78 7.14 5.34 10.98 2.17 27.90 速效钾/(mg·kg-1) 388.4 397 355 415 26.17 6.70 3号 pH值 8.8 8.9 8.01 9.26 0.47 5.34 有机质/(g·kg-1) 5.16 5.2 3.8 6.9 1.14 22.10 碱解氮/(mg·kg-1) 6.08 6.12 5.11 6.99 0.69 11.35 有效磷/(mg·kg-1) 5.55 5.85 3.68 6.96 1.23 22.16 速效钾/(mg·kg-1) 303.6 308 237 355 43.28 14.23 4上 pH值 8.89 8.92 8.69 9.1 0.15 1.69 有机质/(g·kg-1) 4.12 4.2 3.7 4.5 0.36 8.7 碱解氮/(mg·kg-1) 5.39 4.91 3.61 7.71 1.56 28.94 有效磷/(mg·kg-1) 4.88 4.81 3.97 6.12 0.88 18.03 速效钾/(mg·kg-1) 259 255 219 304 34.45 13.3 4下 pH值 8.27 8.26 8.12 8.41 0.12 1.45 有机质/(g·kg-1) 12.28 12.7 9.5 14.1 1.76 14.33 碱解氮/(mg·kg-1) 11.35 10.8 8.85 14.89 2.6 22.91 有效磷/(mg·kg-1) 9.13 8.65 6.99 12.58 2.17 23.77 速效钾/(mg·kg-1) 397.6 392 381 425 18.12 4.56
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 隶属度函数转折点取值
Table 3. Turning points of membership function
转折点 pH值 有机质/(g·kg-1) 碱解氮/(mg·kg-1) 有效磷/(mg·kg-1) 速效钾/(mg·kg-1) x1 5.5 4 5 3 100 x2 6.5 13 15 10 380 x3 7.5 — — — — x4 8.5 — — — —
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 土壤肥力评价指标的隶属度值
Table 4. Membership degree of soil fertility evaluation indexes
土样类型 编号 隶属度值 pH值 有机质 碱解氮 有效磷 速效钾 1号 F-1-1 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 F-1-2 0.37 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 F-1-3 0.13 0.95 0.72 0.76 1.00 F-1-4 0.26 0.61 0.78 0.71 0.92 F-1-5 0.42 0.7 0.53 0.59 1.00 均值 0.28 0.85 0.80 0.78 0.98 2号 S-2-1 0.16 0.97 0.94 1.00 0.92 S-2-2 0.11 1.00 1.00 0.40 1.00 S-2-3 0.200 0.73 0.86 0.57 1.00 S-2-4 0.10 0.68 0.63 0.63 1.00 S-2-5 0.24 0.92 0.49 0.84 0.96 均值 0.16 0.86 0.78 0.68 0.98 3号 T-3-1 0.10 0.23 0.28 0.50 0.73 T-3-2 0.10 0.16 0.20 0.47 0.54 T-3-3 0.10 0.39 0.17 0.10 0.92 T-3-4 0.54 0.22 0.22 0.37 0.77 T-3-5 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.61 0.81 均值 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.41 0.75 4上 F-4-1 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.4 0.76 F-4-2 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.25 0.69 F-4-3 0.10 0.14 0.34 0.22 0.60 F-4-4 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.33 0.50 F-4-5 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.53 均值 0.10 0.12 0.16 0.34 0.62 4下 F-5-1 0.38 0.97 0.83 0.95 1.00 F-5-2 0.23 0.88 0.99 0.71 1.00 F-5-3 0.18 1.00 0.45 0.61 1.00 F-5-4 0.32 1.00 0.47 1.00 1.00 F-5-5 0.44 0.65 0.62 0.82 1.00 均值 0.31 0.90 0.67 0.82 1.00
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 内梅罗指数法土壤肥力综合评价
Table 5. Comprehensive evaluation of soil fertility by Nemerow index method
排土场 内梅罗指数(IFI值) 4下 0.453 1号 0.447 2号 0.402 3号 0.213 4上 0.139
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 土壤肥力分级标准
Table 6. Soil fertility grading standard
肥力等级 优 良 一般 中等 差 IFI值 >0.8 0.7~0.8 0.6~0.7 0.4~0.6 < 0.4
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 宋子岭, 范军富, 王来贵, 等. 露天煤矿开采现状及生态环境影响分析[J]. 露天采矿技术, 2016, 31(9): 1-4, 9.Song Ziling, Fan Junfu, Wang Laigui, et al. Impact analysis on mining status and ecological environment in open-pit coal mine[J]. Opencast Mining Technology, 2016, 31(9): 1-4, 9. [2] 马媛媛. 内蒙古草原矿产资源开发引发的社会矛盾及化解机制研究[J]. 中国市场, 2016(21): 246-248.Ma Yuanyuan. Study on social contradictions and resolving mecha nism of Inner Mongolia grassland mineral resources development[J]. Chinese market, 2016(21): 246-248. [3] 张峰玮, 甄选, 陈传玺, 等. 世界露天煤矿发展现状及趋势[J]. 中国煤炭, 2014, 40(11): 113-116. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGME201411038.htmZhang Fengwei, Zhen Xuan, Chen Chuanxi, et al. Development status and tendency of wlrld open-pit coal mine[J]. China Coal, 2014, 40(11): 113-116. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGME201411038.htm [4] 孙世国. 露天煤矿开采对生态环境的影响及其亟待解决的问题[J]. 煤矿环境保护, 2000, 14(2): 53-54. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYBH200002021.htmSun Shiguo. Influence of ecoenvironment and the problem to be solved due to open pit excavation[J]. Energy Environmental Protection, 2000, 14(2): 53-54. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYBH200002021.htm [5] Rooney R C, Bayley S E, Schindler D W. Oil sands mining and reclamation cause massive loss of peatland and stored carbon[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2012, 109(13): 4933-4937. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1117693108 [6] Palmer M A, Bernhardt E S, Schlesinger W H, et al. Science and regulation. Mountaintop mining consequences[J]. Science, 2010, 327(5962): 148-149. doi: 10.1126/science.1180543 [7] 刘广深, 徐冬梅, 许中坚, 等. 用通径分析法研究土壤水解酶活性与土壤性质的关系[J]. 土壤学报, 2003, 40(5): 756-762. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRXB200305017.htmLiu Guangshen, Xu Dongmei, Xu Zhongjian, et al. The relationship between soil hydrolase activity and soil properties was studied by path analysis[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2003, 40(5): 756-762. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRXB200305017.htm [8] 刘建新. 不同农田土壤酶活性与土壤养分相关关系研究[J]. 土壤通报, 2004, 35(4): 523-525. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRTB200404027.htmLiu Jianxin. Correlative research on the activity of enzyme and soil nutrient in the different types of farmland[J]. Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 2004, 35(4): 523-525. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRTB200404027.htm [9] 胡振琪. 复垦土壤耕作效果的定量评价[J]. 土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报, 1996, 10(2): 86-94. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRQS602.012.htmHu Zhenqi. Quantitative evaluation of tillage effectiveness of reclaimed soil[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 1996, 10(2): 86-94. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRQS602.012.htm [10] 卞正富. 矿区土地复垦界面要素的演替规律及其调控研究[D]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 1997. [11] 陈龙乾, 邓喀中, 徐黎华, 等. 矿区复垦土壤质量评价方法[J]. 中国矿业大学学报, 1999, 28(5): 449-452. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD199905009.htmChen Longqian, Deng Kazhong, Xu Lihua, et al. Method of quantitative evaluation of quality of reclaimed soil[J]. Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 1999, 28(5): 449-452. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGKD199905009.htm [12] 王金满, 杨睿璇, 白中科. 草原区露天煤矿排土场复垦土壤质量演替规律与模型[J]. 农业工程学报, 2012, 28(14): 229-235. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYGU201214037.htmWang Jinman, Yang Ruixuan, Bai Zhongke. Succession law and model of reclaimed soil quality of opencast coal mine dump in grassland[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2012, 28(14): 229-235. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYGU201214037.htm [13] 吕新, 寇金梅, 李宏伟. 模糊评判方法在土壤肥力综合评价中的应用研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2004, 22(3): 56-59. Lü https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHDQ200403014.htmXin, Kou Jinmei, Li Hongwei. Fuzzy integrative evaluation of soil fezrtility based on GIS[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2004, 22(3): 56-59. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHDQ200403014.htm [14] 解倩, 王莹, 齐瑞鹏, 等. 毛乌素沙区退化湿地土壤剖面水分和养分特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2015, 29(3): 150-155, 288. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRQS201503028.htmXie Qian, Wang Ying, Qi Ruipeng, et al. Distribution characteristics of soil moisture and nutrients in the profile of degraded wetlands in mu us sandy land[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 29(3): 150-155, 288. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TRQS201503028.htm [15] 冯万忠, 段文标, 许皞. 不同土地利用方式对城市土壤理化性质及其肥力的影响: 以保定市为例[J]. 河北农业大学学报, 2008, 31(2): 61-64. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CULT200802015.htmFeng Wanzhong, Duan Wenbiao, Xu Hao. Effects of different land use on physicochemical property and fertility of urban soil: a case study of Baoding City[J]. Journal of Agricultural University of Hebei, 2008, 31(2): 61-64. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CULT200802015.htm [16] 周伟, 王文杰, 张波, 等. 长春城市森林绿地土壤肥力评价[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(4): 1211-1220. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-STXB201704017.htmZhou Wei, Wang Wenjie, Zhang Bo, et al. Soil fertility evaluation for urban forests and green spaces in Changchun City[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(4): 1211-1220. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-STXB201704017.htm -
点击查看大图
图(4) / 表(6)
计量
- 文章访问数: 131
- HTML全文浏览量: 24
- PDF下载量: 21
- 被引次数: 0