| The research was carried out in the serious eroded granite area, located inChangting county, Fujian province. There are two kinds of management measures:grass-planting (GP),mixed arbor and shrub (AS). The study also set two checkmeasures: (1) severely eroded region without restoration measures (CK1) , (2) geomantic forest (CK2) . The effect of ecological restoration was discussed in theaspects of the soil quality, the structure and the function of the ecosystem. The resultsshowed that:(1) Soil antierodibility, soil structure, soil permeability, soil water storage ability,soil nutrient characters and microbe quality were improved by GP and AS measures.Soil antierodibility, soil permeability and soil water storage ability of GP was closedto that of CK2．Soil antierodibility and soil structure of AS was closed to that of CK2,and soil permeability as well as soil water storage ability was higher than that of CK2．But restoration degrees (RD) of soil nutrient characters were both low. The RD of soilnutrient characters was lower than physical properties.(2) The analysis of biomass and productivity showed that: the productivity(4．80t? hm-2·a-1 ) and RD of productivity (0．36) of GP were low because of short life ofherb and slow growth of arbor, so its biomass was also low(45．26 t·hm-2 ), RD ofbiomass was 0．20．The productivity(16．01t·hm-2·a-1 ) and RD of productivity(1．43) of AS was high because of high productivity of arbor, so its biomass was alsohigh(141．09t·hm-2 ), RD of biomass was 0．69．(3) The content of N,P,K were highest in the leaves of Pinus massoniana growingin treated communities and control region, followed by that in cortex and branch. Thecontent of Ca and Mg in leaf, cortex or branch was highest. While the nutrient in stemwas lowest. The retention and accumulation of the nutrient increased with differentmeasures. The RD of productivity and nutrient retention of GP were low, and thecommunity and system of GP was also low. The nutrient retention of AS was higherthan that of geomantic forest. The RD of community and system was pretty high. (4) Among all vegetation organs, the average content of C in foliage leave s wasthe highest, the lowest was in moss. The average content of C in dead wood and leafwas lower than that in fresh plant. With the treatment the serious eroded area waschanged from Carbon source to Carbon sink. The annual carbon assimilation of GPwas 2．30 t·hm-2·a-1 , RD was 0．32, and the carbon storage of community, soil andecosystem of GP were 23．28, 28．03 and 52．95 t·hm-2 , RD were 0．21, 0．19 and 0．21respectively. The annual carbon assimilation of AS was 8．35 t·hm-2·a-1 , RD was1．64, and the carbon storage of community, soil and ecosystem of AS were 75．37,37．89,115．70t·hm-2 , RD were 0．75,0．35,0．59．(5) In different community arbors, the gross caloric values of leaf was highest,followed by that of branch and cortex. The ability of absorbing solar energy and theenergy accumulation of the community increased in different treatments. In GP, theannual energy retention was 9．19×103 kJ·m-2·a-1 and RD was 0．35．The energyaccumulation was 91．19×103 kJ·m-2 and RD was 0．21．In AS, annual energyretention was 29．98×103 kJ·m-2·a-1 and RD was 1．38, the present energyaccumulation was 269．01×103kJ·m-2·a-1 and RD was,0．67．(6) The biodiversity of two measures ecosystems were higher than CK1．Fourbiodiversity indexes of the GP's RD were range form 0．15 to 0．32 and the AS's RDrange from 0．49 to 0．94．(7) Correlation among soil quality, biomass, biodiversity and productivity showedthat: the restoration of eroded area was the correlation of the mutual promotion of soilquality and vegetation, and the restoration of shrub should be paid attention.(8) AS's RD was higher than GP's in every respect. And the difference of RDshowed the different effects of GP and AS. The vegetation of GP was still in the firstphase of subtropical vegetation succession (coniferous forest), while the AS'svegetation was already in the second phase (mixed coniferous and broadleaf forestdominated with conifer). |
PDF Full Text Request