乌拉山废弃矿山生态恢复的近自然植被空间配置模式

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2023.07.13

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究着眼于废弃矿山立地类型与植被群落特征关系的研究视角，以近自然修复理论为基础探究其植被群落空间配置，为废弃矿区生态修复过程中植被恢复提供理论依据和参考。研究区位于内蒙古乌拉山废弃矿山，采用主成分分析、相关性分析和聚类分析的方法划分立地类型，探究不同立地类型下植物群落特征，从而得到近自然植被恢复的最佳空间配置比例。结果表明：坡度、坡位和土壤硬度为主导因子并据此将该区域划分为9个立地类型。其中，缓坡坡中中质土立地类型和斜坡坡中中质土立地类型在生物量、植被盖度、Margalef丰富度指数和Shannon-Wiener多样性指数上均大于其他立地类型。就植被配置模式而言，对于生境较差的立地类型如缓坡坡下软质土立地类型，建议配置草本模式（配置比例为多年生草本∶一年生草本=6∶4），对于其他立地条件较好区域，建议配置灌草模式。

关键词: 废弃矿山, 立地类型, 主成分分析, 聚类分析, 植物群落特征

Abstract:

This study addresses the insufficient trade-offs between regional vegetation diversity and topographic differentiation during restoring vegetation processes in abandoned mines. Based on the basic principles of near-natural restoration, this study examines the primary factors determining a classification of different site types, clarifies the spatial distribution patterns of vegetation and near-natural vegetation configuration modes under various site types, and establishes a foundation for near-natural vegetation configuration for ecological restoration in abandoned mine areas. It is crucial to understand the features of the plant communities of various site types for the selection and allocation of species during the restoration of ecological services in abandoned mines. Herein, we employed field investigation and indoor analysis as our study methodologies, situated within abandoned mines of Inner Mongolia’s Wula Mountains. Using principal component, correlation, and cluster analyses, we chose nine indicators, including topographic features and soil properties (slope, slope position, slope direction, available phosphorus, total phosphorus, available potassium content, soil hardness, soil thickness, and soil texture), to identify the dominant site types. The variations in plant community traits (e.g., biomass and diversity) among different site types were then compared. Based on correlation analysis and principal component analysis, the results indicated that slope, slope location, and soil hardness were the key characteristics for classifying different types of sites. The research region was classified into three site type groups and nine site types. The biomass, vegetation coverage, Margalef richness index, and Shannon-Wiener diversity index are greater for the gentle-middle slope-medium hard soil site type, slope-middle slope-medium hard soil site type, and lower for the steep-middle slope-hard soil site type than for other site types. This is because of the variations in moisture, nutritional, and light conditions across the site types owing to topographic influences. In comparison to moderate slopes, steep slopes are more vulnerable to soil erosion caused by gravity and wind, as well as moisture and nutrient loss. Nutrient conditions are better at the downhill than in and on the slope due to the change in slope position. Additionally, too soft or too hard soil does not support the plants’ development. Consequently, the biomass and diversity of various site types on abandoned mining sites vary. Therefore, we must consider the effect of site conditions and create the spatial layout of vegetation according to distinct site types when creating near-natural vegetation for mine ecological restoration. We advise the herbaceous mode for poorer habitat types, such as the steep-middle slope-hard soil site type (with a configuration ratio of perennial herb∶annual herb = 4∶1). We recommend the irrigation and grass mode for better-maintained areas. Examples of these site types include gentle-middle slope-medium hard soil (with a configuration ratio of perennial herb∶annual herb∶shrub or semi-shrub = 5∶4∶1) and slope-middle slope-medium hard soil (with a configuration ratio of perennial herb: annual herb: shrub or semi-shrub = 7∶2∶1).

Key words: abandoned mine, site type, principal component analysis, cluster analysis, characteristics of vegetation community

张泽宇, 吴晓静, 梁一鹏, 张晓霞, 查同刚. 乌拉山废弃矿山生态恢复的近自然植被空间配置模式[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(7): 1164-1171.

ZHANG Zeyu, WU Xiaojing, LIANG Yipeng, ZHANG Xiaoxia, ZHA Tonggang. Spatial allocation pattern of near-natural vegetation for ecological restoration of abandoned mines in the Wula Mountains[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(7): 1164-1171.

图/表 5

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

参考文献 28

[1]	魏远, 顾红波, 薛亮, 等. 矿山废弃地土地复垦与生态恢复研究进展[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2012, 10(2): 107-114.
	[Wei Yuan, Gu Hongbo, Xue Liang, et al. Review of studies on reclamation and ecological restoration of abandoned land of mine[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2012, 10(2): 107-114. ]
[2]	玉宝, 彭华福. 基于自然修复理念的森林经营措施研究[J]. 西南林业大学学报(自然科学), 2023, 43(1): 8-17.
	[Yu Bao, Peng Huafu. Research on forest management measures based on natural restoration concept[J]. Journal of Southwest Forestry University (Natural Sciences), 2023, 43(1): 8-17. ]
[3]	白中科, 师学义, 周伟, 等. 人工如何支持引导生态系统自然修复[J]. 中国土地科学, 2020, 34(9): 1-9.
	[Bai Zhongke, Shi Xueyi, Zhou Wei, et al. How does artificiality support and guide the natural restoration of ecosystems[J]. China Land Science, 2020, 34(9): 1-9. ]
[4]	安伟莉, 卢耀海, 谢威, 等. 基于近自然植被恢复的乔灌草种子混播研究[J]. 中国水土保持, 2021, 42(8): 40-43.
	[An Weili, Lu Yaohai, Xie Wei, et al. Mixed sowing of arbor, shrub and herbs seeds based on near natural vegetation restoration[J]. Soil and Water Conservation in China. 2021, 42(8): 40-43. ]
[5]	Pensa M, Sellin A, Luud A, et al. An analysis of vegetation restoration on opencast oil shale mines in Estonia[J]. Restoration Ecology, 2004, 12(2): 200-206. doi: 10.1111/rec.2004.12.issue-2
[6]	Hodačová D, Prach K. Spoil heaps from brown coal mining: Technical reclamation versus spontaneous revegetation[J]. Restoration ecology, 2003, 11(3): 385-391. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-100X.2003.00202.x
[7]	白世强, 强真. 废弃露天矿山生态修复的问题与对策——以河南省南太行地区为例[J]. 中国国土资源经济, 2022, 35(7): 36-41.
	[Bai Shiqiang, Qiang Zhen. Problems and countermeasures of ecological rehabilitation of abandoned open-pit mines: A case study of South Taihang Region of Henan Province[J]. Natural Resource Economics of China, 2022, 35(7): 36-41. ]
[8]	徐文达. 建平县矿山生态重建与植被恢复存在的问题及解决策略[J]. 现代农业, 2020, 49(4): 87-88.
	[Xu Wenda. Problems and solutions of ecological reconstruction and vegetation restoration of mines in Jianping County[J]. Modern Agriculture, 2020, 49(4): 87-88. ]
[9]	唐玉凤, 李学艳, 程金朋, 等. 昭通龙树河流域废弃稻田湿地植物多样性及群落特征研究[J]. 西南农业学报, 2021, 34(5): 1088-1095.
	[Tang Yufeng, Li Xueyan, Cheng Jinpeng, et al. Plant diversity and communities characteristics of abandoned paddy field wetland of Longshu River Basin in Zhaotong City[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 34(5): 1088-1095. ]
[10]	贺金生, 卜海燕, 胡小文, 等. 退化高寒草地的近自然恢复: 理论基础与技术途径[J]. 科学通报, 2020, 65(34): 3898-3908.
	[He Jinsheng, Bu Haiyan, Hu Xiaowen, et al. Close-to-nature restoration of degraded alpine grasslands: Theoretical basis and technical approach[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2020, 65(34): 3898-3908. ]
[11]	彭东海, 侯晓龙, 何宗明, 等. 金尾矿废弃地不同植被恢复模式群落特征[J]. 水土保持研究, 2016, 23(1): 50-55.
	[Peng Donghai, Hou Xiaolong, He Zongming, et al. Community characteristics of different vegetation restoration models in gold tailing wasteland[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016, 23(1): 50-55. ]
[12]	韦易伶. 山地生态公园近自然植物配置模式初探[J]. 现代园艺, 2021, 44(22): 182-183, 186.
	[Wei Yiling. A Preliminary study on the pattern of near-nature plant allocation in mountain ecological park[J]. Contemporary Horticulture, 2021, 44(22): 182-183, 186. ]
[13]	宋安琪, 季心蕙, 赵兵. 基于生态修复理论的长江岸线林带景观营造——以扬州市江都经济开发区沿江区域林带景观规划设计为例[J]. 园林, 2020, 40(3): 71-75.
	[Song Anqi, Ji Xinhui, Zhao Bing. The landscape construction of the forest belt along the Yangtze River bank based on ecological restoration theory: Take the forest belt landscape planningalong Yangzhou Jiangdu economic development zone riverside as an example[J]. Landscape Architecture Academic Journal, 2020, 40(3): 71-75. ]
[14]	王赛峰, 赵一凡, 乌兰, 等. 乌拉特前旗植被分布特点与保护[J]. 内蒙古林业调查设计, 2006, 46(5): 49-52.
	[Wang Saifeng, Zhao Yifan, Wu Lan, et al. Vegetation distribution and protection of Urat Front Banner[J]. Inner Mongolia Forestry Investigation and Design, 2006, 46(5): 49-52. ]
[15]	戴礼飞. 基于GIS和RUSLE的乌拉山区小流域综合治理[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2013.
	[Dai Lifei. Comprehensive Treatment of the Watershed in Wula Mountains Based on GIS and RUSLE[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2013. ]
[16]	Zhang Hengshuo, Yu Yang, Zha Tonggang, et al. Assessing previous land-vegetation productivity relationships on mountainous areas hosting coming Winter Olympics Games in 2022[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 2021, 788: 147870. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147870
[17]	明健. 平山片麻岩微立地划分、植被特征及植物配置研究[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2019.
	[Ming Jian. Study on Micro-site Division, Vegetation Characteristics and Optimal Allocation of Pingshan Gneiss[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2019. ]
[18]	Cui Ranran, Qi Shi, Wu Bingchen, et al. The influence of stand structure on understory herbaceous plants species diversity of Platycladus orientalis plantations in Beijing, China[J]. Forests, 2022, 13(11): 1921. doi: 10.3390/f13111921
[19]	Aleksandra Glowacka, Ewelina Flis-olszewska. The biodiversity of weed communities of dent maize, narrow-leaved lupin and oat in relation to cropping system and weed control[J]. Annales Umcs Agricultura, 2022, 77: 3.
[20]	袁雪丽, 汪阳东, 黄兴召, 等. 基于数量化理论对山苍子立地类型划分及评价[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2020, 35(5): 91-96.
	[Yuan Xueli, Wang Yangdong, Huang Xingzhao, et al. Classification and evaluation of Litsea cubeba site type based on quantification theory[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2020, 35(5): 91-96. ]
[21]	杨宇平. 灵武矿区采煤迹地立地类型划分及其特征研究[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2020.
	[Yang Yuping. Study on Site Classification and Characteristics of Coal Mining Bases in Lingwu Mining Area[D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2020. ]
[22]	刘莹. 乌海煤矿区排土场立地类型划分及其质量评价[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2021.
	[Liu Ying. Study on Site Classification and Evaluation of Dump in Wuhai Coal Mining Area[D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2021. ]
[23]	赵鹏, 屈建军, 徐先英, 等. 长江源区沙化高寒草地植被群落特征及其与地形因子的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(3): 1030-1040.
	[Zhao Peng, Qu Jianjun, Xu Xianying, et al. Study on the characteristics of sandy alpine grasslands and its relationship between plant distribution and microtopography in the source regions of Yangtze River[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(3): 1030-1040. ]
[24]	和继军, 唐泽军, 蔡强国. 内蒙古农牧交错区农耕地土壤风蚀规律的风洞试验研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2010, 24(4): 35-39.
	[He Jijun, Tang Zejun, Cai Qiangguo. Study on changing laws of soil wind erosion by wind tunnel experiment in Agro-pastoral area of Inner Mongolia[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010, 24(4): 35-39. ]
[25]	赵蒙恩, 闫庆武, 刘政婷, 等. 鄂尔多斯市土壤侵蚀时空演变及影响因子分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(6): 1819-1831.
	[Zhao Mengen, Yan Qingwu, Liu Zhengting, et al. Analysis of temporal and spatial evolution and influencing factors of soil erosion in Ordos City[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(6): 1819-1831. ]
[26]	王君立. 坡度坡位对植烟土壤有机碳氮形态及团聚体组成的影响[D]. 成都: 四川农业大学, 2019.
	[Wang Junli. Effects of Slope Gradient and Position on Organic Carbon and Nitrogen Fractions and Aggregate Composition in Tobacco-growing Soil[D]. Chengdu: Sichuan Agriculture University, 2019. ]
[27]	尉迟文思, 苗恒录, 王星天, 等. 阴山北麓荒漠草原干旱气象因子分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(5): 327-1334.
	[Yuchi Wensi, Miao Henglu, Wang Xingtian, et al. Analysis of meteorological factors affecting drought in a desert steppe of the northern foot of Yinshan Mountain[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2021, 38(5): 327-1334. ]
[28]	冯丹. 鲁中南干旱瘠薄山地立地因子空间变异性及微立地划分[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2021.
	[Feng Dan. Spatial Variability of Site Factors and Micro Site Classification in Arid and Barren Mountains of South Central Shandong Province[D]. Tai’an: Shandong Agriculture University, 2021. ]

		立地因子
		X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄/（mg·kg^-1）	X₅ /（g·kg^-1）	X₆/（mg·kg^-1）	X₇/mm	X₈/cm	X₉/%
立地因子赋值	1	缓坡（<15°）	下坡	阳	5~10	<0.5	<50	软质土（<10）	极薄土（<10）	5~10
	2	斜坡（15°~25°）	中坡	半阴半阳	10~15	0.5~0.6	50~100	中质土（10~20）	薄土（10~30）	10~30
	3	陡坡（>25°）	上坡	阴	15~20	0.6~0.7	100~150	硬质土（>20）	中土（30~50）	>30
	4				>20	>0.7	150~200		厚土（>50）
	5						>200

	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈	X₉
X₁	1.00
X₂	-0.08	1.00
X₃	-0.33^*	0.18	1.00
X₄	0.31	-0.46^*	-0.41^*	1.00
X₅	-0.61^**	-0.47^**	-0.17	0.15	1.00
X₆	-0.15	-0.43^*	-0.16	0.23	0.47^**	1.00
X₇	0.46^**	0.64^**	0.05	-0.35^*	-0.63^**	-0.07	1.00
X₈	-0.36^*	-0.20	0.00	0.45^**	0.44^**	-0.33	0.07	1.00
X₉	0.24	0.31	0.07	0.07	-0.45^**	-0.80^**	0.10	0.24	1.00