河西走廊天然胡杨林的分布和更新特征及其与土壤因子的关系

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2023.02.07

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

通过对河西走廊天然胡杨林立地类型、分布、生长、更新特征及土壤因子调查，分析河西走廊天然胡杨分布、更新特征及其与土壤因子的关系。结果表明：（1）河西走廊天然胡杨林分布以疏勒河、黑河、石羊河三大流域的河岸阶地、古河道阶地及各流域下游绿洲耕地边缘为主。根据土地利用现状和立地条件，将现有天然胡杨林分为弃耕地林地、耕地及灌渠周围林地、现河道沿岸林地、古河道及戈壁低洼地林地4个类型。（2）耕地及灌渠周围林地和现河道沿岸林地胡杨生长、龄级构成及幼苗更新均优于弃耕地林地和古河道及戈壁低洼地林地；仅单位面积更新幼苗株数而言，耕地及灌渠周围林地最多，均值为22.13，其次是弃耕地林地20.92、现河道沿岸林地10.50，古河道及戈壁低洼地林地最少，为1.33。（3）不同类型胡杨林中，土壤因子各不相同，在0~20 cm及20~40 cm土层中，耕地及灌渠周围林地、现河道沿岸林地土壤含水量均高于弃耕地林地和古河道及戈壁低洼地林地，且具显著性差异（P<0.05）；0~20 cm土层中，土壤速效P表现为：现河道沿岸林地<古河道及戈壁低洼地林地<弃耕地林地和耕地及灌渠周围林地，20~40 cm土层中，现河道沿岸林地土壤速效P明显低于其他3类林地（P<0.05）；全N与有机质含量在不同类型林地中无显著差异（P>0.05）；土壤电导率在0~20 cm和20~40 cm土层中，表现为弃耕地林地显著小于其他3类林地（P<0.05），尤其40~60 cm土层中，古河道及戈壁低洼地林地显著大于其他3类林地（P<0.05）；不同类型林地中，除0~20 cm土层中粗沙粒外，各土层中耕地和灌渠周围林地土壤黏粒、粉粒、粗沙粒占比均高于其他3类林地（P<0.05）。（4）土壤水分、速效P含量与胡杨中龄、幼龄及幼苗株数呈正相关关系（P<0.05）。加强林地管护，适时疏枝、去除枝枯梢、间伐及灌溉补水，可推动胡杨林可持续发展。

关键词: 河西走廊, 天然胡杨, 分布更新, 土壤因子

Abstract:

A thorough investigation of the distribution of natural Populus euphratica, tree growth, regeneration characteristics, soil types, and factors in the Hexi Corridor was conducted. The distribution and regeneration status of natural P. euphratica in the Hexi Corridor, as well as its relationship with soil factors, were then examined. The results showed that: (1) Natural P. euphratica forests in the Hexi Corridor were mainly distributed in riparian terraces, ancient river terraces and the edge of oasis cultivated land in the lower reaches of Shule River, Black River, and Shiyang River. There are four main types of forest land: abandoned land, the land around cultivated fields and irrigation canals, land along the current river course, and land among ancient river course and Gobi low-lying land. (2) The growth status, age structure, and seedling regeneration of P. euphratica in the land around cultivated fields and irrigation canal, land along the current river course are better than those of the abandoned land, and among ancient river course and Gobi low-lying land. In terms of the number of renewed seedlings per unit area, the land around the cultivated field and irrigation canal was the largest, with an average value of 22.13, followed by abandoned cultivated land (20.92), land along the current river course (10.50), and among ancient river course and Gobi low-lying land (1.33). (3) Different types of P. euphratica forests have different soil factor contents: (i) Available P: In the 0-20 cm soil layer, the soil available phosphorus showed the trend as; land along the current river course < land among ancient river course and Gobi low-lying land < abandoned land, land around cultivated field and irrigation canal cultivated land; in the 20-40 cm soil layer, land along the current river course had significant less available phosphorus than the other three types of forest land (all P < 0.05); (ii) Moisture content was higher in the land around cultivated fields and irrigation canals, and land along the current river course than in abandoned land, land among ancient river course and Gobi low-lying land (all P < 0.05); (iii) In comparison to the other three types of forest land, abandoned land has significantly lower soil conductivity between the 0-20 cm and 20-40 cm soil layers (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the contents of total N and organic matter among different types of forest land (P > 0.05) and in the 40-60 cm soil layer, land among the ancient river course and Gobi low-lying land was significantly higher (P < 0.05). Except for the coarse sand in the 0-20 cm soil layer, the soil clay particles, silt particles, and coarse particles in the land around the cultivated field and irrigation canal performed significantly higher than those in the other three types of forest land (P < 0.05). (4) The contents of soil moisture and available P were positively correlated with the middle and young age of P. euphratica and the number of seedlings (P < 0.05). (5) To encourage the sustainable development of P. euphratica forest, improve forest management and protection, timely thinning, removal of branches and dieback, thinning, and irrigation.

Key words: Hexi Corridor, natural Populus euphratica, distribution renewal, soil factor

马俊梅, 马剑平, 满多清, 郭春秀, 张裕年, 赵鹏, 王飞, 李元星. 河西走廊天然胡杨林的分布和更新特征及其与土壤因子的关系[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(2): 224-234.

MA Junmei, MA Jianping, MAN Duoqing, GUO Chunxiu, ZHANG Yunian, ZHAO Peng, WANG Fei, LI Yuanxing. Distribution and regeneration characteristics of natural Populus euphratica forests in Hexi Corridor and their relationship with soil factors[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(2): 224-234.

图/表 5

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

参考文献 33

[1]	张宁, 李宝富, 徐彤彤, 等. 1960-2012年全球胡杨分布区干旱指数时空变化特征[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2017, 31(7): 121-126.
	[Zhang Ning, Li Baofu, Xu Tongtong, et al. Spatiotemporal variations of drought index in Populus euphratica global distribution area the past 50 years(1960-2012)[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2017, 31(7): 121-126.]
[2]	肖春生, 肖洪浪, 司建华, 等. 胡杨(Populus euphratica)径向生长日变化特征分析[J]. 冰川冻土, 2010, 32(4): 816-822.
	[Xiao Chunsheng, Xiao Honglang, Si Jianhua, et al. Study on the sub-diurnal radial growth of the Populus euphratica[J]. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2010, 32(4): 816-822.]
[3]	王夏楠, 王亮, 吕瑞恒, 等. 塔里木河中游不同生境胡杨种群的结构特征分析[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2014, 30(5): 1-6.
	[Wang Xianan, Wang Liang, Lyu Ruiheng, et al. Population structure characteristics of Populus euphratica in different habitats of the Tarim River middle reaches[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2014, 30(5): 1-6.]
[4]	高润宏, 董智, 张昊, 等. 额济纳绿洲胡杨林更新及群落生物多样性动态[J]. 生态学报, 2005, 25(5): 1019-1025.
	[Gao Runhong, Dong Zhi, Zhang Hao, et al. Study on regeneration process and biodiversity characteristic of Populus euphratica community in the Ejina Natural Reserve, Inner Mongolia of China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2005, 25(5): 1019-1025.]
[5]	张克新, 刘普幸, 霍华丽, 等. 河西走廊敦煌绿洲天然胡杨林土壤水分空间变化特征研究[J]. 水土保持研究, 2010, 17(5): 109-113.
	[Zhang Kexin, Liu Puxing, Huo Huali, et al. The spatial variations of soil water content under the Populus euphratica in Dunhuang Oasis in Hexi Corridor[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010, 17(5): 109-113.]
[6]	李并成. 河西走廊历史时期沙漠化研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2003.
	[Li Bingcheng. Study on Desertification in the Historical Period of Hexi Corridor[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2003.]
[7]	魏轩, 周立华, 马永欢, 等. 民勤绿洲50余年水利建设的生态经济影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2015, 38(5): 1014-1021.
	[Wei Xuan, Zhou Lihua, Ma Yonghuan, et al. Ecological and economic impacts of water conservancy construction in Minqin Oasis of more than 50 years[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2015, 38(5): 1014-1021.]
[8]	马俊梅, 马剑平, 满多清, 等. 石羊河下游天然胡杨林分布特征及土壤特性分析[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2020, 35(2): 15-23.
	[Ma Junmei, Ma Jianping, Man Duoqing, et al. Distribution and soil characteristics of natural Populus euphratica forests in the lower reaches of Shiyang River[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2020, 35(3): 15-23.]
[9]	杨玉海, 李卫红, 陈亚宁, 等. 极端干旱区自然环境下胡杨幼株对土壤渐进式干旱的生理响应[J]. 林业科学, 2013, 49(11): 171-176.
	[Yang Yuhai, Li Weihong, Chen Yaning, et al. Physiological response of Populus euphratica seedlings to progressive soil drought under natural environment in an extreme arid area[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2013, 49(11): 171-176.]
[10]	陈亚宁, 李卫红, 陈亚鹏, 等. 塔里木河下游断流河道的输水的生态响应与生态恢复[J]. 干旱区研究, 2006, 23(4): 521-530.
	[Chen Yaning, Li Weihong, Chen Yapeng, et al. Ecological response and ecological regeneration of transfusing stream water along the dried-up watercourse in the lower reaches of the Tarim River, Xinjiang[J]. Arid Zone Rrsearch, 2006, 23(4): 521-530.]
[11]	张武文, 史生胜. 额济纳绿洲地下水动态与植被退化关系的研究[J]. 冰川冻土, 2002, 24(4): 421-425.
	[Zhang Wuwen, Shi Shengsheng. Study on the relation between groundwater dynamics and vegetation degeneration in Erjina Oasis[J]. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2002, 24(4): 421-425.]
[12]	罗晓云, 崔长勇. 内蒙古额济纳地区胡杨林退化原因的探讨——以“怪树林”为例[J]. 地质科技情报, 2004, 23(1): 82-85.
	[Luo Xiaoyun, Cui Changyong. Reason for the degradation of Populus euphratica in Ejina area, Inner Mongolia:A case study in “Strange forest”[J]. Geological Science and Technology Iinformation, 2004, 23(1): 82-85.]
[13]	马剑平, 满多清, 马俊梅, 等. 河西胡杨林变化探析[J]. 防护林科技, 2021, 213(6): 64-67.
	[Ma Jianping, Man Duoqing, Ma Junmei, et al. Changes of Populus euphratica forest in Hexi[J]. Protection Forest Science and Technology, 2021, 213(6): 64-67.]
[14]	崔德宝. 艾比湖自然保护区阿其克苏河流域胡杨根蘖繁殖特征及影响因素研究[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆师范大学, 2011.
	[Cui Debao. Character of Root Suckers of Populus euphratica and Influencing Factors along the Aqikesu River Band in Ebinur Lake Natrue Reserve[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Normal University, 2011.]
[15]	王子康, 焦阿永, 凌红波, 等. 不同灌溉模式下胡杨断根处理根蘖繁殖特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(4): 1133-1142.
	[Wang Zikang, Jiao Ayong, Ling Hongbo, et al. Characteristics of Populus euphratica root under various irrigation modes[J]. Arid Zone Rrsearch, 2022, 39(4): 1133-1142.]
[16]	周伟磊. 额济纳绿洲胡杨林更新及植物多样性维持机制[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2011.
	[Zhou Weilei. Regeneration and Plant Diversity Maintenance of Populus euphratica Forest in Ejina Oasis[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2011.]
[17]	王海蓉, 郝鹏, 仲家虎, 等. 额济纳绿洲不同龄级胡杨林群落多样性分析[J]. 内蒙古林业调查设计, 2012(3): 93-96.
	[Wang Hairong, Hao Peng, Zhong Jiahu, et al. Community diversity analysis of Populus euphratica forest of different age grades in Ejin Oasis[J]. Inner Mongolia Forestry Investigation and Design, 2012(3): 93-96.]
[18]	鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2005:23-107.
	[Bao Shidan. Agrochemical Analysis of Soil[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2005: 23-107.]
[19]	满多清, 马俊梅, 马剑平, 等. 甘肃河西胡杨林现状及其退化林恢复技术[J]. 中国科技成果, 2021, 22(18): 28-30.
	[Man Duoqing, Ma Junmei, Ma Jianping, et al. Present situation of Populus euphratica forest and its restoration techniques in Hexi, Gansu Province[J]. China Science and Technology Achievements, 2021, 22(18): 28-30.]
[20]	马剑平, 常兆丰, 张元恺, 等. 民勤沙区胡杨林健康序列及其影响因子分析[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2021, 36(6): 31-38.
	[Ma Jianping, Chang Zhaofeng, Zhang Yuankai, et al. Health sequence and influencing factors of Populus euphratica forest in Minqin desert area[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2021, 36(6): 31-38.]
[21]	高安岭, 王文娟, 邓如军, 等. 人为干扰对绿洲胡杨种群特征和水肥条件的影响[J]. 内蒙古林业调查设计, 2019, 42(2): 44-48, 31.
	[Gao Anling, Wang Wenjuan, Deng Rujun, et al. Effects of human disturbance on the population characteristics and water and fertilizer conditions of oasis Populus euphratica[J]. Inner Mongolia Forestry Investigation and Design, 2019, 42(2): 44-48, 31.]
[22]	马俊梅, 满多清, 李得禄, 等. 干旱荒漠区退耕地植被演替及土壤水分变化[J]. 中国沙漠, 2018, 38(4): 800-807.
	[Ma Junmei, Man Duoqing, Li Delu, et al. Characteristics of vegetation succession and soil moisture in abandoned cropland of arid desert region[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2018, 38(4): 800-807.]
[23]	韩建华, 周芳, 张丽霞, 等. 构筑北方生态安全屏障——四子王旗胡杨林自然繁殖及人工更新探讨[J]. 林业科技情报, 2021, 53(2): 19-22, 25.
	[Han Jianhua, Zhou Fang, Zhang Lixia, et al. Construct the ecological security barrier in the North——Discussion on natural reproduction and artificial regeneration of Populus euphratica in Siziwang banner[J]. Forestry Science and Technology Information, 2021, 53(2): 19-22, 25.]
[24]	武逢平, 李俊清, 李景文, 等. 胡杨(Populus euphratica)在额济纳绿洲三种生境内的根蘖繁殖特性[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(10): 4703-4709.
	[Wu Fengping, Li Junqing, Li Jingwen, et al. The characteristics of root suckers of Populus euphratica Oliv. in three habitats of Ejina oasis[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(10): 4703-4709.]
[25]	卢德亮, 朱教君, 王高峰. 树木萌蘖更新研究进展与展望[J]. 生态学杂志, 2020, 39(12): 4178-4184.
	[Lu Deliang, Zhu Jiaojun, Wang Gaofeng. Resprouting of tree species:A research review[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2020, 39(12): 4178-4184.]
[26]	胡婵娟, 郭雷. 植被恢复的生态效应研究进展[J]. 生态环境学报, 2012, 21(9): 1640-1646.
	[Hu Chanjuan, Guo Lei. Advances in the research of ecological effects of vegetation restor ation[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2012, 21(9): 1640-1646.]
[27]	王晶, 吕昭智, 钱翌, 等. 新疆准噶尔盆地典型荒漠区不同景观植被对土壤养分的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2010, 30(6): 1367-1373.
	[Wang Jing, Lv Zhaozhi, Qian Yi, et al. Soil nutrients under vegetation cover of different desert landscapes in Junggar basin, Xinjiang[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2010, 30(6): 1367-1373.]
[28]	Nobel P. Root distribution and seasonal production in the north-western Sonoran Desert for a C3 subshrub, a C4 bunchgrass, and a CAM leaf succulent[J]. American Journal of Botany, 1997, 84(7): 949-955. pmid: 21708649
[29]	霍华丽, 刘普幸, 张克新, 等. 瓜州绿洲胡杨林下土壤水分空间特征研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2011, 25(2): 151-155.
	[Huo Huali, Liu Puxing, Zhang Kexin, et al. The spatial heterogeneity of soil water in the Populus euphratica forest in Guazhou Oasis[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2011, 25(2): 151-155.]
[30]	王雨辰. 胡杨繁殖根扩展行为及其影响因子研究[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2020.
	[Wang Yuchen. Study on the Foraging Behavior of Clonal Roots and Its Influencing Factors of Populus euphratica[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2020.]
[31]	王雨辰, 王文娟, 钟悦鸣, 等. 胡杨繁殖根扩展行为及其影响因子研究[J]. 植物科学学报, 2020, 38(3): 410-417.
	[Wang Yuchen, Wang Wenjuan, Zhong Yueming, et al. Study on the foraging behavior of clonal roots and its influencing factors in Populus euphratica Oliv.[J]. Plant Science Journal, 2020, 38(3): 410-417.]
[32]	井家林, 夏延国, 郝鹏, 等. 土壤类型及其含水量与盐分对胡杨根蘖发生影响[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2013, 41(12): 42-46, 63.
	[Jing Jialin, Xia Yanguo, Hao Peng, et al. Impacts of soil type, water content and salinity on the root sucker occurrence mechanism of Populus euphratica[J]. Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2013, 41(12): 42-46, 63.]
[33]	叶子奇, 邓如军, 王雨辰, 等. 胡杨繁殖根系分枝特征及其与土壤因子的关联性[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2018, 40(2): 31-39.
	[Ye Ziqi, Deng Rujun, Wang Yuchen, et al. Branching patterns of clonal root of Populus euphratica and its associations with soil factors[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2018, 40(2): 31-39.]

胡杨林类型	林地特征描述	主要植物种类	盖度/%
弃耕地林地	绿洲内原耕地，周围有胡杨树，因客观原因放弃耕种后胡杨在弃耕地内自然繁殖而形成的林地	二白杨、沙枣、柽柳、白刺、枸杞、黑果枸杞、甘草、宽叶独行菜、骆驼蓬、骆驼蒿、盐生草、黄花矶松、芦苇、苦豆子、沙拐枣、芨芨草、赖草、乳苣、猪毛菜、五星蒿、蝶果虫实、鹅绒藤、沙米	31.67
耕地及灌渠周围林地	绿洲内耕地、灌溉水渠周围生长不同龄级胡杨的林地	二白杨、新疆杨、榆树、沙枣、柽柳、梭梭、枸杞、黑果枸杞、白刺、沙拐枣、红砂、花花柴、苦豆子、盐生草、芨芨草、盐爪爪、甘草、芦苇、赖草、驼蹄瓣、猪毛菜、五星蒿、黄花矶松、骆驼蓬、骆驼蒿、田旋花、灰绿藜、乳苣、蒙古鸦葱、鹅绒藤、甘青铁线莲	45.91
现河道沿岸林地	各流域现水流汇集、径流、生长不同龄级胡杨的地带，有山坡地、河岸、河漫滩地等	柽柳、枸杞、黑果枸杞、骆驼刺、大叶白麻、珍珠猪毛菜、合头草、灌木亚菊、红花岩黄耆、河西菊、芨芨草、甘草、芦苇、猪毛菜、五星蒿、盐生草、甘青铁线莲、骆驼蓬、苦豆子、驼蹄瓣、灰绿藜、虎尾草、狗尾草、针茅、赖草	40.50
古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	因水量减少或河流改道，已多年没有水径流，但仍生长有胡杨的地域，如老河道、尾闾荒漠、戈壁低洼滩地等	柽柳、白刺、黑果枸杞、骆驼刺、大叶白麻、盐爪爪、花花柴、甘草、猪毛菜、盐生草、五星蒿、驼蹄瓣、黄花矶松、芦苇、芨芨草、乳苣、蝶果虫实、沙米、沙蒿	39.70

胡杨林类型	各龄级株数/株			幼苗株数/株	胡杨长势
胡杨林类型	C	Z	Y	幼苗株数/株	胡杨长势
弃耕地林地	7.83±4.28	12.17±4.91a	19.67±4.91b	20.92±2.82c	整体生长弱，枯枝枯梢现象明显，尤其退耕年限较长的
耕地及灌渠周围林地	19.38±3.71	42.50±4.25b	26.75±4.25b	22.13±2.449c	大部分生长正常，成熟龄以上的树木有枯枝枯梢现象
现河道沿岸林地	19.80±3.32	22.50±3.80a	19.30±3.81b	10.50±2.18b	大部分生长正常，成熟龄以上的树木有枯枝枯梢现象
古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	13.89±3.50	14.89±4.01a	3.33±4.01a	1.33±2.30a	树木整体生长弱，枯枝枯梢现象严重。

土层/cm	胡杨林类型	速效P /（mg·kg^-1）	全N /（g·kg^-1）	有机质 /（g·kg^-1）	含水率/%	电导率 /（μS·cm^-1）
0~20	弃耕地林地	20.64±3.80c	0.26±0.70	4.80±2.06	0.80±1.93a	310.8±1135.0a
	耕地及灌渠周围林地	21.99±3.10c	0.59±0.57	11.70±1.68	6.20±1.58b	3571.0±983.0b
	现河道沿岸林地	8.18±2.94a	0.42±0.54	6.55±1.59	3.70±1.50ab	2942.8±879.0b
	古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	11.95±3.10b	1.38±0.57	7.67±1.68	0.96±1.58a	4042. 6±927.0b
20~40	弃耕地林地	13.79±8.33b	0.20±0.90	4.30±2.27	1.13±2.89a	282.0±973.0a
	耕地及灌渠周围林地	13.58±8.63b	0.47±0.73	8.92±1.85	8.89±2.36b	2254.0±843.0b
	现河道沿岸林地	5.06±3.32a	0.39±0.70	6.81±1.76	5.48±2.24b	1646.0±754.0b
	古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	11.41±6.02b	1.67±0.73	7.07±1.85	1.58±2.36a	3773.0±794.0b
40~60	弃耕地林地	8.42±2.16	0.13±0.39	2.93±1.75	1.30±2.18	233.0±1376.0a
	耕地及灌渠周围林地	8.00±1.76	0.32±0.32	5.88±1.43	6.99±1.78	1300.0±1192.0b
	现河道沿岸林地	4.15±1.67	0.31±0.30	5.09±1.35	4.97±1.69	1372.0±1066.0b
	古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	7.35±1.76	0.84±0.32	6.70±1.43	2.04±1.78	5169.0±112.04c

土层/cm	胡杨林地类型	黏粒 <0.002 mm	粉粒 0.002~0.02 mm	细沙粒 0.02~0.2 mm	粗沙粒 0.2~2 mm
0~20	弃耕地林地	1.83±0.79a	7.13±3.65a	46.41±7.91	44.64±9.48
	耕地及灌渠周围林地	6.58±0.68b	27.85±3.16b	46.19±6.85	19.38±8.21
	现河道沿岸林地	1.76±0.61a	8.00±2.83a	49.70±6.13	40.54±7.34
	古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	1.28±0.65a	6.59±2.98a	54.65±6.46	37.48±7.74
20~40	弃耕地林地	1.25±0.76a	5.59±3.68a	42.46±7.20	50.70±8.71b
	耕地及灌渠周围林地	7.71±0.66b	31.06±3.18b	46.56±6.23	14.66±7.55a
	现河道沿岸林地	2.08±0.59a	9.92±2.85a	51.82±5.58	36.19±6.75b
	古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	2.00±0.62a	9.33±3.00a	51.90±5.88	36.77±7.11b
40~60	弃耕地林地	1.35±0.98a	5.41±4.17a	38.84±8.25	54.42±9.14b
	耕地及灌渠周围林地	6.80±0.85b	26.62±3.61b	52.69±7.14	13.90±7.91a
	现河道沿岸林地	1.87±0.76a	8.48±3.23a	45.38±6.39	44.27±7.08b
	古河道及戈壁低洼地林地	1.61±0.80a	7.78±3.40a	49.57±6.73	41.04±7.46b

胡杨龄级	土壤速效P	土壤全N	土壤pH	土壤有机质	土壤含水率	土壤电导率
成熟龄	0.081	0.065	-0.019	-0.130	-0.198	0.039
中龄	0.458^**	0.023	-0.277^**	0.015	0.260^**	0.199^*
幼龄	0.408^**	-0.090	-0.186	-0.052	0.295^**	0.149
幼苗	0.415^*	-0.115	-0.105	0.188	0.353^**	0.047