Analysis of Vegetation Community Characteristics under Different Restoration Measures in Xilinhot Open-pit Coal Mine Dump

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.07.022

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2024, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (7): 2214-2224.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.07.022

Analysis of Vegetation Community Characteristics under Different Restoration Measures in Xilinhot Open-pit Coal Mine Dump

ZHAO Wei-xuan, WANG Tong-tong, SHEN Hao-wei, LI Yue, GAO Tian, WANG Ming-jiu

College of Grassland and Resources and Environment/Key Laboratory of Grassland Resources of Ministry of Education, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia 010018, China

Received:2023-12-27 Revised:2024-02-01 Published:2024-08-03

锡林浩特露天煤矿排土场不同恢复措施植被群落特征分析

赵伟璇, 王彤彤, 沈浩伟, 李岳, 高天, 王明玖

内蒙古农业大学草原与资源环境学院/草地资源教育部重点实验室, 内蒙古呼和浩特 010018

通讯作者: 王明玖，E-mail:wangmj_0540@163.com
作者简介:赵伟璇(1998-)，男，汉族，内蒙古包头人，硕士研究生，主要从事矿区排土场生态修复研究，E-mail：zwx980804@163.com
基金资助:
内蒙古典型矿区土壤和植被修复重建及保护关键技术研究(2020ZD0020-3)资助

Abstract

Abstract: Effective vegetation restoration in the soil stacking area will contribute to the restoration of ecological functions in the mining area and its surrounding areas. Different restoration measures have different effects on vegetation restoration. Different restoration measures provide different environments for vegetation restoration,resulting in differences in vegetation community succession. Taking the soil stacking area of the West No. 2 open-pit coal mine in Shengli Coalfield,Xilinguole League as the research object,restoration work was conducted in 2007. This study investigated the plant communities under three different restoration measures in the 13th year of restoration. The three different restoration measures were respectively the straw coverage measure (SW),the sand barrier coverage measure (SZ),and the manual strip sowing measure (RT). The slopes under different measures were divided into four heights:upper slope (PS),middle slope (PZ),lower slope (PX),and platform (PT). The results showed that (1) the restoration effect of the coverage measures was obvious,and species diversity was significantly higher than the RT measure,with the SW measure having better effect. (2) As for the height under the same restoration measure,the PT had the best restoration effect,and slope gradient had a certain impact on plant growth. (3) The annual herb Brassica rapa var. oleifera,the perennial herb Elymus dahuricus,and the shrubs Caragana microphylla and C. korshinskii had good adaptability to the ecological environment of the soil stacking area in Shengli Coalfield.

Key words: Xilingol league, Open-pit coal mine, Soil dumping site, Biological fence measures, Sand barrier measures

摘要： 有效的排土场植被重建会有利于矿区及周边生态功能的恢复，不同措施植被恢复效果不同。以锡林郭勒盟胜利煤田西二号露天煤矿外排土场为研究对象，于2007年开始进行修复工作，本研究对排土场恢复第13年3种不同恢复措施下的植物群落进行调查。其中，3种不同措施分别为生物笆覆盖措施(简称SW)、沙障覆盖措施(简称SZ)和人工条播措施(简称RT)。不同措施坡面同时分为坡上(PS)、坡中(PZ)、坡下(PX)和平台(PT)4个高度。结果表明：(1)覆盖措施恢复效果明显，物种多样性显著高于RT措施，其中SW措施效果较好。(2)同一措施下各高度中，PT恢复效果最好，坡度对于植物生长存在一定影响。(3)一年生草本植物芸薹(Brassica rapa var. oleifera)，多年生草本植物披碱草(Elymus dahuricus)，灌木植物小叶锦鸡儿(Caragana microphylla)、柠条锦鸡儿(C. korshinskii)对于胜利煤田矿区排土场生态环境适应性较好。

关键词: 锡林郭勒盟, 露天煤矿, 排土场, 生物笆措施, 沙障措施

CLC Number:

S812.5

ZHAO Wei-xuan, WANG Tong-tong, SHEN Hao-wei, LI Yue, GAO Tian, WANG Ming-jiu. Analysis of Vegetation Community Characteristics under Different Restoration Measures in Xilinhot Open-pit Coal Mine Dump[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2024, 32(7): 2214-2224.

赵伟璇, 王彤彤, 沈浩伟, 李岳, 高天, 王明玖. 锡林浩特露天煤矿排土场不同恢复措施植被群落特征分析[J]. 草地学报, 2024, 32(7): 2214-2224.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.07.022

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2024/V32/I7/2214

References

[1] 侯竟. 胜利矿区土地退化时空特征与生态修复效果研究[D]. 徐州:中国矿业大学,2022:1-3
[2] 杨晓伟,王妍,刘欣,等. 我国露天煤矿发展现状及展望[J]. 中国煤炭,2023,49(6):126-133
[3] 王言帅. 矿山废弃地生态问题及修复方法研究[J]. 地质研究与环境保护,2023,2(3):177-179
[4] ASIF Z,CHEN Z. Environmental management in north american mining sector[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research,2016,23(1):167-179
[5] 刘佳佳,黄甘霖. 锡林郭勒盟和锡林浩特市草原生态系统服务与人类福祉的关系研究综述[J]. 草业科学,2019,36(2):573-593
[6] 宁璐,崔向新,刘艳萍,等. 内蒙古典型草原区露天矿土壤侵蚀机理及防控技术研究进展[J]. 北方园艺,2022(22):132-138
[7] LEI H, PENG Z, YIGANG H,et al. Vegetation and soil restoration in refuse dumps from open pit coal mines[J]. Ecological Engineering,2016(94):638-646
[8] 程彦郡,朱燕峰,马静,等. 露天矿排土场植物恢复对土壤氮循环功能基因的影响[J]. 土壤通报,2023,54(6):1409-1417
[9] 潘帅. 新邱露天煤矿排土场土壤演变趋势与机理研究[D]. 阜新:辽宁工程技术大学,2023:4-6
[10] 赵传鹏,杨健,姚俊伟,等. 露天矿排土场生态修复与植被重建技术分析[J]. 世界有色金属,2020(7):224-225
[11] 于爽,朱月,徐长友,等. 内蒙古高寒露天煤矿排土场植被恢复研究[J]. 西北植物学报,2023,43(7):1208-1217
[12] 尤云楠,朱燕峰,陈浮,等. 植被类型对露天矿复垦土壤微生物固碳潜力及路径的影响[J]. 生态与农村环境学报,2023,39(9):1170-1179
[13] 卢誉之,陈银萍,曹渤,等. 矿山生态修复技术体系构建[J]. 环境保护科学,2023,49(5):41-50,54
[14] 王瑜,张小平,魏博微. 环境脆弱区大型露天煤矿开发与生态环保协调发展研究[J]. 中国煤炭,2023,49(S1):15-23
[15] 范冰艳,程俊飞,李雪萍. 矿区生态环境的修复[J]. 节能与环保,2019(2):42-43
[16] 丰菲. 宁东矿区煤矸石山人工植物群落特征及土壤理化性质研究[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2022:1-5
[17] 杨卓,周国驰,盛世博,等. 立地条件对露天矿排土场植被重建的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学,2021,49(22):80-84,106
[18] LESICA P, ALLENDORF F W. Ecological genetics and the restoration of plant communities:mix or match?[J]. Restoration Ecology,1999,7(1):42-50
[19] 齐雪. 锡林郭勒盟露天煤矿排土场植被重建与恢复效果研究[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2018:45-52
[20] 姚忠岭,孙砥夫,高超. 胜利煤田东一号露天矿边坡稳定性分析[J]. 内蒙古煤炭经济,2020(6):51-52
[21] 黄鑫,曹学章,张明,等. 基于最小累积阻力模型的内蒙古胜利煤田景观生态安全格局构建[J]. 生态与农村环境学报,2019,35(1):55-62
[22] 李恒. 草原地貌特征提取及内排土场近自然重塑[D]. 徐州:中国矿业大学,2022:18-20
[23] 冯海波. 煤矿开采影响下草原生态系统稳定性及其生态地质学机制研究[D]. 武汉:中国地质大学,2022:23-26
[24] VEECH J, SUMMERVILLE K, CRIST T,et al. The additive partitioning of species diversity:recent revival of an old idea[J]. Oikos,2002(99):3-9
[25] GOSSELIN F. An assessment of the dependence of evenness indices on species richness[J]. Journal of Theoretical Biology,2006,242(3):591-597
[26] 马克平. 生物群落多样性的测度方法α多样性的测度方法(上)[J]. 生物多样性,1994(3):162-168
[27] 李心慧. 露天煤矿区生态稳定性测度及其维持方法研究[D]. 徐州:中国矿业大学,2023:147-151
[28] 耿冰瑾,王舒菲,曹银贵,等. 山西平朔露天矿区不同年限复垦地植被重建特征对比分析[J]. 生态学报,2022,42(8):3400-3419
[29] 邵田田. 草原露天煤矿排土场植被恢复适宜植物种筛选[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2022:51-55
[30] 李晴. 霍林河露天矿区植被类型与植被恢复重建的研究[D]. 上海:华东师范大学,2011:40-41
[31] 罗渊. 十字花科芸薹属植物幼苗建成对四环素胁迫的响应及机理研究[D]. 长沙:湖南大学,2022:7-9
[32] 刘玉玲,王德平,张泓博,等. 补播时间和补播草种对退化草甸草原植物群落的影响[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(11):3098-3105
[33] 王丽. 恢复力视角下矿区植被扰动-损伤-修复综合评价与恢复方案[D]. 徐州:中国矿业大学,2022:129-132
[34] 许木桑,雷少刚,杨星晨,等. 基于高光谱遥感的排土场植被覆盖与植物多样性分析[J]. 生态学杂志,2022,41(3):603-609
[35] 常涛,李珊,李以康,等. 混播人工草地建植初期对黑土滩植被和土壤的恢复效果[J]. 草地学报,2023,31(5):1546-1555
[36] 徐志果. 安太堡露天矿复垦地草本植物群落多样性研究[D]. 北京:中国地质大学,2013:59-61
[37] 杨鑫光. 高寒矿区煤矸石山植被恢复潜力研究[D]. 西宁:青海大学,2020:145-152
[38] 付江涛,赵吉美,刘昌义,等. 坡位对优势植物分布与根系力学特性影响[J]. 草地学报,2023,31(7):2020-2030
[39] MARTINEZ-CAMILO R,MARTINEZ-MELENDEZ M, MARTINEZ-MELENDEZ N,et al. Tropical tree community composition and diversity variation along a volcanic elevation gradient[J]. Journal of Mountain Science,2022,19(12):3475-3486
[40] 刘祥宏,尹勤瑞,辛建宝,等. 生态植被自然修复及其人工促进技术研究进展与展望[J]. 生态环境学报,2022,31(7):1476-1488
[41] ZHANG G H, LIUG G B, WANG L. EFFECTS of caragana korshinskii kom. cover on runoff,sediment yield and nitrogen loss[J]. International Journal of Sediment Research,2010,25(3):245-257
[42] 袁小强,王敏,张鲜花,等. 乌鲁木齐周边典型荒漠草地群落物种多样性及生物量关系研究[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(5):1253-1262
[43] TILMAN D. Causes,Consequences and Ethics of Biodiversity[J]. Nature,2000,405(6783):208-211
[44] 陈彭祯霓,任亮晶,罗辑,等. 海螺沟冰川退缩区原生演替序列植被物种多样性与生物量的关系[J]. 应用与环境生物学报,2022,28(5):1129-1136
[45] 牛钰杰,杨思维,王贵珍,等. 放牧干扰下高寒草甸物种和生活型丰富度与地上及地下生物量的关系[J]. 生态学报,2018,38(8):2791-2801

Analysis of Vegetation Community Characteristics under Different Restoration Measures in Xilinhot Open-pit Coal Mine Dump

锡林浩特露天煤矿排土场不同恢复措施植被群落特征分析

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	XU Xiao-ying, SHEN You-xin, YUAN Chuan, CHEN Fa-jun, DAI Wen. Responses of Native Grass Communities to Tillage and Seed Sowing Treatments in Zhaotong, Southern China [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(8): 2481-2489.
[2]	YANG Jun, LI Xiao-wei, HUANG Wen-guang, MA Hong-ying. Relationship Between Ecological Adaptation Strategies and Ecological Factors of Stipa plants in Ningxia Grassland [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(8): 2516-2526.
[3]	TANG Jing-lei, REN Zhi-guo, ZHANG Xue-yuan, ZHANG Yi-yao, WANG Zhong-wu, WANG Zhen, SUO Ming-chun, REN Hai-yan. Relationships between Species Diversity and Productivity of Different Functional Groups in a Typical Steppe in Inner Mongolia [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(7): 1939-1949.
[4]	ZHAO Huan, WANG Lin, TIAN Hai-jing, SHI Jun-hua, HAN Li-liang. Reviewing and Pondering on the Development of Grassland Natural Park under the Natural Areas Protection System in the New Era [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(6): 1599-1608.
[5]	CHANG Sheng-hua, WANG Lei, JIANG Jia-chang, LIU Yong-jie, PENG Ze-chen, HAN Tian-hu, HUANG Wen-guang, HOU Fu-jiang. Developments Course and Prospect of Grassland Survey and Monitoring Domestic and Abroad [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(5): 1281-1292.
[6]	MA Long, YANG Jun, YANG Jun-long, WANG Rui-xia, LI Xiao-wei. Response of Leaf Anatomical Structure Strategy Spectrum of Caragana korshinskii to the PlantingYears in Southwestern Margin of Maowusu Sandy Land [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(5): 1378-1385.
[7]	LIU Xin-rui, CUI Yuan-yuan, WANG Zhong-wu, SUN Hai-lian, HAN Guo-dong, HOU Dong-jie, WANG Jing, LI Zhi-guo, LIU Zhuo-tong. Effects of Grazing and Simulated Precipitation on Plant Functional Group Diversity in Stipa breviflora Desert Steppe [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(3): 868-875.
[8]	CUI Ting, WANG Yong, NIU Kui-ju, DONG Wen-ke, ZHANG Ran, MA Hui-ling. Study on Distribution and Chemical Forms of Cd in Poa pratensis [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(1): 73-80.
[9]	ZHU Hong, SHEN You-xin, CHEN Fa-jun, FU Xun, WANG Wen. Impacts of the Degraded Grassy Hill and Artificial Reconstruction on Soil Seed Bank in Southern Zhaotong [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(6): 1359-1369.
[10]	JU Xin, HA Jie, WANG Bing-ying, CHEN Chen, LI Zhi-guo, HAN Guo-dong. Analysis on Livestock Production Efficiency of Different Household Ranches in Desert Steppe:A Case Study from Siziwang Banner [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(5): 1263-1272.
[11]	WANG Xiao-yan, ZHANG Cai-jun, PU Qiang-sheng, AN Kang, ZHANG Qian, YANG Jing, SUN Xiao-mei, SU Jun-hu. Effects of Artificial Grassland Construction on Grassland Productivity and Soil Physicochemical Properties in Alpine Meadow of Gannan [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(2): 288-296.
[12]	TANG Fang-lin, YANG Zhi, WANG Zhuo-ran, SUN Nuan, HAN Feng-ze, ZHAO Jin-long. Research on the Establishment of Grassland Governance Systems from the Perspective of Ecological Civilization [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(11): 2381-2390.
[13]	HUANG Jia-xing, WU Jing, LI Chun-bin, QIN Ge-xia, QIAN Juan-bing, LI Huai-hai. Remote Sensing Retrieval of grassland Above-Ground Biomass in Tianzhu County based on Sentinel-2 and Landsat 8 Data [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 2023-2030.
[14]	TANG Fang-lin, SONG Zhong-shan, SUN Nuan, GOU Wen-long, GUO Xu. Views on the Construction of State-owned Rangeland [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 861-865.
[15]	DING Wen-qiang, Hou Xiang-yang, Yin Yan-ting, LI Xi-liang, WANG Duo-bin. Are Herdsmen Overloaded? Who is Overloading and Its Influencing Factors under the Grassland Supplementary Award Policy-A case of Inner Mongolia [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2020, 28(1): 12-19.