SHI Binglin1, WEI Jie1,2, ZHANG Zhimin1, LI Jinlin1
(1.College of Geography and Tourism, Chongqing Normal University, 401331, Chongqing, China;
2.Chongqing Key Laboratory of Surface Process and Environment Remote Sensing in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, 401331,Chongqing, China)
Abstract：Yangjiagou catchment in Shapingba District, Chongqing City, China was sampled to study the characteristics of soil compactness under different land-use types to provide scientific basis for soil quality assessment and land resource management in purple soil region. Soil compactness change with soil depth and land use types was studied using multiple comparative test analysis. Results show that 1) the soil compactness under six land use types are decreasing sequenced as bamboo land, orchard land, shrub land, forest land, grassland and dry land; 2)the soil compactness increase with increasing soil depth in six land use types, but are obvious different occurred among different land-use types; 3) for the same soil layer, the soil compactness of the 0–10 cm topsoil in the dry land is different from other five types (p < 0.05); however, the bottom layer soil compactness has no significant differences among various types. For the different soil layers, affected by external force such as cultivation, trampling disturbance, the soil compactness of the 0–10 cm topsoil are significant different from other soil layers. Significant differences also occurred in 10–20 cm soil layer with other three layers (p < 0.05). Due to the boundary between the topsoil of disturbed and the bottom layer soil of stabilization, soil properties are differentbetweentopsoil and bottom layer. However, there are no obvious differences among other layers. Soil compactness varies with land use types, with close relation to human disturbance degrees. Thanks to a combination of reduced agricultural activities and increased soil depth, the soil compactness is becoming higher.
Key words: purple soil; land use type; soil compactness; multiple comparative test
EARTH AND ENVIRONMENT Vol.44, No.5 Tot No.313, 2016, Page 520-526
