The Influence of Water System Connectivity and Reseeding of Suaeda glauca on Vegetation Restoration and Soil Physical and Chemical Properties in Degraded Coastal Wetlands

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2025.09.009

Ecology and Environmental Sciences ›› 2025, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (9): 1421-1431.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2025.09.009

• Research Article [Ecology] • Previous Articles Next Articles

The Influence of Water System Connectivity and Reseeding of Suaeda glauca on Vegetation Restoration and Soil Physical and Chemical Properties in Degraded Coastal Wetlands

LI Donglin¹^,³(), ZHANG Jiaojiao¹^,³, YANG Lei², WANG Peng², HE Dongmei³

1. Jiangsu Academy of Forestry, Nanjing 211153, P. R. China
2. Geological Survey of Jiangsu Province, Nanjing 210018, P. R. China
3. Yancheng Coastal Wetland Ecosystem Research Station, Yancheng 224136, P. R. China

Received:2025-02-12 Online:2025-09-18 Published:2025-09-05

水系连通与碱蓬复播对滨海退化湿地植被恢复及土壤理化性质的影响

李冬林¹^,³(), 张姣佼¹^,³, 杨磊², 王鹏², 何冬梅³

1.江苏省林业科学研究院，江苏南京 211153
2.江苏省地质调查研究院，江苏南京 210018
3.江苏盐城滨海湿地生态系统定位观测研究站，江苏盐城 224136

作者简介:李冬林（1969年生），男，研究员，博士，研究方向为湿地生态学。E-mail: 704020830@qq.com
基金资助:
江苏省林业科技创新与推广项目(LYKJ[2022]03)

Abstract

Abstract:

Coastal wetlands are among the ecosystems that are most frequently disturbed by human activities and experienced the most severe degradation. It is particularly urgent to implement wetland restoration to curb coastal soil degradation, promote the progression and succession of vegetation, and improve the habitats of animals and plants. The impact of remediation on vegetation recovery, soil physicochemical properties, and two enzyme activities of degraded coastal wetlands in Yancheng, Jiangsu Province were studied using three treatment techniques: land leveling+water system connection+Suaeda glaudata resowing (Ⅰ), land leveling+water system connection (Ⅱ), and land leveling+natural growth (Ⅲ). The effects of different restoration measures on the growth of Suaeda glaudata in wetlands, soil physical and chemical properties, and enzyme activities were compared. The results showed that the restoration treatments significantly improved the habitat conditions of coastal wetlands, and the effect was obvious, with 22 plant species returning, covering six families and 19 genera. The vegetation coverage of treatments I and Ⅱ was 58% and 46%, respectively, significantly higher than that of the control (19%), and Suaeda glauca was the dominant species in the total community. After the drainage connection treatment, the changes in the main physical parameters of the soil were insignificant. The mass fractions of soil organic carbon (SOC), total nitrogen (TN), and available phosphorus (AP) decreased significantly, whereas those of available potassium (AK) and soil salinity (SS) increased significantly. The water system connection measures promoted an increase in catalase (CAT) activity in the surface soil, but the effects on alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and soil urease (SUE) activity were not obvious in the short term. Correlation analysis showed that SOC was significantly positively correlated with TN and AP (p<0.01) and significantly negatively correlated with AK and SS (p<0.01). The correlations between the three soil enzyme activities and the soil physical and chemical indicators were not significant (p>0.05). Redundancy analysis indicated that SOC, AK, SS, TN, CAT, and ALP activity at 0‒10 cm depth were significantly positively correlated with vegetation restoration indicators (p<0.05), whereas bulk density (BD), soil water content (SWC), net primary productivity (NPP), AP, and SUE activity were significantly negatively correlated with them (p<0.05). The results can provide technical references for ecological restoration and saline soil improvement in degraded coastal wetlands.

Key words: coastal degraded wetlands, water system connectivity, reseeding of Suaeda glauca, vegetation recovery, soil physical and chemical properties, enzyme activity

摘要： 滨海湿地是自然界遭受人类活动干扰最频繁、退化最严重的生态系统之一，实施以遏制滨海土壤退化、促进植被进展演替、改善动植物栖息地生境为目标的湿地修复尤为迫切。在江苏盐城通过实施土地平整+水系连通+碱蓬复播（Ⅰ）、土地平整+水系连通（Ⅱ）、土地平整+自然生长（Ⅲ）等3种处理技术，研究了水系连通与碱蓬复播对滨海湿地植被恢复、土壤理化及酶活性的影响，比较了不同修复措施对湿地碱蓬生长、土壤理化性质及酶活性的效应。结果表明：处理区植被恢复效果明显，植物回归22 种，覆盖6个科19属，处理Ⅰ和处理Ⅱ下植被盖度分别达58%、46%，显著高于对照（19%），并以碱蓬植物占绝对优势；水系连通处理后土壤主要物理参数变化不明显，SOC、TN、AP质量分数显著降低，而AK、SS质量分数显著增加；水系连通措施促进了表层土壤CAT活性提高，但短期内对深层次ALP、SUE活性的影响作用不显著。相关分析表明，SOC与TN、AP呈极显著正相关（p<0.01），与AK、SS呈极显著负相关（p<0.01），3种土壤酶活性与土壤理化指标间的相关性均不显著（p>0.05）。冗余分析表明，0-10 cm深度土壤SOC、AK、SS、TN、CAT、ALP活性与植被恢复指标呈显著正相关（p<0.05），BD、SWC、NCP、AP、SUE活性与其呈显著负相关（p<0.05）。该研究结果可为滨海退化湿地实施生态修复及盐土改良提供一定的技术参考。

关键词: 滨海湿地, 水系连通, 碱蓬复播, 植被恢复, 土壤理化, 酶活性

CLC Number:

X171.4

LI Donglin, ZHANG Jiaojiao, YANG Lei, WANG Peng, HE Dongmei. The Influence of Water System Connectivity and Reseeding of Suaeda glauca on Vegetation Restoration and Soil Physical and Chemical Properties in Degraded Coastal Wetlands[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2025, 34(9): 1421-1431.

李冬林, 张姣佼, 杨磊, 王鹏, 何冬梅. 水系连通与碱蓬复播对滨海退化湿地植被恢复及土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2025, 34(9): 1421-1431.

Figures/Tables 9

References 40

[1]	CUI B S, HE Q, GU B H, et al., 2016. China’s coastal wetlands: Understanding environmental changes and human impacts for management and conservation[J]. Wetlands, 36(1): 1-9.
[2]	DAY J W, BOESCH D F, CLAIRAIN E J, et al., 2007. Restoration of the Mississippi Delta: Lessons from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita[J]. Science, 315(5819): 1679-1684. PMID
[3]	JIA M M, WANG Z M, LIU D W, et al., 2015. Monitoring loss and recovery of salt marshes in the Liao River delta, China[J]. Journal of Coastal Research, 31(2): 371-377.
[4]	MA Z J, WANG Y, GAN X J, et al., 2009. Waterbird population changes in the wetlands at Chongming Dongtan in the Yangtze River Estuary, China[J]. Environmental Management, 43(6): 1187-120. DOI PMID
[5]	SCHMIDT K F, 2001. A true blue vision for the Danube[J]. Science, 294: 1444-1447.
[6]	YANG R M, CHEN L M, 2021. Spartina alterniflora invasion alters soil bulk density in coastal wetlands of China[J]. Land Degradation & Development, 32(5): 1993-1999.
[7]	ZHANG L, WU B F, YIN K, et al., 2015. Impacts of human activities on the evolution of estuarine wetland in the Yangtze Delta from 2000 to 2010[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 73(1): 435-447.
[8]	ZHAO J K, LI L X, ZHANG A S, et al., 2017. A New approach for the health assessment of river systems based on interconnected water system networks[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 8(3): 251-257. DOI
[9]	鲍士旦, 2000. 土壤农化分析[M]. 第3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社.
	BAO S D, 2000. Soil Agricultural Chemistry Analysis[M]. Third edition. Beijing: China Agriculture Press.
[10]	戴雅奇, 陆金忠, 陈雪初, 2021. 海岸带侵蚀岸段湿地恢复设计及运行成效分析——以杭州湾北岸奉贤段为例[J]. 园林, 38(8): 20-24.
	DAI Y Q, LU J Z, CEHN X C, 2021. The schemes of coastal wetland restoration in eroded area and its operation effect after implementation: Taking the Fengxian section of the north bank of Hangzhou Bay as an example[J]. Garden, 38(8): 20-24.
[11]	冯建祥, 黄茜, 陈卉, 等, 2018. 互花米草入侵对盐沼和红树林滨海湿地底栖动物群落的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 37(3): 943-951.
	FENG J X, HUANG Q, CHEN H, et al., 2018. Effects of Spartina alterniflora invasion on benthic faunal community in saltmarsh and mangrove wetland[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 37(3): 943-951.
[12]	付建鑫, 张桂香, 张炳文, 等, 2019. 碱蓬的营养价值及开发利用[J]. 中国食物与营养, 25(4): 59-63.
	FU J X, ZHANG G X, ZHANG B W, et al., 2019. Nutritional Function, Development and Utilization of Suaeda[J]. Food and Nutrition in China, 25(4): 59-63.
[13]	国家林业局, 1999. 森林土壤水分-物理性质的测定: LY/T 1215—1999[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社.
	China’s State Forestry Administration, 1999. Determination of forest soil water-physical properties: LY/T 1215—1999[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China.
[14]	国家林业局, 1999. 森林土壤水溶性盐分分析: LY/T 1251—1999[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社.
	China’s State Forestry Administration, 1999. Analysis methods of water soluble salt of forest soil: LY/T 1251—1999[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China.
[15]	国家林业局, 2015. 森林土壤氮的测定元素分析仪法: LY/T 1228—2015[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社.
	China’s State Forestry Administration, 2015. Nitrogen determinations of forest soils: LY/T 1228—2015[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China.
[16]	韩广轩, 王光美, 毕晓丽, 等, 2018. 黄河三角洲滨海湿地演变机制与生态修复[M]. 北京: 科学出版社.
	HAN G X, WANG G M, BI X L, et al., 2018. Evolution mechanism and ecological restoration of coastal wetland in the Yellow River Delta[M]. Beijing: The Science Publishing Company.
[17]	贺文君, 韩广轩, 颜坤, 等, 2021. 微地形对滨海盐碱地土壤水盐分布和植物生物量的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 40(11): 3585-3597.
	HE W J, HAN G X, YAN K, et al., 2021. Effects of micro topography on plant biomass and the distribution of both soil water and salinity in coastal saline-alkali land[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 40(11): 3585-3597.
[18]	姜经梅, 赵慧, 沈铭能, 等, 2011. 长江口潮滩表层沉积物中碱性磷酸酶活性及其影响因素[J]. 环境科学学报, 31(10): 2233-2239.
	JIANG J M, ZHAO H, SHEN M N, et al., 2011. Distribution and impact factor of alkaline phosphatase activity in the intertidal surface sediments of the Yangtze Estuary[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 31(10): 2233-2239.
[19]	蒋科毅, 吴明, 邵学新, 等, 2013. 杭州湾及钱塘江河口南岸滨海湿地鸟类群落多样性及其对滩涂围垦的响应[J]. 生物多样性, 21(2): 214-223. DOI
	JIANG K Y, WU M, SHAO X X, et al., 2013. Diversity of bird communities in southern Hangzhou Bay and the Qiantang River estuary and their responses to reclamation of intertidal mudflats[J]. Biodiversity Science, 21(2): 214-223. DOI
[20]	李春荣, 李雅, 张涛, 等, 2023. 江苏盐城湿地珍禽国家级自然区鸟类种群组成及年际间变化[J]. 中国禽业导刊, 10(10): 39-44.
	LI C R, LI Y, ZHANG T, et al., 2023. Bird population composition and annual changes in Jiangsu Yancheng Wetland National Nature Reserve, Rare Birds[J]. Guide to Chinese Poultry, 10(10): 39-44.
[21]	李云桑, 党玮, 郭沛涌, 等, 2020. 泉州湾滨海退化湿地红树林修复工程对土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 浙江大学学报(理学版), 47(5): 624-629.
	LI Y S, DANG W, GUO P Y, et al., 2020. Effects of mangrove restoration on the soil enzyme activity at Quanzhou bay degraded coastal wetland[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University (Science Edition), 47(5): 624-629.
[22]	李原园, 黄火键, 李宗礼, 等, 2014. 河湖水系连通实践经验与发展趋势[J]. 南水北调与水利科技, 12(4): 81-85.
	LI Y Y, HUANG H J, LI Z Y, et al., 2014. Practical experience and development trend of the interconnected river system Network[J]. South-to-North Water Diversion Project and Water Conservancy Science and Technology, 12(4): 81-85.
[23]	林先贵, 2010. 土壤微生物研究原理与方法[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社.
	LIN X G, 2010. Principles and Methods of Soil Microbiology Research[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
[24]	刘百桥, 孟伟庆, 赵建华, 等, 2015. 中国大陆1990-2013年海岸线资源开发利用特征变化[J]. 自然资源学报, 30(12): 2033-2044.
	LIU B Q, MENGW Q, ZHAO J H, et al., 2015. Variation of Coastline Resources Utilization in China from 1990 to 2013[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 30(12): 2033-2044.
[25]	吕林, 崔丹丹, 陈艳艳, 等, 2019. 1984-2016年江苏省海岸线和沿海滩涂的变迁[J]. 海洋开发与管理 (8): 52-54.
	LÜ L, CUI D D, CHEN Y Y, et al., 2019. The changes of coastline and coastal beach in Jiangsu province from 1984-2016[J]. Ocean Development and Management (8): 52-54.
[26]	庞博, 杨文鑫, 崔保山, 等, 2023. 黄河三角洲湿地生物多样性保护工程植被修复效果评估[J]. 环境工程, 41(1): 213-221.
	PANG B, YANG W X, CUI B S, et al., 2023. Evaluation of the effect of vegetation restoration in the yellow river delta wetland biodiversity conservation project[J]. Environmental Engineering, 41(1): 213-221.
[27]	彭钼植, 雷春英, 吉小敏, 2021. 藜科碱蓬属植物研究进展[J]. 江西农业学报, 33(2): 42-46.
	PENG M Z, LEI C Y, JI X M, 2021. Research Advances in Suaeda Plants[J]. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 33(2): 42-46.
[28]	孙乾照, 林海英, 张美琦, 等, 2021. 滨海盐沼湿地生态修复研究进展[J]. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 57(1): 151-158.
	SUN Q Z, LIN H Y, ZHANG M Q, et al., 2021. Ecological restoration of coastal salt marsh[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Natural Science), 57(1): 151-158.
[29]	王成, 刘红玉, 李玉凤, 等, 2022. 盐城滨海湿地水鸟类群生境适宜性及生态阈值研究: 对栖息地景观结构恢复的启示[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 38(7): 897-908.
	WANG C, LIU H Y, LI Y F, et al., 2022. A study on habitat suitability and ecological threshold of water bird guilds in Yancheng coastal wet-lands: Implications for habitat structure restoration[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 38(7): 897-908.
[30]	王加连, 刘忠权, 2006. 盐城滩涂生物多样性保护及其可持续利用[J]. 生态学杂志, 29(5): 475-478.
	WANG J L, LIU Z Q, 2006. Protection and sustainable utilization for the biodiversity of Yancheng seashore[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 29(5): 475-478.
[31]	王树梅, 庞元湘, 宋爱云, 等, 2018. 基于林龄的滨海盐碱地杨树刺槐混交林土壤理化性质及草本植物多样性动态[J]. 生态学报, 38(18): 6539-6548.
	WANG S M, PANG Y X, SONG A Y, et al., 2018. Soil physiochemical properties and diversity of herbaceous plants dynamic on the different ages mixed forests of Populus×Euramercana ‘Neva’ and Robinia pseucdoacacia in coastal saline-alkali area[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(18): 6539-6548.
[32]	王树起, 韩晓增, 乔云发, 等, 2007. 不同土地利用方式对三江平原湿地土壤酶分布特征及相关肥力因子的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 21(4): 150-153, 192.
	WANG S Q, HAN X Z, QIAO Y F, et al., 2007. Characteristics of soil enzyme activity and fertility under different types of land use in wetland of Sanjiang Plain[J]. Journal of Soiland Water Conservation, 21(4): 150-153, 192.
[33]	王逸飞, 王艳红, 杨啸宇, 等, 2025. 水系连通工程对近海潮汐水域水动力的影响[J]. 人民珠江, 46(1): 78-87.
	WANG Y F, WANG Y H, YANG X Y, et al., 2025. Influence of water system connectivity project on hydrodynamics of offshore tidal waters[J]. Pearl River, 46(1): 78-87.
[34]	邢伟, 王进欣, 王今殊, 等, 2011. 盐城海岸带湿地土地覆盖变化及其生态效应研究[J]. 海洋湖沼通报 (1): 122-130.
	XING W, WANG J X, WANG J S, et al., 2011. Land-covered changes and its ecological effects in the coastal wetlands of Yancheng[J]. Transactions of Oceanology and Limnology (1): 122-130.
[35]	杨刚, 谢永宏, 陈心胜, 等, 2009. 洞庭湖区退田还湖后不同恢复模式下土壤酶活性的变化[J]. 应用生态学报, 20(9): 2187-2192.
	YANG G, XIE Y H, CHEN X S, et al., 2009. Soil enzyme activities under different restoration modes after returning farmland to lake in Dongting Lake area[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 20(9): 2187-2192.
[36]	杨文举, 菲尔卡特·甫力东, 俞程奕, 等, 2020. 滨海湿地在沿海地区海绵城市建设中的功能与应用研究[J]. 华北水利水电大学学报(自然科学版), 41(3): 78-83.
	YANG W J, PLETON F, YU C Y, et al., 2020. Research on function and application of coastal wetlands in construction of sponge city in coastal areas[J]. Journal of North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power (Natural Science Edition), 41(3): 78-83.
[37]	张明亮, 康亚茹, 陈旭, 等, 2021. 一种河口湿地植被生境修复方法: CN112307420A[P]. 2021-02-02. [https://pss-system.cponline.cnipa.gov.cn/retrieveList?prevPageTit=changgui].
	ZHANG M L, KANG Y R, CHEN X, et al., 2021. A method of vegetation habitat restoration in estuarine wetland: CN112307420A[P]. 2021-02-02. [https://pss-system.cponline.cnipa.gov.cn/retrieveList?prevPageTit=changgui].
[38]	中国植物志编辑委员会, 1979. 中国植物志 (第25卷, 第二分册)[M]. 北京: 科学出版社.
	Delectis Florae Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae Agendae Academiae Sinicae Edita, 1979. Flora of China. Vol. 25, Second fascicle[M]. Beijing: Science Press.
[39]	中华人民共和国环境保护部, 2014. 土壤有效磷的测定碳酸氢钠浸提-钼锑抗分光光度法: HJ 704—2014[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社.
	Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China, 2014. Soilquality-Determination of available phosphorus- Sodium hydrogen carbonate solution-Mo-Sb anti spectrophotometric method: HJ 704—2014[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China.
[40]	中华人民共和国环境保护部, 2011. 土壤干物质和水分的测定重量法: HJ 613—2011[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社.
	Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China, 2011. Soil-Determination of dry matter and water content- Gravime: HJ 613—2011[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China.

中文名	学名	科	属	生活型	处理区
中文名	学名	科	属	生活型	Ⅰ	Ⅱ	Ⅲ
盐地碱蓬	Suaeda salsa	苋科	碱蓬属	一年生	√	√
碱蓬	Suaeda glauca	苋科	碱蓬属	一年生	√	√	√
小藜	Chenopodium album	藜科	藜属	一年生			√
灰绿藜	Oxybasis glauca	藜科	藜属	一年生			√
萝藦	Metaplexis japonica	萝藦科	萝藦属	一年生			√
互花米草	Spartina alterniflora	禾本科	米草属	多年生	√	√	√
芦苇	Phragmites australis	禾本科	芦苇属	多年生	√	√
鹅观草	Elymus kamoji	禾本科	鹅观草属	一年生	√	√	√
白茅	Imperata cylindrica	禾本科	白茅属	多年生	√	√	√
牛筋草	Eleusine indica	禾本科	牛筋草属	一年生	√	√	√
狗尾草	Setaria viridis	禾本科	狗尾草属	一年生	√	√	√
马唐	Digitaria sanguinalis	禾本科	马唐属	一年生		√	√
莎草	Cyperus rotundus	莎草科	莎草属	一年生	√	√	√
山柳菊	Hieracium umbellatum	菊科	山柳菊属	一年生	√		√
邹叶酸模	Rumex crispus	菊科	酸模属	一年生			√
茵陈蒿	Artemisia capillaris	菊科	蒿属	多年生	√	√	√
小蓟	Cirsium arvense	菊科	蓟属	一年生	√	√	√
苦苣菜	Sonchus oleraceus	菊科	苦苣菜属	一年生			√
野菊	Dendranthema indicum	菊科	菊属	一年生	√	√	√
盐蒿	Artemisia halodendron	菊科	蒿属	一年生	√	√	√
小蓬草	Erigeron canadensis	菊科	飞蓬属	一年生		√	√
盐角草	Salicornia europaea	苋科	盐角草属	一年生	√	√

中文名	学名	科	属	生活型	处理区
中文名	学名	科	属	生活型	Ⅰ	Ⅱ	Ⅲ
盐地碱蓬	Suaeda salsa	苋科	碱蓬属	一年生	√	√
碱蓬	Suaeda glauca	苋科	碱蓬属	一年生	√	√	√
小藜	Chenopodium album	藜科	藜属	一年生			√
灰绿藜	Oxybasis glauca	藜科	藜属	一年生			√
萝藦	Metaplexis japonica	萝藦科	萝藦属	一年生			√
互花米草	Spartina alterniflora	禾本科	米草属	多年生	√	√	√
芦苇	Phragmites australis	禾本科	芦苇属	多年生	√	√
鹅观草	Elymus kamoji	禾本科	鹅观草属	一年生	√	√	√
白茅	Imperata cylindrica	禾本科	白茅属	多年生	√	√	√
牛筋草	Eleusine indica	禾本科	牛筋草属	一年生	√	√	√
狗尾草	Setaria viridis	禾本科	狗尾草属	一年生	√	√	√
马唐	Digitaria sanguinalis	禾本科	马唐属	一年生		√	√
莎草	Cyperus rotundus	莎草科	莎草属	一年生	√	√	√
山柳菊	Hieracium umbellatum	菊科	山柳菊属	一年生	√		√
邹叶酸模	Rumex crispus	菊科	酸模属	一年生			√
茵陈蒿	Artemisia capillaris	菊科	蒿属	多年生	√	√	√
小蓟	Cirsium arvense	菊科	蓟属	一年生	√	√	√
苦苣菜	Sonchus oleraceus	菊科	苦苣菜属	一年生			√
野菊	Dendranthema indicum	菊科	菊属	一年生	√	√	√
盐蒿	Artemisia halodendron	菊科	蒿属	一年生	√	√	√
小蓬草	Erigeron canadensis	菊科	飞蓬属	一年生		√	√
盐角草	Salicornia europaea	苋科	盐角草属	一年生	√	√

处理	植被盖度/ %	单位面积株数/ (plant·m⁻²)	单位面积生物量/ (kg·m⁻²)	单位面积碱蓬株数/ (plant·m⁻²)	单位面积碱蓬生物量/ (kg·m⁻²)	碱蓬株高/ cm
Ⅰ	58±9a	68±12a	0.187±0.009a	66±11a	0.179±0.011a	62.00±6a
Ⅱ	46±11a	39±9b	0.155±0.011b	36±6b	0.143±0.008b	57.88±4a
Ⅲ	19±6b	14±6c	0.048±0.010c	4±2c	0.014±0.005c	28.21±4b

处理	植被盖度/ %	单位面积株数/ (plant·m⁻²)	单位面积生物量/ (kg·m⁻²)	单位面积碱蓬株数/ (plant·m⁻²)	单位面积碱蓬生物量/ (kg·m⁻²)	碱蓬株高/ cm
Ⅰ	58±9a	68±12a	0.187±0.009a	66±11a	0.179±0.011a	62.00±6a
Ⅱ	46±11a	39±9b	0.155±0.011b	36±6b	0.143±0.008b	57.88±4a
Ⅲ	19±6b	14±6c	0.048±0.010c	4±2c	0.014±0.005c	28.21±4b

处理	土壤深度/cm	SWC/%	BD/(g·cm⁻³)	CP/%	NCP/%	TP/%
Ⅰ	0-10	0.79±0.14Ba	1.46±0.12Aa	44.94±4.80Ab	0.58±0.26Bb	45.52±5.53Aa
	10-20	0.89±0.24Aa	1.53±0.09Aa	42.72±6.07Ab	0.64±0.18Bb	43.36±6.93Ac
	20-30	1.04±0.14Aa	1.54 ±0.09Aa	42.74±1.63Ab	0.84±0.38Ab	43.58±1.70Ab
Ⅱ	0-10	1.57±0.20Aa	1.51±0.19Aa	44.14±4.08Ab	0.66±0.17Ab	44.54±4.26Aa
	10-20	1.22±0.33Aa	1.42±0.11Aa	46.44±3.90Ab	0.56±0.05Ab	46.78±4.44Ab
	20-30	1.76±0.20Aa	1.43 ±0.1Ab	45.20±2.94Ab	0.56±0.12Ac	45.54±3.20Ab
Ⅲ	0-10	1.05±0.31Aa	1.14±0.03Ab	55.16±2.29Aa	0.92±0.23Aa	56.08±2.63Aa
	10-20	1.02±0.51Aa	1.34±0.2）Ab	49.08±7.82Aa	0.96±0.26Aa	50.04±8.74Aa
	20-30	1.33±0.39Aa	1.33±0.19Ab	48.52±4.71Aa	0.94±0.24Aa	49.46±5.25Aa

The Influence of Water System Connectivity and Reseeding of Suaeda glauca on Vegetation Restoration and Soil Physical and Chemical Properties in Degraded Coastal Wetlands

水系连通与碱蓬复播对滨海退化湿地植被恢复及土壤理化性质的影响

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 9

References 40

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

处理	土壤深度/cm	w_(SOC)/(g·kg⁻¹)	w_(TN)/(g·kg⁻¹)	w_(AP)/(g·kg⁻¹)	w_(AK)/(g·kg⁻¹)	w_(SS)/(g·kg⁻¹)
Ⅰ	0-10	2.47± 0.10Ab	0.27±0.23Ab	8.58±4.24Ab	0.60±0.22Aa	4.32±1.53Aa
	10-20	2.58±0.90Ab	0.21±0.13Ab	8.88±3.33Ab	0.56±0.11Aa	3.17±1.64Ba
	20-30	2.33±0.27Ab	0.20±0.06Ab	10.66±7.07Ab	0.50±0.09Aa	2.69±1.25Ba
Ⅱ	0-10	1.44±0.36Ab	0.16±0.02Ab	6.25±0.58Ac	0.57±0.10Aa	5.07±1.66Aa
	10-20	1.90±0.61Ab	0.23±0.12Ab	7.90±1.12Ac	0.74±0.32Aa	4.64±1.25Ba
	20-30	2.33±1.27Ab	0.18±0.04Ab	9.67±1.54Ab	0.60±0.14Aa	4.17±1.48Ca
Ⅲ	0-10	5.93±0.22Aa	0.40±0.15Aa	52.79±4.87Aa	0.34±0.04Ab	0.72±0.17Bb
	10-20	5.27±0.30Aa	0.53±0.24Aa	41.41±8.59Ba	0.36±0.08Ab	0.87±0.33Ab
	20-30	4.02±0.95Ba	0.40±0.18Aa	29.89±12.22Ca	0.36±0.05Ab	0.91±0.28Ab

参数	SWC	BD	CP	NCP	TP	SOC	TN	AP	AK	SS	CAT	ALP	SUE
SWC	1.000	0.050	0.068	−0.214	−0.098	−0.305	−0.338	−0.204	0.173	0.306	−0.313	−0.561	−0.289
BD		1.000	−0.994**	−0.548	−0.991**	−0.850**	−0.692*	−0.892**	−0.600	−0.668*	−0.372	−0.437	−0.609
CP			1.000	0.593	0.998**	0.868**	0.730*	0.916**	−0.635	−0.683*	0.417	−0.434	−0.613
NCP				1.000	0.633	0.804**	0.786*	0.824**	−0.937**	−0.927**	0.262	−0.457	−0.095
TP					1.000	0.890**	0.755*	0.935**	−0.672*	−0.720*	0.416	−0.437	−0.588
SOC						1.000	0.899**	0.894**	−0.858**	−0.915**	0.470	−0.475	−0.432
TN							1.000	0.874**	−0.774*	−0.848**	−0.634	−0.296	−0.455
AP								1.000	−0.858**	−0.891**	0.461	−0.515	−0.476
AK									1.000	0.925**	−0.137	0.628	0.168
SS										1.000	−0.303	0.483	0.211
CAT											1.000	0.137	−0.565
ALP												1.000	0.438
SUE													1.000

指标	0-10 cm		10-20 cm		20-30 cm
指标	第1排序轴	第2排序轴	第1排序轴	第2排序轴	第1排序轴	第2排序轴
特征值	0.8573	0.1427	0.8573	0.1427	0.8573	0.1427
相关系数	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00
累积特征比/%	85.73	100.00	85.73	100.00	85.73	100.00

[1]	LIU Yajun, DUAN Yipeng, LI Rongfu, CHI Zeyong, WU Yongming. Characteristics of Prokaryotic Communities in Sediments of a Lake Inflow Estuary Under Different Nutrient Environments: A Case Study of the Raohe Estuary [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2025, 34(6): 853-862.
[2]	WU Dongyang, WU Jiahuan, LI Weizhi, HUANG Zhijie, YANG Chunya, CHEN Huojun. Effects of Vermicompost and Pig manure Combined with Chemical Fertilizers on Soil Quality, Growth and Quality of Peppers [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2024, 33(9): 1416-1425.
[3]	CAO Xiaoai, ZHANG Rui, WEN Yunhao, WANG Jian, XU Zhichao, TIAN Yating, WANG Lixin, LIU Huamin. Effect of Spring Freeze-thaw Process on Soil Enzyme Activities in Riparian Wetland [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2024, 33(2): 212-221.
[4]	SHENG Meijun, LI Shengjun, YANG Xinyue, WANG Rui, LI Jie, LI Gang, XIU Weiming. Changes of Soil Enzyme Activities in Cropland with Different Land Use Intensities in Fluvo-aquic Soil Area, North China [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2023, 32(2): 299-308.
[5]	YUAN Jiabao, SONG Yanyu, LIU Zhendi, ZHU Mengyuan, CHENG Xiaofeng, MA Xiuyan, CHEN Ning, LI Xiaoyu. Profile Distribution Characteristics of Soil Enzyme Activity and Its Indicative Function of Microbial Nutrient Restriction in Reed Wetlands of Songnen Plain [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2023, 32(12): 2141-2153.
[6]	LI Xuan, QIAN Xiuwen, HUANG Juan, WANG Mingyu, XIAO Jun. Responses of Operating Performance and Microbial Community in Constructed Wetlands to NiO NPs Exposure [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2023, 32(10): 1833-1841.
[7]	WANG Lixiao, LIU Jinxian, CHAI Baofeng. Response of Soil Bacterial Community and Nitrogen Cycle during the Natural Recovery of Abandoned Farmland in Subalpine of the North China [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(8): 1537-1546.
[8]	SUN Jianbo, CHANG Wenjun, LI Wenbin, ZHANG Shiqing, LI Chunqiang, PENG Ming. Dynamics of Soil Microbial Biomass and Enzyme Activities in Rhizosphere Soil at Different Growing Stages of Banana [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(6): 1169-1174.
[9]	DENG Xiao, WU Chunyuan, YANG Guisheng, LI Yi, LI Qinfen. Improvement Effect of Coconut-shell Biochar on Coastal Soil in Hainan [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(4): 723-731.
[10]	ZHOU Chunfu, YU Rui, WANG Xiang, CHUANG Shaochuang, YANG Hongxing, XIE Yue. Effects of Antibiotics on Soil Enzyme Activities in Different Soils [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(11): 2234-2241.
[11]	HAN Xin, YUAN Chunyang, LI Jihong, HONG Zongwen, LIU Xuan, DU Ting, LI Han, YOU Chenming, TAN Bo, ZHU Peng, XU Zhenfeng. Effects of Tree Species and Soil Layers on Soil Extractable Nitrogen Content [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(11): 2143-2151.
[12]	LI Chunhuan, WANG Pan, HAN Cui, XU Yixin, HUANG Juying. Variation Characteristics of Soil Properties Around A Northwest Desert Coal-mining Region under Sulphur and Nitrogen Deposition [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(1): 170-180.
[13]	WANG Rui, SONG Xiangyun, LIU Xinwei. Seasonal Characteristics of Soil Enzymes in Different Vegetations in the Yellow River Delta [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(1): 62-69.
[14]	SUN Zhan, WANG Shengjie, YANG Jinchang, WEI Yongcheng, LIN Chunhua, MA Haibin. Correlation Analysis of the Occurrence of Bacterial Wilt and Physicochemical Properties and Enzyme Activity of Root-Zone Soil of Casuarina spp. [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(1): 70-78.
[15]	LI Xin, CHEN Xiaohua, GU Hairong, QIAN Xiaoyong, SHEN Genxiang, ZHAO Qingjie, BAI Yujie. Distribution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Enzyme Activities in Typical Farmland Soils [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2021, 30(8): 1634-1641.