State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China.
State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China.
Sci Total Environ. 2018 Dec 15;645:753-760. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.124. Epub 2018 Jul 19.
Water erosion control is one of the most important ecosystem services provided by soil conservation techniques (SCTs), which are being widely used to alter soil and water processes and improve ecosystem services. But few studies have focused on providing this service using various techniques across the world. Here, a comprehensive review was conducted to compare the effects of SCTs on water erosion control. We conducted a meta-analysis consisting of 1589 sample plots in 22 countries to identify SCTs, which we classified into three groups: biological techniques (BTs, such as afforestation and grain for green), soil management techniques (STs, such as no tillage and soil amendment), and engineering techniques (ETs, such as terraces and contour bunds). Our results were as follows: (1) The SCTs had significant positive effects on water erosion control, and they were generally more effective at reducing annual soil loss (84%) than at reducing annual runoff (53%). (2) The BTs (e.g., 88% for soil and 55% for runoff) were generally more effective at reducing soil and water loss than ETs (e.g., 86% for soil and 44% for runoff) and STs (e.g., 59% for soil and 48% for runoff). (3) On bare lands, the efficiency of water erosion control decreased as the terrain slope increased, but this value increased as the slope increased on croplands and orchards. Furthermore, the effects of SCTs on runoff and soil loss reduction were most efficient on 25°-40° slopes in croplands and on 20°-25° slopes in orchards. (4) The SCTs were more efficient on croplands and orchards in temperate climate zone (CZ), while those on bare lands were more effective in tropical CZ. (5) The SCTs in Brazil and Tanzania were more effective at reducing runoff and soil loss than those in the USA, China and Europe.
水土保持技术（SCTs）是提供土壤保持服务的最重要生态系统服务之一，这些技术被广泛用于改变土壤和水的过程并改善生态系统服务。但是，很少有研究关注在世界范围内使用各种技术来提供这种服务。在这里，我们进行了一项全面的综述，以比较 SCTs 在水土保持方面的效果。我们进行了一项荟萃分析，其中包括 22 个国家的 1589 个样本点，以确定 SCTs，我们将其分为三组：生物技术（BTs，例如造林和退耕还林），土壤管理技术（STs，例如免耕和土壤改良）和工程技术（ETs，例如梯田和等高田埂）。我们的结果如下：（1）SCTs 对水土保持具有显著的积极影响，它们通常更有效地减少年土壤流失（84％），而不是减少年径流量（53％）。（2）BTs（例如，土壤减少 88％，径流减少 55％）通常比 ETs（例如，土壤减少 86％，径流减少 44％）和 STs（例如，土壤减少 59％，径流减少 48％）更有效地减少土壤和水的流失。（3）在裸地上，随着地形坡度的增加，水土保持效率降低，但在耕地和果园上，随着坡度的增加，该值增加。此外，SCTs 对径流和土壤减少的影响在耕地的 25°-40°坡度和果园的 20°-25°坡度上效率最高。（4）SCTs 在温带气候区（CZ）的耕地和果园上更有效，而在热带 CZ 的裸地上更有效。（5）巴西和坦桑尼亚的 SCTs 在减少径流和土壤流失方面比美国，中国和欧洲的 SCTs 更有效。
