全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

挠力河自然保护区退耕后水环境质量监测
Monitoring of Water Environment Quality after Returning Farmland in Naolihe Nature Reserve

DOI: 10.12677/AEP.2021.115105, PP. 877-883

Keywords: 挠力河自然保护区,水环境因子,营养状态指数,水质评价
Naolihe Nature Reserve
, Water Environment Factors, Nutritional Status Index, Water Quality Evaluation

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

为研究耕地退耕后对挠力河自然保护区的水环境质量,分别于2019年7月和10月,在保护区自然湿地与退耕湿地内共选取12个采样点进行理化监测。利用地表水环境质量监测标准(总氮和总磷)和综合营养状态指数,对挠力河自然保护区的水质进行评价,研究结果表明,挠力河保护区水质处于III-V类,自然湿地水体质量高于退耕湿地,主要污染物为 、TN与TP;保护区自然湿地内水质呈现一定程度的中度营养状态,退耕湿地水质由于受农田退水的影响,水质呈现富营养和轻度富营养状态,因此退耕湿地富营养化程度明显高于自然湿地。
In order to study the water environment quality of Naolihe Nature Reserve after returning farm-land, 12 sampling sites were selected in the natural wetland and returning farmland wetland of the reserve for physical and chemical monitoring in July and October of 2019 respectively. The water quality of Naolihe Nature Reserve was evaluated by using the surface water environmental quality monitoring standard and comprehensive nutritional status index. The results showed that the water quality of Naolihe Nature Reserve was grade III-V level, the water quality of natural wetland was better than that of returning farmland wetland, and the main pollutants were? , TN and TP; The water quality in the reserve was mesotropher. Due to the impact of farmland return water, the returning farmland wet land is rich in nutrients, so the eutrophication degree of the returned farmland wetland was significantly higher than that of the natural wetland.

References

[1]  崔兴波, 刘曼红, 马玉堃. 黑龙江挠力河国家级自然保护区退耕还湿工程及效益分析[J]. 黑龙江科学, 2016, 7(19): 153-155.
[2]  张弘强, 罗春雨, 崔玲, 等. 挠力河国家级自然保护区景观格局特征分析[J]. 国土与自然资源研究, 2017(5): 84-85.
[3]  Sjerps, R.M.A., ter Laak, T.L. and Zwolsman, G.J.J.G. (2017) Projected Impact of Climate Change and Chemical Emissions on the Water Quality of the European Rivers Rhine and Meuse: A Drinking Water Perspective. Science of the Total Environment, 601-602, 1682-1694.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.250
[4]  Griffith, J.F., Weisberg, S.B., Arnold, B.F., et al. (2016) Epi-demiologic Evaluation of Multiple Alternate Microbial Water Quality Monitoring Indicators at Three California Beaches. Water Research, 94, 371-381.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.02.036
[5]  叶洋宏, 梁庆勋. 水环境监测质量控制措施分析[J]. 资源节约与环保, 2021(5): 36-37.
[6]  王晓东, 褚丽娟, 姜明, 王国栋, 孙嘉鸿. 挠力河流域恢复湿地与天然湿地水质对比分析[J]. 湿地科学, 2018, 16(2): 179-184.
[7]  姚允龙, 王蕾. 基于SWAT的典型沼泽性河流径流演变的气候变化响应研究——以三江平原挠力河为例[J]. 湿地科学, 2008, 6(2): 198-203.
[8]  王明翠, 刘雪芹, 张建辉. 湖泊富营养化评价方法及分级标准[J]. 中国环境监测, 2002, 18(5): 47-49.
[9]  中国环境监测总站. 湖泊(水库)富营养化评价方法及分级技术规定[Z]. 北京: 中国环境监测总站, 2001.
[10]  胡胜华, 高云霓, 张世羊, 周巧红, 徐栋, 吴振斌. 武汉月湖水体营养物质的分布与硅藻的生态指示[J]. 生态环境学报, 2009, 18(3): 856-864.
[11]  鲁芳, 寸黎辉. 蒋家寨水库富营养化状况评价[J]. 环境科学导刊, 2020, 39(1): 75-77.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133