Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences ›› 2022, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (7): 1786-1794.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.07.026
• Soil Fertilizer·Agricultural Equipment Engineering and Mechanization·Animal Husbandry Veterinarian·Prataculture • Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHANG Zhibin(), FAN Yanmin, WU Hongqi(), DONG Tong, LIU Jing, LI Yupeng, GU Haibin
Received:
2021-10-10
Online:
2022-07-20
Published:
2022-08-04
Correspondence author:
WU Hongqi
Supported by:
张智斌(), 范燕敏, 武红旗(), 董通, 刘静, 李昱朋, 谷海斌
通讯作者:
武红旗
作者简介:
张智斌(1997-),男,山东日照人,硕士研究生,研究方向为耕地质量评价,(E-mail) 320202525@xjau.edu.cn
基金资助:
CLC Number:
ZHANG Zhibin, FAN Yanmin, WU Hongqi, DONG Tong, LIU Jing, LI Yupeng, GU Haibin. Study on Evaluation of Cultivated Land Quality and Diagnosis of Obstacle Factors in Altay Region, Xinjiang[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(7): 1786-1794.
张智斌, 范燕敏, 武红旗, 董通, 刘静, 李昱朋, 谷海斌. 新疆阿勒泰地区耕地质量评价及障碍因素诊断[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(7): 1786-1794.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.xjnykx.com/EN/10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.07.026
Fig.1 Location of the study area and distribution of sampling sites Note:The map is based on the standard map with the review number of New S (2021) 023 downloaded from the standard map service website of the National Bureau of Surveying, Mapping and Geographic Information, and the base map is unmodified, same below.
目标层 Target layer | 准则层 Guideline layer | 指标层 Indicator layer | 组合权重 Portfolio weights |
---|---|---|---|
阿勒泰地区 耕地质量等级 Altay area Arableland quality grade | 立地条件 | 地形部位 | 0.075 |
耕层质地 | 0.072 | ||
质地构型 | 0.066 | ||
有效土层厚度 | 0.065 | ||
坡度 | 0.063 | ||
理化性质 | 有机质含量 | 0.103 | |
盐渍化程度 | 0.101 | ||
碱解氮含量 | 0.061 | ||
有效磷含量 | 0.075 | ||
速效钾含量 | 0.051 | ||
耕地管理 | 灌溉能力 | 0.115 | |
农田林网化 | 0.070 | ||
沙化程度 | 0.083 |
Tab 1 Weights of Cultivated Land Quality Grade Evaluation Indexes in Altay Region
目标层 Target layer | 准则层 Guideline layer | 指标层 Indicator layer | 组合权重 Portfolio weights |
---|---|---|---|
阿勒泰地区 耕地质量等级 Altay area Arableland quality grade | 立地条件 | 地形部位 | 0.075 |
耕层质地 | 0.072 | ||
质地构型 | 0.066 | ||
有效土层厚度 | 0.065 | ||
坡度 | 0.063 | ||
理化性质 | 有机质含量 | 0.103 | |
盐渍化程度 | 0.101 | ||
碱解氮含量 | 0.061 | ||
有效磷含量 | 0.075 | ||
速效钾含量 | 0.051 | ||
耕地管理 | 灌溉能力 | 0.115 | |
农田林网化 | 0.070 | ||
沙化程度 | 0.083 |
函数类型 Function Type | 项目 Projects | 隶属函数 Affiliation functions | a | c | u |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
戒上型Ring on type | 有机质 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.001 07 | 47.290 001 | 0.6<u<47 |
戒上型Ring on type | 速效钾 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.000 034 7 | 312 | 53<u<312 |
戒上型Ring on type | 有效磷 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.001 26 | 44 | 1<u<44 |
戒上型Ring on type | 碱解氮 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.000 105 | 148.369 995 | 0<u<148 |
戒上型Ring on type | 有效土层厚度 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.000 14 | 150 | 21<u<150 |
戒下型Quit under type | 坡度 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.002 09 | 0 | 0<u<33 |
Tab 2 Functional-type indicators and their affiliation functions for evaluation of arable land quality in Altai region
函数类型 Function Type | 项目 Projects | 隶属函数 Affiliation functions | a | c | u |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
戒上型Ring on type | 有机质 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.001 07 | 47.290 001 | 0.6<u<47 |
戒上型Ring on type | 速效钾 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.000 034 7 | 312 | 53<u<312 |
戒上型Ring on type | 有效磷 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.001 26 | 44 | 1<u<44 |
戒上型Ring on type | 碱解氮 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.000 105 | 148.369 995 | 0<u<148 |
戒上型Ring on type | 有效土层厚度 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.000 14 | 150 | 21<u<150 |
戒下型Quit under type | 坡度 | Y=1/[1+a×(u-c)2] | 0.002 09 | 0 | 0<u<33 |
评价因素Evaluation factors | 评价值Rate the value | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕层质地Tillage texture | 中壤 | 轻壤 | 重壤 | 粘土 | 砂土 | |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.6 | |
质地构型Texture configuration | 蒙金型 | 通体壤 | 通体粘 | 腰砂型 | 漏砂型 | 通体砂 |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
盐渍化Salinization | 非盐渍化 | 轻度盐渍化 | 中度盐渍化 | 重度盐渍化 | ||
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | ||
地形部位Terrain area | 冲洪积扇中部 | 冲洪积扇上部 | 冲洪积扇下部 | 山前坡地 | 丘陵 | |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.6 | |
沙化程度Degree of sanding | 非沙化 | 沙化 | ||||
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.5 | ||||
灌溉能力Irrigation capacity | 最好 | 好 | 一般 | 差 | ||
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.3 | ||
农田林网化Farmland forestry network | 四面有林 | 三面有林 | 两面有林 | 一面有林 | 无林网 | |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
Table 3 Conceptual indicators and their affiliation for the evaluation of arable land quality level in Altai region
评价因素Evaluation factors | 评价值Rate the value | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
耕层质地Tillage texture | 中壤 | 轻壤 | 重壤 | 粘土 | 砂土 | |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.6 | |
质地构型Texture configuration | 蒙金型 | 通体壤 | 通体粘 | 腰砂型 | 漏砂型 | 通体砂 |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
盐渍化Salinization | 非盐渍化 | 轻度盐渍化 | 中度盐渍化 | 重度盐渍化 | ||
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | ||
地形部位Terrain area | 冲洪积扇中部 | 冲洪积扇上部 | 冲洪积扇下部 | 山前坡地 | 丘陵 | |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.6 | |
沙化程度Degree of sanding | 非沙化 | 沙化 | ||||
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.5 | ||||
灌溉能力Irrigation capacity | 最好 | 好 | 一般 | 差 | ||
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.75 | 0.5 | 0.3 | ||
农田林网化Farmland forestry network | 四面有林 | 三面有林 | 两面有林 | 一面有林 | 无林网 | |
隶属度Affiliation | 1 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
耕地质量等级 Cultivated land quality grade | 综合指数 Compreh ensive Index (IFI) | 面积 Area (104 hm2) | 比例 Proportion (%) | 耕地质量等级 Cultivated land quality grade | 综合指数 Compreh ensive Index (IFI) | 面积 Area (104 hm2) | 比例 Proportion (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
一等地 First class | ≥0.811 8 | 0.07 | 0.27 | 六等地 Sixth class | 0.649 7~0.682 1 | 4.52 | 16.99 |
二等地 Second class | 0.779 4~0.811 8 | 0.57 | 2.15 | 七等地 Seventh class | 0.617 3~0.649 7 | 4.21 | 15.83 |
三等地 Third class | 0.746 9~0.779 4 | 2.63 | 9.88 | 八等地 Eighth class | 0.584 9~0.617 3 | 1.79 | 6.71 |
四等地 Fourth class | 0.714 5~0.746 9 | 5.38 | 20.19 | 九等地 Ninth class | 0.552 5~0.584 9 | 0.45 | 1.68 |
五等地 Fifth class | 0.682 1~0.714 5 | 6.83 | 25.66 | 十等地 Tenth class | <0.552 5 | 0.17 | 0.64 |
Table 4 Distribution of arable land quality grade in Altai area
耕地质量等级 Cultivated land quality grade | 综合指数 Compreh ensive Index (IFI) | 面积 Area (104 hm2) | 比例 Proportion (%) | 耕地质量等级 Cultivated land quality grade | 综合指数 Compreh ensive Index (IFI) | 面积 Area (104 hm2) | 比例 Proportion (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
一等地 First class | ≥0.811 8 | 0.07 | 0.27 | 六等地 Sixth class | 0.649 7~0.682 1 | 4.52 | 16.99 |
二等地 Second class | 0.779 4~0.811 8 | 0.57 | 2.15 | 七等地 Seventh class | 0.617 3~0.649 7 | 4.21 | 15.83 |
三等地 Third class | 0.746 9~0.779 4 | 2.63 | 9.88 | 八等地 Eighth class | 0.584 9~0.617 3 | 1.79 | 6.71 |
四等地 Fourth class | 0.714 5~0.746 9 | 5.38 | 20.19 | 九等地 Ninth class | 0.552 5~0.584 9 | 0.45 | 1.68 |
五等地 Fifth class | 0.682 1~0.714 5 | 6.83 | 25.66 | 十等地 Tenth class | <0.552 5 | 0.17 | 0.64 |
地区 Region | 一等地 First class | 二等地 Second class | 三等地 Third class | 四等地 Fourth class | 五等地 Fifth class | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | |
阿勒泰市 Altay City | 531.99 | 73.55 | 2 974.10 | 52.04 | 9 190.93 | 34.93 | 16 161.62 | 30.07 | 11 400.40 | 16.69 |
布尔津县 Burqin County | — | — | 25.03 | 0.44 | 1 428.39 | 5.43 | 4 482.62 | 8.34 | 10 675.48 | 15.63 |
福海县 Fuhai County | — | — | 7.03 | 0.12 | 573.98 | 2.18 | 9 986.61 | 18.58 | 19 161.88 | 28.06 |
富蕴县 Fuyun County | 191.32 | 26.45 | 2 601.62 | 45.52 | 9 286.51 | 35.29 | 7 530.94 | 14.01 | 5 832.36 | 8.54 |
哈巴河县 Habahe County | — | — | — | — | 2 366.92 | 9.00 | 5 916.40 | 11.01 | 10 736.57 | 15.72 |
吉木乃县 Jimnai County | — | — | 60.31 | 1.06 | 771.71 | 2.93 | 4 122.90 | 7.67 | 6 517.23 | 9.54 |
青河县 Qinghe County | — | — | 47.15 | 0.82 | 2 694.45 | 10.24 | 5 551.70 | 10.33 | 3 972.06 | 5.82 |
地区 Region | 六等地 Sixth class | 七等地 Seventh class | 八等地 Eighth class | 九等地 Ninth class | 十等地 Tenth class | |||||
面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | |
阿勒泰市 Altay City | 3 973.30 | 8.79 | 529.25 | 1.26 | 4.80 | 0.03 | — | — | — | — |
布尔津县 Burqin County | 8 166.20 | 18.06 | 7 891.24 | 18.73 | 4 977.89 | 27.85 | 3 466.80 | 77.59 | 1 702.36 | 100 |
福海县 Fuhai County | 22 513.62 | 49.79 | 8 396.72 | 19.93 | 7 726.02 | 43.23 | 686.34 | 15.36 | — | — |
富蕴县 Fuyun County | 603.93 | 1.34 | 56.52 | 0.13 | 18.62 | 0.10 | — | — | — | — |
哈巴河县 Habahe County | 6 466.53 | 14.30 | 7 853.73 | 18.64 | 1 463.75 | 8.19 | 174.76 | 3.91 | — | — |
吉木乃县 Jimnai County | 1 797.99 | 3.98 | 1 474.79 | 3.50 | 1.00 | 0.01 | — | — | — | — |
青河县 Qinghe County | 1 698.06 | 3.76 | 15 934.95 | 37.82 | 3 681.49 | 20.60 | 140.01 | 3.13 | — | — |
Tab 5 Arable land quality grade area statistics by county and city in Altai region
地区 Region | 一等地 First class | 二等地 Second class | 三等地 Third class | 四等地 Fourth class | 五等地 Fifth class | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | |
阿勒泰市 Altay City | 531.99 | 73.55 | 2 974.10 | 52.04 | 9 190.93 | 34.93 | 16 161.62 | 30.07 | 11 400.40 | 16.69 |
布尔津县 Burqin County | — | — | 25.03 | 0.44 | 1 428.39 | 5.43 | 4 482.62 | 8.34 | 10 675.48 | 15.63 |
福海县 Fuhai County | — | — | 7.03 | 0.12 | 573.98 | 2.18 | 9 986.61 | 18.58 | 19 161.88 | 28.06 |
富蕴县 Fuyun County | 191.32 | 26.45 | 2 601.62 | 45.52 | 9 286.51 | 35.29 | 7 530.94 | 14.01 | 5 832.36 | 8.54 |
哈巴河县 Habahe County | — | — | — | — | 2 366.92 | 9.00 | 5 916.40 | 11.01 | 10 736.57 | 15.72 |
吉木乃县 Jimnai County | — | — | 60.31 | 1.06 | 771.71 | 2.93 | 4 122.90 | 7.67 | 6 517.23 | 9.54 |
青河县 Qinghe County | — | — | 47.15 | 0.82 | 2 694.45 | 10.24 | 5 551.70 | 10.33 | 3 972.06 | 5.82 |
地区 Region | 六等地 Sixth class | 七等地 Seventh class | 八等地 Eighth class | 九等地 Ninth class | 十等地 Tenth class | |||||
面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | 面积 (hm2) | 比例 (%) | |
阿勒泰市 Altay City | 3 973.30 | 8.79 | 529.25 | 1.26 | 4.80 | 0.03 | — | — | — | — |
布尔津县 Burqin County | 8 166.20 | 18.06 | 7 891.24 | 18.73 | 4 977.89 | 27.85 | 3 466.80 | 77.59 | 1 702.36 | 100 |
福海县 Fuhai County | 22 513.62 | 49.79 | 8 396.72 | 19.93 | 7 726.02 | 43.23 | 686.34 | 15.36 | — | — |
富蕴县 Fuyun County | 603.93 | 1.34 | 56.52 | 0.13 | 18.62 | 0.10 | — | — | — | — |
哈巴河县 Habahe County | 6 466.53 | 14.30 | 7 853.73 | 18.64 | 1 463.75 | 8.19 | 174.76 | 3.91 | — | — |
吉木乃县 Jimnai County | 1 797.99 | 3.98 | 1 474.79 | 3.50 | 1.00 | 0.01 | — | — | — | — |
青河县 Qinghe County | 1 698.06 | 3.76 | 15 934.95 | 37.82 | 3 681.49 | 20.60 | 140.01 | 3.13 | — | — |
[1] | 陈印军, 易小燕, 方琳娜, 等. 中国耕地资源与粮食增产潜力分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(6):1117-1131. |
CHEN Yinjun, YI Xiaoyan, FANG Lina, et al. Analysis of arable land resources and grain yield increase potential in China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(6):1117-1131. | |
[2] | 马力阳, 周振亚, 罗其友. 中国特色农产品优势区建设现状?问题与对策[J/OL]. 中国农业资源与区划:1-9[2021-10-30]. |
MA Liyang, ZHOU Zhenya, LUO Qiyou. Current situation, problems and countermeasures of the construction of advantageous areas of characteristic agricultural products in China[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning:1- 9 [2021-10-30]. | |
[3] | 周思宇, 郗凤明, 尹岩, 等. 东北地区耕地利用碳排放核算及驱动因素[J/OL]. 应用生态学报:1-9[2021-10-30]. |
ZHOU Siyu, XI Fengming, YIN Yan, et al. Accounting for carbon emissions and drivers of cropland use in Northeast China[J/OL]. Journal of Applied Ecology:1- 9 [2021-10-30]. | |
[4] | 钱凤魁, 项子璇, 王贺兴, 等. 基于国土空间三线融合的城市周边耕地分区保护研究[J/OL]. 农业资源与环境学报:1-12[2021-10-30]. |
QIAN Fengkui, XIANG Zixuan, WANG Hexing, et al. Research on zoning protection of arable land around cities based on the integration of three lines of land space[J/OL]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment:1-12[2021-10-30]. | |
[5] | 张红, 马丽. 1972-2018年策勒绿洲耕地时空演变及驱动力分析[J/OL]. 河北环境工程学院学报:1-5[2021-10-30]. |
ZHANG Hong, MA Li. Spatial and temporal evolution and driving force analysis of arable land in Cele Oasis from 1972-2018[J/OL]. Journal of Hebei University of Environmental Engineering:1- 5 [2021-10-30]. | |
[6] | 黄安, 杨联安, 杜挺, 等. 基于主成分分析的土壤养分综合评价[J]. 干旱区研究, 2014, 31(5):819-825. |
HUANG An, YANG Lianan, DU Ting, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of soil nutrients based on principal component analysis[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2014, 31(5):819-825. | |
[7] | 江娜, 史东梅, 曾小英, 等. 土壤侵蚀对紫色土坡耕地耕层障碍因素的影响[J/OL]. 土壤学报:1-14[2021-11-18]. |
JIANG Na, SHI Dongmei, ZENG Xiaoying, et al. Influence of soil erosion on the barrier factors of cultivated layer on purple soil slopes[J/OL]. Acta Pedologica Sinica:1-14[2021-11-18]. | |
[8] | 苟志宏, 胥桂凤, 樊佳俐. 贵州省耕地资源利用效率评价及障碍因子识别[J]. 国土与自然资源研究, 2021(5):24-29. |
GOU Zhihong, XU Guifeng, FAN Jiali. Evaluation of arable land resource utilization efficiency and identification of obstacle factors in Guizhou Province[J]. Territory & Natural Resources Study, 2021(5):24-29. | |
[9] | 曾荣艳. 基于PSR模型下的耕地可持续利用评价研究[D]. 新疆: 新疆农业大学, 2013. |
ZENG Rongyan. Research on the evaluation of sustainable use of arable land based on PSR model[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2013. | |
[10] | 张立江, 汪景宽, 裴久渤, 等. 东北典型黑土区耕地地力评价与障碍因素诊断[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2017, 38(1):110-117. |
ZHANG Lijiang, WANG Jinkuan, PEI Jiubo, et al. Evaluation of land strength and diagnosis of obstacle factors of cultivated land in typical black soil areas in Northeast China[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2017, 38(1):110-117. | |
[11] | 韩宗伟, 卢德彬, 杨建, 等. 贵州省耕地质量时空格局及变化趋势分析[J]. 水土保持研究, 2017, 24(6):154-159,166,2. |
HAN Zongwei, LU Debin, YANG Jian, et al. Analysis of spatial and temporal patterns of arable land quality and change trends in Guizhou Province[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2017, 24(6):154-159,166,2. | |
[12] | 王慧慧, 李子杰, 高沪宁, 等. 基于GIS的岳西县耕地质量等级时空变化研究[J]. 洛阳理工学院学报(自然科学版), 2021, 31(1):1-5. |
WANG Huihui, LI Zijie, GAO Huning, et al. Study on spatial and temporal changes of arable land quality level in Yuexi County based on GIS[J]. Journal of Luoyang Institute of Technology (Natural Science Ed.), 2021, 31(1):1-5. | |
[13] | 马瑞明, 马仁会, 韩冬梅, 等. 基于多层级指标的省域耕地质量评价体系构建[J]. 农业工程学报, 2018, 34(16):249-257. |
MA Ruiming, MA Renhui, HAN Dongmei, et al. Construction of provincial arable land quality evaluation system based on multi-level indicators[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2018, 34(16):249-257. | |
[14] | 王雪梅, 柴仲平, 武红旗, 等. 阿克苏市耕地地力评价与改良利用研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2013, 33(1):162-166. |
WANG Xuemei, CHAI Zhongping, WU Hongqi, et al. Study on the evaluation and improved utilization of arable land in Aksu City[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2013, 33(1):162-166. | |
[15] | 胡志朋, 杨凤海, 周晓飞. 肇源县耕地集约利用评价及障碍度诊断[J]. 水土保持研究, 2013, 20(1):148-151+155. |
HU Zhipeng, YANG Fenhai, ZHOU Xiaofei. Evaluation of intensive use of arable land and diagnosis of barrier degree in Zhaoyuan County[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2013, 20(1):148-151+155. | |
[16] | 秦伟霞, 王新闯, 马守臣, 等, 宋香平. 基于功能分区的土地生态质量障碍因子诊断-以新乡市为例[J]. 水土保持研究, 2015, 22(4):148-154. |
QIN Weixia, WANG Xinchang, MA Shouchen, et al. Diagnosis of land ecological quality obstacle factors based on functional zoning-example of Xinxiang City[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2015, 22(4):148-154. | |
[17] | 金慧芳, 史东梅, 钟义军, 等. 红壤坡耕地耕层土壤质量退化特征及障碍因子诊断[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(20):84-93. |
JIN Huifang, SHI Dongmei, ZHONG Yijun, et al. Characteristics of soil quality degradation and diagnosis of obstacle factors in the cultivated layer of red soil slopes[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(20):84-93. | |
[18] | 韩株桃, 石杰锋. 陕西省耕地多功能评价与障碍因子诊断[J/OL]. 国土资源情报:1-8[2021-11-18]. |
HAN Zhutao, SHI Jiefeng. Multifunctional evaluation and obstacle factor diagnosis of arable land in Shaanxi Province[J/OL]. Land Resources Information:1- 8 [2021-11-18]. | |
[19] | 雷勋平, Robin Qiu, 刘勇. 基于熵权TOPSIS模型的区域土地利用绩效评价及障碍因子诊断[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(13):243-253. |
LEI Xunping, Robin Qiu, LIU Yong. Regional land use performance evaluation and obstacle factor diagnosis based on entropy power TOPSIS model[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016, 32(13):243-253. | |
[20] | 周晓飞, 雷国平, 徐珊. 城市土地利用绩效评价及障碍度诊断---以哈尔滨市为例. 水土保持研究, 2012, 19 (2): 126-130. |
ZHOU Xiaofei, LEI Guoping, XU Shan. Evaluation of urban land use performance and diagnosis of barrier degree--A case study of Harbin City[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2012, 19(2): 126-130. | |
[21] | 张风丽, 龚新蜀. 新疆工业生态安全评价及障碍因子诊断. 企业经济, 2013, 06: 15-20. |
ZHANG Fengli, GONG Xinshu. Evaluation of industrial ecological safety and diagnosis of obstacle factors in Xinjiang[J]. Enterprise Economy, 2013, 06: 15-20. | |
[22] | 孙才志, 董璐, 郑德凤. 中国农村水贫困风险评价?障碍因子及阻力类型分析. 资源科学, 2014, 05: 895-905. |
SUN, Caizhi, DONG, Lu, ZHENG, Defeng. Risk evaluation, barrier factors and resistance type analysis of rural water poverty in China[J]. Resources Science, 2014, 05: 895-905. | |
[23] | 李志芳, 沈新磊, 王锐. 漯河市耕地质量等别划分与评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(9):79-84. |
LI Zhifang, SHEN Xinlei, WANG Rui. Classification and evaluation of arable land quality in Luohe City[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(9):79-84. | |
[24] | 新疆维吾尔自治区统计局. 新疆统计年鉴[J]. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2020. |
Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Bureau of Statistics. Xinjiang Statistical Yearbook[J]. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2020. | |
[25] | 谢梦姣, 王洋, 康营, 等. 人工神经网络与普通克里金插值法对土壤属性空间预测精度影响研究[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2021, 37(7):934-942. |
XIE Mengjiao, WANG Yang, KANG Ying, et al. Study on the effect of artificial neural network and ordinary kriging interpolation on the accuracy of spatial prediction of soil properties[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2021, 37(7):934-942. | |
[26] | GB/T 33469-2016. 耕地质量等级[S]. |
GB/T 33469-2016. Cultivated Land Quality Grade[S]. | |
[27] | 杨文娜, 任嘉欣, 李忠意, 等. 主成分分析法和模糊综合评价法判断喀斯特土壤的肥力水平[J]. 西南农业学报, 2019, 32(6):1307-1313. |
YANG Wenna, REN Jiaxin, LI Zhongyi, et al. Principal component analysis and fuzzy integrated evaluation method to determine the fertility level of karst soils[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 32(6):1307-1313. | |
[28] | 闫一凡, 刘建立, 张佳宝. 耕地地力评价方法及模型分析. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30 (5): 204-210. |
YAN Yifan, LIU Jianjian, ZHANG Jiabao. Evaluation methods and model analysis of arable land strength[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014, 30(5): 204-210. | |
[29] | 郑红晓, 张红方. 基于地力评价的耕地利用类型分区研究-以沁阳市为例. 中国农业资源与区划, 2015, 36 (5): 132-137. |
ZHENG Hongxiao, ZHANG Hongfang. Research on the zoning of arable land use types based on land strength evaluation-The example of Qingyang City[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2015, 36(5): 132-137. | |
[30] | 朱磊, 盛建东, 武红旗. 基于GIS的和硕县耕地地力评价与耕地土壤改良分区制图[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2013, 50(1):132-139. |
ZHU Lei, SHENG Jiandong, WU Hongqi. GIS-based evaluation of arable land strength and zonal mapping of arable land soil improvement in Heshuo County[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 50(1):132-139. | |
[31] | 许旺旺, 马倩倩, 蔡立群. 基于《耕地质量等级》的靖远县耕地质量等级评价[J]. 草原与草坪, 2021, 41(1):94-102,112. |
XU Wangwang, MA Qianqian, CAI Liqun. Evaluation of the quality level of arable land in Jingyuan County based on "Quality Level of Arable Land"[J]. Grassland and Turf, 2021, 41(1):94-102,112. | |
[32] | 张梦莹, 蔡立群. 玉门市耕地质量等级及其养分空间分布研究[J]. 国土与自然资源研究, 2021(4):1-5. |
ZHANG Mengying, CAI Liqun. Study on the quality level of arable land and its spatial distribution of nutrients in Yumen City[J]. Territory & Natural Resources Study, 2021(4):1-5. | |
[33] | 孙妍芳, 裴久渤, 张立江, 等. 辽宁棕壤耕地质量评价及障碍因素类型分区研究[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2017, 38(11):130-137,144. |
SUN Yanfang, PEI Jiubo, ZHANG Lijiang, et al. Evaluation of quality of brown soil arable land and zoning of obstacle factor types in Liaoning[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2017, 38(11):130-137,144. |
[1] | XIN Huinan, LAI Ning, GENG Qinglong, CHEN Shuhuang, LI Na, LI Yongfu, ZHAO Haiyan. Spatial Variability of Farmland Soil Nutrients in Ta'er Basin Based on GIS [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(7): 1776-1785. |
[2] | Muyinaqia Tusifuhan, WU Hongqi, HOU Yanna, FAN Yanmin. Changes in Organic Carbon Content of Different Soil Types in Northern Xinjiang and Analysis of Their Characteristics and Influencing Factors [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(6): 1513-1521. |
[3] | LI Yongfu,GENG Qinglong,CHEN Shuhuang,LAI Ning,LI Na,XIN Huinan,ZHAO Haiyan. Spatial Distribution Characteristics of Soil Nutrients in Agricultural Areas on the Southern Slope of Tianshan Mountain [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 58(2): 324-331. |
[4] | LUO Jianhang, WANG Haiting, ZHAO Ying, LIU Xiaotong, ZHANG Xuejun. Preliminary Study on Nitrogen Loss and Dynamic Change of Farmland under Different Water and Nitrogen Measures [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 57(12): 2205-2212. |
[5] | LI Na, CHEN Shu-huang, LAI Ning, LI Yong-fu, GEN Qing-long. Spatial Variability Analysis of Soil Nutrients in Farmland of Yili Prefecture Based on GIS and Geostatistics [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 56(11): 2096-2103. |
[6] | LI Hai-feng,REN Hong-song,LIU Zhi-gang,WU Jiu-yun, LIU He-jiang, LIAN Wei-jia, HAN Chen. The Pollution and Distribution Characteristics of Phthalic Acid Esters in Soil-Grape System of Facility Grape Bases [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 55(5): 919-927. |
[7] | YU Jia-wen, ZHOU Jin-long, ZENG Yan-yan, JIA Rui-liang. Comparative Analysis of Farmland Soil Heavy Metals and Health Risk Assessment [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 54(12): 2293-2303. |
[8] | WANG Jian, YANG Beifang, CHEN Huanxuan, LI Xin, FENG Lu, LEI Yaping, XIONG Shiwu, LI Xiaofei, WANG Zhanbiao, LI Yabing. Effects of Plastic Film Mulching on Temporal-spatial Migration of Soil Moisture in Drip Irrigation Cotton Fiel [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 58(7): 1255-1264. |
[9] | WU Xiang-lin, CHENG Shu-huang, LAI Ning, FU Yan-bo, DOU Xiao-jing, DUAN Jing-jing, WANG Zhi-guo. Comprehensive Evaluation of Soil Nutrients in Yecheng County Orchard Based on Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 55(7): 1286-1292. |
[10] | ZHANG Shao-min, BAI Deng-sha, LIU Sheng-lin, ZHOU Guang-wei, FENG Gu. Effects of Land Reclamation Years on the Distribution Characteristics of Soil Salinity, Fertility and Nitrate Nitrogen under Mulching Drip Irrigation [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 55(11): 2060-2068. |
[11] | SUN Ying, ZHOU Jin-long, ZENG Yan-yan, CHEN Yun-fei, WANG Song-tao, DU Jiang-yan. Assessment of Heavy Metal (Metalloid) Pollution and Potential Ecological Risk for Farmland Soil in Yutian County of Xinjiang [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 55(12): 2271-2278. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||