长江流域资源与环境 >> 2014, Vol. 23 >> Issue (04): 573-.doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj201404018

• 自然灾害 • 上一篇    下一篇

汉江上游古洪水与现代洪水滞流沉积物地球化学特征对比分析

郭永强,黄春长,庞奖励,查小春,周亚利   

  1. (陕西师范大学旅游与环境学院,陕西 西安 710062)
  • 出版日期:2014-04-20

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF GEOCHEMICAL ELEMENTS ACCUMULATION IN PALAEOFLOOD AND MODERN FLOOD SLACKWATER DEPOSITS IN THE UPPER HANJIANG RIVER VALLEY

GUO Yongqiang, HUANG Chunchang, PANG Jiangli, ZHA Xiaochun, ZHOU Yali   

  1. (College of Tourism and Environmental Sciences, Shaanxi Normal University, Xian 710062, China)
  • Online:2014-04-20

摘要:

对汉江上游古洪水和现代洪水滞流沉积物(SWD)地球化学元素对比分析,并与上陆地壳UCC含量比较。结果表明:与现代洪水SWD对比,古洪水SWD处于脱钙去钠的初级阶段,而其他常量元素含量没有明显变化。两者的常量元素UCC标准曲线相近,表明洪水SWD物源都是汉江流域内地表松散碎屑物。古洪水SWD的化学风化指数(CIA)平均值为64,现代洪水SWD是60。古洪水SWD化学风化程度略大于现代洪水SWD。但是现代洪水SWD的重金属元素Zn、Co、Cr、V和Ba含量都明显高于古洪水SWD,其UCC标准曲线累积最明显,这些表明汉江上游受现代人类活动影响明显。这些成果有助于更好理解汉江上游环境变化与人类活动之间的关系,同时为汉江上游流域内洪水期间水土保持和生态环境保护等方面提供重要的科学依据

Abstract:

The upper Hanjiang River basin,the water source area of Middle Route of South to North water transfer project of China,is controlled by subtropical monsoonal climate.The rainstorms in the summer and longlasting rains in the autumn often cause great floods.The most recent large floods occurred on 19 July,2010 and 19 September,2011.Hydrologic environment information of large floods is often recorded by slackwater deposits (SWD) in the convex river bank,tributary mouth and wide channel etc.Slackwater deposits (SWD) are actually suspended sediment load of the flood at a highstage stagnant environment.Flood SWD,the product of soil erosion and rock weathering,is closely related to the surface materials during flood period and human actives.In the recent years,palaeoflood SWD were found at several sites along the upper Hanjiang River valley.These SWDs often inserted in the loesspalaeosol and slope clastic deposits.Geochemical elements including major elements and heavy metals accumulation in palaeoflood and modern flood SWD in the upper Hanjiang River valley were measured and analyzed.These results showed that palaeoflood SWD had high Na2O and CaO content and low K2O.UCCnormalized abundances of major elements SiO2,Al2O3,Fe2O3,TiO2,MgO and MnO for palaeoflood SWD were similar to that of modern flood SWD.On the one hand,the chemical index of alteration (CIA) and the weathering index of parker (WIP) were applied to evaluate the chemical weathering intensity of palaeoflood SWD and modern flood SWD in the upper Hanjiang River.The average CIA value of palaeoflood SWD was 64,whereas modern flood SWD was 60.Moreover,the average WIP value of palaeoflood SWD was also close to that of modern flood SWD.On the other hand,the triangle diagram ACNK of flood SWD showed that the weathering intensity of palaeoflood SWDs was intermediate weathering,while modern flood SWD was weak weathering.In addition,Modern flood SWD was a tool for evaluating floodrelated environment impacts on heavy metal concentrations within river sediments,which affect river and groundwater quality,soil quality and floodplain systems.The sources of modern flood SWD were mainly from soil erosion on modern ground during flood periods.Heavy metals Zn,Co,Cr,V and Ba content of modern flood SWD were higher than palaeoflood SWD 16%,60%,20%,77%,42%,respectively.UCCnormalized abundances of Zn,Co,Cr,V and Ba of modern flood SWD were obviously higher than that of palaeoflood SWD.The phenomenon implied that modern flood SWD significantly influenced by heavy metals of anthropogenic input on the Hanjiang drainage basin.The differences of chemical weathering and anthropogenic impact on the hydroclimatic system of the upper Hanjiang River basin were indicated by geochemical character of extraordinary floods in the long timescale.These results enlarge the knowledge of the relationship between human activities and natural weathering,at the same time,they are important for understanding soil and water conservation and ecological environment during flood period in the upper Hanjiang River

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 聂钠, 于坤香. 我国世界自然遗产地旅游业环境经济核算思路[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(2): 121 .
[2] 曹银贵,王 静,程 烨,刘爱霞,许 宁,郝 银,饶彩霞. 三峡库区土地利用变化与影响因子分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(6): 748 .
[3] 徐俊杰, 何 青, 刘 红, 陈吉余. 2006年长江特枯径流特征及其原因初探[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2008, 17(5): 716 .
[4] 游庆龙. 三江源地区1961~2005年气温极端事件变化[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2008, 17(2): 232 .
[5] 吴炳方,罗治敏. 基于遥感信息的流域生态系统健康评价——以大宁河流域为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(1): 102 -106 .
[6] 郝红升,李克锋,李然,赵再兴. 取水口高程对过渡型水库水温分布结构的影响[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(1): 21 -25 .
[7] 刘承良, 田 颖, 梁 滨,5. 武汉城市圈产业经济的系统性分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(1): 1 .
[8] 伍新木,廖 丹,严 瑾. 制度创新:依托武汉建设长江中游城市群[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2004, 13(1): 1 -6 .
[9] 李翀,廖文根,彭静,叶柏生. 宜昌站1900~2004年生态水文特征变化[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(1): 76 -80 .
[10] 张心怡,刘 敏,孟 飞. 基于RS和GIS的上海城建用地扩展研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(1): 29 -33 .