三峡水库“水华”成因初探

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2004年3月、5月、7月、8月、10月和2005年5月对长江干流29个站点进行了5次调查。2004年3月（旱季）在三峡库区坝前（秭归）发现藻类“水华”，藻类密度达2.73×106 cells/L，优势种类为拟多甲藻。2004年8月（雨季）和2005年4月（旱季）沿香溪河下游及河口区以及香溪河口到三峡大坝干流江段进行了2次6个断面分层调查，两次调查中在香溪河下游以及香溪河口区发现了严重的藻类“水华”，藻类密度高达1.87×107 cells/L 和1.67×107 cells/L，优势种分别为蓝隐藻（1.84×107 cells/L）和美丽星杆藻 (1.34×107 cells/L)。相关分析结果表明：三峡库区干流藻类数量和生物量与水库的出水流量有着显著的负相关(Spearman，r=-1.000, r=-0.900, p<0.05)，而与可溶性营养盐（NO3N, PO4P, SiO3Si）的浓度无显著的相关性；在2004年7~8月（雨季）香溪河下游及河口区浮游植物生物量与主要营养盐（NO3N, PO4P,SiO3Si）的浓度呈显著负相关（Spearman,p<0.01, p<0.05,p<0.01, n=21）；在2005年4月（旱季）该河段藻类密度与主要营养盐（NO3NN,SiO3Si）呈显著负相关 (Spearman, p<0.05，p<0.01,n=28)，但与PO4P无显著的相关性。香溪河口到秭归的坝前库区河段藻类数量与主要营养盐（NO3N, PO4P,SiO3Si）没有显著相关性(Spearman, │r│<0.2, n=20)。然而香溪河下游及河口区主要营养盐（NO3N, PO4P, SiO3Si）浓度却低于长江干流。可以推断三峡库区蓄水后干流和支流发生“水华”的最主要原因是筑坝后库区内水动力条件的改变而非营养盐浓度较高。随着三峡工程的全面完工，库区内水体滞留时间的进一步延长，三峡库区水体富营养化趋势将会进一步加剧。

关键词: 三峡水库, 水文条件, 水华

Abstract:

Surveys during March, May, July, October 2004 and May 2005 at 29 stations along the Yangtze River were processed. In March 2004 (dry season) bloom occurred in Zigui, just before the ThreeGorge Dam (TGD); algal abundance reached 2.73×106 cells/L, and the dominant species was Peridiniopsis sp. (9.16×105 cells/L). During August 2004 ( rainy season) and April 2005 ( dry season) blooms also happened in the downstream of the Xiangxi River and the river mouth, and the algal abundance reached 1.87×107 cells/L and 1.67×107 cells/L respectively. The dominant species were Chroomonas acuta（1.84×107 cells/L）and Asterionella formosa (1.34×107cells/L). Correlation analysis indicated that algal density in the mainstream has significant negative correlation with the main current discharge (Spearman, r=-0.900, p<0.05), but not with the main resolvable nutrients（NO3N, PO4P, SiO3Si）(Spearman, r=-0.031; r=-0.116; r＝0.262; n=14). However, in the downstream of the Xiangxi River and the river mouth, significant negative correlations were observed between phytoplankton abundance and nitrate (Spearman, p<0.01, n=21), phosphate (Spearman, p<0.05, n=21) and silicate (Spearman, p<0.01, n=21) in the rainy season. In the dry season, the similar correlations were also observed with nitrate (Spearman, p<0.05, n=28) and silicate (Spearman, p<0.01, n=28), but not with phosphate. In the mainstream of the Three Gorges Reservoir (T〖JP2〗GR), there were no significant correlations between phytoplankton abundance and the main nutrients (Spearman, │r│<0.2, n=20).Whereas the concentrations of the main resolvable nutrients in the mainstream of the Yangtze River are higher than those in the Xiangxi River and its river mouth, and the occurrence of the blooms within TGR could be attributed to the variations of the hydrological condition after damming rather by the nutrient concentrations. With the completion of the Threegorge Project (TGP), the residence time of the water body will be prolonged, and the eutrophication within TGR will be aggravated.

Key words: Three Gorge Reservoir, hydrological conditions, algal blooms

曾辉,,宋立荣,于志刚,陈洪涛. 三峡水库“水华”成因初探[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(3): 336-336.

ZENG Hui,| SONG Lirong*,YU Zhigang,CHEN Hongtao. PRELIMINARY STUDY ON ALGAL BLOOMS WITHIN THE THREE GORGES RESERVOIR[J]. RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT IN THE YANGTZE BASIN, 2007, 16(3): 336-336.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	卓海华, 吴云丽, 刘旻璇, 郑红艳, 兰静. 三峡水库水质变化趋势研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2017, 26(06): 925-936.
[2]	潘晓洁, 黄一凡, 郑志伟, 邹曦, 朱梦灵, 胡莲, 万成炎. 三峡水库小江夏初水华暴发特征及原因分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2015, 24(11): 1944-1952.
[3]	方芳, 翟端端, 郭劲松*, 李哲, 周\| 杨艳. 三峡水库小江回水区溶解有机物的三维荧光光谱特征[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2010, 19(03): 323-.
[4]	朱广伟. 太湖水质的时空分异特征及其与水华的关系[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(5): 439-.
[5]	刘腊美龙天渝李崇明. 三峡水库上游流域非点源颗粒态磷污染负荷研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(4): 320-.
[6]	张信宝,曹植菁, 艾南山. 溪洛渡水电工程拦沙对三峡水库富营养化潜在影响的初步研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(2): 170-.
[7]	曾维华. 多源信息融合技术在内陆湖库水华预警中的研究进展与展望[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(1): 72-.
[8]	余世鹏, 杨劲松, 刘广明, 李冬顺. 三峡调蓄过渡期长江河口地区不同水文年土壤水盐变化特征[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2008, 17(3): 414-414.
[9]	周广杰,况琪军,胡征宇. 大宁河春季浮游藻类“水华”及其营养限制[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(5): 628-628.
[10]	董前进,王先甲,吉海,王建平. 三峡水库洪水资源化多目标决策评价模型[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(2): 260-260.
[11]	阚平,李崇明\|吕平毓,张晟,张勇. 重庆市“禁磷”绩效评估[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(1): 62-65.
[12]	李崇明,黄真理,张晟,常剑波. 三峡水库藻类“水华”预测[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(1): 1-6.
[13]	张磊,董立新,吴炳方,周万村. 三峡水库建设前后库区10年土地覆盖变化[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2007, 16(1): 107-112.
[14]	张远,郑丙辉,刘鸿亮. 三峡水库蓄水后的浮游植物特征变化及影响因素[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(2): 254-258.
[15]	李崇明,黄真理. 三峡水库入库污染负荷研究（Ⅱ）——蓄水后污染负荷预测[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(1): 97-106.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed