基于地貌特征的青藏高原边缘泥石流沟分类

doi:10.11821/dlxb202007004

地理学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 75 ›› Issue (7): 1373-1385.doi: 10.11821/dlxb202007004

基于地貌特征的青藏高原边缘泥石流沟分类

梁馨月¹^,²^,⁵(), 徐梦珍², 吕立群²^,³, 崔一飞², 张风宝¹^,⁴

1. 中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所黄土高原土壤侵蚀与旱地农业国家重点实验室,杨凌 712100
2. 清华大学水沙科学与水利水电工程国家重点实验室,北京 100084
3. 北京林业大学水土保持学院,北京100083
4. 西北农林科技大学水土保持研究所,杨凌 712100
5. 中国科学院大学,北京 100049

收稿日期:2019-11-02 修回日期:2020-05-27 出版日期:2020-07-25 发布日期:2020-09-25
作者简介:梁馨月(1995-), 女, 四川南充人, 硕士生, 主要从事土壤侵蚀与山地灾害研究。E-mail: liangxinyue17@mails.ucas.edu.cn
基金资助:
中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(XDA23090401);国家自然科学基金项目(41790434)

Geomorphological characteristics of debris flow gullies on the edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau

LIANG Xinyue¹^,²^,⁵(), XU Mengzhen², LYU Liqun²^,³, CUI Yifei², ZHANG Fengbao¹^,⁴

1. State Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Dryland Farming on the Loess Plateau, Institute of Soil and Water Conservation , CAS and Ministry of Water Resources, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
3. Beijing Engineering Research Center of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
4. Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, China
5. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

Received:2019-11-02 Revised:2020-05-27 Published:2020-07-25 Online:2020-09-25
Supported by:
Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences(XDA23090401);National Natural Science Foundation of China(41790434)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

青藏高原地形急变带受构造运动、极端降水等因素的影响,呈现泥石流高发、群发的特点。对泥石流沟地貌特征的科学分类有利于探索泥石流发生机制、确定防治对策,对山区防灾减灾和生态修复具有重要意义。本文以青藏高原边缘7个泥石流高发流域为研究对象,开展地貌测量和统计分析。通过非度量多维尺度分析,将泥石流沟分为3种类型：I型是基岩下切区暴雨型泥石流;II型是基岩下切区冰川融水型泥石流;III型是沉积盆地下切区暴雨型泥石流。通过Kruskal-Wallis检验进一步分析3类泥石流沟地貌差异性,从地质、地貌与气候等方面探讨了3类泥石流沟的松散物来源与水沙输移特性。在气候变暖的影响下,II型泥石流的活跃性将增大;随着极端降雨频率的增加,I型和III型泥石流活跃性也将增加。

关键词: 青藏高原, 泥石流沟分类, 非度量多维尺度分析, Kruskal-Wallis检验

Abstract:

The edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau is characterized by high topographic relief, significant tectonic motion, extreme precipitation, and densely populated active debris flow gullies. It is essential to scientifically categorize the debris flow gullies to understand their mechanisms, prevent and mitigate debris flow disasters, and find out strategies to restore the ecology. The present study carried out topographical measurements and statistical analyses of seven regions on the edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, in which active debris flow gullies are concentrated. The debris flow gullies are classified into three types by means of nonmetric multidimensional scaling. Type I is formed by rainstorms in exposed bedrock areas, Type II is formed by glaciers in exposed bedrock areas, and Type III is formed by rainstorms in depositional basins. The variation in landforms of the three types is analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis tests. The sources of loose material and the characteristics of water flow and sediment transport in all the three types of debris flow gullies are discussed from the aspects of geology, topography, and climate. It is shown that the activity of Type II increases along with the warming of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, and the activities of types I and III increase along with the frequency of extreme rainfalls.

Key words: Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, categorization of debris flow gullies, nonmetric multidimensional scaling, Kruskal-Wallis test

梁馨月, 徐梦珍, 吕立群, 崔一飞, 张风宝. 基于地貌特征的青藏高原边缘泥石流沟分类[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(7): 1373-1385.

LIANG Xinyue, XU Mengzhen, LYU Liqun, CUI Yifei, ZHANG Fengbao. Geomorphological characteristics of debris flow gullies on the edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2020, 75(7): 1373-1385.

图/表 8

图1

表1

影响泥石流发生的主要地貌参数

地貌参数	公式	公式释意
面积(A)	通过ArcGIS水文分析模块提取	面积是泥石流物源条件的反映,面积较大的沟谷有更多滑坡、崩塌为泥石流发生提供松散物质。
坡度(S)	$S = ta n - 1 H h L h$	H_h为岩体垂直高度;L_h为水平长度。坡度反映松散物补给方式和汇流速度,坡度越陡,松散物越容易启动。
主沟长度(L)	通过ArcGIS水文分析模块提取	主沟越长,越利于增加水量,接纳和搬运的松散碎屑物越多。
比降(G)	$G = ? H ? L$	$? H$ 为海拔变化; $? L$ 为长度变化。比降反映沟道演化状况,表征泥石流沟水动力条件和物质输送能力,在一定范围内,比降越大越易爆发泥石流。
高差(RA)	$RA = h max - h min$	h_max和h_min分别是流域内的最高和最低海拔;RA表示切口深度和地表剥蚀程度,反映流域构造活动强度和能量条件。高差越大,越易发生泥石流。
沟谷形状指数(R_f)	$R f = A L 2$	R_f反映沟谷的汇水和水动力条件。R_f大,沟道中洪峰流量越大,越有利松散物质的起动。
面积—高程积分值(HI)	$HI = h mean - h min h max - h min$	h_mean表示是流域内的平均海拔。HI反映流域受侵蚀程度,HI越大,表明流域演化阶段越年轻,可蚀性越大。
纵剖面形态指数(N)	$h = H l L N$	h及l：纵剖面上某点与河口的高差及距离;H及L：河源与河口之间的高差及水平距离;N反映泥石流发育地貌条件,可将泥石流分为幼年期、壮年期和老年期。
沟壑密度(GD)	$GD = L 总 / A$	L_总为沟谷河流的总长;GD反映流域发育的完善程度。沟壑密度越大的地区,不稳定面越多,边坡稳定性越弱,发生泥石流的可能性也越大
植被覆盖度(FVC)	$FVC = (NDVI - NDV I soil) (NDV I veg - NDV I soil)$	NDVI_soil是裸土或者无植被覆盖区域的NDVI;NDVI_veg是完全被植被覆盖的NDVI。通常植被覆盖度越高,坡面越稳定。

表1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 53

[1]	Liu C N, Dong J J, Peng Y F, et al. Effects of strong ground motion on the susceptibility of gully type debris flows. Engineering Geology, 2009,104(3):241-253.
[2]	Chang T C, Chao R J. Application of back-propagation networks in debris flow prediction. Engineering Geology, 2006,85(3):270-280. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.02.007
[3]	Gao J, Sang Y. Identification and estimation of landslide-debris flow disaster risk in primary and middle school campuses in a mountainous area of Southwest China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2017,25:60-71.
[4]	Zhao Y, Meng X, Qi T, et al. AI-based identification of low-frequency debris flow catchments in the Bailong River basin, China. Geomorphology, 2020: 107125. Doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107125.
[5]	Zou Q, Cui P, He J, et al. Regional risk assessment of debris flows in China: An HRU-based approach. Geomorphology, 2019,340:84-102.
[6]	Melo R, Zêzere J L, Oliveira S C, et al. Defining evacuation travel times and safety areas in a debris flow hazard scenario. Science of the Total Environment, 2020,712:136452. Doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136452. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136452 pmid: 31931203
[7]	Rodríguez Morata C, Villacorta S, Stoffel M, et al. Assessing strategies to mitigate debris-flow risk in Abancay province, south-central Peruvian Andes. Geomorphology, 2019,342:127-139.
[8]	Miao C, Liu X. Characterization of acceptable risk for debris flows in China: Comparison in debris-flow prone areas and nonprone areas. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2020,42:101405. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr. 2019.101405.
[9]	Liu X, Miao C, Guo L. Acceptability of debris-flow disasters: Comparison of two case studies in China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2019,34:45-54.
[10]	Winter M G. A strategic approach to debris flow risk reduction on the road network. Procedia Engineering, 2016,143:759-768.
[11]	Chen H X, Li J, Feng S J, et al. Simulation of interactions between debris flow and check dams on three-dimensional terrain. Engineering Geology, 2019,251:48-62.
[12]	Cucchiaro S, Cazorzi F, Marchi L, et al. Multi-temporal analysis of the role of check dams in a debris-flow channel: Linking structural and functional connectivity. Geomorphology, 2019,345:106844. Doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph. 2019.106844.
[13]	Zhao Yan, Meng Xingmin, Zheng Jiaoyu. Application of geomorphological theory in study of debris flow and exploration of its applied theory. Journal of Catastrophology, 2017,32(1):43-49.
	[ 赵岩, 孟兴民, 郑娇玉, 等. 地貌学在泥石流研究中的应用与理论初探. 灾害学, 2017,32(1):43-49.]
[14]	Singh P, Gupta A, Singh M. Hydrological inferences from watershed analysis for water resource management using remote sensing and GIS techniques. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 2014,17(2):111-121.
[15]	Zhang P Z, Shen Z K, Wang M, et al. Continuous deformation of the Tibetan Plateau from Global Positioning System Data. Geology, 2004,32(9):809-812.
[16]	Wang Z. Geological environment and sisasters along railway line in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Earth Science Frontiers, 2007,14(6):31-37.
[17]	Huang Jiangcheng, Ou Guoqiang, Pan Huali. Geomorphic evolution of comparison on debris flow gullies in Bailongjiang and Xiaojiang basins. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2014,25(1):6-11.
	[ 黄江成, 欧国强, 潘华利. 白龙江与小江泥石流流域地貌演化比较分析. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 2014,25(1):6-11.]
[18]	Yao Tandong, Yu Wusheng, Wu Guangjian, et al. Glacier anomalies and relevant disaster risks on the Tibetan Plateau and surroundings. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2019,64(27):2770-2782.
	[ 姚檀栋, 余武生, 邬光剑, 等. 青藏高原及周边地区近期冰川状态失常与灾变风险. 科学通报, 2019,64(27):2770-2782.]
[19]	Seong Y B, Owen L A, Yi C, et al. Geomorphology of anomalously high glaciated mountains at the northwestern end of Tibet: Muztag Ata and Kongur Shan. Geomorphology, 2009,103(2):227-250.
[20]	Wang Jie, Zhou Shangzhe, Zhao Jingdong, et al. Quaternary glacial geomorphology and glaciations of Kongur Mountain, eastern Pamir, China. Scientia Sinica (Terrae), 2011,41(3):350-361.
	[ 王杰, 周尚哲, 赵井东, 等. 东帕米尔公格尔山地区第四纪冰川地貌与冰期. 中国科学: 地球科学, 2011,41(3):350-361.]
[21]	Winiger M, Gumpert M, Yamout H. Karakorum-Hindukush-western Himalaya: Assessing high-altitude water resources. Hydrological Processes, 2005,19(12):2329-2338.
[22]	Zhao Xin, Cheng Zunlan, Liu Jiankang, et al. Hazard degree assessment on site-specific debris flows in Dongchuan of Yunnan Province. Journal of Catastrophology, 2013,28(1):102-106.
	[ 赵鑫, 程尊兰, 刘建康, 等. 云南东川地区单沟泥石流危险度评价研究. 灾害学, 2013,28(1):102-106.]
[23]	Du Jun, Wang Zhaoyin, Li Zhiwei, et al. A preliminary study on spinulose stream networks in the Tongde Basin of the Yellow River source. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2014,28(2):129-135.
	[ 杜俊, 王兆印, 李志威, 等. 黄河源同德盆地刺状水系初步研究. 干旱区资源与环境, 2014,28(2):129-135.]
[24]	Yang Dayuan, Wu Shengguang, Wang Yunfei. On river terraces of the upper reaches of the Huanghe River and change of the river system. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 1996,16(2):137-143.
	[ 杨达源, 吴胜光, 王云飞. 黄河上游的阶地与水系变迁. 地理科学, 1996,16(2):137-143.]
[25]	Singh P, Thakur J K, Singh U. Morphometric analysis of Morar River Basin, Madhya Pradesh, India, using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2013,68(7):1967-1977.
[26]	Dai F C, Lee C F. Landslide characteristics and slope instability modeling using GIS, Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology, 2002,42(3):213-228.
[27]	Abdallah C, Chorowicz J, Bou Kheir R, et al. Detecting major terrain parameters relating to mass movements' occurrence using GIS, remote sensing and statistical correlations, case study Lebanon. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2005,99(4):448-461.
[28]	Wan S, Lei T C, Huang P C, et al. The knowledge rules of debris flow event: A case study for investigation Chen Yu Lan River, Taiwan. Engineering Geology, 2008,98(3):102-114.
[29]	Pike R, Wilson S. Elevation-relief ratio, hypsometric integral, and geomorphic area-altitude analysis. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 1971,82(4):1079-1084.
[30]	Jiang Zhongxin. A statistical analysis on longitudinal profile shape of debris flow valley along Palongzangbu River in Tibet. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2001,12(4):41-47.
	[ 蒋忠信. 西藏帕隆藏布泥石流沟谷纵剖面形态统计分析. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 2001,12(4):41-47.]
[31]	Basu T, Pal S. RS-GIS based morphometrical and geological multi-criteria approach to the landslide susceptibility mapping in Gish River Basin, West Bengal, India. Advances in Space Research, 2019,63(3):1253-1269.
[32]	Li Zhiqiang, Li Weiquan, Chen Zishen, et al. Influencing factors and classifications of arc-shaped coasts in South China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014,69(5):595-606.
	[ 李志强, 李维泉, 陈子燊, 等. 华南岬间弧形海岸平面形态影响因素及类型. 地理学报, 2014,69(5):595-606.]
[33]	Yang Zhigang, Zhuoma, Lu Hongya, et al. Characteristics of precipitation variation and its effects on runoff in the Yanglung Zangbo River basin during 1961-2010. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2014,36(1):166-172.
	[ 杨志刚, 卓玛, 路红亚, 等. 1961—2010年西藏雅鲁藏布江流域降水量变化特征及其对径流的影响分析. 冰川冻土, 2014,36(1):166-172.]
[34]	Zhang Wancheng, Xiao Ziniu, Zheng Jianmeng, et al. Characteristics of the Nujiang River runoff for a long term and its response to climate change. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2007,52(Suppl.II):135-141.
	[ 张万诚, 肖子牛, 郑建萌, 等. 怒江流量长期变化特征及对气候变化的响应. 科学通报, 2007,52(增刊II):135-141.]
[35]	Tate E L, Farquharson F A K. Simulating reservoir management under the threat of sedimentation: The case of Tarbela Dam on the River Indus. Water Resources Management, 2000,14(3):191-208. doi: 10.1023/A:1026579230560
[36]	Tang C, Jiang Z, Li W. Seismic landslide evolution and debris flow development: A case study in the Hongchun Catchment, Wenchuan area of China. Engineering Geology for Society and Territory, 2015,2:445-449.
[37]	Tang C, Zhu J, Li W L, et al. Rainfall-triggered debris flows following the Wenchuan earthquake. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2009,68(2):187-194.
[38]	Xu M, Wang Z, Qi L, et al. Disaster chains initiated by the Wenchuan earthquake. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2012,65(4):975-985.
[39]	Wang Z, Cui P, Wang R. Mass movements triggered by the Wenchuan earthquake and management strategies of quake lakes. International Journal of River Basin Management, 2009,7(4):391-402.
[40]	Cui Peng, Wei Fangqiang, Chen Xiaoqing, et al. Geo-hazards in Wenchuan earthquake area and countermeasures for disaster reduction. Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2008,23(4):317-323.
	[ 崔鹏, 韦方强, 陈晓清, 等. 汶川地震次生山地灾害及其减灾对策. 中国科学院院刊, 2008,23(4):317-323.]
[41]	Tang Chuan. Activity tendency prediction of rainfall induced landslides and debris flows in the Wenchuan Earthquake areas, Mountain Research, 2010,28(3):341-349.
	[ 唐川. 汶川地震区暴雨滑坡泥石流活动趋势预测. 山地学报, 2010,28(3):341-349.]
[42]	Cheng W, Wang N, Zhao M, et al. Relative tectonics and debris flow hazards in the Beijing mountain area from DEM-derived geomorphic indices and drainage analysis. Geomorphology, 2016,257:134-142.
[43]	Hack J T. Stream-profile analysis and stream-gradient index. Journal Research of United States Geological Survey, 1973,1(4):421-429.
[44]	Seeber L, Gornitz V. River profiles along the Himalayan arc as indicators of active tectonics. Tectonophysics, 1983,92(4):335-367.
[45]	Nefeslioglu H A, Duman T Y, Durmaz S. Landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of tectonic Kelkit Valley (Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey). Geomorphology, 2008,94(3):401-418.
[46]	Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H, Nefeslioglu H A, et al. The 17 March 2005 Kuzulu landslide (Sivas, Turkey) and landslide-susceptibility map of its near vicinity. Engineering Geology, 2005,81(1):65-83.
[47]	Kim S, Sharma A. The role of floodplain topography in deriving basin discharge using passive microwave remote sensing. Water Resources Research, 2019,55(2):1707-1716.
[48]	Lyu Liqun, Wang Zhaoyin, Xu Mengzhen, et al. Geomorphic characters of debris flow fans along Nu River and the river blocking mechanisms. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2016,47(10):1245-1252.
	[ 吕立群, 王兆印, 徐梦珍, 等. 怒江泥石流扇地貌特征与扇体堵江机理研究. 水利学报, 2016,47(10):1245-1252.]
[49]	Comiti F, Mao L, Penna D, et al. Glacier melt runoff controls bedload transport in alpine catchments. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2019,520:77-86. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2019.05.031
[50]	Wang C, Guo Y. Precipitable water conversion rates over the Qinghai-Xizang (Tibet) Plateau: Changing characteristics with global warming. Hydrological Processes, 2012,26:1509-1516.
[51]	Yao Tandong, Wu Guangjian, Xu Baiqing, et al. Asian water tower change and its impacts. Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2019,34(11):1203-1209.
	[ 姚檀栋, 邬光剑, 徐柏青, 等. “亚洲水塔”变化与影响. 中国科学院院刊, 2019,34(11):1203-1209.]
[52]	Xu Fei, Jia Yangwen, Niu Cunwen, et al. Variation character of annual, seasonal and monthly temperature and precipitation. Mountain Research, 2018,36(2):171-183.
	[ 徐飞, 贾仰文, 牛存稳, 等. 横断山区气温和降水年季月变化特征. 山地学报, 2018,36(2):171-183.]
[53]	Li Lin, Li Xiaodong, Xiao Ruixiang, et al. The heterogeneity of climate change and its genesis in the northeastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019,34(7):1496-1505.
	[ 李林, 李晓东, 校瑞香, 等. 青藏高原东北部气候变化的异质性及其成因. 自然资源学报, 2019,34(7):1496-1505.]

基于地貌特征的青藏高原边缘泥石流沟分类

Geomorphological characteristics of debris flow gullies on the edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 53

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	侯光良, 兰措卓玛, 朱燕, 庞龙辉. 青藏高原史前时期交流路线及其演变[J]. 地理学报, 2021, 76(5): 1294-1313.
[2]	黄海, 田尤, 刘建康, 张佳佳, 杨东旭, 杨顺. 藏东地区斜坡土壤冻融侵蚀力学机制及敏感性分析[J]. 地理学报, 2021, 76(1): 87-100.
[3]	封志明, 李文君, 李鹏, 肖池伟. 青藏高原地形起伏度及其地理意义[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(7): 1359-1372.
[4]	孙思奥, 王晶, 戚伟. 青藏高原地区城乡虚拟水贸易格局与影响因素[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(7): 1346-1358.
[5]	冯雨雪, 李广东. 青藏高原城镇化与生态环境交互影响关系分析[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(7): 1386-1405.
[6]	许珺, 徐阳, 胡蕾, 王振波. 基于位置大数据的青藏高原人类活动时空模式[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(7): 1406-1417.
[7]	王楠, 王会蒙, 杜云艳, 易嘉伟, 刘张, 涂文娜. 青藏高原人口流入流出时空模式研究[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(7): 1418-1431.
[8]	戚伟, 刘盛和, 周亮. 青藏高原人口地域分异规律及“胡焕庸线”思想应用[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(2): 255-267.
[9]	高星, 康世昌, 刘青松, 陈鹏飞, 段宗奇. 1899—2011年青藏高原南部枪勇错沉积物磁性矿物的环境意义[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(1): 68-81.
[10]	范科科, 张强, 孙鹏, 宋长青, 余慧倩, 朱秀迪, 申泽西. 青藏高原土壤水分变化对近地面气温的影响[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(1): 82-97.
[11]	郭超,蒙红卫,马玉贞,李丹丹,胡彩莉,刘杰瑞,雒聪文,王凯. 藏南羊卓雍错沉积物元素地球化学记录的过去2000年环境变化[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(7): 1345-1362.
[12]	高兴川,曹小曙,李涛,吕敏娟. 1976-2016年青藏高原地区通达性空间格局演变[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(6): 1190-1204.
[13]	田原,余成群,查欣洁,高星,于明寨. 青藏高原西部、南部和东北部边界地区天然水的水化学性质及其成因[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(5): 975-991.
[14]	范科科, 张强, 孙鹏, 宋长青, 朱秀迪, 余慧倩, 申泽西. 青藏高原地表土壤水变化、影响因子及未来预估[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(3): 520-533.
[15]	范科科,张强,史培军,孙鹏,余慧倩. 基于卫星遥感和再分析数据的青藏高原土壤湿度数据评估[J]. 地理学报, 2018, 73(9): 1778-1791.