Journal of Resources and Ecology >
Site Type Division and Evaluation of the Waste Dump in an Arid Open-pit Mining Area—Taking the Treated Waste Dump in Wuhai City as an Example
WAN Yajun, E-mail: 975686918@qq.com |
Received date: 2022-08-20
Accepted date: 2023-03-20
Online published: 2023-07-14
Supported by
Key Research and Development Program of China(2017YFC0504406)
The Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Science and Technology Major Project(2020ZD0021-03)
Many problems exist in the ecological restoration of the waste dumps in open-pit mining areas, such as unclear site types of vegetation construction, unsuitable vegetation measures and site conditions, and poor vegetation growth. To resolve these problems, the site type classification and evaluation of the waste dump in the mining area is a key link to speed up its vegetation reconstruction. In this study, the waste dump in Wuhai treated mining area was selected as the test site. A combination of microtopography, slope direction, mulch thickness, soil hardness, soil texture, total phosphorus content, total potassium content, organic matter content, number of vegetation species, and life forms qualitative and quantitative factors were selected. After logarithmic quantification and standardized site factor correlation analysis, principal component analysis, cluster analysis and factor analysis, the site types of the waste dump were classified and evaluated. The results showed that the micro topography, slope direction and mulch thickness were the dominant factors, and they were the main factors influencing vegetation restoration in the study area. According to the combinations of these dominant factors, the waste dump in Wuhai Mining Area was divided into four site type groups and 14 site types. The site quality evaluation of the 14 site types indicated that topographic factors and vegetation factors are the main factors influencing the site quality of the waste dump, and the site quality grades were divided into four relative scores of excellent (comprehensive score greater than 7), good (comprehensive score between 6 and 7), medium (comprehensive score between 5 and 6) and poor (comprehensive score less than 5). Among these grades, 50% of the site types had site quality scores of "medium" or "poor", so the overall site quality of the waste dump in Wuhai Mining Area was below the medium level. On this basis, appropriate vegetation allocation suggestions are put forward in order to provide theoretical support for the ecological restoration in an arid open-pit mining area.
Key words: vegetation reconstruction; waste dump; site type division
WAN Yajun , GUO Xiaoping , LI Qingfeng , XUE Xinyue . Site Type Division and Evaluation of the Waste Dump in an Arid Open-pit Mining Area—Taking the Treated Waste Dump in Wuhai City as an Example[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2023 , 14(4) : 794 -804 . DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2023.04.012
Fig. 1 Location of the waste dump in Wuhai mine and distribution of the individual study sites |
Table 1 Factor quantification criteria |
Quantification | X1 (°) | X2 | X3 (cm) | X4 (mm) | X5 (%) | X6 (g kg-1) | X7 (g kg-1) | X8 (g kg-1) | X9 | X10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | >35 | Platform | ≤20 | ≤10 | 1-5 | <0.2 | <5 | <6 | <3 | Herbal |
4 | 30-35 | Sunny slope | 5-10 | 0.2-0.4 | 5-10 | 6-10 | 3-4 | |||
6 | 20-40 | 10-20 | 0.4-0.6 | 10-15 | 10-20 | 4-6 | Herbal and bush | |||
8 | 5-30 | Semi-sunny and semi-shady and shady-sunny slopes | 10-30 | 0.6-0.8 | 15-20 | 20-30 | 6-11 | |||
10 | <5 | Shady slope | ≥40 | ≥20 | >30 | 0.8-1 | 20-25 | 30-40 | >11 | Herbal, bush and arbor |
Table 2 Correlation analysis of site factors in the waste dump |
Factors | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X9 | X10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
X1 | 1 | |||||||||
X2 | -0.703** | 1 | ||||||||
X3 | -0.292 | 0.272 | 1 | |||||||
X4 | -0.231 | 0.186 | -0.384* | 1 | ||||||
X5 | -0.323* | 0.274 | -0.027 | 0.257 | 1 | |||||
X6 | -0.080 | 0.184 | -0.126 | 0.295 | 0.092 | 1 | ||||
X7 | -0.423** | 0.411** | 0.018 | 0.426** | 0.281 | 0.481** | 1 | |||
X8 | -0.331* | 0.387** | -0.151 | 0.312* | 0.271 | 0.183 | 0.427** | 1 | ||
X9 | -0.343* | 0.238 | 0.188 | 0.015 | 0.055 | 0.247 | 0.202 | 0.076 | 1 | |
X10 | -0.184 | 0.201 | -0.002 | -0.071 | -0.198 | 0.195 | 0.132 | -0.088 | 0.312* | 1 |
Note: Site factors X1-X10 represent microtopography, slope direction, mulch thickness, soil hardness, soil texture, total phosphorus content, total potassium content, organic matter content, number of vegetation species, and life forms, respectively. ** indicates a significant correlation at the 0.01 level; * indicates a significant correlation at the 0.05 level. |
Table 3 Total variance explanations for the site factors of the waste dump |
Site factors | Principal components | ||
---|---|---|---|
F1 | F2 | F3 | |
X1 | -0.747 | -0.333 | 0.286 |
X2 | 0.759 | 0.335 | -0.200 |
X3 | 0.071 | 0.762 | -0.334 |
X4 | 0.519 | -0.602 | 0.100 |
X5 | 0.481 | -0.241 | -0.457 |
X6 | 0.492 | -0.189 | 0.640 |
X7 | 0.774 | -0.145 | 0.143 |
X8 | 0.610 | -0.307 | -0.194 |
X9 | 0.392 | 0.429 | 0.376 |
X10 | 0.217 | 0.440 | 0.401 |
Table 4 Characteristic component matrix of the landform factors of the waste dump |
Component | Initial eigenvalue | Extraction of the sum of squares of loads | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total | Variance (%) | Cumulative (%) | Total | Variance (%) | Cumulative (%) | |
1 | 3.055 | 30.550 | 30.550 | 3.055 | 30.550 | 30.550 |
2 | 1.752 | 17.522 | 48.072 | 1.752 | 17.522 | 48.072 |
3 | 1.391 | 13.909 | 61.981 | 1.391 | 13.909 | 61.981 |
4 | 0.836 | 8.360 | 70.340 | |||
5 | 0.732 | 7.325 | 77.665 | |||
6 | 0.677 | 6.771 | 84.436 | |||
7 | 0.579 | 5.787 | 90.223 | |||
8 | 0.428 | 4.283 | 94.506 | |||
9 | 0.286 | 2. 858 | 97.364 | |||
10 | 0.264 | 2.636 | 100.000 |
Table 5 Grading criteria of the dominant factors of the waste dump |
Microtopography | Slope direction | Mulch thickness |
---|---|---|
Platform (<5°) | Sunny slope (135°-225°) | Thin thickness (≤20 cm) |
Low slope (5°-30°) | Shady-sunny slope (45°-135°, 225°-315 °) | Medium thickness (20-40 cm) |
Slope (30°-35°) | Shady slope (0°-45°, 315°-360°) | Deep thickness (≥40 cm) |
Steep slope (35°-40°) |
Fig. 2 Cluster analysis tree diagram |
Table 6 Classification of the site types and their characteristics in the waste dump of Wuhai mine |
Site type group | Site type | Sample site number | Site characteristics |
---|---|---|---|
Platform site type group | Thin thickness platform | 10, 15, 36, 4 | Slope 0°, mulch thickness 11-16 cm, thin |
Medium thickness platform | 1, 2, 3 | Slope 0°, mulch thickness 23.5-26 cm, medium | |
Slow slope site type group | Thin thickness low shady-sunny slop | 27 | Slope 29°, shady-sunny slop, mulch thickness 11.5 cm, thin |
Medium thickness low shady-sunny slope | 25, 17, 13, 44 | Slope 28°-29°, shady-sunny slope, mulch thickness 21.5-29.5 cm, medium | |
Thin thickness sloping sunny slope | 18, 26, 6, 29 | Slope 32°-35°, sunny slope, mulch thickness 12-19 cm, thin | |
Medium thickness sloping sunny slope | 8, 43 | Slope 33°-35°, sunny slope, mulch thickness 33-36.3 cm, medium | |
Slope site type group | Thin thickness sloping shady-sunny slope | 4, 5, 24 | Slope 31°-33°, shady-sunny slope, mulch thickness 12-16.5 cm, thin |
Medium thickness sloping shady-sunny slope | 23, 33, 40, 35, 32, 16, 42, 34 | Slope 30°-34°, shady-sunny slope, mulch thickness 20.1-33.4 cm, medium | |
Deep thickness sloping shady-sunny slope | 7 | Slope 34°, shady-sunny slope, mulch thickness 46 cm, thicker | |
Thin thickness sloping shady slope | 39 | Slope 31°, shady slope, mulch thickness 17.7 cm, thin | |
Medium thickness sloping shady slope | 9, 12, 30, 14, 11, 31 | Slope 30°-34°, shady slope, mulch thickness 22.5-34 cm, medium | |
Thin thickness steep shady-sunny slope | 28 | Slope 36°, shady-sunny slope, mulch thickness 12.5 cm, thin | |
Steep slope site type group | Medium thickness steep sunny slope | 38 | Slope 39°, sunny slope, mulch thickness 26 cm, medium thickness |
Medium thickness steep shady-sunny slope | 20, 37, 22, 19, 21 | Slope 36°-39°, shady-sunny slope, mulch thickness 20-37.8 cm, medium |
Table 7 Evaluation index weights of site quality |
Indicator | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X9 | X10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Weight | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.12 |
Table 8 Evaluation of site type quality in the waste dump of Wuhai mine |
Site type | Overall score | Site quality level |
---|---|---|
Medium thickness low shady-sunny slope | 7.54 | |
Medium thickness sloping shady slope | 7.34 | Excellent (>7) |
Medium thickness sloping shady-sunny slope | 7.10 | |
Deep thickness sloping shady-sunny slope | 7.06 | |
Medium thickness steep shady-sunny slope | 6.72 | |
Thin thickness sloping shady slope | 6.28 | Good (6-7) |
Thin thickness sloping shady-sunny slope | 6.22 | |
Thin thickness steep shady-sunny slope | 6.00 | |
Thin thickness platform | 5.90 | |
Thin thickness low shady-sunny slop | 5.84 | Medium (5-6) |
Thin thickness sloping sunny slope | 5.74 | |
Medium thickness steep sunny slope | 5.70 | |
Medium thickness sloping sunny slope | 5.20 | |
Medium thickness platform | 4.96 | Poor (<5) |
[1] |
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
|
[10] |
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[14] |
|
[15] |
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
|
[20] |
|
[21] |
|
[22] |
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
|
/
〈 | 〉 |