虫害侵扰不同时期华山松群落结构和特征变化

李欢欢, 崔鸿侠, 郑京津, 胡文杰, 王奔, 曾驰, 宋云瑞

南京林业大学学报(自然科学版) ›› 2026, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (3) : 247-256.

PDF(6825 KB)
PDF(6825 KB)
南京林业大学学报(自然科学版) ›› 2026, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (3) : 247-256. DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202501041
研究论文

虫害侵扰不同时期华山松群落结构和特征变化

作者信息 +

Changes in community structures and characteristics of Pinus armandi at different stages of pest infestation

Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

【目的】研究湖北神农架林区华山松(Pinus armandi)群落在受大小蠹(Dendroctonus armandi)虫害侵扰不同时期的群落结构和特征变化,为华山松群落虫害防治和森林经营提供合理策略,也为区域生物多样性保护提供科学依据。【方法】在神农架林区运用固定样地法分别于虫害侵扰早期(2015年)和虫害侵扰后期(2022年)开展土壤环境和植物群落学调查,并进行土壤环境、群落物种组成、物种重要值和生物多样性变化分析。【结果】与虫害侵扰早期相比,后期林地土壤环境变化较大:有机质含量、全氮和全磷含量均显著上升,分别升高159.86%、96.18%和54.39%;土壤温湿度、枯落物厚度、pH和全钾含量变化不显著。群落物种组成类型和数量均增多:早期样地有维管植物63科101属116种,后期样地有维管植物74科145属189种。其中,乔木层种类增加20种,占比上升;灌木层种类增加9种,但占比下降;草本层种类增加55种,占比上升。各层重要值变化各不相同:两个时期乔木层最大优势种均为华山松,但重要值从42.52%下降至24.41%;灌木层重要值靠前的物种变化较大;草本层重要值前3名物种,分别为中日金星蕨(Parathelypteris nipponica)、求米草(Oplismenus undulatifolius)和六叶葎(Galium hoffmeisteri)但前后期无变化。各层生物多样性变化也不尽相同:乔木层和草本层物种丰富度指数、Shannon-Wiener指数和Simpson指数均显著增加,Pielou指数变化不显著;灌木层Pielou指数和Simpson指数显著增加,物种丰富度指数和Shannon-Wiener指数变化不显著。【结论】多年虫害侵扰虽然导致华山松种群衰退,但侵扰后期群落组成和结构却变得更为复杂,生物多样性更加丰富,尤其是乔木层和草本层。建议在对华山松虫害治理过程中,注重以自然恢复为主,对环境适应性较好的乔灌草物种予以重点保护,并对更新层进行抚育,同时选择重要值较高物种如灯台树(Cornus controversa)、鹅耳枥(Carpinus turczaninovii)、胡桃楸(Juglans mandshurica)进行林窗补植,提升生物多样性,促进群落趋于稳定。

Abstract

【Objective】This study investigated changes in the community structure and characteristics of Pinus armandi communities at different stages of pest infestation by Dendroctonus armandi in Shennongjia. The aim was to provide strategies for pest control and forest management of P. armandi community, and to establish a scientific basis for biodiversity conservation.【Method】Fixed-plot surveys were conducted in Shennongjia Forest District in 2015 (earlier pestr infestation stage) and 2022 (later pest infestation stage).We investigated the soil environment and plant community, and analyzed changes in soil properties, species composition, importance values, and biodiversity indices.【Result】Compared to the earlier pest infestation stage, the soil environment changed significantly in the late stage of pest infestation: the content of organic matter, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus increased significantly by 159.86%, 96.18% and 54.39%, respectively. However, soil temperature and humidity, litter thickness, pH, and total potassium exhibited no significant changes. Both species composition and richness increased in the community. Vascular plant diversity expanded from 116 species (63 families, 101 genera) to 189 species (74 families, 145 genera). Specifically, the arbor layer increased by 20 species, the shrub layer added 9 species, and the herb layer increased by 55 species. Changes in importance values varied among layers. P. armandi remained the dominant arbor species, but its importance value declined from 42.52% to 24.41%.The species with the highest importance values in the shrub layer changed significantly, whereas the herb layer retained its top three species: Parathelypteris nipponica, Oplismenus undulatifolius and Galium hoffmeisteri. Biodiversity changes also differed among layers. In the arbor and herb layers,species richness, Shannon-Wiener index, and Simpson index increased significant, while the Pielou index showed no marked change. In the shrub layer, Pielou and Simpson indices increased significantly, while richness and Shannon-Wiener index remained stable.【Conclusion】Despite the decline in the P. armandi population due to years of pest infestation, the composition and structure became more complex and biodiversity increased, particularly in arbor and herb layers. In managing P. armandi-infested forests, natural restoration should be prioritized. Species across all layers that exhibit strong environmental adaptability should be protected, and the regeneration layer should be fostered. In addition, strategic gap planting utilizing high-importance-value species—such as Cornus controversa, Carpinus turczaninovii, and Juglans mandshurica—are recommended to enhance biodiversity and promote community stabilization.

关键词

华山松 / 虫害侵扰 / 群落结构 / 生物多样性 / 重要值 / 大小蠹 / 湖北神农架

Key words

Pinus armandi / pest infestation / community structure / biodiversity / importance value / Dendroctonus armandi / Shennongjia, Hubei

引用本文

导出引用
李欢欢, 崔鸿侠, 郑京津, . 虫害侵扰不同时期华山松群落结构和特征变化[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版). 2026, 50(3): 247-256 https://doi.org/10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202501041
LI Huanhuan, CUI Hongxia, ZHENG Jingjin, et al. Changes in community structures and characteristics of Pinus armandi at different stages of pest infestation[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition). 2026, 50(3): 247-256 https://doi.org/10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202501041
中图分类号: S718.5   

参考文献

[1]
丛明旸, 石会平, 张小锟, 等. 八仙山国家级自然保护区典型森林群落结构及物种多样性研究[J]. 南开大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 46(4):44-52.
CONG M Y, SHI H P, ZHANG X K, et al. Analyses on community structure and species diversity of typical forest in Baxianshan National Natural Reserve[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Nankaiensis, 2013, 46(4):44-52. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.0465-7942.2013.04.044.
[2]
袁蕾, 周华荣, 宗召磊, 等. 乌鲁木齐地区典型灌木群落结构特征及其多样性研究[J]. 西北植物学报, 2014, 34(3):595-603.
YUAN L, ZHOU H R, ZONG Z L, et al. Structural characteristics and diversity of typical shrub plant community in the Urumqi region[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2014, 34(3):595-603. DOI:10.7606/j.issn.1000-4025.2014.03.0595.
[3]
TILMAN D, REICH P B, KNOPS J M H. Biodiversity and ecosystem stability in a decade-long grassland experiment[J]. Nature, 2006, 441(7093):629-632. DOI:10.1038/nature04742.
[4]
宋厚娟, 叶吉, 师帅, 等. 长白山区阔叶红松林残留片段木本植物物种组成与群落结构[J]. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25(5):1239-1249.
SONG H J, YE J, SHI S, et al. Woody plant species composition and community structure in residual fragments of broad-leaved Korean pine mixed forests in Changbai Mountains area[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2014, 25(5):1239-1249. DOI:10.13287/j.1001-9332.2014.0003.
[5]
陈泓宇, 兰明钰, 孙传玺, 等. 粤北不同演替阶段森林群落结构与种间关联[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2022, 42(5):465-473.
CHEN H Y, LAN M Y, SUN C X, et al. Community structure and interspecific association in different forest successional stages in north Guangdong[J]. Journal of Forest and Environment, 2022, 42(5):465-473. DOI: 10.13324/j.cnki.jfcf.2022.05.003.
[6]
范明阳, 胡萌, 杨园, 等. 中国东部地区马尾松与黄山松群落分类及群落结构和物种多样性特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 48(1):47-58.
FAN M Y, HU M, YANG Y, et al. Community classification,structures and species diversity characteristics of Pinus massoniana and P.hwangshanensis in the eastern China[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition), 2024, 48(1):47-58. DOI:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202210029.
[7]
柏冰洋, 易家喜, 崔娥, 等. 华山松大小蠹的防控技术研究综述[J]. 湖北林业科技, 2023, 52(5):68-72.
BO B Y, YI J X, CUI E, et al. Overview on prevention and control technology of Dendroctonus armandi[J]. Hubei Forestry Science and Technology, 2023, 52(5):68-72. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-3020.2023.05.013.
[8]
胡文杰, 崔鸿侠, 潘磊, 等. 神农架国家公园华山松退化群落生态位特征及种间关系[J]. 西南林业大学学报(自然科学), 2023, 43(6):26-37.
HU W J, CUI H X, PAN L, et al. Niche characteristics and interspecific relationships of degenerated Pinus armandii community in Shennongjia National Park[J]. Journal of Southwest Forestry University (Natural Sciences), 2023, 43(6):26-37. DOI: 10.11929/j.swfu.202212032.
[9]
张子一, 查玉平, 王少明, 等. 神农架林区华山松大小蠹生物学特性研究[J]. 中国森林病虫, 2015, 34(6):1-4.
ZHANG Z Y, ZHA Y P, WANG S M, et al. Bionomics of Dendroctonus armandi in Shennongjia forestry district[J]. Forest Pest and Disease, 2015, 34(6):1-4. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1671-0886.2015.06.001.
[10]
赵明振, 代鲁鲁, 陈辉. 华山松大小蠹野外诱捕探究[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2018, 33(5):137-141,230.
ZHAO M Z, DAI L L, CHEN H. Technology of field trapping of Dendroctonus armandi(Coleopteran:Curculionidae:Scolytidae)[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2018, 33(5):137-141,230. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2018.05.00.
[11]
王文杰, 杜红居, 肖路, 等. 凉水自然保护区3种森林类型的植物组成和林分结构特征[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(9):166-176.
WANG W J, DU H J, XIAO L, et al. Differences in plant composition and forest structure among of 3 forest types in Liangshui National Nature Reserve[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2019, 55(9):166-176. DOI:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20190918.
[12]
黄金莲, 崔鸿侠, 唐万鹏, 等. 虫害对华山松人工林土壤酶活性及碳氮磷化学计量特征的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2023, 59(10):128-137.
HUANG J L, CUI H X, TANG W P, et al. Effects of insect disturbance on characteristics of soil enzyme activity and C∶N∶P stoichiometry in Pinus armandii forest[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2023, 59(10):128-137. DOI:10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20220115.
[13]
张亚昊. 基于多源遥感数据的神农架华山松大小蠹虫害空间格局动态变化研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2022.
ZHANG Y H. Spatial pattern dynamics of Dendroctonus armandi infestation in Shennongjia based on multi-source remote sensing data[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2022. DOI: 10.27158/d.cnki.ghznu.2022.000111.
[14]
陈文静, 徐华东, 刘美爽. 应用MODIS数据监测神农架林区大小蠹虫害时空分布[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2020, 40(12):60-68.
CHEN W J, XU H D, LIU M S. Spatial and temporal distribution of Dendroctonus armandi infestation in Shennongjia forested region using MODIS data[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2020, 40(12):60-68. DOI: 10.14067/j.cnki.1673-923x.2020.12.008.
[15]
马望, 房磊, 方国飞, 等. 基于最大熵模型的神农架林区华山松大小蠹灾害遥感监测[J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(8):2122-2131.
MA W, FANG L, FANG G F, et al. Mapping the infestation of Dendroctonus armandi in Shennongjia forested region using Landsat and Max Ent model[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2016, 35(8):2122-2131. DOI:10.13292/j.1000-4890.201608.029.
[16]
何斌, 李青, 刘勇. 草海国家级自然保护区华山松群落特征及物种多样性研究[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2020, 28(1):44-52.
HE B, LI Q, LIU Y. Community characteristics and species diversity of Pinus armandii in Caohai National Nature Reserve[J]. Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Botany, 2020, 28(1):44-52. DOI: 10.11926/jtsb.4063.
[17]
胡文杰, 潘磊, 唐万鹏, 等. 虫害侵扰初期华山松群落草本层生态位特征和种间关系[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2023, 51(3):36-40.
HU W J, PAN L, TANG W P, et al. Niche characteristics and interspecific relationship of herbaceous layer in Pinus armandii community at the early stage of pest infestation[J]. Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2023, 51(3):36-40. DOI:10.13759/j.cnki.dlxb.2023.03.017.
[18]
王建栋, 张志华, 杨喜田, 等. 黑河流域土壤理化性质分布特征[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2020, 54(1):133-139.
WANG J D, ZHANG Z H, YANG X T, et al. Soil physicochemical properties and distribution characteristics in Heihe River,northwest China[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural University, 2020, 54(1):133-139. DOI: 10.16445/j.cnki.1000-2340.20200214.007.
[19]
庾晓红, 李贤伟, 白降丽. 我国植被数量分析方法的研究概况和发展趋势[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005, 24(4):448-451.
YU X H, LI X W, BAI J L. Research progress and development trend on numerical analysis of vegetation in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2005, 24(4):448-451. DOI: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.200504.021.
[20]
吴昊. 不同类型群落物种多样性指数的比较研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2015, 35(5):84-89.
WU H. Comparative study of species diversity indices of different type communities[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2015, 35(5):84-89. DOI: 10.14067/j.cnki.1673-923x.2015.05.015.
[21]
马克平, 刘玉明. 生物群落多样性的测度方法 Ⅰ.α多样性的测度方法(下)[J]. 生物多样性, 1994, 2(4):231-239.
MA K P, LIU Y M. Methods for measuring biodiversity of biological communities Ⅰ.Methods for measuring α-diversity (Ⅱ)[J]. Biodiversity Science, 1994, 2(4):231-239. DOI:10.3321/j.issn:1005-0094.1994.04.009.
[22]
范杰. 地形和林分结构对神农架华山松大小蠹发生的影响及不同林分类型下华山松更新特征研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2024.
FAN J. Effects of topography and stand structure on the damage of Dendroctonus armandii in Shennongjia and the regeneration characteristics of Pinus armandi under different stand types[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2024. DOI:10.27158/d.cnki.ghznu.2024.000454.
[23]
PIELECH R, ANIOL-KWIATKOWSKA J, SZCZESNIAK E. Landscape-scale factors driving plant species composition in mountain streamside and spring riparian forests[J]. Forest Ecology & Management, 2015, 347:217-227. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2015.03.038.
[24]
YIRGA F, MARIE M, KASSA S, et al. Impact of altitude and anthropogenic disturbance on plant species composition,diversity,and structure at the Wof-Washa Highlands of Ethiopia[J].Heliyon, 2019, 5(8):e02284. DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02284.
[25]
赵成章, 石福习, 董小刚, 等. 祁连山北坡退化林地植被群落的自然恢复过程及土壤特征变化[J]. 生态学报, 2011, 31(1):115-122.
ZHAO C Z, SHI F X, DONG X G, et al. Dynamics of vegetation structure and soil properties in the natural restoration process of degraded woodland on the northern slope of Qilian Mountains,northwestern China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(1):115-122. DOI:10.20103/j.stxb.2011.01.014.
[26]
王绍颖. 神农架华山松退化林植物多样性与群落演替趋势研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2023.
WANG S Y. Study on plant diversity and community succession trend of degraded forest of Pinus armandii in Shennongjia[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2023. DOI:10.27158/d.cnki.ghznu.2023.001268.
[27]
胡文浩, 张晓婧, 陈雅杰, 等. 坝上地区不同年代退耕还林生境的草本层植物多样性及影响因子[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(3):1116-1126.
HU W H, ZHANG X J, CHEN Y J, et al. Herb diversity and its impact factors in different periods from 1970s to 2000s of the returning farmland to forest project in the Bashang Area of North China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(3):1116-1126. DOI:10.5846/stxb201912042631.
[28]
GILLIAM F S. The ecological significance of the herbaceous layer in temperate forest ecosystems[J]. BioScience, 2007, 57(10):845-858. DOI:10.1641/B571007.
[29]
王耀仪, 王宏翔, 王永强, 等. 雅长保护区老龄林不同林层功能性状多样性及其影响因素分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 48(5):28-38.
WANG Y Y, WANG H X, WANG Y Q, et al. Affecting factors analysis of functional diversity at different forest strata in an old growth forest community in Yachang Natural Reserve[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition), 2024, 48(5):28-38. DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202208030.
[30]
WULF M, NAAF T. Herb layer response to broadleaf tree species with different leaf litter quality and canopy structure in temperate forests[J]. Journal of Vegetation Science, 2009, 20(3):517-526. DOI:10.1111/j.1654-1103.2009.05713.x.
[31]
康永祥, 康博文, 刘建军, 等. 陕北黄土高原文冠果群落结构及物种多样性[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30(16):4328-4339.
KANG Y X, KANG B W, LIU J J, et al. Structure and species diversity of Xanthoceras sorbifolia community in the Loess Plateau of north Shaanxi[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(16):4328-4339. DOI:10.20103/j.stxb.2010.16.009.
[32]
冷流江, 张艳, 赵廷宁, 等. 松散堆积体边坡植被分布特征及其环境因子解析[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2024, 40(12):1595-1602.
LENC L J, ZHANC Y, ZHAO T N, et al. Amalysis of vegetation distrbution characteristics and emiommental factos of loose acumlation slope[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rumal Environment, 2024, 40(12):1595-1602. DOI:10.19741/j.issn.1673-4831.2024.0228.
[33]
胡文杰, 王晓荣, 崔鸿侠, 等. 林分结构和树种组成对宜昌九岭头马尾松林更新幼苗密度的影响[J]. 植物资源与环境学报, 2020, 29(4):52-60.
HU W J, WANG X R, CUI H X, et al. Effects of stand structure and tree species composition on density of regeneration seedling of Pinus massoniana forest in Jiulingtou of Yichang City[J]. Journal of Plant Resources and Environment, 2020, 29(4):52-60. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-7895.2020.04.07.
[34]
郭弘婷, 纪小芳, 汪成, 等. 我国人工林林下灌木层植物多样性空间变异及影响要素[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 46(4):144-152.
GUO H T, JI X F, WANG C, et al. Spatial variability and influencing factors of plant diversity in the shrub layers of artificial forests in China[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition), 2022, 46(4):144-152. DOI:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202103014.

基金

湖北省林业科技支撑重点项目(2022LYKJ06)
湖北省林科院科技攻关项目(2021YGG05)
经济林木种质改良与资源综合利用湖北省重点实验室
大别山特色资源开发湖北省协同创新中心2023年开放基金项目(202328304)

责任编辑: 王国栋
PDF(6825 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/