不同龄组天然常绿阔叶林与杉木人工林林下草本层生物量分配特征

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2016.05.027

国家林草科技领军期刊
中国精品科技期刊
中国高校百佳科技期刊
江苏省新闻出版政府奖期刊奖
RCCSE林学权威期刊（A+）
CSCD核心期刊
Scopus数据库收录期刊
中文核心期刊
SCD核心期刊

作者加群：102861116

微信公众号：南京林业大学学报

高级检索

南京林业大学学报（自然科学版） ›› 2016, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (05): 170-176.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2016.05.027

不同龄组天然常绿阔叶林与杉木人工林林下草本层生物量分配特征

李静¹,王玲红²,程栋梁^1,3,徐朝斌¹,张中瑞¹,吴永宏¹,钟全林^1,3*

1.福建师范大学地理科学学院,福建福州 350007;
2.江西省吉安县林业局,江西吉安 343100;
3.湿润亚热带山地生态国家重点实验室培育基地,福建省植物生理生态重点实验室,福建福州 350007

出版日期:2016-10-18 发布日期:2016-10-18
基金资助:
收稿日期:2015-10-15 修回日期:2015-12-23
基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目(31170596,31170374,31370589); 福建省重大科技项目(2014N5008); 福建省种业创新项目(2014S1477-4)
第一作者:李静(lij1510341@sina.com)。*通信作者:钟全林(qlzhong@126.com),教授。
引文格式:李静,王玲红,钟全林,等. 不同龄组天然常绿阔叶林与杉木人工林林下草本层生物量分配特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2016,40(5):170-176.

Above and below ground biomass allocation on herb layer of natural evergreen broad-leaved forest and Chinese fir plantation with different age classes

LI Jing¹, WANG Linghong², CHENG Dongliang^1,3,XU Chaobin¹,ZHANG Zhongrui¹, WU Yonghong¹,ZHONG Quanlin^1,3*

1. College of Geographical Sciences, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou 350007, China;
2. Ji'an County Forestry Bureau of Jiangxi Province, Ji'an 343100, China;
3. State Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Humid Subtropical Mountain Ecology, Fujian Provincial Key Laboratory of Plant Ecophysiology Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou 350007, China

Online:2016-10-18 Published:2016-10-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以福建省天然常绿阔叶林及人工杉木林下草本层为研究对象,对其地上生物量(y)与地下生物量(x)分配关系进行研究,并对方程lg y=b+ a lg x中的生长指数(a)和生长常数(b)进行计算分析,初步揭示不同森林类型草本层植物生物量分配及其随乔木层林龄变化的基本特征,探究其是否符合等速生长规律。结果显示:①天然常绿阔叶林草本层生物量随林龄增加而下降,人工杉木林草本层生物量在成熟林时期最大,幼、中龄林次之,近熟林最小; ②天然常绿阔叶林幼龄林及成熟林草本层地上-地下生物量分配遵循等速生长规律,中龄林及近熟林生长指数a的95%置信区间上限接近理论值1,各林龄生长常数以成熟林<幼龄林<中龄林<近熟林; ③人工杉木林草本层地上-地下生物量分配均遵循等速生长规律,各林龄生长常数以幼龄林>成熟林>近熟林>中龄林。研究表明,人为干扰对草本层地上-地下生物量分配有影响,但并未破坏其等速分配生长的规律。

Abstract: To explore the above and below ground biomass allocation patterns of herb layer, two different forest type including the natural evergreen broad-leaved forest and Chinese fir plantation with various age classes in Fujian Province were analyzed using the logarithmic equation: lg y=b+a lg x, and the isometric above and below ground biomass allocation theory was also detected using the above and below ground biomass of herb layer. The results indicated that the herbaceous layer biomass of natural evergreen broad-leaved forest decreased with the increasing of stand age. On the contrary, in Chinese fir plantations, the total biomass of herb layer was the highest in the mature forest stage, and the total biomass was the minimum in the pre-mature forest. Additionally, the ratios of above to below ground biomass were different for the two forest types. In different forest age, the scaling exponents(a)of above and below ground biomass in natural evergreen broad-leaved forest herb layer were 0.785, 0.757, 0.760 and 1.232, respectively. The above ground biomass scaled isometrically with below ground biomass of young and mature forest herb layers in natural evergreen broad-leaved forest, with the 95% confidence interval including the theoretical value of 1.0. Furthermore, the 95% confidence interval of the scaling exponents were close with 1.0 in the middle age and pre-mature forests. For the scaling constants(b), it followed the order of mature forest <young forest < middle-age forest < pre-mature forest. The scaling exponents(a)of herb layer ground in Chinese fir forests were all consistent with the isometric biomass allocation theory. For the scaling constants(b), it followed the order of young forest >mature forest > pre-mature forest > middle-age forest. The result support the theory that above ground biomass of herb layer scales i ometrically with below ground biomass.

中图分类号:

S718

李静,王玲红,程栋梁,等. 不同龄组天然常绿阔叶林与杉木人工林林下草本层生物量分配特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2016, 40(05): 170-176.

LI Jing, WANG Linghong, CHENG Dongliang,XU Chaobin¹,ZHANG Zhongrui, WU Yonghong,ZHONG Quanlin. Above and below ground biomass allocation on herb layer of natural evergreen broad-leaved forest and Chinese fir plantation with different age classes[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2016, 40(05): 170-176.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2016.05.027.

参考文献

[1] 范玉龙,胡楠,丁圣彦,等.伏牛山自然保护区森林生态系统草本植物功能群的分类[J].生态学报,2008,28(7):3092-3101. Fan Y L,Hu N,Ding S Y,et al. The classification of plant functional types based on the dominant herbaceous species in forest ecosystem at Funiu Mountain Natural Reserve[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(7): 3092-3101.
[2] 胡相明,程积民,万惠娥.黄土丘陵区人工林下草本层植物的结构特征[J].水土保持通报,2006,26(3):41-45.Doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-288x.2006.03.010. Hu X M,Cheng J M,Wan H E. Structure characteristics of herbages underfive types of artificial forest plantations in Loess hilly region[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation,2006,26(3): 41-45.
[3] 王欢.北京妙峰山林场林下灌草层生物量及固碳效益研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2014. Wang H. Study on biomass and carbon sequestration benefits for shrubs and herbs of typical plantations in Beijing Miaofengshan Forest Farm [D].Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2004.
[4] 龙世友,鲍雅静,李政海,等.内蒙古草原67种植物碳含量分析及与热值的关系研究[J].草业学报,2013,22(1): 112-119. Long S Y, Bao Y J, Li Z H,et al. The carbon contents and the relationship with the calorific values of 67 plants species in Inner Mongolia grasslands[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica,2013,22(1):112-119.
[5] 李步杭,张健,姚晓琳,等.长白山阔叶红松林草本植物多样性季节动态及空间分布格局[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(3):467-473 Li B H, Zhang J, Yao X L, et al. Seasonal dynamics and spatial distribution patterns of herbs diversity in broadleaved Korean pine(Pinus koraiensis)mixed forest in Changbai Mountains[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008, 19(3): 467-473.
[6] 余敏,周志勇,康峰峰,等.山西灵空山小蛇沟林下草本层植物群落梯度分析及环境解释[J].植物生态学报,2013, 37(5):373-383.Doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00039. Yu M, Zhou Z Y, Kang F F, et al. Gradient analysis and environmental interpretation of understory herb layer communities in Xiaoshegou of Lingkong Mountain,Shanxi, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2013,37(5): 373-383.
[7] 王娓,彭书时,方精云. 中国北方天然草地的生物量分配及其对气候的响应[J].干旱区研究, 2008,25(1):90-97. Wang W, Peng S S, Fang J Y. Biomass distribution of natural grasslands and its response to climate change in north China[J]. Aric Zone Research. 2008, 25(1): 90-97.
[8] 肖遥,陶冶,张元明.古尔班通古特沙漠4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期的生物量分配与叶片化学计量特征[J].植物生态学报,2014,38(9):929-940.Doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00087. Xiao Y,Tao Y,Zhang Y M.Biomass allocation and leaf stoichiometric characteristics in four desert herbaceous plants during different growth periods in the Gurbantünggüt Desert, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology,2014,38(9): 929-940.
[9] 陶冶,张元明.准噶尔荒漠6种类短命植物生物量分配与异速生长关系[J].草业学报,2014,23(2):38-48.Doi:10.11686/cyxb20140205. Tao Y, Zhang Y M. Biomass allocation patterns and allometric relationships of six ephemeroid species in Junggar Basin, China [J]. Acta Pratacult Sin, 2014, 23(2): 38-48.
[10] 王亮,牛克昌,杨元合,等. 中国草地生物量地上-地下分配格局-基于个体水平的研究[J].中国科学:生命科学,2010,40(7):642-649. Wang L, Niu K C, Yang Y H,et al. Patterns of above and below-ground biomass allocation in China's grasslands: evidence from individual-level observations[J]. Science China: Life Sciences, 2010, 40(7):642-649.
[11] Falster D S, Warton D I, Wright U. User' guide to SMATR: standardised major axis tests and routines Version 2.0[EB/OL].
[2016-12-10].http://www.bio.mq.Edu.au/ecology/SMATR, 2003.
[12] 程栋梁.植物生物量分配模式与生长速率的相关规律研究[D].兰州:兰州大学,2007. Cheng D L. Study on the correlation of plant biomass allocation pattern and growth rate[D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University, 2007.
[13] 朱强根, 金爱武, 王意锟, 等. 不同营林模式下毛竹枝叶的生物量分配: 异速生长分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2013,37(9):811-819.Doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00085. Zhu Q G, Jin A W, Wang Y K, et al. Biomass allocation of branches and leaves in Phyllostachys heterocycla ‘Pubescens' under different management modes: allometric scaling analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2013,37(9): 811-819.
[14] 刘磊,温远光,卢立华,等.不同林龄杉木人工林林下植物组成及其生物量变化[J].广西科学,2007,14(2):172-176.Doi:10.3969/j.issn.1005-9164.2007.02.026. Liu L, Wen Y G, Lu L H, et al. Variety of under-storey species composition and biomass in different age Cunninghamia tanceolata plantation [J]. Guangxi Sciences, 2007, 14(2): 172-176.
[15] 林开敏,洪伟,俞新妥.杉木人工林林下植物生物量的动态特征和预测模型[J].林业科学,2001,37(S1):99-105.Doi:10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2001.21.018. Lin K M, Hong W, Yu X T. The dynamic characteristics and forecasting models of biomass of undergrowth plant in Chinese fir plantation [J].Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2001, 37(1):99-105.
[16] 秦建华,姜志林.杉木林生物量及其分配的变化规律[J].生态学杂志,1996,15(1):1-7. Qin J H, Jiang Z L.The change rule of biomass and its allocation in Chinese fir plantation [J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 1996, 15(1):1-7.
[17] 常云妮,钟全林,程栋梁,等. 闽西北地区不同林龄常绿阔叶混交林物种多样性比较[J]. 生态环境学报, 2013, 22(6): 955-960. Doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-5906.2013.06.008. Chang Y N, Zhong Q L, Cheng D L, et al. Species diversity of ever-green broad-leaved mixed forest with different forest age in the north-west of Fujian Province [J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2013, 22(6): 955-960.
[18] 赵金龙,王泺鑫,韩海荣,等. 辽河源不同龄组油松天然次生林生物量及空间分配特征[J].生态学报,2014,34(23):7026-7037.Doi:10.5846/stxb201303060357. Zhao J L, Wang L X, Han H R, et al.Biomass and spatial distribution characteristics of Pinus tabulaeformis natural secondary forest at different age groups in the Liaoheyuan Nature Reserve, Hebei Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014, 34(23):7026-7037.
[19] 王祖华,李瑞霞,王晓杰,等.间伐对杉木人工林林下植被多样性及生物量的影响[J].生态环境学报,2010,19(12):2778-2782.Doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-5906.2010.12.002. Wang Z H, Li R X, Wang X J, et al. Effects of thinning on biomass and species diversity of understory in Chinese fir plantations [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2010, 19(12): 2778-2782.
[20] Huffman D W, Moore M M. Responses of Fendler ceanothus to overstory thinning, prescribed fire, and drought in an Arizona ponderosa pine forest [J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2004, 198: 105-115.
[21] Gundale M J, Deluca T H, Fiedler C E, et al. Restoration treatments in a Montana ponderosa pine forest: effects on soil physical, chemical, and biology properties [J]. Forest Ecoloy and Management, 2005, 213(1): 25-38.Doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2005.03.015.
[22] 毛志宏,朱教君,刘足根,等.间伐对落叶松人工林内草本植物多样性及其组成的影响[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(10):1201-1207. Mao Z H, Zhu J J, Liu Z G, et al. Effects of thinning on species diversity and composition of understory herbs in a larch plantation [J].Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2006, 25(10):1201-1207.
[23] 牛存洋,阿拉木萨,宗芹,等.科尔沁沙地小叶锦鸡儿地上-地下生物量分配格局[J].生态学杂志,2013,32(8):1980-1986. Niu C Y, A Lamusa, Zong Q, et al. Allocation patterns of above-and below-ground biomass of Caragana microphylla in Horqin sandy land, north China[J].Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2013, 32(8):1980-1986.

不同龄组天然常绿阔叶林与杉木人工林林下草本层生物量分配特征

Above and below ground biomass allocation on herb layer of natural evergreen broad-leaved forest and Chinese fir plantation with different age classes

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者

读者

审稿

[1]	杨永. 裸子植物的系统分类:历史、现状和展望[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 14-26.
[2]	张瑞, 周正虎, 王传宽, 金鹰. 东北温带森林不同材性树种木质部解剖和水力性状[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 229-236.
[3]	黄永健, 荀航, 张保, 尤俊昊, 姚曦, 汤锋. HPLC同时测定竹笋中8种酚酸类物质含量的方法研究及其应用[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 237-244.
[4]	邓云飞. 安息香科的系统学研究进展[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 27-35.
[5]	李家亮, 巫大宇, 毛康珊. 柏木属的分类地位和物种多样性研究现状与建议[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 36-45.
[6]	李涌福, 杨庆华, 陈林, 张敏, 向其柏, 王贤荣, 段一凡. 木犀属内分组关系的分类修订[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 58-62.
[7]	杨皓, 刘超, 庄家尧, 张树同, 张文韬, 毛国豪. 不同载体菌肥对紫穗槐生长和光合特性及土壤养分的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 81-89.
[8]	丁咏, 刘鑫, 张金池, 王宇浩, 陈美玲, 李涛, 刘孝武, 周悦湘, 孙连浩, 廖艺. 酸雨类型转变对杉木林地土壤和细根生长的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 90-98.
[9]	武燕, 黄青, 刘讯, 郑睿, 岑佳宝, 丁波, 张运林, 符裕红. 西南喀斯特地区马尾松人工林林龄对土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 99-107.
[10]	卜晓婷, 付威, 李淑娴, 徐志标, 彭大庆, 徐林桥. 幼化和外源激素对娜塔栎嫩枝扦插生根的影响及其生根解剖学观察[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 129-136.
[11]	杜晋城, 李欣欣, 王泽亮, 刘偲, 钟毅, 王丽华. 聚乙二醇胁迫下3个油橄榄品种生理指标响应[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 137-143.
[12]	方静, 张书曼, 严善春, 武帅, 赵佳齐, 孟昭军. 两种丛枝菌根真菌复合接种对青山杨叶片抗美国白蛾的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 144-154.
[13]	张馨方, 王广鹏, 张树航, 李颖, 郭燕. 不同抗螨性板栗差异次生代谢物筛选与分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 234-240.
[14]	杨宏, 伊贤贵, 王贤荣, 吴桐, 周华近, 陈洁, 李蒙, 朱兆青. 樱花新品种‘元春’[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 275-276.
[15]	田梦阳, 朱树林, 窦全琴, 季艳红. 薄壳山核桃-茶间作对‘安吉白茶’速生期光合特性的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 86-96.