不同灌溉方式对樟子松生长、光合特性及土壤水分运移的影响

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202107011

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） ›› 2022, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (4): 135-143.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202107011

不同灌溉方式对樟子松生长、光合特性及土壤水分运移的影响

刘雅楠¹(), 刘洋¹^,^*(), 兰再平², 铁牛¹, 张梦弢³, 王成德⁴, 罗奇辉¹, 张晨¹

1.内蒙古农业大学林学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010019
2.中国林业科学研究院华北林业实验中心,北京 100091
3.山西农业大学林学院,山西太谷 030801
4.山东农业大学林学院,山东泰安 271018

收稿日期:2021-07-06 修回日期:2022-01-12 出版日期:2022-07-30 发布日期:2022-08-01
通讯作者: 刘洋
基金资助:
内蒙古自治区科技成果转化项目(CGZH2018058);内蒙古自治区自然科学基金项目(2021MS03096)

Effects of different irrigation methods on growth, photosynthetic characteristics and soil water transport of Mongolian pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica)

LIU Yanan¹(), LIU Yang¹^,^*(), LAN Zaiping², TIE Niu¹, ZHANG Mengtao³, WANG Chengde⁴, LUO Qihui¹, ZHANG Chen¹

1. College of Forestry, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010019, China
2. North China Forestry Experiment Center, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China
3. Forestry College, Shanxi Agricultural University,Taigu 030801, China
4. College of Forestry, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai’an 271018, China

Received:2021-07-06 Revised:2022-01-12 Online:2022-07-30 Published:2022-08-01
Contact: LIU Yang

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究滴灌、漫灌和对照3种处理方式下樟子松(Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica)生长状况和土壤水分运移规律,探讨其生长、光合、蒸腾特性和水分运移对不同灌溉技术的响应,为在干旱、半干旱地区高效栽培樟子松提供参考。【方法】以内蒙古大青山国家级自然保护区的樟子松林为研究对象,基于单因素方差分析比较不同灌溉方式下樟子松的生长(地径、树高、冠幅、抽穗长和生物量)与光合特性[光合速率(P_n)、蒸腾速率(T_r)、气孔导度(G_s)、胞间CO₂浓度(C_i)和水分利用效率(E_WUE)];采用土壤剖面观测法比较不同灌溉方式和灌溉时间下土壤水分垂直和水平运移的变化规律,并利用经验模型对土壤水分运移轮廓进行模拟。【结果】①滴灌处理下樟子松的地径、树高、冠幅、抽穗长和生物量分别比漫灌方式下高1.5 cm、0.5 m、10.0 cm、5.9 cm和11.5 kg,分别比对照高3.4 cm、0.9 m、60.0 cm、7.2 cm和2.5 kg;②滴灌处理下樟子松的光合速率、蒸腾速率、气孔导度和胞间CO₂浓度显著高于漫灌和对照(P < 0.05),各种灌溉方式下的上述指标大小具体表现为滴灌>漫灌>对照;水分利用效率大小表现为对照>滴灌>漫灌,表明樟子松可在较低的土壤含水量条件下生长;③在灌溉2、4和6 h后,樟子松林地滴灌比漫灌处理下土壤湿润锋的垂直运移距离和停灌后最终垂直运移距离深,两种灌溉方式下3种不同灌溉时长的土壤湿润锋的最大水平运移距离都出现在0~20 cm土层,然而停灌后的垂直运移距离以滴灌>漫灌;④利用经验模型对土壤湿润体轮廓进行模拟,设定:为垂直方向上任意位置处土壤水分水平运移距离(i=1,2,3,4);L_MR为土壤水分水平最大运移距离;R_MH为垂直方向上任意位置处土壤水分垂直运移相对距离;a_i为模型参数。则滴灌和漫灌的最优模型分别为多项式模型(M_R1)和Baldwin模型(M_R4), $M_{\mathrm{R} 1}=L_{\mathrm{MR}}\left[a_{1}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}-1\right)+a_{2}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}^{2}-1\right)+a_{3}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}{ }^{3}-1\right)+a_{4}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}^{4}-1\right)\right]$; $M_{\mathrm{R} 4}=a_{1}+\left[\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}-1\right) /\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}+1\right)\right]+a_{2}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}-1\right)$。【结论】在北方干旱区,滴灌区樟子松的生长和光合特性明显优于漫灌;在持续灌溉2、4和6 h后,滴灌试验区60 cm土层以上的土壤湿润锋在最终水平运移距离上均大于漫灌区。将滴灌技术应用于樟子松林木培育,有利于根系吸收水分和促进树木生长,且樟子松的光合特性受水分利用效率影响,合理的灌溉可改善林木的生长机制。

关键词: 樟子松, 滴灌, 漫灌, 光合特性, 生长, 土壤水分运移, 水分运移模拟

Abstract:

【Objective】 The growth and soil water transport of Mongolian pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica) were studied under three different drip treatments (drip irrigation, flood irrigation and control), and the responses of growth, photosynthesis, transpiration and water transport to the irrigation methods were discussed to provide a reference for efficient cultivation of P. sylvestris var. mongolica in arid and semi-arid areas. 【Method】 With P. sylvestris var. mongolica of the Daqingshan National Nature Reserve in Inner Mongolia as the research object, the growth (ground diameter, tree height, crown width, head sprouting length and biomass) and photosynthetic characteristics [photosynthetic rate (P_n), transpiration rate (T_r), stomatal conductance (G_s), intercellular CO₂ concentration (C_i), and water use efficiency (E_WUE)] of P. sylvestris var. mongolica were compared under different irrigation methods based on One-way ANOVA; soil profile observation was used to compare the migration distance of soil water in horizontal and vertical directions under different irrigation methods and durations. 【Result】 (1) The ground diameter, tree height, crown width, head sprouting length and biomass parameters of P. sylvestris var. mongolica in the drip irrigation were 1.5 cm, 0.5 m, 10 cm, 5.9 cm and 11.5 kg higher, respectively, than those in the flood irrigation, and 3.4 cm, 0.9 m, 60.0 cm, 7.2 cm and 2.5 kg higher than those in the control, respectively. (2) The P_n, T_r, G_s and C_i values of samples under the drip irrigation were significantly higher than those under the flood irrigation and control (P < 0.05), and decreased in the following order: drip irrigation > flood irrigation > control. However, E_WUE decreased in the following order: control > drip irrigation > flood irrigation, indicating P. sylvestris var. mongolica had the ability to tolerate drought under low soil water conditions. (3) After 2, 4 and 6 h irrigation, the vertical migration distance of soil moisture front and the final vertical migration distance after stopping the irrigation were deeper in the drip irrigation than in the flood irrigation. Under the two irrigation methods, the maximum horizontal migration distance of soil moisture front for the three different irrigation times in each soil layer was observed to be in the range of 0-20 cm. However, the vertical migration distance after stopping the irrigation decreased in the following order: drip irrigation > flood irrigation. (4) A few empirical models were used to simulate the profile of soil wetting body and the results confirmed that the optimal models for the drip irrigation and the flood irrigation were Polynomial (Eq.1) $M_{\mathrm{R} 1}=L_{\mathrm{MR}}\left[a_{1}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}-1\right)+a_{2}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}^{2}-1\right)+a_{3}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}{ }^{3}-1\right)+a_{4}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}^{4}-1\right)\right]$ and Baldwin and Peterson (Eq.4) $M_{\mathrm{R} 4}=a_{1}+\left[\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}-1\right) /\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}+1\right)\right]+a_{2}\left(R_{\mathrm{MH}}-1\right)$, respectively. Among them, is the horizontal movement distance of soil water at any position in the vertical direction; L_MR is the maximum horizontal movement distance of soil water; R_MH is the vertical movement of soil water at any position in the vertical direction relative distance; a_i is the model parameter (i=1, 2, 3, 4).【Conclusion】 The drip irrigation was obviously better than the flood irrigation based on each evaluation index in the arid areas of the north China. After 2, 4 and 6 h irrigation, the final horizontal migration distance of soil water front above 60 cm soil layer in the drip irrigation was larger than that in the flood irrigation. The drip irrigation was beneficial to the root water absorption and the growth of P. sylvestris var. mongolica. The E_WUE affects the photosynthetic characteristics of P. sylvestris var. mongolica and reasonable irrigation can improve the growth mechanisms.

Key words: Mogolian pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica), drip irrigation, flood irrigation, photosynthetic characteristics, tree growth, soil water transport, water transport simulation

中图分类号:

S718

刘雅楠,刘洋,兰再平,等. 不同灌溉方式对樟子松生长、光合特性及土壤水分运移的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2022, 46(4): 135-143.

LIU Yanan, LIU Yang, LAN Zaiping, TIE Niu, ZHANG Mengtao, WANG Chengde, LUO Qihui, ZHANG Chen. Effects of different irrigation methods on growth, photosynthetic characteristics and soil water transport of Mongolian pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica)[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2022, 46(4): 135-143.DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202107011.

图/表 6

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

表2

两种灌溉方式下樟子松林地土壤水分运移最优轮廓模型的参数回归系数和模型评价指标"

灌溉方式 irrigation method	最优模型 optimal model	模型参数±标准误差 model parameters ± SE				模型拟合指标 model fitting index
灌溉方式 irrigation method	最优模型 optimal model	a₁	a₂	a₃	a₄	$R a d j 2$	RMSE
滴灌drip irrigation	Eq.1	1.82±0.58	-8.38±2.70	12.07±4.18	-6.41±2.06	0.97	2.41
漫灌flood irrigation	Eq.4	48.53±6.89	-101.20±23.83			0.83	8.67

表2

参考文献 36

[1]	王显蕾, 肖璇, 李雄. 水资源综合利用问题探讨[J]. 资源节约与环保, 2015(12):16.
	WANG X L, XIAO X, LI X. Discussion on comprehensive utilization of water resources[J]. Resour Econ Environ Prot, 2015(12): 16.DOI:10.16317/j.cnki.12-1377/x.2015.12.015.
[2]	贾黎明, 邢长山, 韦艳葵, 等. 地下滴灌条件下杨树速生丰产林生长与光合特性[J]. 林业科学, 2004, 40(2):61-67.
	JIA L M, XING C S, WEI Y K, et al. The growth and photosynthesis of poplar trees in fast-growing and high-yield plantations with subterranean drip irrigation[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2004, 40(2):61-67.DOI:10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2004.02.011.
[3]	韦艳葵, 贾黎明, 邢长山. 滴灌在林业上应用的研究与进展[J]. 世界林业研究, 2003, 16(4):38-43.
	WEI Y K, JIA L M, XING C S. A review of the research and development of the application of drip-irrigation in forestry[J]. World For Res, 2003, 16(4):38-43.DOI:10.13348/j.cnki.sjlyyj.2003.04.008.
[4]	郭慧滨, 史群. 国内外节水灌溉发展简介[J]. 节水灌溉, 1998(5):23-25.
	GUO H B, SHI Q. A review of water-saving irrigation development here and abroad[J]. Water Sav Irrigation, 1998(5):23-25.
[5]	AIELLO A S, GRAVES W R. Success varies when using subirrigation instead of mist to root softwood cuttings of woody taxa[J]. J Environ Hortic, 1998, 16(1):42-47.DOI:10.24266/0738-2898-16.1.42.
[6]	CAMP C R, LAMM F R, EVANS RG, et al. Subsurface drip irrigation-past, present, and future[C]// National Irrigation Symposium. Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Symposium, Phoenix, Arizona, USA, November 14-16, 2000.
[7]	GREENLAND S, LEVIN E, DALRYMPLE J F, et al. Sustainable innovation adoption barriers:water sustainability,food production and drip irrigation in Australia[J]. Soc Responsib J, 2019, 15(6):727-741.DOI:10.1108/srj-07-2018-0181.
[8]	HEARD J W, PORKER M J, ARMSTRONG D P, et al. The economics of subsurface drip irrigation on perennial pastures and fodder production in Australia[J]. Agric Water Manag, 2012, 111:68-78.DOI:10.1016/j.agwat.2012.05.005.
[9]	ALCON F, DE MIGUEL M D, BURTON M. Duration analysis of adoption of drip irrigation technology in southeastern Spain[J]. Technol Forecast Soc Change, 2011, 78(6):991-1001.DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.02.001.
[10]	KALPAKIAN J, LEGROURI A, EJEKKI F, et al. Obstacles facing the diffusion of drip irrigation technology in the Middle Atlas region of Morocco[J]. Int J Environ Stud, 2014, 71(1):63-75.DOI:10.1080/00207233.2014.881956.
[11]	车赛男. 关于工业废水污染治理途径与技术的研究[J]. 资源节约与环保, 2020(9):91-92.
	CHE S N. Study on treatment approach and technology of industrial wastewater pollution[J]. Resour Econ Environ Prot, 2020(9):91-92.DOI:10.16317/j.cnki.12-1377/x.2020.09.050.
[12]	代永欣, 王林, 万贤崇. 干旱导致树木死亡机制研究进展[J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(11):3228-3236.
	DAI Y X, WANG L, WAN X C. Progress on researches of drought-induced tree mortality mechanisms[J]. Chin J Ecol, 2015, 34(11):3228-3236.DOI:10.13292/j.1000-4890.20151023.029.
[13]	朱玲. 智能滴灌带来林业节水新变化[J]. 中国林业, 2017(22):44-45.
	ZHU L. Intelligent drip irrigation brings new changes in forestry water saving[J]. For China, 2017(22):44-45.
[14]	傅建平, 兰再平, 孙尚伟, 等. 滴灌条件下杨树人工林土壤的水分运移[J]. 林业科学, 2013, 49(6):25-29.
	FU J P, LAN Z P, SUN S W, et al. Soil water movement in a poplar plantation under drip irrigation[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2013, 49(6):25-29.DOI:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20130604.
[15]	HANSEN E A. Irrigating short rotation intensive culture hybrid poplars[J]. Biomass, 1988, 16(4):237-250. DOI:10.1016/0144-4565(88)90029-7.
[16]	DICKMANN D I, NGUYEN P V, PREGITZER K S. Effects of irrigation and coppicing on above-ground growth,physiology,and fine-root dynamics of two field-grown hybrid poplar clones[J]. For Ecol Manag, 1996, 80(1/2/3):163-174. DOI:10.1016/0378-1127(95)03611-3.
[17]	KHAMZINA A, LAMERS J P A, VLEK P L G. Tree establishment under deficit irrigation on degraded agricultural land in the lower Amu Darya River region,Aral Sea Basin[J]. For Ecol Manag, 2008, 255(1):168-178.DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2007.09.005.
[18]	韦庆钰, 黄海龙, 吴纯泽, 等. 3种倍性青杨扦插苗对覆膜滴肥的生长响应[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 45(5):93-101.
	WEI Q Y, HUANG H L, WU C Z, et al. Response of Populus cathayana cutting seedlings of three ploidy types to fertilizer under film mulching and drip irrigation[J]. Natural Sciences Edition, 2021, 45(5):93-101. DOI:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202012048.
[19]	白育英. 大青山水源涵养林生态效益的研究[J]. 内蒙古林业科技, 2000(2):16-19.
	BAI Y Y. Study on ecological benefits of water regulation forest in Daqing Mt[J]. Inn Mong For Sci Tech, 2000(2):16-19.
[20]	庞晓燕. 内蒙古大青山自然保护区森林生态系统服务功能及其价值评估[J]. 内蒙古林业调查设计, 2017, 40(2):44-47.
	PANG X Y. Forest ecosystem services and their value assessment in Daqingshan Nature Reserve, Inner Mongolia[J]. Inn Mong For Investig Des, 2017, 40(2):44-47.DOI:10.13387/j.cnki.nmld.2017.02.019.
[21]	罗云建, 王效科, 逯非. 中国主要林木生物量模型手册[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2015.
	LUO Y J, WANG X K, LU F. Comprehensive database of biomass regressions for China’s tree Species[M]. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing Press, 2015.
[22]	张正斌, 山仑. 作物水分利用效率和蒸发蒸腾估算模型的研究进展[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 1997(1):73-78.
	ZHANG Z B, SHAN L. Research development in estimation models of crop water use efficiency and transpiration and evaporation[J]. Agric Reseach Arid Areas, 1997(1):73-78.
[23]	CRCENTE-CAMPO F, MARSHALL P, LEMAY V, et al. A crown profile model for Pinus radiata D. Don in northwestern Spain[J]. For Ecol Manage, 2009, 257: 2370-2379. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.03.038.
[24]	BALDWI JR V C, PETERSON K D. Predicting the crown shape of loblolly pine trees[J]. Can J For Res, 1997, 27(1):102-107. DOI:10.1139/x96-100.
[25]	LIU Y, TRANCOSO R, MA Q, et al. Incorporating climate effects in Larix gmelinii improves stem taper models in the Greater Khingan Mountains of Inner Mongolia, northeast China[J]. For Ecol Manage, 2020, 464, 118065. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118065.
[26]	TEAMA R D C. ‘R: A language and environment for statistical computing’, R foundation for statistical computing[J]. Computing, 2010, 14: 12-21. DOI: 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[3097:CFHIWS]2.0.CO;2
[27]	马铁成. 寒旱区紫花苜蓿不同灌溉方式生长特性分析[J]. 水利科学与寒区工程, 2020, 3(4):15-18.
	MA T C. Analysis on the growth characteristics for alfalfa under different irrigation methods in cold and arid region[J]. Hydro Sci Cold Zone Eng, 2020, 3(4):15-18.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-3305.2020.04.004.
[28]	张雅倩, 林琪, 刘家斌, 等. 干旱胁迫对不同肥水类型小麦旗叶光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2011, 31(4):724-730.
	ZHANG Y Q, LIN Q, LIU J B, et al. Effects of drought stress on photosynthetic characteristics and yield of different fertilizer and water types of wheat[J]. J Triticeae Crops, 2011, 31(4):724-730.
[29]	井大炜, 邢尚军, 杜振宇, 等. 干旱胁迫对杨树幼苗生长、光合特性及活性氧代谢的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24(7):1809-1816.
	JING D W, XING S J, DU Z Y, et al. Effects of drought stress on the growth,photosynthetic characteristics,and active oxygen metabolism of poplar seedlings[J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2013, 24(7):1809-1816.DOI:10.13287/j.1001-9332.2013.0420.
[30]	裴艳武, 黄来明, 贾小旭, 等. 黄土高原2种典型灌木地土壤水分有效性及其影响因素[J]. 土壤学报, 2019, 56(3):627-637.
	PEI Y W, HUANG L M, JIA X X, et al. Soil water availability and its influencing factors in soils under two types of shrubberies typical of the Loess Plateau[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2019, 56(3):627-637. DOI:10.11766/trxb201807090294.
[31]	陈金平, 兰再平, 杨慎骄, 等. 黄河故道不同灌水方式刺槐人工林幼树水分利用效率和生长特性[J]. 生态学报, 2015, 35(8):2529-2535.
	CHEN J P, LAN Z P, YANG S J, et al. Water use efficiency and growth characteristics of young trees of Robinia pseudoacacia plantation forest under different irrigation methods in old course of Yellow River area[J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2015, 35(8):2529-2535.DOI:10.5846/stxb201306101568.
[32]	HEITHOLT J J. Water use efficiency and dry matter distribution in nitrogen-and water-stressed winter wheat[J]. Agron J, 1989, 81(3):464-469.DOI:10.2134/agronj1989.00021962008100030014x.
[33]	郑强卿, 李铭, 李鹏程, 等. 滴灌条件下沙地肉苁蓉土壤水分空间分布特性研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2011, 39(30):18548-18550,18600.
	ZHENG Q Q, LI M, LI P C, et al. Study on the spatial distribution features of sand land soil moisture under the drip irrigation of Cistanche deserticola[J]. J Anhui Agric Sci, 2011, 39(30):18548-18550,18600.DOI:10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2011.30.163.
[34]	马蒙蒙, 林青, 徐绍辉. 不同因素影响下层状土壤水分入渗特征及水力学参数估计[J]. 土壤学报, 2020, 57(2):347-358.
	MA M M, LIN Q, XU S H. Water infiltration characteristics of layered soil under influences of different factors and estimation of hydraulic parameters[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2020, 57(2):347-358. DOI:10.11766/trxb201905090250.
[35]	吴丹. 沙地樟子松人工林根系及土壤养分分布特征研究[D]. 阜新: 辽宁工程技术大学, 2020.
	WU D. Root system and soil nutrient distribution of Pinus sylvestris var.mongolica plantation on sandy land feature research[D]. Fuxin: Liaoning Technical University, 2020.
[36]	李豆豆, 席本野, 唐连峰, 等. 砂壤土下滴灌毛白杨幼林土壤水分运移规律与模拟[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(12):157-168.
	LI D D, XI B Y, TANG L F, et al. Patterns of soil water movement in drip-irrigated young Populus tomentosa plantations on sandy loam soil and their simulation[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2018, 54(12):157-168.DOI:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20181218.

灌溉方式 irrigation methods	地径/cm diameter at ground	树高/m tree height	冠幅/m crown width	抽穗长/cm heading trait	生物量/kg biomass	N
滴灌drip irrigation	9.5±0.61 a	3.8±0.26 ab	1.8±0.07 a	39.6±14.4 a	5.7±0.04 a	133
漫灌flood irrigation	8.0±0.10 b	3.3±0.04 a	1.7±0.07 a	33.7±7.4 b	5.3±0.05 ab	132
对照control	6.1±0.09 c	2.9±0.31 b	1.2±0.02 b	32.4±6.7 b	3.2±0.04 b	101

不同灌溉方式对樟子松生长、光合特性及土壤水分运移的影响

Effects of different irrigation methods on growth, photosynthetic characteristics and soil water transport of Mongolian pine (Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica)

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 36

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者

读者

审稿

[1]	赵金满, 韩馨悦, 程瑞明, 张志东. 塞罕坝自然保护区华北落叶松和樟子松人工林健康评价[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(3): 199-206.
[2]	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.
[3]	王改萍, 章雷, 曹福亮, 丁延朋, 赵群, 赵慧琴, 王峥. 红蓝光质对银杏苗木生长生理特性及黄酮积累的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 105-112.
[4]	韩新宇, 高露双, 秦莉, 庞荣荣, 刘鸣谦, 朱一泓, 田益雨, 张金. 林分密度对兴安落叶松径向生长-气候关系的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 182-190.
[5]	尹增芳, 欧香, 陈瑶, 杨爱香, 孙李勇. 望春玉兰生物学基础研究进展与展望[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 256-262.
[6]	赵晓龙, 沈家怡, 刘涛, 吴家胜, 胡渊渊. 当年和越年生香榧叶片的光合效率及抗氧化特性的季节性变化[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(2): 45-50.
[7]	魏绪英, 张瑶, 马美霞, 姜雪茹, 陈慧婷, 吴靖, 杨玉, 蔡军火. 石蒜年生长周期内NSC及其代谢酶活性变化[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(1): 106-114.
[8]	张曦文, 陈旭, 吴军, 孙国飞, 吴力国, 赵长海, 代伟昭, 刘桂丰. 彩叶桦新品种幼龄期生长适应性早期分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(1): 124-130.
[9]	魏静, 谭星, 王昌盛, 闫瑞, 李林珂, 宁月, 刘芸. 引种美国红枫在两种紫色土区的生长和光合特性比较[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(1): 97-105.
[10]	欧阳, 欧阳芳群, 孙猛, 王超, 王军辉, 安三平, 王丽芳, 许娜, 王猛. 欧洲云杉无性系幼龄生长节律、年度和密度互作效应及选择策略[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(6): 95-104.
[11]	梁文超, 步行, 罗思谦, 谢寅峰, 胡加玲, 张往祥. 施肥对增温促花后‘长寿冠’海棠叶片生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(5): 114-120.
[12]	李建新, 徐森, 杨丽婷, 陈双林, 郭子武. 毛竹林下多花黄精构件生物量分配特征的年际效应[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(5): 121-128.
[13]	魏亚娟, 郭靖, 党晓宏, 解云虎, 汪季, 李小乐, 吴慧敏. 吉兰泰荒漠绿洲过渡带不同生境下白刺灌丛沙堆形态特征与影响机制[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(5): 172-180.
[14]	贾瑞瑞, 祝艳艳, 杨秀莲, 付钰, 岳远征, 王良桂. 不同砧木对楸树嫁接苗生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(5): 97-106.
[15]	盖军鹏, 陈东升, 贾炜玮, 王政. 基于种源和气候效应的日本落叶松树高生长模型研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(4): 51-60.