Chinese Bulletin of Botany ›› 2016, Vol. 51 ›› Issue (6): 774-.DOI: 10.11983/CBB15206
Previous Articles Next Articles
Chunju Yang1,2, Yonggang Chen1,2*, Mengping Tang1,2, Yongjun Shi1,2, Jianhua Hou3, Yanfei Sun4
Received:
2015-12-10
Accepted:
2016-06-13
Online:
2016-11-01
Published:
2016-12-02
Contact:
Chen Yonggang
About author:
# Co-first authors
Chunju Yang, Yonggang Chen, Mengping Tang, Yongjun Shi, Jianhua Hou, Yanfei Sun. [J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2016, 51(6): 774-.
Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2.95 | 16 | 22.60 | 31 | 302.22 | 46 | 1102.62 |
2 | 4.48 | 17 | 25.03 | 32 | 359.53 | 47 | 1151.59 |
3 | 5.75 | 18 | 27.50 | 33 | 414.37 | 48 | 1195.15 |
4 | 7.16 | 19 | 30.79 | 34 | 466.10 | 49 | 1234.87 |
5 | 8.35 | 20 | 35.66 | 35 | 519.33 | 50 | 1272.80 |
6 | 9.32 | 21 | 41.35 | 36 | 577.44 | 51 | 1310.51 |
7 | 10.21 | 22 | 48.37 | 37 | 623.08 | 52 | 1338.12 |
8 | 11.17 | 23 | 58.98 | 38 | 674.48 | 53 | 1359.88 |
9 | 12.53 | 24 | 74.67 | 39 | 717.95 | 54 | 1375.80 |
10 | 13.79 | 25 | 96.72 | 40 | 770.15 | 55 | 1383.17 |
11 | 14.73 | 26 | 124.33 | 41 | 822.86 | 56 | 1389.04 |
12 | 15.79 | 27 | 153.60 | 42 | 877.58 | 57 | 1389.63 |
13 | 16.91 | 28 | 189.76 | 43 | 935.37 | ||
14 | 18.56 | 29 | 228.49 | 44 | 993.77 | ||
15 | 20.45 | 30 | 258.13 | 45 | 1050.57 |
Table 1 The statistical table of young bamboo height (unit: cm) under extensive management model
Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2.95 | 16 | 22.60 | 31 | 302.22 | 46 | 1102.62 |
2 | 4.48 | 17 | 25.03 | 32 | 359.53 | 47 | 1151.59 |
3 | 5.75 | 18 | 27.50 | 33 | 414.37 | 48 | 1195.15 |
4 | 7.16 | 19 | 30.79 | 34 | 466.10 | 49 | 1234.87 |
5 | 8.35 | 20 | 35.66 | 35 | 519.33 | 50 | 1272.80 |
6 | 9.32 | 21 | 41.35 | 36 | 577.44 | 51 | 1310.51 |
7 | 10.21 | 22 | 48.37 | 37 | 623.08 | 52 | 1338.12 |
8 | 11.17 | 23 | 58.98 | 38 | 674.48 | 53 | 1359.88 |
9 | 12.53 | 24 | 74.67 | 39 | 717.95 | 54 | 1375.80 |
10 | 13.79 | 25 | 96.72 | 40 | 770.15 | 55 | 1383.17 |
11 | 14.73 | 26 | 124.33 | 41 | 822.86 | 56 | 1389.04 |
12 | 15.79 | 27 | 153.60 | 42 | 877.58 | 57 | 1389.63 |
13 | 16.91 | 28 | 189.76 | 43 | 935.37 | ||
14 | 18.56 | 29 | 228.49 | 44 | 993.77 | ||
15 | 20.45 | 30 | 258.13 | 45 | 1050.57 |
Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 3.91 | 16 | 22.32 | 31 | 253.89 | 46 | 1037.29 |
2 | 5.06 | 17 | 24.40 | 32 | 285.41 | 47 | 1085.78 |
3 | 6.03 | 18 | 26.86 | 33 | 345.85 | 48 | 1131.96 |
4 | 7.37 | 19 | 29.37 | 34 | 403.09 | 49 | 1175.77 |
5 | 8.75 | 20 | 32.61 | 35 | 464.73 | 50 | 1220.91 |
6 | 10.03 | 21 | 37.85 | 36 | 510.46 | 51 | 1256.84 |
7 | 11.18 | 22 | 42.74 | 37 | 572.94 | 52 | 1284.08 |
8 | 12.66 | 23 | 49.12 | 38 | 626.51 | 53 | 1310.76 |
9 | 14.27 | 24 | 58.14 | 39 | 672.76 | 54 | 1329.83 |
10 | 15.29 | 25 | 72.24 | 40 | 715.67 | 55 | 1334.20 |
11 | 16.13 | 26 | 94.56 | 41 | 754.97 | 56 | 1339.78 |
12 | 16.87 | 27 | 123.24 | 42 | 804.21 | 57 | 1339.78 |
13 | 17.59 | 28 | 151.89 | 43 | 861.96 | ||
14 | 19.20 | 29 | 190.29 | 44 | 912.84 | ||
15 | 20.93 | 30 | 232.26 | 45 | 976.89 |
Table 2 The statistical table of young bamboo height (unit: cm) under intensive management model
Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) | Time (d) | Average (cm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 3.91 | 16 | 22.32 | 31 | 253.89 | 46 | 1037.29 |
2 | 5.06 | 17 | 24.40 | 32 | 285.41 | 47 | 1085.78 |
3 | 6.03 | 18 | 26.86 | 33 | 345.85 | 48 | 1131.96 |
4 | 7.37 | 19 | 29.37 | 34 | 403.09 | 49 | 1175.77 |
5 | 8.75 | 20 | 32.61 | 35 | 464.73 | 50 | 1220.91 |
6 | 10.03 | 21 | 37.85 | 36 | 510.46 | 51 | 1256.84 |
7 | 11.18 | 22 | 42.74 | 37 | 572.94 | 52 | 1284.08 |
8 | 12.66 | 23 | 49.12 | 38 | 626.51 | 53 | 1310.76 |
9 | 14.27 | 24 | 58.14 | 39 | 672.76 | 54 | 1329.83 |
10 | 15.29 | 25 | 72.24 | 40 | 715.67 | 55 | 1334.20 |
11 | 16.13 | 26 | 94.56 | 41 | 754.97 | 56 | 1339.78 |
12 | 16.87 | 27 | 123.24 | 42 | 804.21 | 57 | 1339.78 |
13 | 17.59 | 28 | 151.89 | 43 | 861.96 | ||
14 | 19.20 | 29 | 190.29 | 44 | 912.84 | ||
15 | 20.93 | 30 | 232.26 | 45 | 976.89 |
No. | W | P-value | H | No. | W | P-value | H |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 845.5 | 0.036 | 1 | 29 | 1646.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
2 | 901.0 | 0.091 | 1 | 30 | 139.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
3 | 1060.5 | 0.618 | 1 | 31 | 214.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
4 | 1220.5 | 0.493 | 1 | 32 | 1332.5 | 0.129 | 1* |
5 | 1397.0 | 0.045 | 1 | 33 | 1631.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
6 | 1376.0 | 0.065 | 1 | 34 | 1678.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
7 | 1442.0 | 0.019 | 1 | 35 | 459.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
8 | 1292.0 | 0.223 | 1 | 36 | 1625.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
9 | 951.5 | 0.190 | 1 | 37 | 1563.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
10 | 1132.5 | 0.976 | 1 | 38 | 1505.5 | 0.005 | 0 |
11 | 777.0 | 0.009 | 0 | 39 | 655.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
12 | 670.0 | 0.001 | 0 | 40 | 518.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
13 | 1138.5 | 0.941 | 1 | 41 | 974.5 | 0.327 | 1 |
14 | 1127.5 | 1.000 | 1 | 42 | 1094.5 | 0.943 | 1 |
15 | 541.0 | 0.000 | 0 | 43 | 923.5 | 0.172 | 1 |
16 | 922.5 | 0.127 | 1 | 44 | 1327.5 | 0.092 | 1 |
17 | 1133.5 | 0.970 | 1 | 45 | 1329.0 | 0.090 | 1 |
18 | 790.5 | 0.012 | 1 | 46 | 1211.0 | 0.320 | 1 |
19 | 757.0 | 0.006 | 0 | 47 | 1192.0 | 0.297 | 1 |
20 | 1147.5 | 0.888 | 1 | 48 | 972.0 | 0.620 | 1 |
21 | 807.0 | 0.017 | 1 | 49 | 1227.0 | 0.128 | 1 |
22 | 619.0 | 0.000 | 0 | 50 | 1082.0 | 0.578 | 1 |
23 | 485.5 | 0.000 | 0 | 51 | 994.0 | 0.828 | 1 |
24 | 505.0 | 0.000 | 0 | 52 | 871.5 | 0.763 | 1 |
25 | 822.5 | 0.023 | 1 | 53 | 624.5 | 0.700 | 1 |
26 | 1218.5 | 0.503 | 1 | 54 | 341.5 | 0.887 | 1 |
27 | 700.0 | 0.001 | 0 | 55 | 210.0 | 0.200 | 1 |
28 | 1082.5 | 0.738 | 1 |
Table 3 Wilcoxon test for growth rate of young bamboo under intensive and extensive management models
No. | W | P-value | H | No. | W | P-value | H |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 845.5 | 0.036 | 1 | 29 | 1646.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
2 | 901.0 | 0.091 | 1 | 30 | 139.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
3 | 1060.5 | 0.618 | 1 | 31 | 214.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
4 | 1220.5 | 0.493 | 1 | 32 | 1332.5 | 0.129 | 1* |
5 | 1397.0 | 0.045 | 1 | 33 | 1631.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
6 | 1376.0 | 0.065 | 1 | 34 | 1678.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
7 | 1442.0 | 0.019 | 1 | 35 | 459.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
8 | 1292.0 | 0.223 | 1 | 36 | 1625.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
9 | 951.5 | 0.190 | 1 | 37 | 1563.5 | 0.000 | 0 |
10 | 1132.5 | 0.976 | 1 | 38 | 1505.5 | 0.005 | 0 |
11 | 777.0 | 0.009 | 0 | 39 | 655.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
12 | 670.0 | 0.001 | 0 | 40 | 518.0 | 0.000 | 0 |
13 | 1138.5 | 0.941 | 1 | 41 | 974.5 | 0.327 | 1 |
14 | 1127.5 | 1.000 | 1 | 42 | 1094.5 | 0.943 | 1 |
15 | 541.0 | 0.000 | 0 | 43 | 923.5 | 0.172 | 1 |
16 | 922.5 | 0.127 | 1 | 44 | 1327.5 | 0.092 | 1 |
17 | 1133.5 | 0.970 | 1 | 45 | 1329.0 | 0.090 | 1 |
18 | 790.5 | 0.012 | 1 | 46 | 1211.0 | 0.320 | 1 |
19 | 757.0 | 0.006 | 0 | 47 | 1192.0 | 0.297 | 1 |
20 | 1147.5 | 0.888 | 1 | 48 | 972.0 | 0.620 | 1 |
21 | 807.0 | 0.017 | 1 | 49 | 1227.0 | 0.128 | 1 |
22 | 619.0 | 0.000 | 0 | 50 | 1082.0 | 0.578 | 1 |
23 | 485.5 | 0.000 | 0 | 51 | 994.0 | 0.828 | 1 |
24 | 505.0 | 0.000 | 0 | 52 | 871.5 | 0.763 | 1 |
25 | 822.5 | 0.023 | 1 | 53 | 624.5 | 0.700 | 1 |
26 | 1218.5 | 0.503 | 1 | 54 | 341.5 | 0.887 | 1 |
27 | 700.0 | 0.001 | 0 | 55 | 210.0 | 0.200 | 1 |
28 | 1082.5 | 0.738 | 1 |
No. | Mood test of scale | Ansari-Bradley test | No. | Mood test of scale | Ansari-Bradley test | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Z | P-value | H | AB | P-value | H | Z | P-value | H | AB | P-value | H | |||||
1 | -0.11 | 0.912 | 1 | 1134.50 | 0.658 | 1 | 29 | -1.54 | 0.123 | 1 | 1278.50 | 0.089 | 1 | |||
2 | -0.43 | 0.666 | 1 | 1177.00 | 0.847 | 1 | 30 | 0.67 | 0.500 | 1 | 1109.50 | 0.416 | 1 | |||
3 | 0.18 | 0.855 | 1 | 1142.50 | 0.747 | 1 | 31 | 1.29 | 0.198 | 1 | 1054.00 | 0.101 | 1 | |||
4 | 3.34 | 0.001 | 0* | 938.50 | 0.001 | 0* | 32 | -0.35 | 0.725 | 1 | 1189.50 | 0.706 | 1 | |||
5 | 0.89 | 0.373 | 1 | 1103.00 | 0.363 | 1 | 33 | 1.10 | 0.272 | 1 | 1080.50 | 0.213 | 1 | |||
6 | -0.88 | 0.377 | 1 | 1227.00 | 0.346 | 1 | 34 | 1.09 | 0.274 | 1 | 1109.50 | 0.416 | 1 | |||
7 | 1.89 | 0.058 | 1 | 1054.00 | 0.099 | 1 | 35 | -1.53 | 0.127 | 1 | 1278.00 | 0.090 | 1 | |||
8 | -0.49 | 0.624 | 1 | 1188.00 | 0.721 | 1 | 36 | 1.89 | 0.059 | 1 | 1028.00 | 0.085 | 1 | |||
9 | 0.15 | 0.884 | 1 | 1132.50 | 0.636 | 1 | 37 | -2.12 | 0.034 | 1 | 1283.50 | 0.027 | 1 | |||
10 | 0.87 | 0.386 | 1 | 1120.50 | 0.520 | 1 | 38 | -1.37 | 0.171 | 1 | 1240.50 | 0.255 | 1 | |||
11 | 0.61 | 0.545 | 1 | 1093.00 | 0.285 | 1 | 39 | -0.61 | 0.539 | 1 | 1208.00 | 0.514 | 1 | |||
12 | 0.70 | 0.484 | 1 | 1121.00 | 0.518 | 1 | 40 | -1.14 | 0.254 | 1 | 1190.00 | 0.348 | 1 | |||
13 | -1.40 | 0.162 | 1 | 1255.50 | 0.174 | 1 | 41 | -1.73 | 0.084 | 1 | 1212.50 | 0.201 | 1 | |||
14 | -0.99 | 0.321 | 1 | 1229.50 | 0.343 | 1 | 42 | -1.38 | 0.169 | 1 | 1204.50 | 0.247 | 1 | |||
15 | 0.14 | 0.890 | 1 | 1159.00 | 0.939 | 1 | 43 | -1.72 | 0.085 | 1 | 1237.50 | 0.099 | 1 | |||
16 | -0.72 | 0.471 | 1 | 1205.50 | 0.539 | 1 | 44 | -1.01 | 0.310 | 1 | 1196.50 | 0.300 | 1 | |||
17 | 0.75 | 0.453 | 1 | 1113.50 | 0.450 | 1 | 45 | -0.22 | 0.826 | 1 | 1137.00 | 0.892 | 1 | |||
18 | 0.25 | 0.799 | 1 | 1139.50 | 0.713 | 1 | 46 | -1.52 | 0.130 | 1 | 1214.00 | 0.062 | 1 | |||
19 | -1.27 | 0.204 | 1 | 1261.00 | 0.149 | 1 | 47 | 0.09 | 0.930 | 1 | 1077.00 | 0.950 | 1 | |||
20 | -1.27 | 0.206 | 1 | 1222.50 | 0.384 | 1 | 48 | 0.98 | 0.327 | 1 | 1018.00 | 0.412 | 1 | |||
21 | 0.25 | 0.803 | 1 | 1162.00 | 0.975 | 1 | 49 | 0.48 | 0.633 | 1 | 1077.00 | 0.907 | 1 | |||
22 | 0.56 | 0.576 | 1 | 1125.00 | 0.560 | 1 | 50 | -1.53 | 0.125 | 1 | 1144.00 | 0.078 | 1 | |||
23 | 0.00 | 1.000 | 1 | 1181.50 | 0.796 | 1 | 51 | 0.67 | 0.506 | 1 | 1007.00 | 0.927 | 1 | |||
24 | 1.61 | 0.107 | 1 | 1052.00 | 0.095 | 1 | 52 | 1.57 | 0.116 | 1 | 794.50 | 0.047 | 1 | |||
25 | -1.06 | 0.287 | 1 | 1235.50 | 0.288 | 1 | 53 | -1.03 | 0.301 | 1 | 692.50 | 0.391 | 1 | |||
26 | 0.33 | 0.745 | 1 | 1161.50 | 0.969 | 1 | 54 | 0.30 | 0.762 | 1 | 376.50 | 0.758 | 1 | |||
27 | -0.35 | 0.729 | 1 | 1193.00 | 0.667 | 1 | 55 | 0.03 | 0.978 | 1 | 334.00 | 0.894 | 1 | |||
28 | -2.20 | 0.028 | 1 | 1293.50 | 0.054 | 1 |
Table 4 Ansari-Bradley and Mood tests for disperse degree of growth rate of young bamboo under intensive and extensive management models
No. | Mood test of scale | Ansari-Bradley test | No. | Mood test of scale | Ansari-Bradley test | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Z | P-value | H | AB | P-value | H | Z | P-value | H | AB | P-value | H | |||||
1 | -0.11 | 0.912 | 1 | 1134.50 | 0.658 | 1 | 29 | -1.54 | 0.123 | 1 | 1278.50 | 0.089 | 1 | |||
2 | -0.43 | 0.666 | 1 | 1177.00 | 0.847 | 1 | 30 | 0.67 | 0.500 | 1 | 1109.50 | 0.416 | 1 | |||
3 | 0.18 | 0.855 | 1 | 1142.50 | 0.747 | 1 | 31 | 1.29 | 0.198 | 1 | 1054.00 | 0.101 | 1 | |||
4 | 3.34 | 0.001 | 0* | 938.50 | 0.001 | 0* | 32 | -0.35 | 0.725 | 1 | 1189.50 | 0.706 | 1 | |||
5 | 0.89 | 0.373 | 1 | 1103.00 | 0.363 | 1 | 33 | 1.10 | 0.272 | 1 | 1080.50 | 0.213 | 1 | |||
6 | -0.88 | 0.377 | 1 | 1227.00 | 0.346 | 1 | 34 | 1.09 | 0.274 | 1 | 1109.50 | 0.416 | 1 | |||
7 | 1.89 | 0.058 | 1 | 1054.00 | 0.099 | 1 | 35 | -1.53 | 0.127 | 1 | 1278.00 | 0.090 | 1 | |||
8 | -0.49 | 0.624 | 1 | 1188.00 | 0.721 | 1 | 36 | 1.89 | 0.059 | 1 | 1028.00 | 0.085 | 1 | |||
9 | 0.15 | 0.884 | 1 | 1132.50 | 0.636 | 1 | 37 | -2.12 | 0.034 | 1 | 1283.50 | 0.027 | 1 | |||
10 | 0.87 | 0.386 | 1 | 1120.50 | 0.520 | 1 | 38 | -1.37 | 0.171 | 1 | 1240.50 | 0.255 | 1 | |||
11 | 0.61 | 0.545 | 1 | 1093.00 | 0.285 | 1 | 39 | -0.61 | 0.539 | 1 | 1208.00 | 0.514 | 1 | |||
12 | 0.70 | 0.484 | 1 | 1121.00 | 0.518 | 1 | 40 | -1.14 | 0.254 | 1 | 1190.00 | 0.348 | 1 | |||
13 | -1.40 | 0.162 | 1 | 1255.50 | 0.174 | 1 | 41 | -1.73 | 0.084 | 1 | 1212.50 | 0.201 | 1 | |||
14 | -0.99 | 0.321 | 1 | 1229.50 | 0.343 | 1 | 42 | -1.38 | 0.169 | 1 | 1204.50 | 0.247 | 1 | |||
15 | 0.14 | 0.890 | 1 | 1159.00 | 0.939 | 1 | 43 | -1.72 | 0.085 | 1 | 1237.50 | 0.099 | 1 | |||
16 | -0.72 | 0.471 | 1 | 1205.50 | 0.539 | 1 | 44 | -1.01 | 0.310 | 1 | 1196.50 | 0.300 | 1 | |||
17 | 0.75 | 0.453 | 1 | 1113.50 | 0.450 | 1 | 45 | -0.22 | 0.826 | 1 | 1137.00 | 0.892 | 1 | |||
18 | 0.25 | 0.799 | 1 | 1139.50 | 0.713 | 1 | 46 | -1.52 | 0.130 | 1 | 1214.00 | 0.062 | 1 | |||
19 | -1.27 | 0.204 | 1 | 1261.00 | 0.149 | 1 | 47 | 0.09 | 0.930 | 1 | 1077.00 | 0.950 | 1 | |||
20 | -1.27 | 0.206 | 1 | 1222.50 | 0.384 | 1 | 48 | 0.98 | 0.327 | 1 | 1018.00 | 0.412 | 1 | |||
21 | 0.25 | 0.803 | 1 | 1162.00 | 0.975 | 1 | 49 | 0.48 | 0.633 | 1 | 1077.00 | 0.907 | 1 | |||
22 | 0.56 | 0.576 | 1 | 1125.00 | 0.560 | 1 | 50 | -1.53 | 0.125 | 1 | 1144.00 | 0.078 | 1 | |||
23 | 0.00 | 1.000 | 1 | 1181.50 | 0.796 | 1 | 51 | 0.67 | 0.506 | 1 | 1007.00 | 0.927 | 1 | |||
24 | 1.61 | 0.107 | 1 | 1052.00 | 0.095 | 1 | 52 | 1.57 | 0.116 | 1 | 794.50 | 0.047 | 1 | |||
25 | -1.06 | 0.287 | 1 | 1235.50 | 0.288 | 1 | 53 | -1.03 | 0.301 | 1 | 692.50 | 0.391 | 1 | |||
26 | 0.33 | 0.745 | 1 | 1161.50 | 0.969 | 1 | 54 | 0.30 | 0.762 | 1 | 376.50 | 0.758 | 1 | |||
27 | -0.35 | 0.729 | 1 | 1193.00 | 0.667 | 1 | 55 | 0.03 | 0.978 | 1 | 334.00 | 0.894 | 1 | |||
28 | -2.20 | 0.028 | 1 | 1293.50 | 0.054 | 1 |
[1] | 陈先刚, 张一平, 张小全, 郭颖 (2008). 过去50年中国竹林碳储量变化. 生态学报 28, 5219-5262. |
[2] | 陈永刚, 汤孟平, 杨春菊, 马天午, 王礼 (2015). 天然毛竹林竞争空间关系分析. 植物生态学报 39, 726-735. |
[3] | 楚秀丽, 刘青华, 范辉华, 王生华, 陈柳英, 周志春 (2014). 不同生境、造林模式闽楠人工林生长及林分分化. 林业科学研究 27, 445-453. |
[4] | 贺新强, 李素文 (1999). 毛竹细胞壁自发荧光的显微荧光分光光度分析. 植物学报 41, 711-714. |
[5] | 侯新毅, 江泽慧, 任海青 (2010). 我国竹子标准体系的构建. 林业科学 46, 85-92. |
[6] | 江泽慧 (2002). 世界竹藤. 沈阳: 辽宁科学技术出版社. |
[7] | 江泽慧, 费本华, 范少辉 (2014). 积极发展竹产业, 大力推进生态文明建设. 国家林业局管理干部学院学报 13, 12-16. |
[8] | 李睿, 钟章成, 维尔格MJA (1997). 毛竹的无性系生长与立竹密度和叶龄结构的关系. 植物生态学报 6, 545-550. |
[9] | 刘国华, 傅伯杰, 方精云 (2000). 中国森林碳动态及其对全球碳平衡的贡献. 生态学报 20, 734-742. |
[10] | 刘华军, 郭春兰, 黄敏 (2014). 毛竹出笋及增粗生长规律研究. 江西林业科技 1, 30-31. |
[11] | 时培建, 郭世权, 杨清培, 王兵, 杨光耀, 方楷 (2010). 毛竹的异质性空间点格局分析. 生态学报 30, 4401-4407. |
[12] | 施拥军, 刘恩斌, 周国模, 沈振明, 俞淑红 (2013). 基于随机过程的毛竹笋期生长模型构建及应用. 林业科学 49, 89-93. |
[13] | 吴喜之 (2013). 非参数统计. 北京: 中国统计出版社. |
[14] | 吴喜之, 赵博娟 (2013). 非参数统计. 北京: 中国统计出版社. |
[15] | 肖复明, 陈红兴, 江香梅, 李万和, 彭星火, 张小军 (2008). 江西安福林区毛竹林雨雪冰冻灾情调查分析. 林业科学 44, 32-35. |
[16] | 许庆标, 郭宝华, 范少辉, 苏文会, 赵建成 (2014). 春笋幼竹期毛竹地上生物量格局及养分动态变化规律. 热带作物学报 35, 1481-1486. |
[17] | 颜杰, 李彩霞, 方积乾, 丁守銮 (2004). 完全随机设计两组t检验与秩和检验的功效比较. 中国卫生统计 21, 10-13. |
[18] | 张国防, 缪碧华 (2000). 毛竹经营管理的研究进展. 福建林学院学报 20, 375-379. |
[19] | 郑进烜, 董文渊, 陈冲, 段春香, 赵金发, 卢珍红 (2008). 海子坪天然毛竹种群生长规律研究. 竹子研究汇刊 27, 32-37. |
[20] | 周国模, 姜培坤 (2004). 毛竹林的碳密度和碳贮量及其空间分布. 林业科学 40, 20-24. |
[21] | 周国模, 吴家森, 姜培坤 (2006). 不同管理模式对毛竹林碳贮量的影响. 北京林业大学学报 28, 52-60. |
[22] | Bauer DF (1972). Constructing confidence sets using rank statistics.J Am Statist Assoc 67, 687-690. |
[23] | Conover WJ (1999). Practical Nonparametric Statistics, 3rd edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons. |
[24] | Hollander M, Wolfe DA, Chicken E (2013). Nonparametric Statistical Methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons. |
[25] | Jiang PK, Meng CF, Zhou GM, Xu QF (2011). Comparative study of carbon storage in different forest stands in subtropical China.Bot Rev 77, 242-251. |
[26] | Li Y, Zhou G, Jiang P, Wu J, Lin L (2011). Carbon accumulation and carbon forms in tissues during the growth of young bamboo (Phyllostachys pubescens).Bot Rev 77, 278-286. |
[27] | Paul WM (1967). Note on some squared rank tests with existing ties.Technometrics 9, 312-314. |
[28] | Zeng ZQ, Wang SL, Zhang CM, Gong C, Hu Q (2013). Carbon storage in evergreen broad-leaf forests in mid- subtropical region of China at four succession stages.J Forest Res 24, 677-682. |
No related articles found! |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||