Chinese Bulletin of Botany ›› 2017, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (4): 496-510.DOI: 10.11983/CBB16115
Previous Articles Next Articles
Nuonan Ye1, Naping Shen2, Tianqi Shang1, Hongdi Gao3, Jieran Guan1, Lita Yi1*
Received:
2016-05-26
Accepted:
2016-10-11
Online:
2017-07-01
Published:
2017-05-05
Contact:
Yi Lita
About author:
# Co-first authors
Nuonan Ye, Naping Shen, Tianqi Shang, Hongdi Gao, Jieran Guan, Lita Yi. Vegetation Structure and Internal Relationship Between Distribution Patterns of Vegetation and Environment in Ecological Service Forest of Rui’an City in Zhejiang Province[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2017, 52(4): 496-510.
Layer | Number | Species | Importance value | Layer | Number | Species | Importance value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tree | 1 | Pinus massoniana | 30.1251 | 48 | Syzygium buxifolium | 2.6616 | |
2 | Cunninghamia lanceolata | 19.1471 | 49 | Camellia oleifera | 2.6044 | ||
3 | Cryptomeria fortunei | 11.7255 | 50 | Pinus massoniana | 2.4924 | ||
4 | Phyllostachys heterocycla | 10.4433 | 51 | Camellia sinensis | 2.3143 | ||
5 | Schima superba | 6.4891 | 52 | Pleioblastus amarus | 2.1880 | ||
6 | Lithocarpus glaber | 2.7277 | 53 | Smilax china | 2.1092 | ||
7 | Liquidambar formosana | 2.5786 | 54 | Smilax sieboldii | 1.9226 | ||
8 | Cyclobalanopsis glauca | 2.1817 | 55 | Mallotus japonicus | 1.8279 | ||
9 | Castanopsis sclerophylla | 2.0855 | 56 | Liquidambar formosana | 1.7230 | ||
10 | Castanopsis eyrei | 1.5263 | 57 | Litsea cubeba | 1.6368 | ||
11 | Symplocos sumuntia | 1.4795 | 58 | Schima superba | 1.4864 | ||
12 | Myrica rubra | 1.0891 | 59 | Rubus phoenicolasius | 1.1355 | ||
13 | Eurya japonica | 0.8298 | 60 | Cyclobalanopsis glauca | 0.9140 | ||
14 | Pinus taiwanensis | 0.8262 | 61 | Symplocos stellaris | 0.8884 | ||
15 | Machilus thunbergii | 0.7395 | 62 | Rubus buergeri | 0.7625 | ||
16 | Ilex chinensis | 0.6225 | 63 | Camellia japonica | 0.7053 | ||
17 | Toxicodendron succedaneum | 0.4550 | 64 | Castanopsis sclerophylla | 0.6913 | ||
18 | Cinnamomum camphora | 0.4451 | 65 | Toxicodendron succedaneum | 0.6529 | ||
19 | Litsea cubeba | 0.3609 | 66 | Trachelospermum jasminoides | 0.5940 | ||
20 | Vernicia montana | 0.3327 | 67 | Adinandra millettii | 0.5748 | ||
21 | Ulmus pumila | 0.3149 | 68 | Dendrocalamopsis oldhami | 0.5642 | ||
22 | Camellia japonica | 0.2716 | 69 | Cryptomeria fortunei | 0.5083 | ||
23 | Elaeocarpus decipiens | 0.2526 | 70 | Lindera aggregata | 0.4966 | ||
24 | Loropetalum chinense | 0.2059 | 71 | Rubus xanthocarpus | 0.4675 | ||
25 | Ficus microcarpa | 0.2039 | 72 | Quercus fabri | 0.4185 | ||
26 | Mallotus japonicus | 0.1838 | 73 | Myrica rubra | 0.4185 | ||
27 | Cyclobalanopsis myrsinifolia | 0.1728 | 74 | Lespedeza bicolor | 0.4092 | ||
28 | Eucalyptus camaldulensis | 0.1678 | 75 | Pinus taiwanensis | 0.4092 | ||
29 | Diospyros kaki | 0.1445 | 76 | Rosa laevigata | 0.4092 | ||
30 | Rhus chinensis | 0.1296 | 77 | Rhus chinensis | 0.3742 | ||
31 | Albizia kalkora | 0.1260 | 78 | Neocinnamomum chekiangense | 0.3602 | ||
32 | Paulownia tomentosa | 0.1199 | 79 | Osmanthus fragrans | 0.3509 | ||
33 | Machilus leptophylla | 0.1132 | 80 | Glochidion puberum | 0.3101 | ||
34 | Adinandra millettii | 0.1109 | 81 | Ulmus pumila | 0.3019 | ||
35 | Quercus fabri | 0.1099 | 82 | Gardenia jasminoides | 0.2985 | ||
Shrub | 36 | Eurya japonica | 13.5139 | 83 | Vernicia fordii | 0.2845 | |
37 | Rhododendron simsii | 7.6406 | 84 | Toxicodendron sylvestre | 0.2553 | ||
38 | Loropetalum chinense | 5.6483 | 85 | Eucalyptus camaldulensis | 0.2437 | ||
39 | Phyllostachys heteroclada | 5.5905 | 86 | Diospyros kaki | 0.2437 | ||
40 | Cunninghamia lanceolata | 4.3673 | 87 | Dalbergia hupeana | 0.2145 | ||
41 | Symplocos sumuntia | 4.3183 | 88 | Photinia serratifolia | 0.2029 | ||
42 | Brachystachyum densiflorum | 4.3177 | 89 | Melia azedarach | 0.1655 | ||
43 | Castanopsis eyrei | 3.6525 | 90 | Phyllostachys edulis | 0.1655 | ||
44 | Vaccinium bracteatum | 3.3764 | 91 | Pinus elliottii | 0.1655 | ||
45 | Lithocarpus glaber | 3.1092 | 92 | Machilus leptophylla | 0.1364 | ||
46 | Ilex chinensis | 3.0220 | 93 | Lindera glauca | 0.1073 | ||
47 | Smilax corbularia | 2.7980 | 94 | Phoebe sheareri | 0.1073 | ||
Herb | 95 | Osmunda japonica | 60.1798 | 105 | Boehmeria nivea | 0.6881 | |
96 | Dryopteris fuscipes | 6.8201 | 106 | Dicranopteris pedata | 0.5281 | ||
97 | Miscanthus floridulus | 6.7660 | 107 | Juncus setchuensis | 0.3454 | ||
98 | Cyperus difformis | 6.5565 | 108 | Onychium japonicum | 0.2944 | ||
99 | Imperata cylindrica | 4.9332 | 109 | Pteris dispar | 0.2816 | ||
100 | Miscanthus sinensis | 4.0732 | 110 | Carex brunnea | 0.1684 | ||
101 | Polytrichum sp. | 3.7467 | 111 | Woodwardia japonica | 0.1472 | ||
102 | Pueraria montana | 1.7609 | 112 | Boehmeria spicata | 0.1472 | ||
103 | Diplopterygium glaucum | 1.4828 | 113 | Yucca gloriosa | 0.1387 | ||
104 | Chrysanthemum indicum | 0.8028 | 114 | Lygodium japonicum | 0.1387 |
Table 1 Importance values of the main tree, shrub and herb on 92 plots in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province
Layer | Number | Species | Importance value | Layer | Number | Species | Importance value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tree | 1 | Pinus massoniana | 30.1251 | 48 | Syzygium buxifolium | 2.6616 | |
2 | Cunninghamia lanceolata | 19.1471 | 49 | Camellia oleifera | 2.6044 | ||
3 | Cryptomeria fortunei | 11.7255 | 50 | Pinus massoniana | 2.4924 | ||
4 | Phyllostachys heterocycla | 10.4433 | 51 | Camellia sinensis | 2.3143 | ||
5 | Schima superba | 6.4891 | 52 | Pleioblastus amarus | 2.1880 | ||
6 | Lithocarpus glaber | 2.7277 | 53 | Smilax china | 2.1092 | ||
7 | Liquidambar formosana | 2.5786 | 54 | Smilax sieboldii | 1.9226 | ||
8 | Cyclobalanopsis glauca | 2.1817 | 55 | Mallotus japonicus | 1.8279 | ||
9 | Castanopsis sclerophylla | 2.0855 | 56 | Liquidambar formosana | 1.7230 | ||
10 | Castanopsis eyrei | 1.5263 | 57 | Litsea cubeba | 1.6368 | ||
11 | Symplocos sumuntia | 1.4795 | 58 | Schima superba | 1.4864 | ||
12 | Myrica rubra | 1.0891 | 59 | Rubus phoenicolasius | 1.1355 | ||
13 | Eurya japonica | 0.8298 | 60 | Cyclobalanopsis glauca | 0.9140 | ||
14 | Pinus taiwanensis | 0.8262 | 61 | Symplocos stellaris | 0.8884 | ||
15 | Machilus thunbergii | 0.7395 | 62 | Rubus buergeri | 0.7625 | ||
16 | Ilex chinensis | 0.6225 | 63 | Camellia japonica | 0.7053 | ||
17 | Toxicodendron succedaneum | 0.4550 | 64 | Castanopsis sclerophylla | 0.6913 | ||
18 | Cinnamomum camphora | 0.4451 | 65 | Toxicodendron succedaneum | 0.6529 | ||
19 | Litsea cubeba | 0.3609 | 66 | Trachelospermum jasminoides | 0.5940 | ||
20 | Vernicia montana | 0.3327 | 67 | Adinandra millettii | 0.5748 | ||
21 | Ulmus pumila | 0.3149 | 68 | Dendrocalamopsis oldhami | 0.5642 | ||
22 | Camellia japonica | 0.2716 | 69 | Cryptomeria fortunei | 0.5083 | ||
23 | Elaeocarpus decipiens | 0.2526 | 70 | Lindera aggregata | 0.4966 | ||
24 | Loropetalum chinense | 0.2059 | 71 | Rubus xanthocarpus | 0.4675 | ||
25 | Ficus microcarpa | 0.2039 | 72 | Quercus fabri | 0.4185 | ||
26 | Mallotus japonicus | 0.1838 | 73 | Myrica rubra | 0.4185 | ||
27 | Cyclobalanopsis myrsinifolia | 0.1728 | 74 | Lespedeza bicolor | 0.4092 | ||
28 | Eucalyptus camaldulensis | 0.1678 | 75 | Pinus taiwanensis | 0.4092 | ||
29 | Diospyros kaki | 0.1445 | 76 | Rosa laevigata | 0.4092 | ||
30 | Rhus chinensis | 0.1296 | 77 | Rhus chinensis | 0.3742 | ||
31 | Albizia kalkora | 0.1260 | 78 | Neocinnamomum chekiangense | 0.3602 | ||
32 | Paulownia tomentosa | 0.1199 | 79 | Osmanthus fragrans | 0.3509 | ||
33 | Machilus leptophylla | 0.1132 | 80 | Glochidion puberum | 0.3101 | ||
34 | Adinandra millettii | 0.1109 | 81 | Ulmus pumila | 0.3019 | ||
35 | Quercus fabri | 0.1099 | 82 | Gardenia jasminoides | 0.2985 | ||
Shrub | 36 | Eurya japonica | 13.5139 | 83 | Vernicia fordii | 0.2845 | |
37 | Rhododendron simsii | 7.6406 | 84 | Toxicodendron sylvestre | 0.2553 | ||
38 | Loropetalum chinense | 5.6483 | 85 | Eucalyptus camaldulensis | 0.2437 | ||
39 | Phyllostachys heteroclada | 5.5905 | 86 | Diospyros kaki | 0.2437 | ||
40 | Cunninghamia lanceolata | 4.3673 | 87 | Dalbergia hupeana | 0.2145 | ||
41 | Symplocos sumuntia | 4.3183 | 88 | Photinia serratifolia | 0.2029 | ||
42 | Brachystachyum densiflorum | 4.3177 | 89 | Melia azedarach | 0.1655 | ||
43 | Castanopsis eyrei | 3.6525 | 90 | Phyllostachys edulis | 0.1655 | ||
44 | Vaccinium bracteatum | 3.3764 | 91 | Pinus elliottii | 0.1655 | ||
45 | Lithocarpus glaber | 3.1092 | 92 | Machilus leptophylla | 0.1364 | ||
46 | Ilex chinensis | 3.0220 | 93 | Lindera glauca | 0.1073 | ||
47 | Smilax corbularia | 2.7980 | 94 | Phoebe sheareri | 0.1073 | ||
Herb | 95 | Osmunda japonica | 60.1798 | 105 | Boehmeria nivea | 0.6881 | |
96 | Dryopteris fuscipes | 6.8201 | 106 | Dicranopteris pedata | 0.5281 | ||
97 | Miscanthus floridulus | 6.7660 | 107 | Juncus setchuensis | 0.3454 | ||
98 | Cyperus difformis | 6.5565 | 108 | Onychium japonicum | 0.2944 | ||
99 | Imperata cylindrica | 4.9332 | 109 | Pteris dispar | 0.2816 | ||
100 | Miscanthus sinensis | 4.0732 | 110 | Carex brunnea | 0.1684 | ||
101 | Polytrichum sp. | 3.7467 | 111 | Woodwardia japonica | 0.1472 | ||
102 | Pueraria montana | 1.7609 | 112 | Boehmeria spicata | 0.1472 | ||
103 | Diplopterygium glaucum | 1.4828 | 113 | Yucca gloriosa | 0.1387 | ||
104 | Chrysanthemum indicum | 0.8028 | 114 | Lygodium japonicum | 0.1387 |
Environmental factors | Axis 1 | Axis 2 | Axis 3 | Axis 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Elevation | 0.7595* | -0.1964 | 0.1744 | 0.0626 |
Slope | -0.2506 | -0.6853* | -0.1253 | 0.0902 |
Aspect | -0.1357 | -0.1096 | 0.6827* | 0.0054 |
Position | 0.3322 | 0.0569 | 0.0666 | 0.5886* |
Eigenvalues | 0.2900 | 0.1980 | 0.1110 | 0.1070 |
Species-environment correlations | 0.8200 | 0.7410 | 0.7000 | 0.6500 |
Cumulative percentage variance of species-environment relation (%) | 41.00 | 69.10 | 84.40 | 100.00 |
Table 2 Coefficients between the first 4 axes in canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) ordination and environment factors of 92 plots in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province
Environmental factors | Axis 1 | Axis 2 | Axis 3 | Axis 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Elevation | 0.7595* | -0.1964 | 0.1744 | 0.0626 |
Slope | -0.2506 | -0.6853* | -0.1253 | 0.0902 |
Aspect | -0.1357 | -0.1096 | 0.6827* | 0.0054 |
Position | 0.3322 | 0.0569 | 0.0666 | 0.5886* |
Eigenvalues | 0.2900 | 0.1980 | 0.1110 | 0.1070 |
Species-environment correlations | 0.8200 | 0.7410 | 0.7000 | 0.6500 |
Cumulative percentage variance of species-environment relation (%) | 41.00 | 69.10 | 84.40 | 100.00 |
Figure 1 CCA ordination of 114 dominant species in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province^Species number see Table 1. ELE: Elevation; SL: Slope; ASP: Aspect; POS: Position
Figure 2 Dendrogram of TWINSPAN classification of 92 plots in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province^Ninety-seven plots were surveyed, and the data of the plot 1, 2, 19, 41, and 71 were missing.
Figure 4 Shannon-Wiener (A), Pielou (B), and Simpson (C) index of the 3 vertical levels in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province
Index | Shannon-Wiener | Simpson | Pielou | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Layer | Tree | Shrub | Herb | Tree | Shrub | Herb | Tree | Shrub | Herb | ||
Mean | 1.885 | 2.871 | 1.460 | 0.548 | 0.759 | 0.491 | 0.832 | 1.114 | 0.815 | ||
SE | 0.257 | 0.298 | 0.159 | 0.066 | 0.050 | 0.054 | 0.098 | 0.062 | 0.075 |
Table 3 Difference analysis of tree layer, shrub layer and herb layer in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang pro- vince
Index | Shannon-Wiener | Simpson | Pielou | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Layer | Tree | Shrub | Herb | Tree | Shrub | Herb | Tree | Shrub | Herb | ||
Mean | 1.885 | 2.871 | 1.460 | 0.548 | 0.759 | 0.491 | 0.832 | 1.114 | 0.815 | ||
SE | 0.257 | 0.298 | 0.159 | 0.066 | 0.050 | 0.054 | 0.098 | 0.062 | 0.075 |
Test methods | Positive correlations | Negative correlations | None correlations | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | ad=bc | ||
χ2-test | 7 | 4 | 33 | 0 | 1 | 21 | 0 | ||
AC | AC≥0.60 | 0.20≤AC<0.60 | 0.05≤AC<0.20 | AC≤-0.60 | -0.60≤AC<-0.20 | -0.20≤AC<-0.05 | -0.05≤AC<0.05 | ||
AC values | 2 | 17 | 10 | 3 | 11 | 5 | 18 | ||
PC | PC≥0.7 | 0.4≤PC<0.7 | 0.2≤PC<0.4 | - | - | - | 0≤PC<0.2 | ||
PC values | 0 | 4 | 30 | - | - | - | 10 |
Table 4 Chi-square test, association coefficient (AC) and percentage co-occurrence (PC) in tree layer of 13 ecological associations in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province
Test methods | Positive correlations | Negative correlations | None correlations | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | ad=bc | ||
χ2-test | 7 | 4 | 33 | 0 | 1 | 21 | 0 | ||
AC | AC≥0.60 | 0.20≤AC<0.60 | 0.05≤AC<0.20 | AC≤-0.60 | -0.60≤AC<-0.20 | -0.20≤AC<-0.05 | -0.05≤AC<0.05 | ||
AC values | 2 | 17 | 10 | 3 | 11 | 5 | 18 | ||
PC | PC≥0.7 | 0.4≤PC<0.7 | 0.2≤PC<0.4 | - | - | - | 0≤PC<0.2 | ||
PC values | 0 | 4 | 30 | - | - | - | 10 |
Test methods | Positive correlations | Negative correlations | None correlations | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | ad=bc | ||
χ2-test | 4 | 4 | 104 | 0 | 0 | 141 | 20 | ||
AC | AC≥0.60 | 0.20≤AC<0.60 | 0.05≤AC<0.20 | AC≤-0.60 | -0.60≤AC<-0.20 | -0.20≤AC<-0.05 | -0.05≤AC<0.05 | ||
AC values | 0 | 22 | 44 | 60 | 46 | 29 | 55 | ||
PC | PC≥0.7 | 0.4≤PC<0.7 | 0.2≤PC<0.4 | - | - | - | 0≤PC<0.2 | ||
PC values | 0 | 1 | 22 | - | - | - | 92 |
Table 5 Chi-square test, association coefficient (AC) and percentage co-occurrence (PC) in shrub layer of 13 ecological associations in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province
Test methods | Positive correlations | Negative correlations | None correlations | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | ad=bc | ||
χ2-test | 4 | 4 | 104 | 0 | 0 | 141 | 20 | ||
AC | AC≥0.60 | 0.20≤AC<0.60 | 0.05≤AC<0.20 | AC≤-0.60 | -0.60≤AC<-0.20 | -0.20≤AC<-0.05 | -0.05≤AC<0.05 | ||
AC values | 0 | 22 | 44 | 60 | 46 | 29 | 55 | ||
PC | PC≥0.7 | 0.4≤PC<0.7 | 0.2≤PC<0.4 | - | - | - | 0≤PC<0.2 | ||
PC values | 0 | 1 | 22 | - | - | - | 92 |
Test methods | Positive correlations | Negative correlations | None correlations | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | ad=bc | ||
χ2-test | 2 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 0 | ||
AC | AC≥0.60 | 0.20≤AC<0.60 | 0.05≤AC<0.20 | AC≤-0.60 | -0.60≤AC<-0.20 | -0.20≤AC<-0.05 | -0.05≤AC<0.05 | ||
AC values | 3 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 2 | ||
PC | PC≥0.7 | 0.4≤PC<0.7 | 0.2≤PC<0.4 | - | - | - | 0≤PC<0.2 | ||
PC values | 0 | 0 | 3 | - | - | - | 12 |
Table 6 Chi-square test, association coefficient (AC) and percentage co-occurrence (PC) in herb layer of 13 ecological associations in ecological service forest of Rui’an city in Zhejiang province
Test methods | Positive correlations | Negative correlations | None correlations | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | P<0.01 | 0.01<P<0.05 | P>0.05 | ad=bc | ||
χ2-test | 2 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 0 | ||
AC | AC≥0.60 | 0.20≤AC<0.60 | 0.05≤AC<0.20 | AC≤-0.60 | -0.60≤AC<-0.20 | -0.20≤AC<-0.05 | -0.05≤AC<0.05 | ||
AC values | 3 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 2 | ||
PC | PC≥0.7 | 0.4≤PC<0.7 | 0.2≤PC<0.4 | - | - | - | 0≤PC<0.2 | ||
PC values | 0 | 0 | 3 | - | - | - | 12 |
[1] | 陈瑶, 胥晓, 张德然, 魏勇 (2006). 四川龙门山西北部植被分布与地形因子的相关性. 生态学杂志 25, 1052-1055. |
[2] | 程煜, 洪伟, 吴承祯, 王新功 (2002). 闽北马尾松人工林密度效应蓄积量改进模型. 河南农业大学学报 36, 147-150. |
[3] | 戴守斌 (2012). 瑞安市塘下镇森林城镇建设规划中的树种选择与配置探讨. 绿色科技 10, 78-80. |
[4] | 管杰然, 伊力塔, 钱逸凡, 何德汀, 余树全, 沈燕 (2012). 嵊州市公益林生物量及碳储量. 湖北农业科学 51, 4556-4560. |
[5] | 郭晋平, 张芸香 (2003). 中国森林景观生态研究的进展与展望. 世界林业研究 16(5), 46-49. |
[6] | 郭逍宇, 张金屯, 宫辉力, 董志 (2004). 安太堡矿区植被恢复过程主要种生态位梯度变化研究. 西北植物学报 24, 2329-2334. |
[7] | 郭屹立, 卢训令, 丁圣彦 (2012). 伊洛河河岸带生态系统草本植物功能群划分. 生态学报 32, 4434-4442. |
[8] | 洪伟, 林成来, 吴承祯, 何东进, 陈昆 (1999). 福建建溪流域常绿阔叶防护林物种多样性特征研究. 生物多样性 7, 208-213. |
[9] | 贾晓妮, 程积民, 万惠娥 (2007). DCA、CCA和DCCA三种排序方法在中国草地植被群落中的应用现状. 中国农学通报 23, 391-395. |
[10] | 江波 (2005). 浙江省生态公益林群落结构特征及其调控研究. 博士论文. 北京: 北京林业大学. pp. 16-18. |
[11] | 巨天珍, 王彦, 任海峰, 姚晶晶, 王蒙, 孟凡涛, 王继伟 (2012). 小陇山国家级自然保护区次生林分类、排序及演替. 生态学杂志 31, 23-29. |
[12] | 李土生, 袁位高 (2011). 公益林监测研究 . 北京: 中国林业出版社. pp. 12-14. |
[13] | 李智叁, 李凤日 (2008). 乌兰布和沙漠天然白刺种群及主要伴生种种间关联性研究. 植物研究 28, 98-103. |
[14] | 刘金福, 洪伟, 樊后保, 林荣福 (2001). 天然格氏栲林乔木层种群种间关联性研究. 林业科学 37(4), 117-123. |
[15] | 刘萍萍 (2000). 植物种间联结关系的研究. 水土保持研究 7, 179-184. |
[16] | 栾青杉, 孙军, 宋书群, 沈志良, 俞志明 (2007). 长江口夏季浮游植物群落与环境因子的典范对应分析. 植物生态学报 31, 445-450. |
[17] | 罗佳竺 (2012). 瑞安市海洋地质灾害研究与对策. 硕士论文. 北京: 中国地质大学. pp. 7-8. |
[18] | 孟睿, 何连生, 过龙根, 席北斗, 李中强, 舒俭民, 刁晓君, 李必才 (2013). 长江中下游草型湖泊浮游植物群落及其与环境因子的典范对应分析. 环境科学 34, 2588-2596. |
[19] | 彭少麟, 周厚诚 (1999). 鼎湖山地带性植被种间联结变化研究. 植物学报 41, 1239-1244. |
[20] | 钱逸凡, 伊力塔, 钭培民, 朱国亮, 应宝根, 余树全 (2012). 浙江缙云公益林生物量及固碳释氧效益. 浙江农林大学学报 29, 257-264. |
[21] | 钱逸凡, 伊力塔, 张超, 余树全, 沈露, 彭冬琴, 郑超超 (2013). 浙江省中部地区公益林生物量与碳储量. 林业科学 49(5), 17-23. |
[22] | 商天其, 郑超超, 高洪娣, 叶诺楠, 伊力塔 (2015). 嵊州市公益林群落数量分类、排序及环境解析. 热带亚热带植物学报 3, 334-342. |
[23] | 沈泽昊, 张新时 (2000). 基于植物分布地形格局的植物功能型划分研究. 植物学报 42, 1190-1196. |
[24] | 沈泽昊, 张新时, 金义兴 (2000). 三峡大老岭森林物种多样性的空间格局分析及其地形解释. 植物学报 42, 620-627. |
[25] | 孙军, 刘东艳 (2014). 多样性指数在海洋浮游植物研究中的应用. 海洋学报 26, 62-75. |
[26] | 王伯荪, 李鸣光, 彭少麟 (1995). 植物种群学. 广州: 广东高等教育出版社. pp. 132-148. |
[27] | 王晶, 张钦弟, 许强, 张文静, 毕润成 (2016). 山西庞泉沟银露梅群落物种多样性的海拔格局. 植物学报 51, 335-342. |
[28] | 王世杰, 李阳兵, 李瑞玲 (2003). 喀斯特石漠化的形成背景、演化与治理. 第四纪研究 23, 657-666. |
[29] | 闫淑君, 洪伟, 洪滔, 吴承祯 (2006). 万木林中亚热带常绿阔叶林物种多样性林隙梯度变化. 应用生态学报 17, 947-950. |
[30] | 伊力塔, 严晓素, 余树全, 包春泉, 屠永海, 潘昌尧 (2012). 浙江省不同森林类型林分健康指标体系. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版) 36, 145-148. |
[31] | 袁位高 (2009). 浙江省生态公益林主要群落结构的比较研究. 北京: 中国林业科学研究院. pp. 1-3. |
[32] | 岳明, 张林静, 党高弟, 辜天琪 (2002). 佛坪自然保护区植物群落物种多样性与海拔梯度的关系. 地理科学 22, 349-354. |
[33] | 张桂萍, 张峰, 茹文明 (2006). 山西绵山植被木本植物优势种群种间关联. 生态学杂志 25, 295-298. |
[34] | 张华柳, 伊力塔, 余树全, 余小龙, 陈亚峰, 张朋伟 (2011). 嵊州市公益林生物量及生态效益价值评价. 林业资源管理 1, 78-85. |
[35] | 张金屯 (1995). 植被数量生态学方法. 北京: 中国科学技术出版社. pp. 58-67. |
[36] | 张明霞, 王得祥, 康冰, 张岗岗, 刘璞, 杜焰玲, 于飞 (2015). 秦岭华山松天然次生林优势种群的种间联结性. 林业科学 51, 13-21. |
[37] | 郑超超, 伊力塔, 余树全, 廖文海, 钱逸凡 (2013). 浙江江山公益林群落生物多样性与稳定性. 东北林业大学学报 41(11), 31-35. |
[38] | 郑超超, 伊力塔, 张超, 余树全, 库伟鹏, 钱逸凡, 凌骅 (2015). 浙江江山公益林物种种间关系及CCA排序. 生态学报 35, 7511-7521. |
[39] | 郑元润 (1998). 大青沟森林植物群落物种多样性研究. 生物多样性 6, 191-196. |
[40] | 周先叶, 王伯荪, 李鸣光, 昝启杰 (2000). 广东黑石顶自然保护区森林次生演替过程中群落的种间联结性分析. 植物生态学报 24, 332-339. |
[41] | 朱彦鹏, 梁军, 孙志强, 姜明媛, 吴晓明, 张耀星 (2013). 昆嵛山森林群落数量分类、排序及多样性垂直格局. 林业科学 49(4), 54-61. |
[42] | Brian JL, Kasarda B (1977). Contemporary Urban Ecology. New York: Macmillan. pp. 95-113. |
[43] | Clark DB, Palmer MW, Clark DA (1999). Edaphic factors and the landscape—scale distributions of tropical rain forest trees.Ecology 80, 2662-2675. |
[44] | Forman RTT (1995). Land Mosaics: the Ecology of Lands- capes and Regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 133-142. |
[45] | Henriques RPB, Hay JDV (1998). The plant communities of a foredune in southeastern Brazil.Can J Bot 76, 1323-1330. |
[46] | Hurlbert SH (1969). A coefficient of interspecific association.Ecology 50, 1-9. |
[47] | Peet RK (1974). The measurement of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol System 5, 285-307. |
[48] | Pielou EC (1975). Ecology Diversity. New York: J. Wiley and Sons. pp. 62-82. |
[49] | Rad JE, Manthey M, Mataji A (2009). Comparison of plant species diversity with different plant communities in deci- duous forests.Inter J Environ Sci Technol 6, 389-394. |
[50] | Routledge RD (1979). Diversity indices: which ones are ad- missible?J Theor Biol 76, 503-515. |
[51] | Swanson FJ, Kratz TK, Caine N, Woodmansee RG (1988). Landform effects on ecosystem patterns and processes: geomorphic features of the earth’s surface regulate the distribution of organisms and processes. BioScience 38(2), 92-98. |
[52] | Wilsey BJ, Potvin C (2000). Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: importance of species evenness in an old fie- ld.Ecology 81, 887-892. |
[53] | Woodward FI, Mckee IF (1991). Vegetation and climate.Environ Inter 17, 535-546. |
No related articles found! |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||