秦岭南坡栓皮栎实生苗的构型分析

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20150920

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

[目的] 分析秦岭南坡栓皮栎实生苗在阴、阳坡生境中的构型,对比不同生境中其构型的差异,探讨构型与生境之间的关系,为森林结构及其经营措施的优化提供依据。[方法] 通过样方调查,研究秦岭南坡的阴坡和阳坡2种生境中1~10年生栓皮栎幼苗的植株生长、枝系特征、叶片特征和生物量分配等构型特征。[结果] 各个年龄实生苗的基径、树高均是阳坡 >阴坡,冠幅则相反,在9年生之前均是阴坡>阳坡; 基径在2个生境间没有显著差异,树高在7~10年间出现显著差异,冠幅在3年和8年时差异显著。阳坡和阴坡生境光照条件存在差异,这使栓皮栎实生苗形成不同的适应策略,不同坡向栓皮栎实生苗1级枝和3级枝出现的年龄阶段不同,阴坡(分别出现在4年生、6年生时)早于阳坡(分别出现在5年生、8年生时); 总体分枝率与逐步分枝率(R_1:2)表现为阳坡>阴坡; 1级枝分枝角和1级枝长度则表现为阴坡>阳坡。各个年龄栓皮栎幼苗的叶长、叶宽、单叶面积、叶面积指数均表现为阴坡>阳坡; 2个生境中,叶长宽比固定变化在2.00~2.61,这可能是因为叶长宽比由遗传性状所控制,不容易随环境的不同而产生变异。2个生境中,栓皮栎实生苗的叶、干、侧枝的生物量均呈指数形式增长,1~5年苗生物量增长缓慢,6年后增长加快,且在6年后2个生境间的差异显著(P<0.05); 根茎比在1~7年生时有显著差异(P<0.05),在8年生之前其生物量格局是把较多的干物质分配到根系,确保幼苗的存活; 各器官生物量比率高峰值出现的年龄也不同,叶生物量比率最高值阴、阳坡分别出现在第4年、第3年,侧枝生物量比率最高值阴、阳坡分别出现在第8年、第9年; 2个生境中,干、叶生物量比率在1~4年时有显著差异,而随着年龄增大,差异明显变小,但在8年生后,又有显著差异。[结论] 阳坡生境较阴坡更有利于栓皮栎实生苗的生长发育,但阴坡生境内栓皮栎实生苗通过强烈分枝和增加叶面积来获取更多光辐射,可见为充分利用不同生境内的光资源,栓皮栎实生苗通过构型变化形成不同的适应策略。

关键词: 栓皮栎, 实生苗, 生境, 构型分析

Abstract:

[Objective] The spatial architecture of plant population is a final product of plant-environment interaction and mutual adaption. In order to illustrate the relation between habitat and architecture, seedlings of Quercus variabilis in the shady and sunny slopes were studied. The study will therefore provide evidences for optimization of forest structure and managemental measures. [Method] By surveying nine quadrats, architectural characteristics (growth characteristics, branching characteristics, leaf characteristics and biomass allocation) of 1-10 years old seedlings of Q. variabilis in the shady slope and sunny slope were studied.[Result] The average base diameter and height of Q. variabilis seedlings were larger in sunny slope than in shady slope. On the contrary, the crown width was larger in shady slope than in sunny slope before 9 years. No significant differences of base diameter were found between the two habitats, but the tree height at 7 to 10 years old and the crown width at 3 and 8 years old significantly differ between the two habitats. Due to the differences of sunlight intensity between the two habitats, Q. variabilis seedlings have evolved different adaptive strategies. In the shady slope, the first order branch and the third order branch of Q. variabilis seedlings appeared earlier than that in the sunny slope. The overall bifurcation ratio and the stepwise bifurcation ratio (R_1:2) were larger in sunny slope than in shady slope, while the length and the angle of the first order branch were larger in shady slope than in sunny slope. The leaf length, leaf width, leaf area and leaf area index of Q. variabilis seedlings appeared to be larger in shady slope than in sunny slope. In the two habitats, the ratio of length to width of leaf varied from 2.00 to 2.61, indicating that the characteristics is under genetic control. The biomass of leaf, stem and branch increased in exponential function in the two habitats. The difference between the two habitats was significant after 6 years (P<0.05). And the ratio of root to shoot was significantly different between the two habitats during the period from 1 to 7 years old (P<0.05). To ensure survival, it distributes more dry matter to root before 8 years old. The peak value of biomass ratio of each organ appeared at different age. The peak value of leaf biomass ratio and branch biomass ratio respectively appeared at 4 and 8 years old in the shady slope. However in the sunny slope the peak value of leaf biomass ratio and branch biomass ratio respectively appeared at 3 and 9 years old. The stem and leaf biomass proportions significantly differed in the two habitats at 1 to 4 years old, but the difference decreased between the two habitats with the increase of age. There was a significant difference after 8 years old between the two habitats.[Conclusion] The growth performances of the seedlings were superior in the sunny slope to those in the shady slope. But to obtain more light interception, Q. variabilis seedlings developed strong branching and larger leaf area. In order to make full use of sunlight, the seedlings of Q. variabilis evolved different architectural characteristics for adaptation to different habitats.

Key words: Quercus variabilis, seedling, habitat, architectural analysis

中图分类号:

S718.54

胡晓静, 张文辉, 何景峰. 秦岭南坡栓皮栎实生苗的构型分析[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(9): 157-164.

Hu Xiaojing, Zhang Wenhui, He Jingfeng. Architectural Analysis of Quercus variabilis Seedlings in the South Slopes of Qinling Mountains[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2015, 51(9): 157-164.

参考文献

陈圣宾, 宋爱琴, 李振基. 2005. 森林幼苗更新对光环境异质性的响应研究进展. 应用生态学报, 16(2): 365-370.
(Chen S B, Song A Q, Li Z J. 2005. Research advance in response of forest seedling regeneration to light environmental heterogeneity. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 16(2): 362-370.[in chinese])
韩照祥, 山仑. 2005. 栓皮栎种群变异与适应对策研究. 林业科学, 412(6): 16-22.
(Han Z X, Shan L. 2005. Variation and adaptive countermeasures of Quercus variabilis population in Shaanxi Province. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 412(6): 16-22.[in chinese])
何亚平, 段元文, 费世民, 等. 2008. 青藏高原天山报春高寒湿地种群的花期资源分配. 应用与环境生物学报, 14(2): 180-186.
(He Y P, Duan Y W, Fei S M, et al. 2008. Resource allocation of Primula nutans population in the alpine wetland of the east Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, China.Chin J Appl Environ Biol, 14(2): 180-186.[in chinese])
黎云祥, 陈利, 杜道林, 等. 1998. 四川大头茶的分枝率和顶芽动态. 生态学报, 18(3): 309-314.
(Li Y X, Chen L, Du D L, et al. 1998. The bifurcation ratios and leader-bud dynamics of Gordonia acuminata. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 18(3): 309-314.[in chinese])
梁艳, 张小翠, 陈学林. 2008. 多年生龙胆属植物个体大小与花期资源分配研究. 西北植物学报, 28(12): 2400-2407.
(Liang Y, Zhang X C, Chen X L. 2008. Individual size and resource allocation in perennial Gentiana. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 22(5): 1093-1101.[in chinese])
林勇明, 洪滔, 吴承祯, 等. 2009. 不同起源与方位下桂花的构型差异. 福建林学院学报, 29(2): 97-102.
(Lin Y M, Hong T, Wu C Z, et al. 2009. Architectural variation of Osmanthus fragrans in different origins and orientations. Journal of Fujian College of Forestry, 29(2): 97-102.[in chinese])
卢康宁, 张怀清. 2010. 植物构筑型研究综述. 世界林业研究, 23(1):17-20.
(Lu K N, Zhang H Q. 2010. A review of plant architecture. World Forestry Research, 23(1):17-20.[in chinese])
祁建, 马克明, 张育新. 2008. 北京东灵山不同坡位辽东栎(Quercus liaotungensis)叶属性的比较. 生态学报, 28(1): 122-128.
(Qi J, Ma K M, Zhang Y X. 2008. Comparisons on leaf traits of Quercus liaotungensis Koidz. on different slope positions in Dongling Mountain of Beijing.Acta Ecologica Sinica, 28(1): 122-128.[in chinese])
孙书存, 陈灵芝. 1999a. 不同生境中辽东栎的构型差异. 生态学报, 19(3): 359-364.
(Sun S C, Chen L Z. 1999a.The architectural variation of Quercus liaotungensis in different habitats. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 19(3): 359-364.[in chinese])
孙书存, 陈灵芝. 1999b. 辽东栎的构型分析. 植物生态学报, 25(3): 433-440.
(Sun S C, Chen L Z. 1999b. Architectural analysis of crown geometry in Quercus liaotungensis. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 23(5): 433-440.[in chinese])
吴明作, 刘玉萃, 姜志林. 2001. 栓皮栎种群生殖生态与稳定性机制研究. 生态学报, 21(2): 225-230.
(Wu M Z, Liu Y C, Jiang Z L. 2001. The reproductive ecology and stable mechanism of Quercus variabilis ( Fagaceae) population. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 21(2): 225-230.[in chinese])
徐程扬. 2001. 不同光环境下紫椴幼树树冠结构的可塑性响应. 应用生态学报, 12(3): 339-343.
(Xu C Y. 2001. Response of structural plasticity of Tilia amurensis sapling crowns to different light conditions. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 12(3): 339-343.[in chinese])
杨小艳, 尹林克, 姜逢清, 等. 2010. 不同配置城市防护绿地中胡杨构型特征. 干旱区资源与环境, 24(6): 178-183.
(Yang X Y, Yin L K, Jiang F Q, et al. 2010. Response of branching architectures characteristics of Populus euphratica in different collocation in shelterbelts. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 24(6): 178-183.[in chinese])
姚红, 谭敦炎. 2005. 胡卢巴属4种短命植物个体大小依赖的繁殖输出与生活史对策. 植物生态学报, 29(6): 954-960.
(Yao H, Tan D Y. 2005. Size-dependent reproductive output and life-history strategies in four ephemeral species of Trigonella. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 29(6): 954-960.[in chinese])
臧润国, 蒋有绪. 1998. 热带树木构筑学研究概述. 林业科学, 34(5):112-119.
(Zang R G, Jiang Y X. 1998. Review on the architecture of tropical trees. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 34(5):112-119.[in chinese])
张丹. 2011. 沙质海岸防护林黑松根系构筑型研究. 泰安:山东农业大学博士学位论文.
(Zhang D. 2011. Root architecture of Pinus thunbergii in sandy coast protective forest. Tai'an: PhD Thesis of Shandong Agricultural University.[in chinese])
张文辉, 李红, 李景侠, 等. 2003. 秦岭独叶草种群个体和构件生物量动态研究. 应用生态学报, 14(4): 530-534.
(Zhang W H, Li H, Li J X, et al. 2003. Individual and modular biomass dynamics of Kingdonia uninflora population in Qinling Mountain. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 14(4): 530-534.[in chinese])
张文辉, 卢志军. 2002. 栓皮栎种群的生物学生态学特性和地理分布研究. 西北植物学报, 22(5): 1093-1101.
(Zhang W H, Lu Z J. 2002. A study on the biological and ecological property and geographical distribution of Quercus variabilis population. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 22(5): 1093-1101.[in chinese])
郑万均. 1985. 中国树木志. 北京: 中国林业出版社.
(Zheng W J. Chinese Sylvae. 1985. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House.[in chinese])
Abrams M D. 1986. Physiological plasticity in water relations and leaf structure of understory versus open-grown Cercis canadensis in north-eastern Kansas. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 16(6):1170-1174.
Bazzaz F A, Chiariello N R, Coley P D, et al. 1987. Allocation resources to reproduction and defense. Bioscience, 37(1):58-67.
Borchert R, Slade N A. 1981. Bifurcation ratios and the adaptive geometry of trees. Bot Gaz, 142(3): 394-401.
Brock M A. 1983. Reproduction allocation in annual and perennial species of the submerged aquatic halophyte Ruppia. Journal of Ecology, 71(3):811-819.
Cluzeau C N, Goff L, Ottorini J M. 1994. Development of primar branches and crown profile of Fraxinus excelsior. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 24(12): 2315-2323.
Falster D S, Westoby M. 2003. Leaf size and angle vary widely across species: what consequences for light absorption? New Phytologist, 158(3): 509-525.
Godin C. 2000. Representing and encoding plant architecture: a review. Annals of Forest Science, 57(5): 413-438.
Hallé F, Oldeman R A A, Tomlinson P B. 1978. Tropical trees and forests: an architectural analysis. Berlin:Springer-Verlag.
Hölscher D, Hertel D, Leuschner C, et al. 2002. Tree species diversity and soil patchiness in a temperate broad-leaved forest with limited rooting space. Flora- Morphology Distribution Functional Ecology of Plants, 197(2): 118-125.
Jackson R B, Canadell J, Ehleringer J R, et al. 1996. A global analysis of root distribution for terrestrial biomes. Oecologia, 180(3): 389-411.
Küppers M. 1989. Ecological significance of above ground architectural patterns in woody plants: a question of cost-benefit relationship. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 4(12): 375-379.
Lee D W, Richards J H. 1991. Heteroblastic development in vines//Putz F E, Mooney H A. On the economy of plant form and function. London: Cambridge University Press, 205-243.
Sharma N, Koul A K, Kaul V. 1999. Pattern of resource allocation of six Plantago species with different breeding systems. Journal of Plant Research, 112(1):1-5.
Sprugel D G, Hinckley T M, Schaap W. 1991. The theory and practice of branch autonomy. Annual Review of Ecology Systematics, 22:309-334.
Steingraeber D A, Waller D M. 1986. Non-stationary of tree branching pattern and bifurcation ratios. Proceedings of Royal Society of London B, 228(1251): 187-194.
Valladares F, Chico J, Aranda I, et al. 2002. The greater seedling highlight tolerance of Quercus robur over Fagus sylvatica is linked to a greater physiological plasticity. Trees, 16(6):395- 403.
Valladares F, Gianoli E, Gomez J M. 2007. Ecological limits to plant phenotypic plasticity. New Phytologist, 176(4): 749-763.
Valladares F, WrightS J, Lasso E, et al. 2000. Plastic phenotypic response to light of 16 congeneric shrubs from a Panamanian rainforest. Ecology, 81(7): 1925-1936.

[1]	官纪元, 樊卫国. 不同磷水平下刺梨实生苗生长及根系形态特征与内源激素含量的关系[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(4): 51-61.
[2]	陈俊, 艾训儒, 姚兰, 陈思艺. 木林子大样地两个青冈属优势种的点格局对比[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(10): 1-10.
[3]	王家鸣, 许涵, 李意德, 林明献, 周璋, 骆土寿, 陈德祥. 地形异质性对尖峰岭热带山地雨林木本植物群落结构及多样性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(1): 1-11.
[4]	史文辉, 李国雷, 苏淑钗, 刘勇, 贾黎明, 尚治国. 子叶切除与苗圃施肥对栓皮栎容器苗造林效果的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(1): 64-73.
[5]	韩婉诗, 王德良. 湖南九龙江国家森林公园白鹇栖息地选择的季节变化[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(8): 71-80.
[6]	刘佳嘉, 李国雷, 刘勇, 尚治国. 容器类型和胚根短截对栓皮栎容器苗苗木质量及造林初期效果的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(6): 47-55.
[7]	谭凌照, 范春雨, 张春雨, 赵秀海. 局域生态过程对吉林蛟河阔叶红松林群落相似度的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(11): 12-19.
[8]	刘自强, 余新晓, 贾国栋, 贾剑波, 娄源海, 张坤. 北京山区侧柏和栓皮栎的水分利用特征[J]. 林业科学, 2016, 52(9): 22-30.
[9]	刘霞, 徐正会, 于娜娜, 张成林. 藏东南嘎隆拉山及墨脱河谷蚂蚁物种的分布格局[J]. 林业科学, 2016, 52(11): 88-95.
[10]	陈闯, 刘勇, 李国雷, 孙巧玉, 王琰, 万芳芳. 底部渗灌灌水梯度对栓皮栎容器苗生长和养分状况的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(7): 21-27.
[11]	黄秋娴, 赵顺, 刘春梅, 李玉灵. 遮荫处理对铁尾矿基质臭柏实生苗快速叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(6): 17-26.
[12]	叶松涛, 杜旭华, 宋帅杰, 李黎, 卢杨, 应叶青. 水杨酸对干旱胁迫下毛竹实生苗生理生化特征的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(11): 25-31.
[13]	尹艺凝, 张文辉. 栓皮栎栲胶品质与生态因子的相关分析[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(8): 30-38.
[14]	崔豫川, 张文辉, 李志萍. 干旱和复水对栓皮栎幼苗生长和生理特性的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(7): 66-73.
[15]	徐湘婷, 王林, 黄平, 万宇轩, 李建中, 万贤崇. 风和光照对侧柏、栓皮栎生长和形态建成的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(7): 164-168.