塞罕坝华北落叶松人工林间伐和混交改造对大型土壤动物群落结构的影响

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20191117

林业科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (11): 153-162.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20191117

塞罕坝华北落叶松人工林间伐和混交改造对大型土壤动物群落结构的影响

扈梦梅¹,田龙¹,吴亚楠¹,杨晋宇^1,^2,^3,*,吕小翠¹,黄选瑞^1,^2,³

1. 河北农业大学林学院保定 071000
2. 河北塞罕坝森林培育国家长期科研基地承德 067000
3. 河北省林木种质资源与森林保护重点实验室保定 071000

收稿日期:2019-03-10 出版日期:2019-11-25 发布日期:2019-12-21
通讯作者: 杨晋宇
基金资助:
"十三五"国家重点研发计划项目课题"华北落叶松高效培育技术"(2017YFD0600403);河北省自然科学基金项目(C2018204154);国家自然科学基金项目(31971615);"十三五"国家重点研发计划项目专题"结构调控对人工林生产力形成的影响机制"

Influences of Thinning and Mixed Transformation of Larix principis-rupprechtii Plantations on the Community Structure of Soil Macro Faunal in Saihanba Area

Mengmei Hu¹,Long Tian¹,Yanan Wu¹,Jinyu Yang^1,^2,^3,*,Xiaocui Lü¹,Xuanrui Huang^1,^2,³

1. College of Forestry, Agriculture University of Heibei Baoding 071000
2. National Long-Term Scientific Research Base of Forest Cultivation in Saihanba of Hebei Chengde 067000
3. Key Laboratory of Germplasm Resources of Forest and Forest Protection of Hebei Province Baoding 071000

Received:2019-03-10 Online:2019-11-25 Published:2019-12-21
Contact: Jinyu Yang
Supported by:
"十三五"国家重点研发计划项目课题"华北落叶松高效培育技术"(2017YFD0600403);河北省自然科学基金项目(C2018204154);国家自然科学基金项目(31971615);"十三五"国家重点研发计划项目专题"结构调控对人工林生产力形成的影响机制"

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 比较研究塞罕坝地区华北落叶松人工林间伐和混交改造对大型土壤动物群落组成和多样性的影响，为实现华北落叶松人工林质量精准提升和可持续利用提供理论依据和技术支撑。方法: 以塞罕坝机械林场未经营的华北落叶松人工林（CK）、抚育间伐后的华北落叶松人工林（TH）和引入阔叶树的华北落叶松白桦混交林（M）为对象，于2014年5-9月，利用手拣法调查大型土壤动物群落，研究不同经营措施林分内土壤动物的结构组成、空间分布、多样性和功能群组成的差异及其影响因素。结果: 共获得大型土壤动物55类1 405头，隶属2门4纲12目，优势类群为正蚓目、叶甲科幼虫、象甲科幼虫。总体上，经间伐和混交改造后华北落叶松人工林内大型土壤动物的类群数显著高于未经营的对照林分（P < 0.05），TH内土壤动物密度亦显著高于CK（P < 0.05）。不同经营措施林分大型土壤动物类群数均表现为沿土壤剖面位置上升逐渐增加的趋势，且M和TH凋落物层土壤动物类群数及0~10 cm土层土壤动物密度显著高于CK（P < 0.05）。间伐和混交改造后，土壤动物群落各多样性指数均有提高，其中M的Shannon-Wiener多样性指数（H）显著高于CK（P < 0.05）。各功能群中，植食性土壤动物所占比例（47.19%）最高，其次为腐食性土壤动物（33.31%）；捕食性（19类）和植食性（18类）土壤动物的类群数居多；多因素方差分析显示，经营措施、土层和时间均对大型土壤动物功能群组成和结构影响显著（P < 0.05），其中间伐和混交改造均可显著提高植食性土壤动物的类群数。冗余度分析（RDA）显示，凋落物全碳含量（P=0.03）和C/N（P=0.08）对凋落物层大型土壤动物分布影响显著；而土壤含水量（P=0.008）、pH（P=0.012）和土壤密度（P=0.062）对土壤层大型土壤动物分布影响显著。结论: 塞罕坝华北落叶松人工林经间伐和混交改造后，林分结构和微环境的改善可提高大型土壤动物的种类、数量和多样性水平，尤其是部分功能群种类增加可能更有利于凋落物早期的粉碎和分解。

关键词: 大型土壤动物, 群落结构, 功能群, 经营措施, 华北落叶松人工林

Abstract:

Objective: The effects of thinning and mixed transformation of Larix principis-rupprechtii plantations in Saihanba on the communities and biodiversities of soil macro-fauna were comparatively investigated to provide a theoretical basis for the sustainable management of the regional plantations. Method: In this experiment, three types of forests, including a unmanaged larch pure forest (CK), a thinning larch forest (TH) and a larch-birch mixed forest (M), were targeted. From May to September, 2014, the soil macro-faunal community was investigated by hand picking method to study the differences of structure composition, spatial pattern, biodiversity and functional groups composition of soil fauna in different managed forests and their influencing factors. Result: A total of 1 405 soil macro-fauna were obtained and identified, and they belong to 2 phyla, 4 classes, 12 orders, 55 groups. The dominant groups were Lumbricina, Curculionidae larvae and Chrysomelidae larvae. In general, the group number of soil macro-fauna in TH and M was significantly higher than that in CK (P < 0.05), and the density of soil fauna in TH was also significantly higher than that in CK (P < 0.05). The group number of soil macro-fauna showed a gradually increasing trend along the soil profile in the three forests. The group number of soil fauna in litter layers and the mean density in 0-10 cm soil layer in M and TH were significantly higher than those in CK. In addition, thinning and mixed transformation improved the diversity indices of soil macro-fauna, and the Shannon-Wiener diversity index of M was significantly higher than that of CK (P < 0.05). Among functional groups, phytophagous had the highest density (47.19%), followed by saprophagous (33.31%). Predatory (19) and phytophagous (18) had more group numbers. The results of multivariate analysis (MANOVA) showed that the management measures, soil layers and seasons significantly influenced the four functional groups composition (P < 0.05); in particular, thinning and mixed transformation significantly increased the group numbers of phytophagous. The results of redundancy analysis (RDA) indicated that the distribution of soil macro-fauna in litter layer was significantly correlated with the organic carbon (P=0. 03) and C/N (P < =0.08). The soil macro-fauna in soil layers were significantly correlated with soil water content (P < =0.008), pH (P=0. 012) and soil bulk density (P=0. 062). Conclusion: After thinning and mixed management, the changes in stand structure and microenvironments in the forest enhanced soil macro-faunal community structure and biodiversity, especially the increase of group numbers of functional groups may be more conducive to the early pulverization and decomposition of litter.

Key words: soil macro-fauna, community structure, functional groups, management practices, Larix principis-rupprechtii plantation

中图分类号:

S718.52⁺1.1

扈梦梅,田龙,吴亚楠,杨晋宇,吕小翠,黄选瑞. 塞罕坝华北落叶松人工林间伐和混交改造对大型土壤动物群落结构的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(11): 153-162.

Mengmei Hu,Long Tian,Yanan Wu,Jinyu Yang,Xiaocui Lü,Xuanrui Huang. Influences of Thinning and Mixed Transformation of Larix principis-rupprechtii Plantations on the Community Structure of Soil Macro Faunal in Saihanba Area[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2019, 55(11): 153-162.

图/表 7

表1

附表1

大型土壤动物组成①"

类群Group	未经营CK		间伐TH		混交M		总个体数Total	百分比Percentage(%)
类群Group	个体数Individuals	百分比Percentage(%)	个体数Individuals	百分比Percentage(%)	个体数Individuals	百分比Percentage(%)	总个体数Total	百分比Percentage(%)
正蚓目Lumbricida	63	20	57	9.56	26	5.26	146	10.39
颤蚓目Tubificida	9	2.85	1	0.17	18	3.64	28	1.99
石蜈蚣目Lithobiomorpha	13	4.13	28	4.69	12	2.43	53	3.77
地蜈蚣目Geophilomorpha	4	1.27	5	0.84	9	1.82	18	1.28
盲蛛目Opiliones	5	1.59	2	0.34	3	0.61	10	0.71
球蛛科Theridiidae	—	—	4	0.67	5	1.01	9	0.64
漏斗蛛科Agelenidae	2	0.63	1	0.17	—	—	3	0.21
肖蛸科Tetragnathidae	—	—	2	0.34	1	0.20	3	0.21
圆颚蛛科Corinnidae	—	—	1	0.17	—		1	0.07
平腹蛛科Gnaphosidae	—	—	—	—	2	0.41	2	0.14
狼蛛科Lycosidae	—	—	7	1.17	7	1.42	14	1.00
蟹蛛科Thomisidae	—	—	3	0.50	4	0.81	7	0.50
跳蛛科Salticidae	—	—	—	—	1	0.20	1	0.07
圆珠科Araneidae	5	1.59	2	0.34	4	0.81	11	0.78
伪蝎目Pseudoscorpiones	—	—	1	0.17	—	—	1	0.07
啮虫目Psocoptera	—	—	1	0.17	—	—	1	0.07
叶蝉科Cicadellidae	2	0.63	8	1.34	2	0.41	12	0.86
同蝽科Acanthosomatidae	—	—	1	0.17	14	2.83	15	1.07
蚜科Aphididae	1	0.32	1	0.17	1	0.20	3	0.21
长蝽科Lygaeidae	—	—	—	—	1	0.20	1	0.07
奇蝽科Enicocephalidae	—	—	1	0.17	—	—	1	0.07
盲蝽科Miridae	1	0.32	2	0.34	8	1.62	11	0.78
土蝽科Cydnidae	—	—	2	0.34	1	0.20	3	0.21
蝽科Pentatomidae	—	—	3	0.50	3	0.61	6	0.43
步甲科/成Carabidae/A	8	2.54	18	3.02	34	6.88	60	4.27
阎甲科/成Histeridae/A	—	—	1	0.17	—	—	1	0.07
象甲科/成Curculionidae/A	—	—	2	0.34	—	—	2	0.14
瓢甲科/成Coccinellidae/A	—	—	4	0.67	1	0.20	5	0.36
金龟科/成Scarabaeidae/A	—	—	—	—	1	0.20	1	0.07
叶甲科/成Chrysomelidae/A	4	1.27	27	4.53	14	2.84	45	3.21
拟花蚤科/成Scraptiidae/A	—	—	—	—	1	0.20	1	0.07
隐翅甲科/成Staphylinidae/A	1	0.32	5	0.84	2	0.41	8	0.57
埋葬甲科/成Silphidae/A	—	—	—	—	1	0.20	1	0.07
水龟甲科/成Hydrophilidae/A		—	2	0.34			2	0.14
水龟甲科/幼Hydrophilidae/L	2	0.63	—	—	—	—	2	0.14
阎甲科/幼Histeridae/L	1	0.32	—	—	—	—	1	0.07
隐翅甲科/幼Staphylinidae/L	1	0.32	10	1.68	10	2.02	21	1.50
叶甲科/幼Chrysomelidae/L	68	21.59	167	28.02	61	12.35	296	21.07
金龟科/幼Scarabaeidae/L	—	—	1	0.17	—	—	1	0.07
歩甲科/幼Carabidae/L	1	0.32	—	—	—	—	1	0.07
象甲科/幼Curculionidae/L	33	10.47	110	18.45	126	25.51	269	19.15
长角亚目/幼Nematocera/L	16	5.08	44	7.38	35	7.09	95	6.76
短角亚目/幼Brachycera/L	35	11.11	39	6.54	57	11.54	131	9.33
芒角亚目/幼Aristocera/L	18	5.71	9	1.51	7	1.42	34	2.42
短角亚目Brachycera	1	0.32	—	—	—	—	1	0.07
长角亚目Nematocera	1	0.32	—	—	1	0.20	2	0.14
蚁科Formicidae	1	0.32	6	1.00	7	1.42	14	1.00
胡蜂科Vespidae	—	—	—	—	1	0.20	1	0.07
叶蜂科Tenthredinidae	—	—	2	0.34	3	0.61	5	0.36
姬蜂科Lchneumonidae	3	0.95	3	0.50	1	0.20	7	0.50
小卷叶蛾科/幼Olethreutidae/L	1	-0.32	—	—	—	—	1	0.07
卷叶蛾科/幼Tortricidae/L	1	0.32	—	—	—	—	1	0.07
夜蛾科/幼Noctuidae/L	—	—	2	0.34	4	0.81	6	0.43
尺蛾科/幼Geometridae/L	14	4.44	10	1.68	5	1.01	29	2.07
舟蛾科/幼Notodontidae/L	—	—	1	0.17	—	—	1	0.07
总个体数Total individuals	315	100	596	100	494	100	1 405	100
总类群数Total group number	29	—	41	—	39	—	55	—

附表1

图1

表2

表3

表4

图2

参考文献 0

	陈颖彪, 殷秀琴. 凉水地区不同林型土壤动物群落研究. 上海师范大学学报:自然科学版, 2000. 29 (2): 79- 84.
	Chen Y B , Yin X Q . The study of soil animals community in difference forest type in Liangshui zone. Journal of Shanghai Normal University:Natural Sciences, 2000. 29 (2): 79- 84.
	高敏, 马香丽, 杨晋宇, 等. 冀北山地华北落叶松人工林与白桦混交改造模式对土壤动物群落的影响. 林业科学, 2017. 53 (1): 70- 81.
	Gao M , Ma X L , Yang J Y , et al. Influence of the mixed modes of larch and birch on soil faunal community in mountain area of northern Hebei, China. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2017. 53 (1): 70- 81.
	高敏. 2015.经营措施对华北落叶松人工林土壤动物群落的影响.保定:河北农业大学硕士学位论文.
	Gao M. 2015. Influence of forest management measures on soil faunal communities in Larch plantations. MS thesis of Hebei Agricultural University.[in Chinese]
	高鑫, 张晓明, 杨洁, 等. 花椒园节肢动物群落特征与气象因子的关系. 生态学报, 2011. 31 (10): 2788- 2796.
	Gao X , Zhang X M , Yang J , et al. Relationships between arthropod community characteristic and meteorological factors in Zanthoxylum bungeanum gardens. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011. 31 (10): 2788- 2796.
	黄旭, 文维全, 张健, 等. 川西高山典型自然植被土壤动物多样性. 应用生态学报, 2010. 21 (1): 181- 190.
	Huang X , Wen W Q , Zhang J , et al. Soil faunal diversity under typical alpine vegatations in west Sichuan. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2010. 21 (1): 181- 190.
	焦向丽, 朱教君, 闫巧玲. 辽东山区次生林生态系统大、中型土壤动物组成与季节动态. 生态学报, 2009. 29 (5): 2631- 2638.
	Jiao X L , Zhu J J , Yan Q L . Composition and seasonal dynamics of macro-and meso-soil fauna in secondary forest ecosystems of Liaodong montane area, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009. 29 (5): 2631- 2638.
	李国雷, 刘勇, 吕瑞恒, 等. 华北落叶松人工林密度调控对林下植被发育的作用过程. 北京林业大学学报, 2009. 31 (1): 19- 24. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-1522.2009.01.004
	Li G L , Liu Y , Lü R H , et al. Responses of understory vegetation development to regulation of tree density in Larix principis-rupprechtii plantations. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2009. 31 (1): 19- 24. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-1522.2009.01.004
	李娜, 张雪萍, 张利敏. 三种温带森林大型土壤动物群落结构的时空动态. 生态学报, 2013. 33 (19): 6236- 6245.
	Li N , Zhang X P , Zhang L M . Spatial and temporal variation of soil macro-fauna community structure in three temperate forests. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013. 33 (19): 6236- 6245.
	李晓强, 殷秀琴, 孙立娜. 松嫩草原不同演替阶段大型土壤动物功能类群特征. 生态学报, 2014. 34 (2): 442- 450.
	Li X Q , Yin X Q , Sun L N . Soil macro-faunal guild characteristics at different successional stages in the Songnen grassland of China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014. 34 (2): 442- 450.
	刘任涛, 赵哈林, 赵学勇. 半干旱区草地土壤动物多样性的季节变化及其与温湿度的关系. 干旱区资源与环境, 2013. 27 (1): 97- 101.
	Liu R T , Zhao H L , Zhao X Y . Seasonal changes of soil faunal diversity and its relation to temperature and moisture in semi-arid grassland, north China. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2013. 27 (1): 97- 101.
	王移, 卫伟, 杨兴中, 等. 我国土壤动物与土壤环境要素相互关系研究进展. 应用生态学报, 2010. 21 (9): 2441- 2448.
	Wang Y , Wei W , Yang X Z , et al. Interrelationships between soil fauna and soil environmental factors in China:research advance. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2010. 21 (9): 2441- 2448.
	王振海, 殷秀琴, 蒋云峰. 长白山苔原带土壤动物群落结构及多样性. 生态学报, 2014. 34 (3): 755- 765.
	Wang Z H , Yin X Q , Jiang Y F . Structure and diversity of soil fauna communities in the tundra of the Changbai Mountains, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014. 34 (3): 755- 765.
	吴东辉, 张柏, 陈鹏. 吉林省黑土区农业生境大型土壤节肢动物群落组成与生态分布. 中国农业科学, 2006. 39 (1): 125- 131. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2006.01.018
	Wu D H , Zhang B , Chen P . Community composition and distribution of soil macro-arthropods under agricultural environment in the black soil region of Jilin Province. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2006. 39 (1): 125- 131. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2006.01.018
	吴鹏飞, 朱波. 桤柏混交林与纯柏林土壤动物群落特征的比较. 应用与环境生物学报, 2008. (4): 488- 493. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1006-687X.2008.04.011
	Wu P F , Zhu B . Comparison of soil animal community characteristics between alder and cypress mixed plantation and cypress pure plantation. Chinese Journal of Applied & Environmental Biology, 2008. (4): 488- 493. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1006-687X.2008.04.011
	肖玖金, 张健, 黄玉梅, 等. 采伐干扰前后巨桉人工林土壤动物群落比较. 应用与环境生物学报, 2011. 17 (1): 73- 77.
	Xiao J J , Zhang J , Huang Y M , et al. Variation of soil fauna community in eucalyptus grandis plantation before and after felling disturbance. Chinese Journal of Applied & Environmental Biology, 2011. 17 (1): 73- 77.
	杨万勤, 邓仁菊, 张健. 森林凋落物分解及其对全球气候变化的响应. 应用生态学报, 2007. 18 (12): 2889- 2895.
	Yang W Q , Deng R J , Zhang J . Forest litter decomposition and its responses to global climate change. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2007. 18 (12): 2889- 2895.
	杨效东, 邹晓明. 西双版纳热带季节雨林凋落叶分解与土壤动物群落:两种网孔分解袋的分解实验比较. 植物生态学报, 2006. 30 (5): 791- 801. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1005-264X.2006.05.009
	Yang X D , Zou X M . Soil fauna and leaf litter decomposition in tropical rain forest in Xishuangbanna, SW China:effects of mesh size of litterbags. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2006. 30 (5): 791- 801. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1005-264X.2006.05.009
	殷秀琴, 蒋云峰, 陶岩, 等. 长白山红松阔叶混交林土壤动物生态分布. 地理科学, 2011. 31 (8): 935- 940.
	Yin X Q , Jiang Y F , Tao Y , et al. Ecogeographical distribution of soil fauna in Pinus koraiensis mixed broad-leaved forest of Changbai Mountains. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2011. 31 (8): 935- 940.
	殷秀琴, 陶岩, 王海霞, 等. 我国东北森林土壤动物生态学研究现状与展望. 生物多样性, 2018. 26 (10): 1083- 1090. doi: 10.17520/biods.2018102
	Yin X Q , Tao Y , Wang H X , et al. Forest soil fauna ecology in northeast China:Review and prospect. Biodiversity Science, 2018. 26 (10): 1083- 1090. doi: 10.17520/biods.2018102
	殷秀琴, 张桂荣. 森林凋落物与大型土壤动物相关关系的研究. 应用生态学报, 1993. 4 (2): 167- 173. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.1993.02.014
	Yin X Q , Zhang G R . Correlation between forest litter and soil macroanimals. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 1993. 4 (2): 167- 173. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-9332.1993.02.014
	尹文英. 中国土壤动物检索图鉴. 北京: 科学出版社. 1998.
	Yin W Y . Pictorial keys to soil animals of China. Beijing: Science Press. 1998.
	张蕾. 2007.中国林业分类经营改革研究.北京:北京林业大学博士学位论文.
	Zhang L. 2007. Study on reform of forestry classification mangagement in China. Beijing: PhD thesis of Beijing Foresty University.[in Chinese]
	张雪萍, 侯威岭, 陈鹏. 东北森林土壤动物同功能种团及其生态分布. 应用与环境生物学报, 2001. 7 (4): 370- 374. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1006-687X.2001.04.014
	Zhang X P , Hou W L , Chen P . Soil animal guilds and their ecological distribution in the northeast of China. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology, 2001. 7 (4): 370- 374. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1006-687X.2001.04.014
	张雪萍. 帽儿山针叶林与针阔叶混交林土壤动物对比研究Ⅰ.区系组成与特征. 哈尔滨师范大学自然科学学报, 1995. (2): 94- 99.
	Zhang X P . A comparative study on soil animals of coniferious forest and coniferious broadleaf mixed forest in Maoershan Mount. Natural Science Journal of Harbin Normal University, 1995. (2): 94- 99.
	周泓杨, 张丹桔, 张捷, 等. 马尾松人工林郁闭度对大型土壤动物功能群的影响. 应用生态学报, 2017. 28 (6): 1860- 1868.
	Zhou H Y , Zhang D J , Zhang J , et al. Effects of canopy density on the functional group of soil macro fauna in Pinus massoniana plantations. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017. 28 (6): 1860- 1868.
	中国科学院南京土壤研究所. 土壤理化分析. 上海科学技术出版社. 1978.
	Institute of Soil Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences . Soil physicochemical analyses. Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers. 1978.
	Chauvat M , Titsch D , Zaytsev A S , et al. Changes in soil faunal assemblages during conversion from pure to mixed forest stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 2011. 262, 317- 324. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.03.037
	Coleman D C , Crossley D A , Hendrix P F . Fundamentals of soil ecology. Pittsburgh: Academic Press. 2004.
	Fierer N , Strickland M S , Liptzin D , et al. Global patterns in belowground communities. Ecology Letters, 2009. 12 (11): 1238- 1249. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01360.x
	Gartner T B , Cardon Z G . Decomposition dynamics in mixed-species leaf litter. Oikos, 2004. 104 (2): 230- 246. doi: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12738.x
	Gongalsky K B , Malmström A , Zaitsev A S . Do burned areas recover from inside? An experiment with soil fauna in a heterogeneous landscape. Applied Soil Ecology, 2012. 59, 73- 86. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2012.03.017
	Koehler H . Secondary succession of soil mesofauna:a thirteen year study. Applied Soil Ecology A, 1998. 9 (1/3): 81- 86.
	Lindberg N. 2003. Soil fauna and global change: responses to experimental drought, irrigation, fertilisation and soil warming. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae-Silvestria, 37. + Papers Ⅰ-Ⅳ.
	Liu J L , Wei H , Niu R X , et al. Trophic group responses of ground arthropods to land-cover change and management disturbance. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011. 31 (15): 4169- 4181.
	Motohiro H , Aino T O , Daisuke K , et al. The effects of mixed broad-leaved trees on the collembolan community in larch plantations of central Japan. Applied Soil Ecology, 2014. 83, 125- 132. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2013.06.005
	Nathalie K , Gabriel P , Matthieu C . How tree diversity affects soil fauna diversity:a review. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 2016. 94, 94- 106.
	Pielou E C . Mathematical ecology. New York: John Wiley and Sones Inc. 1975.
	Ponge J F , Gillet S , Dubs F . Collembolan communities as bioindicators of land use intensification. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 2003. 35, 813- 826. doi: 10.1016/S0038-0717(03)00108-1
	Russella D J , Gergócs V . Forest-management types similarly influence soil collembolan communities throughout regions in Germany-a data bank analysis. Forest Ecology and Management, 2019. 434, 49- 62. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2018.11.050
	Salamon J A , Alphei J S J A , et al. The Collembola community of a central European forest:influence of tree specie composition. European Journal of Soil Biology, 2009. 45, 199- 206. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2008.12.005
	Salmon S , Artuso N , Frizzera L , et al. Relationships between soil fauna communities and humus forms:Response to forest dynamics and solar radiation. Soil Biology& Biochemistry, 2008. 40 (7): 1707- 1715.
	Walter D E , Proctor H C . Mites:ecology, evolution and behavior. Austral Entomology, 2000. 39 (2): 96- 97. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-6055.2000.0152b.x
	Wardle D A . Communities and ecosystems:linking the aboveground and belowground components. Austral Ecology, 2010. 29 (3): 358- 359.
	Weaver W , Shannon C E . The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 1949.
	Yang B , Pang X Y , Hu B , et al. Does thinning-induced gap size result in altered soil microbial community in pine plantation in eastern Tibetan Plateau?. Ecology and Evolution, 2017. 7 (9): 2986- 2993. doi: 10.1002/ece3.2714
	Zaitsev A S , Chauvat M , Wolters V . Spruce forest conversion to a mixed beech-coniferous stand modifies oribatid community structure. Applied Soil Ecology, 2014. 76 (2): 60- 67.
	Zhao J , Shao Y H , Wang X L , et al. Sentinel soil invertebrate taxa as bio-indicators for forest management practices. Ecological Indicators, 2013. 24, 236- 239. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.06.012

林分特征Forest characteristics	未经营CK	间伐TH	混交M
林龄Forest age/a	28	28	28
乔木密度Forest density/(tree·hm^-2)	2 082±142.03^a	1 015±55.67^b	1 170±75.50^b
平均树高Mean tree height/m	11.00±0.23^b	13.80±0.31^a	10.53±1.12^b
平均胸径Mean DBH/cm	14.80±0.06^b	19.76±1.31^a	13.94±0.38^b
郁闭度Canopy closure(%)	71.67±2.33^a	59.00±3.01^b	65.33±2.03^ab
土壤pH Soil pH	6.09±0.02^a	6.12±0.02^a	6.06±0.03^a
土壤全氮含量Soil total nitrogen/(g·kg^-1)	1.80±0.01^a	2.11±0.02^a	1.24±0.02^b
土壤全碳含量Soil total carbon/(g·kg^-1)	25.31±1.54^a	22.49±1.15^a	16.65±1.39^b
土壤含水量Soil water content(%)	17.50±1.21^a	17.11±1.53^a	17.65±0.01^a
土壤密度Soil density/(g·cm^-3)	0.70±0.07^a	0.73±0.07^a	0.75±0.06^a
凋落物含水量Litter water content(%)	39.00±4.04^a	33.33±5.24^a	29.00±1.16^a
凋落物厚度Litter depth/cm	6.00±0.41^a	6.13±0.21^a	5.27±0.29^a
凋落物生物量Litter biomass/(kg·m^-2)	5.90±0.72^a	5.98±0.59^a	4.97±0.51^a
凋落物全氮含量Litter total nitrogen/(g·kg^-1)	7.91±0.05^b	7.82±0.02^b	12.24±0.08^a
凋落物全碳含量Litter total carbon/(g·kg^-1)	168.70±4.13^a	171.40±13.19^a	150.90±1.52^a

经营样地 Plot	月份 Month	类群数Group numbers			平均密度Mean density/(ind·m^-2)
经营样地 Plot	月份 Month	凋落物层 Litter layer	0~10 cm土层 0-10 cm layer	10~20 cm土层 0-20 cm layer	凋落物层 Litter layer	0~10 cm土层 0-10 cm layer	10~20 cm土层 10-20 cm layer
未经营CK	5月May	6.00±1.15^Ba	6.00±0.00^Aa	2.00±0.58^Bb	14.08±3.65^Aa	17.04±2.97^Aa	11.85±2.60^Aa
	7月July	6.00±1.00^Aa	5.00±0.58A^ab	2.00±0.58^Bb	13.71±5.46^Aa	19.26±5.46^Ba	13.71±1.62^Ba
	9月Sep.	4.33±1.76^Ba	3.33±0.67^Aa	3.33±0.33^Aa	16.67±8.98^Aa	6.30±1.85^Aa	4.08±0.74^Aa
间伐TH	5月May	12.00±2.89^Aa	7.67±1.76^Ab	6.00±1.00^Ab	22.22±7.70^Aa	24.82±3.65^Aa	16.30±0.74^Aa
	7月July	9.00±1.15^Aa	7.00±1.15^Aab	4.67±0.88^ABb	27.41±6.46^Ab	52.97±10.23^Aa	53.71±28.51^Aa
	9月Sep.	6.33±0.33^ABa	3.00±1.15^Aa	4.00±0.58^Aa	10.37±2.67^Aa	5.56±2.57^Aa	7.41±2.06^Aa
混交M	5月May	7.33±1.76^Ba	6.33±2.33^Aa	4.33±1.45^ABa	12.97±2.97^Aa	31.85±7.76^Aa	7.04±2.60^Aa
	7月July	9.00±2.65^Aa	8.33±0.88^Aa	6.33±0.88^Aa	19.26±4.18^Ab	60.00±4.01^Aa	32.97±10.82^ABb
	9月Sep.	9.67±0.88^Aa	4.67±1.20b^Aa	2.00±0.58^Bb	18.89±2.57^Aa	12.22±1.29^Aa	3.71±1.48^Aa

经营样地Plot	H	J_d	H			J_d
经营样地Plot	H	J_d	5月May	7月July	9月Sep.	5月May	7月July	9月Sep.
未经营CK	2.21±0.01^B	0.90±0.01^{A A}	1.66±0.18^Ba	1.66±0.20^Aa	1.79±0.170^Aa	0.82±0.04^Aa	0.80±0.08^Aa	0.90±0.06^Aa
间伐TH	2.37±0.07^AB	0.87±0.03^A	2.36±0.22^Aa	1.75±0.13^Ab	2.13±0.07^Aab	0.91±0.03^Aa	0.83±0.06^Aa	0.93±0.02^Aa
混交M	2.52±0.09^A	0.91±0.01^A	2.32±0.12^ABa	1.89±0.15^Aa	2.22±0.16^Aa	0.95±0.02^Aab	0.83±0.01^Ab	0.95±0.01^Aa

项目Source	腐食性Saprophagous		捕食性Predatism		植食性Phytophagy		杂食性Omnivory
项目Source	平均密度 Density	类群 Group	平均密度 Density	类群 Group	平均密度 Density	类群 Group	平均密度 Density	类群 Group
经营措施Man.	0.804	0.067	0.040^*	0.161	0.067	0.003^**	0.005^**	0.141
土层Lay.	0.000^**	0.000^**	0.018^*	0.000^**	0.021^**	0.150	0.000^**	0.000^**
月份Mon.	0.004^**	0.021^*	0.036^*	0.052	0.000^**	0.169	0.025^*	0.029^*
经营措施×取样层次Man.×Lay.	0.065	0.194	0.690	0.539	0.489	0.331	0.095	0.578
月份×经营措施Mon.×Man.	0.092	0.001^**	0.295	0.392	0.064	0.105	0.044^*	0.103
月份×取样层次Mon.×Lay.	0.555	0.489	0.835	0.880	0.002^**	0.003^*	0.043^*	0.126
月份×经营措施×取样层次Mon.×Man.×Lay.	0.331	0.127	0.942	0.571	0.529	0.573	0.005^**	0.845

[1]	刘昌霖,周国英,肖柏,刘君昂. 降香黄檀心材和边材内生真菌多样性[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(4): 109-120.
[2]	韩新生, 王彦辉, 李振华, 王艳兵, 于澎涛, 熊伟. 六盘山半干旱区华北落叶松人工林林下日蒸散特征及其影响因子[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(9): 11-21.
[3]	王安宁, 黄秋娴, 李晓刚, 徐学华, 李玉灵. 冀北山区不同植被恢复类型根际土壤细菌群落结构及多样性[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(9): 130-141.
[4]	曹红雨, 高广磊, 丁国栋, 张英, 赵媛媛, 任悦, 陈宇轩, 郭米山. 呼伦贝尔沙区4种生境土壤真菌群落结构和多样性[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(8): 118-127.
[5]	陈金磊, 方晰, 辜翔, 李雷达, 刘兆丹, 王留芳, 张仕吉. 中亚热带2种森林群落组成、结构及区系特征[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(2): 159-172.
[6]	张晓,刘世荣,黄永涛,傅声雷. 辽东栎林演替过程中的土壤细菌群落结构和多样性变化[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(10): 193-202.
[7]	李楠, 姜明, 田雪, 金光泽. 富锦国家湿地公园的轮虫群落结构及水质评价[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(1): 47-55.
[8]	杨安娜, 陆云峰, 张俊红, 吴家森, 徐金良, 童再康. 杉木人工林土壤养分及酸杆菌群落结构变化[J]. 林业科学, 2019, 55(1): 119-127.
[9]	陆梅, 田昆, 孙向阳, 任玉连, 王行, 彭淑娴. 纳帕海典型湿地土壤真菌群落特征的积水条件和干湿季节变化[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(2): 98-109.
[10]	姜文虎, 张德健, 刘军侠, 李超丽, 路战远, 杨敏生. 转Bt基因和非转基因杨树-棉花复合系统中节肢动物群落比较分析[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(10): 73-79.
[11]	贺同鑫, 孙建飞, 李艳鹏, 俞有志, 胡宝清, 王清奎. 环割对杉木和马尾松人工林土壤微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(6): 77-84.
[12]	李翀, 周国模, 施拥军, 周宇峰, 徐林, 范叶青, 沈振明, 李少虹, 吕玉龙. 不同经营措施对毛竹林生态系统净碳汇能力的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(2): 1-9.
[13]	乔沙沙, 周永娜, 刘晋仙, 景炬辉, 贾彤, 李毳, 杨欣, 柴宝峰. 关帝山针叶林土壤细菌群落结构特征[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(2): 89-99.
[14]	高敏, 马香丽, 杨晋宇, 黄选瑞, 吴亚楠. 冀北山地华北落叶松人工林与白桦混交改造模式对土壤动物群落的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(1): 70-81.
[15]	刘任涛, 朱凡. 流动沙地人工种植灌丛对地面节肢动物多样性与功能群结构的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2016, 52(2): 91-98.

塞罕坝华北落叶松人工林间伐和混交改造对大型土壤动物群落结构的影响

Influences of Thinning and Mixed Transformation of Larix principis-rupprechtii Plantations on the Community Structure of Soil Macro Faunal in Saihanba Area

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 0

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者中心

期刊获奖

引证指标

联系方式