基于交角和密集度的竞争指数构建及评价

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20210419

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 以蒙古栎次生林和云冷杉过伐林为研究对象，构建新的基于交角和密集度的竞争指数，为更好表达蒙古栎次生林和云冷杉过伐林林木间的竞争状况提供依据。方法: 在吉林省汪清林业局塔子沟和金沟岭林场分别选择具有代表性的3块1 hm²蒙古栎次生林和3块1 hm²云冷杉过伐林样地，基于2013和2018年2期调查数据，构建基于交角和密集度的竞争指数（caCI），采用优势度分析法确定优势树种，并建立优势树种的单木断面积生长量模型评价竞争指数caCI与Hegyi、aCI和uaCI的优劣。结果: 竞争指数caCI与Hegyi、aCI和uaCI呈显著正相关关系。断面积生长量线性回归模型和混合效应模型表明，林木断面积生长量与初始断面积呈正相关关系，与竞争指数呈负相关关系，暗示影响生长量的主要因素是林木初始大小，而林木竞争也会影响林木生长。优势树种嵌套于样地的2水平线性混合效应模型的拟合精度优于回归模型，反映出不同树种的生长趋势差异显著，而样地影响较小。模型中带竞争指数的拟合效果较不带竞争指数的拟合效果有所提升，与Hegyi、aCI和uaCI相比，caCI在云冷杉过伐林中表现最佳，在蒙古栎次生林中效果次之，说明竞争指数caCI适合空间结构更复杂的林分。结论: 基于交角和密集度的竞争指数caCI能够有效反映蒙古栎次生林和云冷杉过伐林林木间的竞争状况，尤其是林木结构更为复杂的天然混交林。

关键词: 竞争指数, 密集度, 混合效应模型, 蒙古栎次生林, 云冷杉过伐林

Abstract:

Objective: In order to provide a basis for better calculating the competition status of secondary forest of Mongolian oak and over-logged spruce and fir forest, a new competition index was constructed by adding the crowding to the competition index based on intersection angle. Method: Three representative plots of Mongolian oak secondary forest and three plots of over-logged spruce and fir forests with an area of 1 hm² were selected in Tazigou and Jingouling forest farm of Wangqing Forestry Bureau, Jilin, China. The stands were investigated in 2013 and 2018, respectively. The competition index caCI based on intersection and crowding was constructed, dominant tree species were determined by dominance analysis, and the individual tree basal area growth model of dominant tree species was established to evaluate the competition index caCI, Hegyi, aCI and uaCI. Result: The results showed that caCI had a significant positive correlation with Hegyi, aCI and uaCI. The regression model and linear mixed-effects model of basal area growth showed that the basal area growth was positively correlated with the initial basal area, and negatively correlated with the competition index, suggesting that the major factor affecting the increment was the initial size of trees and that the competition among trees also had an effect on tree growth. The fitting accuracy of the linear mixed effect model was better than that of the regression model, which indicated that the growth dynamic of different tree species was significantly different, but the influence of the sample plot was slight. The fitting effect of the model with competition index was better than that of the model without competition index. Compared with Hegyi, aCI and uaCI, caCI showed the best performance in over-logged spruce-fir forests, followed by secondary forest of Mongolian oak, which indicated that caCI was suitable for forest with more complex spatial structure. Conclusion: The competition index caCI could effectively reflect the competition of secondary forest of Mongolian oak and over-logged spruce-fir forest, especially in the natural mixed forest with more complex forest structure.

Key words: competition index, crowding, mixed effect model, secondary forest of Mongolian oak, over-logged forest of spruce and fir

中图分类号:

S753.7

胡雪凡,张会儒,段光爽,卢军. 基于交角和密集度的竞争指数构建及评价[J]. 林业科学, 2021, 57(4): 182-190.

Xuefan Hu,Huiru Zhang,Guangshuang Duan,Jun Lu. Establishment and Evaluation of Tree Competition Index Based on Intersection and Crowding[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2021, 57(4): 182-190.

图/表 6

表1

表2

表3

图1

表4

表5

参考文献 0

	陈科屹, 张会儒, 雷相东, 等. 云冷杉过伐林垂直结构特征分析. 林业科学研究, 2017, 30 (3): 450- 459.
	Chen K Y , Zhang H R , Lei X D , et al. Analysis of vertical structure characteristics for spruce-fir over-cutting forest. Forest Research, 2017, 30 (3): 450- 459.
	符利勇, 孙华. 基于混合效应模型的杉木单木冠幅预测模型. 林业科学, 2013, 49 (8): 65- 74.
	Fu L Y , Sun H . Individual crown diameter prediction for Cunninghamia lanceolata forests based on mixed effects models. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2013, 49 (8): 65- 74.
	胡艳波, 惠刚盈. 基于相邻木关系的林木密集程度表达方式研究. 北京林业大学学报, 2015, 37 (9): 1- 8.
	Hu Y B , Hui G Y . How to describe the crowding degree of trees based on the relationship of neighboring trees. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2015, 37 (9): 1- 8.
	惠刚盈. 角尺度——一个描述林木个体分布格局的结构参数. 林业科学, 1999, 35 (1): 37- 42.
	Hui G Y . The neighborhood pattern—a new structure parameter for describing distribution of forest tree position. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 1999, 35 (1): 37- 42.
	惠刚盈, 胡艳波, 赵中华, 等. 基于交角的林木竞争指数. 林业科学, 2013, 49 (6): 68- 73.
	Hui G Y , Hu Y B , Zhao Z H , et al. A forest competition index based on intersection angle. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2013, 49 (6): 68- 73.
	惠刚盈, 克劳斯·冯佳多. 森林空间结构量化分析方法. 北京: 中国科学技术出版社, 2003.
	Hui G Y , Gadow V K . Quantitative analysis method of forest spatial structure. Beijing: China Science and Technology Press, 2003.
	姜立春, 刘瑞龙. 基于非线性混合模型的落叶松树干削度模型. 林业科学, 2011, 47 (4): 101- 106.
	Jiang L C , Liu R L . A stem taper model with nonlinear mixed effects for dahurian larch. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2011, 47 (4): 101- 106.
	李春明. 混合效应模型在森林生长模拟研究中的应用. 北京: 中国林业科学研究院博士学位论文, 2010.
	Li C M . Application of mixed effects models in forest growth models. Beijing: PhD thesis of Chinese Acadamy of Forestry, 2010.
	李际平, 房晓娜, 封尧, 等. 基于加权Voronoi图的林木竞争指数. 北京林业大学学报, 2015, 37 (3): 61- 68.
	Li J P , Fang X N , Feng Y , et al. Tree competition indexes based on weighted Voronoi diagram. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2015, 37 (3): 61- 68.
	吕勇, 钱升平, 吕飞舟, 等. 青冈栎次生林林木综合竞争压力指数研究. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2017, 37 (10): 1- 6.
	Lü Y , Qian S P , Lü F Z , et al. Study on comprehensive competition stress index of Cyclobalanopsis glauca secondary forest. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2017, 37 (10): 1- 6.
	邵方丽, 余新晓, 郑江坤, 等. 北京山区防护林优势树种分布与环境的关系. 生态学报, 2012, 32 (19): 6092- 6099.
	Shao F L , Yu X X , Zheng J K , et al. Relationships between dominant arbor species distribution and environmental factors of shelter forests in the Beijing mountain area. Acta Ecological Sinica, 2012, 32 (19): 6092- 6099. doi: 10.5846/stxb201108231229
	汤孟平. 森林空间结构分析. 北京: 科学出版社, 2013.
	Tang M P . Analysis of forest spatial structure. Beijing: Science Press, 2013.
	汤孟平, 陈永刚, 施拥军, 等. 基于Voronoi图的群落优势树种种内种间竞争. 生态学报, 2007, 27 (11): 4707- 4716. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2007.11.039
	Tang M P , Chen Y G , Shi Y J , et al. Intraspecific and Interspecific competition analysis of community dominant plant populations based on Voronoi diagram. Acta Ecological Sinica, 2007, 27 (11): 4707- 4716.
	王良民, 任宪威, 刘一樵. 我国落叶栎的地理分布. 北京林业大学学报, 1985, 7 (2): 57- 69.
	Wang L M , Ren X W , Liu Y Q . The geographical distribution of deciduous oak in China. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 1985, 7 (2): 57- 69.
	吴大荣. 福建罗卜岩闽楠(Phoebe bournei)林中优势树种生态位研究. 生态学报, 1999, 21 (5): 851- 855.
	Wu D R . A study on the niche of dominant species in Phoebe bournei forests in Luoboyan nature reserve of Fujian. Acta Ecological Sinica, 1999, 21 (5): 851- 855.
	殷晓洁, 周广胜, 隋兴华, 等. 蒙古栎地理分布的主导气候因子及其阈值. 生态学报, 2013, 33 (1): 103- 109.
	Yin X J , Zhou G S , Sui X H , et al. Dominant climatic factors of Quercus mongolica geographical distribution and their thresholds. Acta Ecological Sinica, 2013, 33 (1): 103- 109.
	于顺利, 马克平, 陈灵芝. 中国北方蒙古栎林起源和发展的初步探讨. 广西植物, 2000, 5 (2): 131- 137.
	Yu S L , Ma K P , Chen L Z . Preliminary discussion on the origin of Quercus mongolica forest in north China. Guihaia, 2000, 5 (2): 131- 137.
	郑焕能, 贾松青, 胡海清. 大兴安岭林区的林火与森林恢复. 东北林业大学学报, 1986, 14 (4): 1- 7.
	Zheng H N , Jia S Q , Hu H Q . Forest fire and forest restoration in Daxing'anling forest area. Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 1986, 14 (4): 1- 7.
	周红敏, 惠刚盈, 赵中华, 等. 林分空间结构分析中样地边界木的处理方法. 林业科学, 2009, 45 (2): 1- 5.
	Zhou H M , Hui G Y , Zhao Z H , et al. Treatment methods of plot boundary trees in spatial forest structure analysis. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2009, 45 (2): 1- 5.
	Aguirre O , Hui G Y , Gadow K V , et al. An analysis of spatial forest structure using neighbourhood-based variables. Forest Ecology and Management, 2003, 183, 137- 145.
	Arney J D . Tables for quantifying competitive stress on individual trees. Victoria BC: Canadian Forest Service, 1973.
	Bella I E . A new competition model for individual trees. Forest Science, 1971, 17 (3): 364- 372.
	Biging G S , Dobbertin M . A comparison of distance-dependent competition measures for height and basal area growth of individual conifer trees. Forest Science, 1992, 38 (3): 695- 720.
	Bolte A , Ammer C , Löf M , et al. Adaptive forest management in central Europe: climate change impacts, strategies and integrative concept. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 2009, 24 (6): 473- 482.
	Calegario N , Daniels R F , Maestri R , et al. Modeling dominant height growth based on nonlinear mixed-effects model: a clonal Eucalyptus plantation case study. Forest Ecology and Management, 2005, 204 (1): 11- 21.
	Coomes D A , Allen R B . Effects of size, competition and altitude on tree growth. Journal of Ecology, 2007, 95 (5): 1084- 1097.
	Das A J . The effect of size and competition on tree growth rate in old-growth coniferous forests. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2012, 42 (11): 1983- 1995.
	Hegyi F. 1974. A simulation model for managing jack pine stands//Fried J. Growth models for tree and stand simulations. Royal College of Forestry, Stockholm, 74-90.
	Hui G , Wang Y , Zhang G , et al. A novel approach for assessing the neighborhood competition in two different aged forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 2018, 422, 49- 58.
	King D A , Davies S J , Noor N S J . Growth and mortality are related to adult tree size in a Malaysian mixed dipterocarp forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 2006, 223, 152- 158.
	Matsushita M , Takata K , Hitsuma G , et al. A novel growth model evaluating age-size effect on long-term trends in tree growth. Functional Ecology, 2015, 29, 1250- 1259.
	Newnham R M . The development of a stand model for Douglas fir. Columbia: PhD thesis of University of British Columbia, 1964,
	Ohsawa M . Differentiation of vegetation zones and species strategies in the subalpine region of Mt. Fuji. Vegetatio, 1984, 57 (1): 15- 52. doi: 10.1007/BF00031929
	Opie J E . Predictability of individual tree growth using various definitions of competing basal area. Forest Science, 1968, 14 (3): 314- 323.
	Pinheiro J , Bates D . Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. Springer Science & Business Media., 2006,
	Rigling A , Bigler C , Eilmann B , et al. Driving factors of a vegetation shift from Scots pine to pubescent oak in dry Alpine forests. Global Change Biology, 2013, 19 (1): 229- 240.
	Schelhaas M J , Nabuurs G J , Hengeveld G , et al. Alternative forest management strategies to account for climate change-induced productivity and species suitability changes in Europe. Regional Environmental Change, 2015, 15 (8): 1581- 1594. doi: 10.1007/s10113-015-0788-z
	Staebler G R . Growth and spacing in an even-aged stand of Douglas-fir. Michigan: PhD thesis of University of Michigan., 1951.
	Vose J M , Miniat C F , Luce C , et al. Ecohydrological implications of drought for forests in the United States. Forest Ecology & Management, 2016, 380, 335- 345.
	Zhang Z , Papaik M J , Wang X , et al. The effect of tree size, neighborhood competition and environment on tree growth in an old-growth temperate forest. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2016, 10 (6): 970- 980.

样地号 Sample plot No.	树种组成(按断面积) Species composition (basal area)	坡位 Slope position	株数 Tree number	胸径DBH/cm			树高Tree height/m
样地号 Sample plot No.	树种组成(按断面积) Species composition (basal area)	坡位 Slope position	株数 Tree number	最小值 Min.	最大值 Max.	平均值 Mean	最小值 Min.	最大值 Max.	平均值 Mean
ZH-01	5QM 1PK 1TA 1AM 1BP 1PU	上Up	1 089	5.0	53.8	15.6	1.4	21.8	10.0
ZH-02	4QM 3BP 2OT 1LO	中Middle	618	5.0	50.7	13.6	1.8	22.9	14.3
ZH-03	5QM 2LO 1OT 1BP 1FM	中Middle	754	5.0	65.3	11.6	1.4	23.3	11.0
YLK-01	1 AN 1PJ 1PK 1LO 1BC 1TA 1PU 1AM 1BP 1OT	上Up	1 112	5.0	49.8	15.4	3.2	25.9	14.4
YLK-02	2TA 1PJ 1AN 1PK 1LO 1BC 1BP 1OT 1FM	上Up	1 138	5.0	47.8	15.8	3.0	33.0	15.5
YLK-03	3LO 2FM 1PK 1AN 1BC 1BP 1PJ	上Up	1 280	5.0	56.0	15.3	3.6	31.1	16.6

优势种Dominant tree species	株数Tree number	比例Percent (%)	断面积Basal area/m²	比例Percent (%)	d	胸径DBH/cm
优势种Dominant tree species	株数Tree number	比例Percent (%)	断面积Basal area/m²	比例Percent (%)	d	最小Min.	最大Max.	平均Mean
蒙古栎Q. mongolica	192	27.67	8.96	49.48	0.031 2	5.3	46.7	22.1
红松P. koraiensis	204	29.39	2.87	15.84	0.014 9	5.0	31.5	12.2
紫椴T. amurensis	139	20.03	2.41	13.32	0.011 0	5.2	40.0	12.9
小计Total	535	77.09	14.24	78.64		5.0	46.7	15.9
样地总计Plot	694	100.00	18.11	100.00		5.0	46.7	15.7

优势种Dominant tree species	株数Tree number	比例Percent (%)	断面积Basal area/m²	比例Percent (%)	d	胸径DBH/cm
优势种Dominant tree species	株数Tree number	比例Percent (%)	断面积Basal area/m²	比例Percent (%)	d	最小Min.	最大Max.	平均Mean
长白落叶松L. olgensis	193	30.02	5.25	31.23	0.038 0	9.0	33.6	17.9
水曲柳F. mandshurica	55	8.55	1.88	11.17	0.016 6	8.9	32.1	19.6
红松P. koraiensis	52	8.09	1.75	10.43	0.009 8	5.0	43.6	17.2
臭冷杉A. nephrolepis	80	12.44	1.75	10.43	0.006 4	5.4	29.2	15.6
枫桦B. costata	64	9.95	1.51	8.95	0.004 8	9.0	29.4	16.7
鱼鳞云杉P. jezoensis var. microsperma	30	4.67	1.23	7.34	0.004 1	8.0	31.2	18.0
白桦B. platyphylla	29	4.51	1.20	7.14	0.003 7	11.1	32.4	21.9
紫椴T. amurensis	52	8.09	1.101 9	6.56	0.003 5	5.0	40.7	13.9
小计Total	555	86.31	15.675 2	93.25		5.0	43.6	17.3
样地总计Plot	643	100.00	16.809 5	100.00		5.0	43.6	16.4

林分类型Stand type	竞争指数Competition index	线性回归模型Linear regression model			线性混合效应模型Linear mixed-effects model
林分类型Stand type	竞争指数Competition index	a	b₁	b₂	a	b₁	b₂
蒙古栎次生林 Secondary forest of Mongolian oak	caCI	-2.556	1.780	-0.815	-2.399	0.794	-0.919
	uaCI	-2.805	1.683	-0.345	-2.789	0.719	-0.515
	aCI	-2.508	1.675	-0.756	-2.256	0.720	-1.166
	Hegyi	-2.872	1.608	-0.056	-2.732	0.740	-0.049
	—	-2.648	1.827		-2.393	0.845
云冷杉过伐林Over-logged forest of spruce and fir	caCI	-3.298	1.291	-0.657	-2.891	0.666	-0.830
	uaCI	-3.538	1.189	-0.325	-3.219	0.607	-0.374
	aCI	-3.250	1.213	-0.593	-2.838	0.613	-0.807
	Hegyi	-3.448	1.249	-0.033	-3.103	0.636	-0.047
	—	-3.337	1.363		-2.991	0.693

林分类型Stand type	竞争指数Competition index	线性回归模型Linear regression model				线性混合效应模型Linear mixed-effects model
林分类型Stand type	竞争指数Competition index	R²	RMSE	TRE	AIC	R²	RMSE	TRE	AIC
蒙古栎次生林 Secondary forest of Mongolian oak	caCI	0.642	0.624	1.140	1 453.8	0.714	0.557	0.905	1 329.9
	uaCI	0.638	0.627	1.150	1 462.6	0.712	0.560	0.914	1 337.3
	aCI	0.640	0.625	1.140	1 457.9	0.717	0.554	0.896	1 323.0
	Hegyi	0.649	0.617	1.110	1 437.9	0.716	0.555	0.899	1 324.9
	—	0.635	0.630	1.160	1 466.1	0.706	0.566	0.933	1 349.4
云冷杉过伐林 Over-logged forest of spruce and fir	caCI	0.547	0.505	0.788	2 022.9	0.633	0.455	0.638	1 879.5
	uaCI	0.542	0.508	0.797	2 038.3	0.625	0.459	0.652	1 907.6
	aCI	0.543	0.507	0.794	2 033.8	0.629	0.457	0.645	1 893.0
	Hegyi	0.542	0.508	0.796	2 037.3	0.630	0.456	0.643	1 897.3
	—	0.536	0.511	0.806	2 052.3	0.618	0.463	0.663	1 924.2