湘西南喀斯特石漠化地区植物多样性研究
|
摘要
以湘西南喀斯特石漠化生态系统环境为研究对象,采用野外样方调查和以空间代替时间的方法,研究了轻度、中度和重度3种不同等级石漠化环境下植物群落的结构特征、物种组成和植物多样性演变规律,旨在为湘西南喀斯特石漠化生态系统的恢复与重建提供理论支撑。结果表明:1)该石漠化地区植物调查记录共39科68属77种,其中灌木植物有28科40属47种,草本植物14科28属30种,3种不同等级石漠化样地中蔷薇科、壳斗科、菊科和禾本科等植物的种类和数量较多;2)在3种不同等级石漠化样地中,灌木层的物种丰富度为中度石漠化>重度石漠化>轻度石漠化,而Shannon-Wiener指数、Simpson指数和Pielou指数均是中度石漠化>轻度石漠化>重度石漠化;草本层的物种丰富度、Shannon-Wiener指数均随着石漠化等级程度下降呈现上升趋势,Pielou指数和Simpson指数表现为中度石漠化>重度石漠化>轻度石漠化;3)不同石漠化等级的植物相似性有较大差异,其中灌木层和草本层植物的相似性分别为21.28%和33.33%,轻度、中度和重度石漠化样地灌木层和草本层单独植物分别为8.51%～34.84%和6.67%～26.67%,而灌木层和草本层在不同石漠化样地之间的相似性分别在6.38%～12.77%和3.33%～6.67%之间。说明3个不同等级石漠化样地生活型的植物组成、多样性和群落相似性存在较大差异,随着石漠化程度的加深,在长期不加治理的情况下湘西喀斯特石漠化生态系统灌木化会更加严重。
Krast rocky desertification has been an important ecological issue impeding the economy and society development of southwestern China karst region. It is of great significance to study the plant diversity of the karst rocky desertification ecosystem. Based on these problems, by using field surveys and replacing space with time, the structural characteristics, species composition, and diversity of plant communities under different rocky desertification environments(light rocky desertification, LRD, moderate rocky desertification, MRD), and intense rocky desertification, IRD) were studied. The purpose is to provide theoretical support for the restoration and reconstruction of Karst rocky desertification ecosystem in Southwest Hunan. The results are as follows. 1) The flora in the studied areas consists of 39 families, 68 genera,and 77 species, including 28 families, 40 genera and 47 species of shrubs, and 14 families, 28 genera and 30 species of herbs. However, it is mainly the types and quantities of plants in three kinds of rocky desertification plots, such as Rosaceae, Fagaceae, Compositae and Gramineae. 2) In three different rocky desertification plots, the species richness of shrub layer ranked from high to low as MRD > IRD > LRD, and Shannon-Wiener index, Simpson index, and Pielou index sorted as follows: MRD > LRD > IRD; Species richness and Shannon-Wiener index of herb layer showed an increasing trend with the decrease of rocky desertification, and Pielou index and Simpson index showed a changing trend of MRD > IRD > LRD. 3) There were great differences in plant similarity among different grades of rocky desertification. The similarity of shrub and herb layer plants in three different grades of rocky desertification plots were 21.28% and 33.33% respectively. The alone plants that is unique to shrub and herb layer plants in three different grades of rocky desertification plots were 8.51%-34.04% and 6.67%-26.67%, respectively; while the similarities between shrub and herb layers in different rocky desertification plots ranged from 6.38% to 12.77% and 3.33% to 6.67% respectively. The findings reveal that there were significant differences in the plant composition, diversity, and community similarity of life forms in three different grade rocky desertification plots. With the extending of rocky desertification, the shrub encroachment of the karst rocky desertification ecosystem in southwestern Hunan will become more severe in the case of long-term non-governance.
Krast rocky desertification has been an important ecological issue impeding the economy and society development of southwestern China karst region. It is of great significance to study the plant diversity of the karst rocky desertification ecosystem. Based on these problems, by using field surveys and replacing space with time, the structural characteristics, species composition, and diversity of plant communities under different rocky desertification environments(light rocky desertification, LRD, moderate rocky desertification, MRD), and intense rocky desertification, IRD) were studied. The purpose is to provide theoretical support for the restoration and reconstruction of Karst rocky desertification ecosystem in Southwest Hunan. The results are as follows. 1) The flora in the studied areas consists of 39 families, 68 genera,and 77 species, including 28 families, 40 genera and 47 species of shrubs, and 14 families, 28 genera and 30 species of herbs. However, it is mainly the types and quantities of plants in three kinds of rocky desertification plots, such as Rosaceae, Fagaceae, Compositae and Gramineae. 2) In three different rocky desertification plots, the species richness of shrub layer ranked from high to low as MRD > IRD > LRD, and Shannon-Wiener index, Simpson index, and Pielou index sorted as follows: MRD > LRD > IRD; Species richness and Shannon-Wiener index of herb layer showed an increasing trend with the decrease of rocky desertification, and Pielou index and Simpson index showed a changing trend of MRD > IRD > LRD. 3) There were great differences in plant similarity among different grades of rocky desertification. The similarity of shrub and herb layer plants in three different grades of rocky desertification plots were 21.28% and 33.33% respectively. The alone plants that is unique to shrub and herb layer plants in three different grades of rocky desertification plots were 8.51%-34.04% and 6.67%-26.67%, respectively; while the similarities between shrub and herb layers in different rocky desertification plots ranged from 6.38% to 12.77% and 3.33% to 6.67% respectively. The findings reveal that there were significant differences in the plant composition, diversity, and community similarity of life forms in three different grade rocky desertification plots. With the extending of rocky desertification, the shrub encroachment of the karst rocky desertification ecosystem in southwestern Hunan will become more severe in the case of long-term non-governance.
引文
[1]盛茂银,熊康宁,崔高仰,等.贵州喀斯特石漠化地区植物多样性与土壤理化性质[J].生态学报,2015,35(2):434-448.
[2]LEGRAND H E.Hydrological and Ecological Problems of Karst Regions:Hydrological actions on limestone regions cause distinctive ecological problems[J].Sci.,1973,179(4076):859-864.
[3]李艳琼,邓湘雯,易昌晏,等.湘西南喀斯特地区灌丛生态系统植物和土壤养分特征[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(4):1015-1023.
[4]宋同清,彭晚霞,杜虎,等.中国西南喀斯特石漠化时空演变特征、发生机制与调控对策[J].生态学报,2014,34(18):5328-5341.
[5]ZHOU J P,HUANG Y,MO M H.Phylogenetic analysis on the soil bacteria distributed in karst forest[J].Brazilian Journal of Microbiology,2009,40(4):827-837.
[6]ZENG F,PENG W,SONG T,et al.Changes in vegetation after 22 years’natural restoration in the Karst disturbed area in northwestern Guangxi,China[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2007,27(12):5110-5119.
[7]董旭杰,彭继庆,曹福祥,等.湘中、湘南石漠化地区植物多样性研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2015,35(12):102-107.
[8]王世杰,李阳兵,李瑞玲.喀斯特石漠化的形成背景、演化与治理[J].第四纪研究,2003,23(6):657-666.
[9]喻理飞,朱守谦,叶镜中,等.退化喀斯特森林自然恢复过程中群落动态研究[J].林业科学,2002,38(1):1-7.
[10]王倩,艾应伟,裴娟,等.遂渝铁路边坡草本植物多样性季节动态和空间分布特征[J].生态学报,2010,30(24):6892-6900.
[11]魏辅文,聂永刚,苗海霞,等.生物多样性丧失机制研究进展[J].科学通报,2014,59(6):430-437.
[12]冯耀宗.物种多样性与人工生态系统稳定性探讨[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(6):853-857.
[13]喻理飞,朱守谦,叶镜中,等.退化喀斯特森林自然恢复评价研究[J].林业科学,2000,36(6):12-19.
[14]彭萱亦,吴金卓,栾兆平,等.中国典型森林生态系统生物多样性评价综述[J].森林工程,2013,29(6):4-10.
[15]吴昊.不同类型群落物种多样性指数的比较研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2015,35(5):84-89.
[16]魏忠平,刘阳,王婷,等.辽宁老秃顶子国家自然保护区典型森林群落生物多样性研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2016,36(4):68-72.
[17]景宜然,邓湘雯,邓东华,等.湘西南不同石漠化程度土壤理化性质及相关性分析[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(1):189-195.
[18]中华人民共和国国家林业局.LY/T 1840-2009喀斯特石漠化地区植被恢复技术规程[M].北京:中国标准出版社,2009.
[19]张晓龙,周继华,蔡文涛,等.水分梯度下黑河流域荒漠植物群落多样性特征[J].生态学报,2017,37(14):4627-4635.
[20]方精云,沈泽昊,唐志尧,等.“中国山地植物物种多样性调查计划”及若干技术规范[J].生物多样性,2004,12(1):5-9.
[21]马克平,黄建辉,于顺利,等.北京东灵山地区植物群落多样性的研究:Ⅱ丰富度、均匀度和物种多样性指数[J].生态学报,1995,18(3):268-277.
[22]R CORE TEAM.R:A language and environment for statistical computing.R Foundation for Statistical Computing,Vienna,Austria.URL https://www.R-project.org/,2017.
[23]陈圣宾.中国东部森林树种多样性和碳库的空间格局及其影响因素研究[D].北京:中国科学院大学,2011.
[24]刘怿宁.中国落叶阔叶林的群落结构和多样性[D].北京:北京大学,2012.
[25]吴克华,熊康宁,容丽,等.不同等级石漠化综合治理的植被恢复过程特征--以贵州省花江峡谷为例[J].地球与环境,2007,35(4):327-335.
[26]李阳兵,谢德体,魏朝富.岩溶生态系统土壤及表生植被某些特性变异与石漠化的相关性[J].土壤学报,2004,41(2):196-202.
[27]龙健,邓启琼,江新荣,等.贵州喀斯特石漠化地区土地利用方式对土壤质量恢复能力的影响[J].生态学报,2005,25(12):3188-3195.
[28]李晨,熊康宁,吴光梅,等.岩溶山区石漠化生态治理的植物多样性动态响应--以贵州省花江示范区顶坛小流域为例[J].热带地理,2012,32(5):487-492.
[2]LEGRAND H E.Hydrological and Ecological Problems of Karst Regions:Hydrological actions on limestone regions cause distinctive ecological problems[J].Sci.,1973,179(4076):859-864.
[3]李艳琼,邓湘雯,易昌晏,等.湘西南喀斯特地区灌丛生态系统植物和土壤养分特征[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(4):1015-1023.
[4]宋同清,彭晚霞,杜虎,等.中国西南喀斯特石漠化时空演变特征、发生机制与调控对策[J].生态学报,2014,34(18):5328-5341.
[5]ZHOU J P,HUANG Y,MO M H.Phylogenetic analysis on the soil bacteria distributed in karst forest[J].Brazilian Journal of Microbiology,2009,40(4):827-837.
[6]ZENG F,PENG W,SONG T,et al.Changes in vegetation after 22 years’natural restoration in the Karst disturbed area in northwestern Guangxi,China[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2007,27(12):5110-5119.
[7]董旭杰,彭继庆,曹福祥,等.湘中、湘南石漠化地区植物多样性研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2015,35(12):102-107.
[8]王世杰,李阳兵,李瑞玲.喀斯特石漠化的形成背景、演化与治理[J].第四纪研究,2003,23(6):657-666.
[9]喻理飞,朱守谦,叶镜中,等.退化喀斯特森林自然恢复过程中群落动态研究[J].林业科学,2002,38(1):1-7.
[10]王倩,艾应伟,裴娟,等.遂渝铁路边坡草本植物多样性季节动态和空间分布特征[J].生态学报,2010,30(24):6892-6900.
[11]魏辅文,聂永刚,苗海霞,等.生物多样性丧失机制研究进展[J].科学通报,2014,59(6):430-437.
[12]冯耀宗.物种多样性与人工生态系统稳定性探讨[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(6):853-857.
[13]喻理飞,朱守谦,叶镜中,等.退化喀斯特森林自然恢复评价研究[J].林业科学,2000,36(6):12-19.
[14]彭萱亦,吴金卓,栾兆平,等.中国典型森林生态系统生物多样性评价综述[J].森林工程,2013,29(6):4-10.
[15]吴昊.不同类型群落物种多样性指数的比较研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2015,35(5):84-89.
[16]魏忠平,刘阳,王婷,等.辽宁老秃顶子国家自然保护区典型森林群落生物多样性研究[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2016,36(4):68-72.
[17]景宜然,邓湘雯,邓东华,等.湘西南不同石漠化程度土壤理化性质及相关性分析[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(1):189-195.
[18]中华人民共和国国家林业局.LY/T 1840-2009喀斯特石漠化地区植被恢复技术规程[M].北京:中国标准出版社,2009.
[19]张晓龙,周继华,蔡文涛,等.水分梯度下黑河流域荒漠植物群落多样性特征[J].生态学报,2017,37(14):4627-4635.
[20]方精云,沈泽昊,唐志尧,等.“中国山地植物物种多样性调查计划”及若干技术规范[J].生物多样性,2004,12(1):5-9.
[21]马克平,黄建辉,于顺利,等.北京东灵山地区植物群落多样性的研究:Ⅱ丰富度、均匀度和物种多样性指数[J].生态学报,1995,18(3):268-277.
[22]R CORE TEAM.R:A language and environment for statistical computing.R Foundation for Statistical Computing,Vienna,Austria.URL https://www.R-project.org/,2017.
[23]陈圣宾.中国东部森林树种多样性和碳库的空间格局及其影响因素研究[D].北京:中国科学院大学,2011.
[24]刘怿宁.中国落叶阔叶林的群落结构和多样性[D].北京:北京大学,2012.
[25]吴克华,熊康宁,容丽,等.不同等级石漠化综合治理的植被恢复过程特征--以贵州省花江峡谷为例[J].地球与环境,2007,35(4):327-335.
[26]李阳兵,谢德体,魏朝富.岩溶生态系统土壤及表生植被某些特性变异与石漠化的相关性[J].土壤学报,2004,41(2):196-202.
[27]龙健,邓启琼,江新荣,等.贵州喀斯特石漠化地区土地利用方式对土壤质量恢复能力的影响[J].生态学报,2005,25(12):3188-3195.
[28]李晨,熊康宁,吴光梅,等.岩溶山区石漠化生态治理的植物多样性动态响应--以贵州省花江示范区顶坛小流域为例[J].热带地理,2012,32(5):487-492.