天然毛竹林节肢动物多样性和不同类型毛竹的比较
|
摘要
通过野外系统定位观察和室内生物测试,研究了湖南和四川两地天然毛竹林节肢动物的多样性,比较了不同类型毛竹(新竹、大年竹、小年竹)冠层节肢动物的组成与结构,分析了竹叶主要化学成分的时序变化规律及其对节肢动物的影响效应。主要研究结果如下:
1. 2009年4～11月,对湖南炎陵和四川长宁两地天然毛竹林节肢动物的野外调查共获得林冠层标本7 096号,林下层标本1 756号,其中湖南炎陵的主要害虫是竹卵圆蝽(Hippota dorsalis),四川长宁的是竹蚜(Oregma bambusicola)、竹刺瘿螨(Aculus bambusae)、小绿叶蝉(Empoasca sp.)和毛竹尖胸沫蝉(Aphrophora notabilis);两地的节肢动物均主要隶属于膜翅目、鞘翅目、双翅目、半翅目、蜘蛛目和同翅目。从林冠和林下层的节肢动物共有种看,湖南炎陵的共有种有147种,四川有84种;两地共有种都以鞘翅目、双翅目、膜翅目、蜘蛛目和同翅目为主,大多数共有种均为植食性,其次为捕食性。
2.对不同经营管理天然毛竹林节肢动物多样性的分析和比较表明:经营管理措施对节肢动物多样性具有显著影响,无论是保护性经营措施还是高强度纯林经营,均明显减少了节肢动物的科和物种数,在湖南炎陵主要表现为鞘翅目、双翅目、膜翅目和蜘蛛目的科和物种减少,在四川长宁则主要表现为半翅目、膜翅目、双翅目的科和物种减少;与此同时,各经营管理措施还明显减少了林冠和林下层的共有种数,降低了两个林层间的相互联系;在湖南炎陵主要表现为双翅目共有种的减少,在四川长宁则主要表现为膜翅目和鞘翅目共有种的减少;这些减少的物种大多数属于天敌或中性物种。总体上,保护性经营和高强度纯林经营措施均不同程度地增加了林冠层和降低了林下层节肢动物的多样性。
3. 2009年3～10月,在福建福州、三明和四川长宁的花年竹林内分别系统调查了新竹、大年竹和小年竹林冠节肢动物的多样性,测定了3种不同类型毛竹叶的主要化学成分。系统调查共获得节肢动物标本9 374号,隶属于3纲18目147科234种。小年竹的节肢动物优势种为竹刺瘿螨(Aculus bambusae)、南京裂爪螨(Shcizotetranychus nanjingensis)和竹裂爪螨(Schizotetranychus celarius),新竹为竹刺瘿螨和南京裂爪螨,大年竹为竹刺瘿螨;不同类型毛竹冠层的节肢动物均主要隶属于鞘翅目、膜翅目、蜘蛛目、同翅目和双翅目,均以植食性物种的丰富度最高,但其物种多样性和均匀度指数均较低。3种类型毛竹冠层的节肢动物共有种有72种,以蜘蛛目种类最多,膜翅目次之,但个体数上以植食性物种最多,其次为捕食性物种。3种类型毛竹冠层节肢动物特有种的个体数量均较小,大年竹的特有种以鞘翅目和同翅目为主;小年竹的以鞘翅目和膜翅目为主;新竹的则以鳞翅目、鞘翅目、双翅目和蜘蛛目为主,特有种各功能团的科、种、个体数和多样性指数均以植食性功能团最高。
4.对不同类型毛竹叶部节肢动物的时间格局的分析表明:花年竹林内各类毛竹冠层节肢动物多样性的时序变化可以大致分为2类,一类为小年竹和新竹,物种的个体数量和优势集中性指数均在5月份出现了一个明显的高峰,多样性指数和均匀度指数则在5月份出现一个明显的低谷,在6月和10月则较高;另一类为大年竹,其变化趋势与前两种类型毛竹正好相反。相关性分析表明:大、小年竹节肢动物丰富度分别与竹叶单宁含量和含水率呈显著正相关,小年竹植食性功能团的个体数量和竹刺瘿螨个体数量均与竹叶多糖含量呈显著正相关,新竹蠕须盾蚧个体数量与叶绿素含量呈显著负相关。
Through systematic field observation and indoor biological testing, we researched the arthropod diversity of natural bamboo forests (Phyllostachys heterocycla cv. Pubesens) in Hunan and Sichuan, compared the canopy arthropod composition and structure between different types of bamboo (new bamboo, on-year bamboo and off-year bamboo), and analyzed the main chemical components of bamboo leaves temporal variation and its effects on arthropods. The major findings are as follows:
1. From April to November 2009, through the wild experimentation and farmers field visits from Piken Village Yanling Hunan and Jiulong Village Sichuan Changning, the result shwed the field Positioning System survey obtained 7096 individuals arthropod specimens from the canopy, 1756 individuals from the lower layer, The major pests of Yanling Hunan is Hippota dorsalis, Sichuan Changning is Oregma bambusicola、Aculus bambusae、Empoasca sp. and Aphrophora notabilis; In this two places the arthropods are primarily belong to Hymenoptera, Coleoptera, Diptera, Hemiptera, Araneae and Homoptera etc.. From the common species of arthropods of canopy and lower layer to see, Yanling Hunan has total of 147 kinds of common species, 84 species in Sichuan, Most of them are in order Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Araneae and Homoptera in two places, most common species are herbivorous, followed by the predatory.
2. Analysis and comparison of arthropod diversity in bamboo forests under different management shows that: the measures on the arthropod diversity of bamboo forests had significant effects, the number of the families and the species of bamboo forest arthropod of both protective management measures and high-intensity pure forest management significantly reduced, Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, and spiders reduced significantly mainly in Yanling Hunan; while in Sichuan Changning the Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Diptera, the purpose of families and species reduced; and the total species of canopy and lower layer under the operation and management measures also significantly reduced, so does the two inter-linkages between forest layers reduce;in Hunan Yanling the mainly manifested common species of Diptera reduced ; while in Sichuan Changning the mainly manifested was in Hymenoptera and Coleoptera; The majority of the reduced species are natural enemies or neutral species . As a whole,Purpose of this study the protective management practices conducive to the improvement of production of bamboo, bamboo is also conducive to pest control and arthropod diversity conservation。
3.DuringMarch-October 2009, the diversity of arthropods on different types of bamboo in the on-off year are systematic investigated in Changning Sichuan, Fuzhou and Sanming Fujian, and the main chemical composition of three different types of bamboo leaves were measured. Systematic investigated got 9374 arthropod individuals in total, which belong to 3 classes, 18 orders, 147 families,234 species. The dominant species of off-year bamboo are Aculus bambusae, Shcizotetranychus nanjingensis and Schizotetranychus celarius; The dominant species are Aculus bambusae and Shcizotetranychus nanjingensis on new bamboo; The dominant species on on-year bamboo is Aculus bambusae. Canopy arthropods on different types of bamboo are mainly in Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, Araneae, Homoptera and Diptera. The richness of Herbivorous species is the highest, but both species diversity and evenness index are lower. The common arthropod species on canopy among three types of bamboo have a total of 72 species, the number of species up to Araneae, followed by Hymenoptera, but the number of individuals up to Phytophagous species, followed by Predatory species. The number of endemic species on three types of bamboo are small, on-year bamboo endemic are Coleoptera, and Homoptera based;Off-year bamboo are Coleoptera and Hymenoptera dominated; New bamboo are Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Diptera and Araneae based. Phytophagous functional groups have the highest number of families, species, individual numbers and diversity index of each functional group of the endemic species.
4. Analysis on time pattern of arthropod on different types of bamboo canopy in the on-off year bamboo showed that: Arthropod diversity in various bamboo layer timing changes can be divided into two categories, off-year bamboo and new bamboo, there was a clear peak of the number of individual species and the dominant concentration index in May, diversity index and evenness index in May marked the emergence of a low point, in June and in October was higher; another on-year bamboo, and it changes with the first two types of bamboo the opposite. Analysis on the correlation between Canopy arthropod diversity and the main insect pest populations with main chemical composition of different types of bamboo leaves showed that: Arthropod richness of on-year bamboo and off-year bamboo were significantly positive correlated with Tannin content and water content of the leaves,the individual number of Phytophagous functional groups and Aculus bambusae on off-year bamboo were significantly positive correlated with polysaccharide content, the individual number of Kuwanaspis vermiformis on new bamboo is significantly negative correlated with Chlorophyll content .
1. 2009年4～11月,对湖南炎陵和四川长宁两地天然毛竹林节肢动物的野外调查共获得林冠层标本7 096号,林下层标本1 756号,其中湖南炎陵的主要害虫是竹卵圆蝽(Hippota dorsalis),四川长宁的是竹蚜(Oregma bambusicola)、竹刺瘿螨(Aculus bambusae)、小绿叶蝉(Empoasca sp.)和毛竹尖胸沫蝉(Aphrophora notabilis);两地的节肢动物均主要隶属于膜翅目、鞘翅目、双翅目、半翅目、蜘蛛目和同翅目。从林冠和林下层的节肢动物共有种看,湖南炎陵的共有种有147种,四川有84种;两地共有种都以鞘翅目、双翅目、膜翅目、蜘蛛目和同翅目为主,大多数共有种均为植食性,其次为捕食性。
2.对不同经营管理天然毛竹林节肢动物多样性的分析和比较表明:经营管理措施对节肢动物多样性具有显著影响,无论是保护性经营措施还是高强度纯林经营,均明显减少了节肢动物的科和物种数,在湖南炎陵主要表现为鞘翅目、双翅目、膜翅目和蜘蛛目的科和物种减少,在四川长宁则主要表现为半翅目、膜翅目、双翅目的科和物种减少;与此同时,各经营管理措施还明显减少了林冠和林下层的共有种数,降低了两个林层间的相互联系;在湖南炎陵主要表现为双翅目共有种的减少,在四川长宁则主要表现为膜翅目和鞘翅目共有种的减少;这些减少的物种大多数属于天敌或中性物种。总体上,保护性经营和高强度纯林经营措施均不同程度地增加了林冠层和降低了林下层节肢动物的多样性。
3. 2009年3～10月,在福建福州、三明和四川长宁的花年竹林内分别系统调查了新竹、大年竹和小年竹林冠节肢动物的多样性,测定了3种不同类型毛竹叶的主要化学成分。系统调查共获得节肢动物标本9 374号,隶属于3纲18目147科234种。小年竹的节肢动物优势种为竹刺瘿螨(Aculus bambusae)、南京裂爪螨(Shcizotetranychus nanjingensis)和竹裂爪螨(Schizotetranychus celarius),新竹为竹刺瘿螨和南京裂爪螨,大年竹为竹刺瘿螨;不同类型毛竹冠层的节肢动物均主要隶属于鞘翅目、膜翅目、蜘蛛目、同翅目和双翅目,均以植食性物种的丰富度最高,但其物种多样性和均匀度指数均较低。3种类型毛竹冠层的节肢动物共有种有72种,以蜘蛛目种类最多,膜翅目次之,但个体数上以植食性物种最多,其次为捕食性物种。3种类型毛竹冠层节肢动物特有种的个体数量均较小,大年竹的特有种以鞘翅目和同翅目为主;小年竹的以鞘翅目和膜翅目为主;新竹的则以鳞翅目、鞘翅目、双翅目和蜘蛛目为主,特有种各功能团的科、种、个体数和多样性指数均以植食性功能团最高。
4.对不同类型毛竹叶部节肢动物的时间格局的分析表明:花年竹林内各类毛竹冠层节肢动物多样性的时序变化可以大致分为2类,一类为小年竹和新竹,物种的个体数量和优势集中性指数均在5月份出现了一个明显的高峰,多样性指数和均匀度指数则在5月份出现一个明显的低谷,在6月和10月则较高;另一类为大年竹,其变化趋势与前两种类型毛竹正好相反。相关性分析表明:大、小年竹节肢动物丰富度分别与竹叶单宁含量和含水率呈显著正相关,小年竹植食性功能团的个体数量和竹刺瘿螨个体数量均与竹叶多糖含量呈显著正相关,新竹蠕须盾蚧个体数量与叶绿素含量呈显著负相关。
Through systematic field observation and indoor biological testing, we researched the arthropod diversity of natural bamboo forests (Phyllostachys heterocycla cv. Pubesens) in Hunan and Sichuan, compared the canopy arthropod composition and structure between different types of bamboo (new bamboo, on-year bamboo and off-year bamboo), and analyzed the main chemical components of bamboo leaves temporal variation and its effects on arthropods. The major findings are as follows:
1. From April to November 2009, through the wild experimentation and farmers field visits from Piken Village Yanling Hunan and Jiulong Village Sichuan Changning, the result shwed the field Positioning System survey obtained 7096 individuals arthropod specimens from the canopy, 1756 individuals from the lower layer, The major pests of Yanling Hunan is Hippota dorsalis, Sichuan Changning is Oregma bambusicola、Aculus bambusae、Empoasca sp. and Aphrophora notabilis; In this two places the arthropods are primarily belong to Hymenoptera, Coleoptera, Diptera, Hemiptera, Araneae and Homoptera etc.. From the common species of arthropods of canopy and lower layer to see, Yanling Hunan has total of 147 kinds of common species, 84 species in Sichuan, Most of them are in order Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Araneae and Homoptera in two places, most common species are herbivorous, followed by the predatory.
2. Analysis and comparison of arthropod diversity in bamboo forests under different management shows that: the measures on the arthropod diversity of bamboo forests had significant effects, the number of the families and the species of bamboo forest arthropod of both protective management measures and high-intensity pure forest management significantly reduced, Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, and spiders reduced significantly mainly in Yanling Hunan; while in Sichuan Changning the Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Diptera, the purpose of families and species reduced; and the total species of canopy and lower layer under the operation and management measures also significantly reduced, so does the two inter-linkages between forest layers reduce;in Hunan Yanling the mainly manifested common species of Diptera reduced ; while in Sichuan Changning the mainly manifested was in Hymenoptera and Coleoptera; The majority of the reduced species are natural enemies or neutral species . As a whole,Purpose of this study the protective management practices conducive to the improvement of production of bamboo, bamboo is also conducive to pest control and arthropod diversity conservation。
3.DuringMarch-October 2009, the diversity of arthropods on different types of bamboo in the on-off year are systematic investigated in Changning Sichuan, Fuzhou and Sanming Fujian, and the main chemical composition of three different types of bamboo leaves were measured. Systematic investigated got 9374 arthropod individuals in total, which belong to 3 classes, 18 orders, 147 families,234 species. The dominant species of off-year bamboo are Aculus bambusae, Shcizotetranychus nanjingensis and Schizotetranychus celarius; The dominant species are Aculus bambusae and Shcizotetranychus nanjingensis on new bamboo; The dominant species on on-year bamboo is Aculus bambusae. Canopy arthropods on different types of bamboo are mainly in Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, Araneae, Homoptera and Diptera. The richness of Herbivorous species is the highest, but both species diversity and evenness index are lower. The common arthropod species on canopy among three types of bamboo have a total of 72 species, the number of species up to Araneae, followed by Hymenoptera, but the number of individuals up to Phytophagous species, followed by Predatory species. The number of endemic species on three types of bamboo are small, on-year bamboo endemic are Coleoptera, and Homoptera based;Off-year bamboo are Coleoptera and Hymenoptera dominated; New bamboo are Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Diptera and Araneae based. Phytophagous functional groups have the highest number of families, species, individual numbers and diversity index of each functional group of the endemic species.
4. Analysis on time pattern of arthropod on different types of bamboo canopy in the on-off year bamboo showed that: Arthropod diversity in various bamboo layer timing changes can be divided into two categories, off-year bamboo and new bamboo, there was a clear peak of the number of individual species and the dominant concentration index in May, diversity index and evenness index in May marked the emergence of a low point, in June and in October was higher; another on-year bamboo, and it changes with the first two types of bamboo the opposite. Analysis on the correlation between Canopy arthropod diversity and the main insect pest populations with main chemical composition of different types of bamboo leaves showed that: Arthropod richness of on-year bamboo and off-year bamboo were significantly positive correlated with Tannin content and water content of the leaves,the individual number of Phytophagous functional groups and Aculus bambusae on off-year bamboo were significantly positive correlated with polysaccharide content, the individual number of Kuwanaspis vermiformis on new bamboo is significantly negative correlated with Chlorophyll content .
引文
[1]江泽慧主编.世界竹藤[M].辽宁科学技术出版社,2002.
[2]丁岩钦.昆虫数学生态学[M].北京:科学出版社,1994:22-134.
[3]丁岩钦.论害虫种群的生态控制[J].生态学报,1993,13(2):99-105.
[4]尤民生,王海川,杨广.农业害虫的持续控制[J].福建农业大学学报,1999,28(4):434-44.
[5]庞雄飞.动物种群生态学的进展[J].生态学杂志,1992,11(1):9-14.
[6]庞雄飞,梁广文.害虫种群系统的控制[M].广州:广东科技出版社,1995:15-30.
[7]庞雄吃,尤民生.昆虫群落生态学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1996:77-103.
[8]赵良平,叶建仁,曹国江,等.森林健康理论与病虫害可持续控制—对美国林业考察的思考[J].南京林业大学学报,2002,26(1):5-9.
[9]赵杰,王瑞红.有害生物综合管理理论的发展及其展望[J].中国森林病虫,2003,22(4):33-34.
[10]马喜英,王昶远.森林病虫害可持续控灾与治理对策[J].辽宁林业科技,2003(3):36.
[11]陆元昌.森林健康状态监测技术体系综述[J].世界林业研究,2003,16(1):22-24.
[12]陈建寅,胡正坚,杨国荣,等.竹林害虫综合防治中营林技术作用研究[J].竹子研究汇刊,1992,11(4):72-77.
[13]陈建寅,杨国荣,胡正坚,等.竹林主要害虫发生类型初步研究[J].竹子研究汇刊,1992,11(4):52-60.
[14]周淑芷.生物多样性保护与森林病虫害综合管理[J].世界林业研究,1996(2):18-22.
[15]郭玉杰,王念英,赵军华,等.四种生类型稻区节肪动物的甚本组成-结构特征分析[J].生态学报.1995,15(4):4333-4441.
[16]郭玉杰,王念英,赵军华,等.不同稻田节肢动物群落中捕食者与猎物的种类和数量特征[J].生物防治通报,1994,10(4):157-161.
[17]郭玉杰,王念英,赵军华,等.中性昆虫在稻田节肢动物群落中作为捕食者营养桥梁作用[J].昆虫学报,1995,15(4):4333-4441.
[18]吴进才,陆自强,杨金生,等.稻田主要捕食性天敌的栖境生态位与捕食作用分析[J].昆虫学报,1993,36(3):323-31.
[19]吴进才,陆自强.稻田节肢动物群落营养结构的初步研究[J].农业科学集刊,1993 (1):234-238.
[20]吴进才,胡国文.稻田中性昆虫对群落食物网的调控作用[J].生态学报,1994,14(4):381-386.
[21]张古忍,张文庆,古德祥.稻田主要节肢类捕食者天敌群落的多样性[J].中山大学学报论丛,1995(2):27-32.
[22]徐建样,吴进才,程遐年,等.两种杀虫剂对稻田捕食性天敌集团捕食功能的影响[J].生态学报,2000,20(1):145-149.
[23]郝树广,张孝羲,程遐年,等.群落营养层及优势功能集团的组成与多样性动态[J].昆虫学报,1998,41(4):343-353.
[24]万方浩,陈常铭.综防区和化防区稻田害虫-天敌群落组成及多样性的研究[J].生态学报,1986,6(2):159-170.
[25]万方浩,刘万学,郭建英.不同类型棉田棉铃虫天敌功能团的组成及时空动态[J].生态学报,2002,22(6):935-942.
[26]师光禄,刘贤谦,王满,等.枣树昆虫群落结构及其综合治理效果研究[J].林业科学,1998,34(4):58-63.
[27]师光禄,曹挥,戈峰,等.不同枣园生态系统中昆虫群落及其多样性[J].林业科学,2002,38(3):94-101.
[28]师光禄,曹挥,席银宝,等.枣园节肢动物群落优势功能集团的空间时序动态及其相关性[J].林业科学,2003,39(4):78-83.
[29]徐天森.大小年毛竹林与竹类害虫发生关系的探讨[J].森林病虫通讯,1982(1):14-17.
[30]刘怀.毛竹竹冠节肢动物群落及竹裂爪螨、竹盲走螨生物学生态学研究[D].西南农业大学博士毕业论文.2001:1-3.
[31]张飞萍,蔡秋锦,钟景辉,等.竹缺爪螨实验种群生命表的研究[J].林业科学,2001,37(3):101-105.
[32]刘怀.赵志棋.竹裂爪螨实验种群生命表研究[J].西南农业大学学报,1999,21(6):556-560.
[33]张飞萍,蔡秋锦,钟景辉,等.毛竹叶螨及其天敌捕食螨生态位的研究[J].林业科学,2001,37(2):56-61.
[34]丁岩钦.论害虫种群的生态控制[J].生态学报,1993,17(2):99-106.
[35]戈峰.害虫生态调控的原理与方法[J].生态学杂志,1998,17(2):38-42.
[36] Vereijken,P. From integrated control to integrated farming.Agric[J].Ecosystem Environment,1986,26:17-38.
[37] Whitten,W.J. Pest management in 2000:What we night learn from the twentieth century.In :S .A .Kadirand H.S .Barlow eds.Pest management and the environment in 2000[J].London:International Wallingford,1993:9-44.
[38] Pimental, D. Low-input sustainable agriculture using ecological management practices, Agric [J]. Ecosystem Environment, 1989,27:3 -24.
[39]唐启义,冯明光.实用统计分析及其DPS数据处理系统[M].北京:科学出版社,2002.
[40]尤民生,王海川,杨广.农业害虫的持续控制[J].福建农业大学学报,1999,28(4):434-444.
[41]张真,吴东亮,王淑芬.马尾松林昆虫群落动态及稳定性研究[J].林业科学,1998,34(1):65-71.
[42]张真,王淑芬,吴东亮,等.马尾松林食叶类群昆虫多样性及相互关系[J].昆虫知识,2005,42(1):36-40.
[43] Kimmins JP..Biodiversity and its relationship to ecosystem health and integrity[J]. Forestry Chronicle, 1997,73(2): 229-232.
[44]董文霞,张钟宁,李生才.不同棉田昆虫群落的比较研究[J].昆虫知识,2001,38(2):112-116.
[45]楼一平,盛炜彤,萧江华.我国毛竹林长期立地生产力研究问题的评述[J].林业科学研究,1999,12(2):172-178.
[46]楼一平,吴良如,李瑞成,等.竹木混交林改为毛竹纯林经营后的林分生长动态[J].林业科学研究,1997,10(1):35-41.
[47]师光禄,曹挥,戈峰,等.不同枣园生态系统中昆虫群落及其多样性[J].林业科学,2002,38(3):94-101.
[48]万方浩,陈常铭.综防区与化防区稻田害虫天敌群落组成及多样性研究[J].生态学报, 1986,6(2):159-170.
[49]张飞萍,陈清林,侯有明,尤民生.毛竹林冠层与林下层节肢动物类群的关系[J]生态学报,2005,25(10):2623-2628.
[50]张飞萍,陈清林,施友文,等.毛竹林林下植被、竹叶化学成分与节肢动物群落的关系[J].林业科学,2006,42(8):50-56.
[51]张飞萍,陈清林,吴庆锥,等.毛竹林节肢动物群落的组成与结构[J].生态学报,2005,25(9):2272-2283.
[52]张飞萍,陈清林,尤民生,等.毛竹林经营干扰、林下植物与冠层螨类之间的关系[J].林业科学,2004,40(5):143-150.
[53]张飞萍,侯有明,尤民生.不同管理措施对毛竹林节肢动物群落结构和组成的影响[J].昆虫学报,2005,48(6):928-934.
[54]张飞萍,侯有明,尤民生.管理措施对毛竹林节肢动物群落害虫与天敌相互作用的影响[J].林业科学,2007,43(10):90-94.
[55]张飞萍,尤民生.不同林分类型毛竹林节肢动物群落的多样性与稳定性[J].昆虫学报,2007,50(1):31-37.
[56]张飞萍,尤民生.林丹烟剂对毛竹林冠与林下层节肢动物共有种及其多样性的影响[J].应用与环境生物学报,2007,13(4):501-506.
[57]张飞萍,张思禄,尤民生.林丹烟剂干扰下毛竹林节肢动物群落的结构与组成[J].生态学报,2007,27(3):1026-1034.
[58]赵志模,刘映红,张昌伦.重庆市郊不同种植制度菜地昆虫群落结构研究[J].植物保护学报, 1994,2(1):39-45.
[59]铁俊德.昆虫与植物的关系[M].北京:科学出版社,1987.
[60]钦俊德,王琛柱.昆虫与植物的关系[J].昆虫学报,2001,44(3):360-365.
[61]汤德良,王琛柱,罗林儿,等[J].昆虫与植物的关系.中国科学,2000,30(5):5ll-5l6.
[62]王琛柱,钦俊德.论昆虫与植物相互作用与进化的关系[J].昆虫学报,2001,44(3):360-364.
[63]王琛柱,钦俊德.昆虫与植物相互作用的研究进展[J].世界农业,1998.
[64]钦俊德.昆虫与植物关系的研究进展[J].动物学报,1995,41(1):12-20.
[65] Coley, PD. Herbivory and defensive characteristics of tree species in a lowland tropical forest[J]. Ecological Monographs 1983, 53(2): 209-233.
[66] Lowman MD. Temporal and spatial variability in sect grazing of the canopies of five Australian rainforest tree species[J]. Australian J. of Ecology, 1987,10: 7-24.
[67]孙谷畴.亚热带季风常绿阔叶林和次生林植物虫食的研究[J].广西植物,1990,10(3):256-260.
[68]郑征.西双版纳热带季节雨林林窗内幼树叶生长与虫食动态[J].植物生态学报,2001,25(6):679-686.
[69]于晓东.辽东栎叶片取食形状多样性及其变化模式[J].植物生态学报,2001,25(5):553-560.
[70]蔡志权,曹坤芳.热带森林植物幼叶抗虫食防卫方式研究的现状及进展[J].广西植物,2002,22(5):474-480.
[71] Kursar TA & PD Coley. Convergence in defense syndromes of young leaves in tropical rainforests [J]. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology, 2003, 31: 929-949.
[72] Coley, PD & JA, Barone. Herbivory and plant defenses in tropical forests [J]. nnu.Rev.Ecol.Syst, 1996, 27:305-35.
[73]李继东,毕会涛,冯建灿,等.毛白杨无性系有机物质含量和酶活性与抗性关系研究[J].河南科学,2006,24(4):517-520.
[74]李淑玲,刘美青,李继东,等.毛白杨无性系树皮有机物质含量与抗性关系的研究[J].河南农业大学学报,2001,35(5):216-220.
[75]张潮巨.毛竹受害后化学物质含量的变化及其对刚竹毒蛾种群参数的影响[J].华东昆虫学报,2006,15(4):281-283.
[76]张飞萍,邓秀明,陈清林,等.毛竹尖胸沫蝉危害对毛竹枝叶黄酮和单宁含量的影响[J].竹子研究汇刊,2003,22(1):43-46.
[77]黄炜东.两色绿刺蛾为害对毛竹营养物质的影响[J].竹子研究汇刊,2006,25(4):24-27.
[78]薛皎亮,谢映平,刘计权,等.鞘蛾危害后诱导华北落叶松体内化学物质变化的研究[J],林业科学,2000,36(4):46-50.
[79]吴兴德.栗瘿蜂危害下锥栗叶片中单宁含量的变化[J].福建林学院学报,2005,25(4):365-367.
[80]杨勇,陈顺立,吴晖,等.栗瘿蜂危害下锥栗叶片中黄酮含量的变化[J].福建林学院学报,2005,25(2):125-127.
[81] Theis N & M Lerdau. The evolution of function in plant secondary metabolites[J]. International Journal of Plant Science, 2003,164: S93-S102.
[82] Iwasa Y et al. Optimal level of chemical defense decreasing with leaf age[J]. Theoretical Population Biology, 1996, 50:124-148.
[83] Stamp N. Out of the quagmire of plant defense hypotheses [J]. Quarterly Review of Biology, 2003,78: 23-55.
[84] Aide TM. Dry season leaf production: an escape from herbivory [J]. Biotropica, 1992, 24: 532-537.
[85] Aide TM. Patterns of leaf development and herbivory in a tropical understory community [J]. Ecology, 1993, 74: 455-466.
[86]张志达,刘红,李世东,等.中国竹林培育[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1998.
[87]郑郁善,洪伟.毛竹经营学[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社.1998.
[88]陈嵘.竹的种类及栽培利用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1982.
[89]陈兴福.毛竹培育与利用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1996.
[90]温太辉.竹类经营[M].北京:农业出版社,1965.
[91]宛志泸,方升佐.立地条件与毛竹生长发育关系的研究[J].竹类研究,1990.
[92]朱建华,陈顺立,张再福.森林病虫害预测预报[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2002.
[93]张飞萍,陈清林,陈顺立,等.毛竹主要食叶害虫研究进展[J].竹子研究汇刊.2002,21(3):55-60.
[94]中国科学院动物研究所,浙江农业大学.天敌昆虫图册[M].科学出版社,1978.
[95]周尧.昆虫图集[M].河南:科学技术出版社,2001.
[96]孟庆华,陈汉彬.中国蚊虫分类系统和检索表[M].北京:科学出版社,1986.
[97]萧采瑜.中国蝽类昆虫鉴定手册(半翅目异亚目)第一册[M].北京:科学出版社,1977.
[98]萧采瑜.中国蝽类昆虫鉴定手册(半翅目异亚目)第二册[M].北京:科学出版社,1981.
[99]中科院动物所.浙江农业大学.天敌昆虫图册[M].北京:科学出版社,1978.
[100] Grcssit,J.L,Kimoto.中国叶甲科检索表(华立中译)[M].广东:广东省佛山地区林业局印,1981.
[101]赵修复.中国姬蜂分类纲要[M].北京:科学出版社,1976.
[102]赵修复.寄生蜂分类纲要[M].北京:科学出版社1987.
[103]范滋德.中国常见蝇类检索表[M].北京:科学出版杜,1965.
[104]钟觉民.昆虫分类图谱[M].南京:江苏科技出版杜,1985.
[105]张执中.森林昆虫学(第二版)[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1991.
[106]南开大学.中山大学等.昆虫学(上册)[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1980.
[107]湖北省农业科学院植保所.水稻害虫及其天敌图册[M].武汉:湖北人民出版社,1978.
[108]胡金林.中国农业蜘蛛[M].天津:天津科技出版社,1983.
[109]邓国藩主编.中国农业昆虫(上册)[M].北京:农业出版社,1986.
[110]邓国藩主编.中国农业昆虫(下册)[M].北京:农业出版社,1987.
[111]王福钧,严国光.农业仪器分析法[M].北京:农业出版社,1982.
[112]黄京华.丛生竹黄酮类化合物的分析研究及其在分类上的应用[J].竹子研究汇刊,1993,12(1):18-27.
[113]韩富根,刘学芝,焦桂珍.用福林法测定烟叶中总酚含量的探讨[J].河南农业大学学报,1993,27(1):95-98.
[114]北京医学院.中草药成分化学[M].上海:上海科技出版社,1983.
[115]中科学院上海药物所.中草药有效成分提取与分离[M].上海:上海科技出版社,1983.
[116]阚毓铭.中药化学实验操作技术[M].北京:中国医药科技出版社,1988.
[2]丁岩钦.昆虫数学生态学[M].北京:科学出版社,1994:22-134.
[3]丁岩钦.论害虫种群的生态控制[J].生态学报,1993,13(2):99-105.
[4]尤民生,王海川,杨广.农业害虫的持续控制[J].福建农业大学学报,1999,28(4):434-44.
[5]庞雄飞.动物种群生态学的进展[J].生态学杂志,1992,11(1):9-14.
[6]庞雄飞,梁广文.害虫种群系统的控制[M].广州:广东科技出版社,1995:15-30.
[7]庞雄吃,尤民生.昆虫群落生态学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1996:77-103.
[8]赵良平,叶建仁,曹国江,等.森林健康理论与病虫害可持续控制—对美国林业考察的思考[J].南京林业大学学报,2002,26(1):5-9.
[9]赵杰,王瑞红.有害生物综合管理理论的发展及其展望[J].中国森林病虫,2003,22(4):33-34.
[10]马喜英,王昶远.森林病虫害可持续控灾与治理对策[J].辽宁林业科技,2003(3):36.
[11]陆元昌.森林健康状态监测技术体系综述[J].世界林业研究,2003,16(1):22-24.
[12]陈建寅,胡正坚,杨国荣,等.竹林害虫综合防治中营林技术作用研究[J].竹子研究汇刊,1992,11(4):72-77.
[13]陈建寅,杨国荣,胡正坚,等.竹林主要害虫发生类型初步研究[J].竹子研究汇刊,1992,11(4):52-60.
[14]周淑芷.生物多样性保护与森林病虫害综合管理[J].世界林业研究,1996(2):18-22.
[15]郭玉杰,王念英,赵军华,等.四种生类型稻区节肪动物的甚本组成-结构特征分析[J].生态学报.1995,15(4):4333-4441.
[16]郭玉杰,王念英,赵军华,等.不同稻田节肢动物群落中捕食者与猎物的种类和数量特征[J].生物防治通报,1994,10(4):157-161.
[17]郭玉杰,王念英,赵军华,等.中性昆虫在稻田节肢动物群落中作为捕食者营养桥梁作用[J].昆虫学报,1995,15(4):4333-4441.
[18]吴进才,陆自强,杨金生,等.稻田主要捕食性天敌的栖境生态位与捕食作用分析[J].昆虫学报,1993,36(3):323-31.
[19]吴进才,陆自强.稻田节肢动物群落营养结构的初步研究[J].农业科学集刊,1993 (1):234-238.
[20]吴进才,胡国文.稻田中性昆虫对群落食物网的调控作用[J].生态学报,1994,14(4):381-386.
[21]张古忍,张文庆,古德祥.稻田主要节肢类捕食者天敌群落的多样性[J].中山大学学报论丛,1995(2):27-32.
[22]徐建样,吴进才,程遐年,等.两种杀虫剂对稻田捕食性天敌集团捕食功能的影响[J].生态学报,2000,20(1):145-149.
[23]郝树广,张孝羲,程遐年,等.群落营养层及优势功能集团的组成与多样性动态[J].昆虫学报,1998,41(4):343-353.
[24]万方浩,陈常铭.综防区和化防区稻田害虫-天敌群落组成及多样性的研究[J].生态学报,1986,6(2):159-170.
[25]万方浩,刘万学,郭建英.不同类型棉田棉铃虫天敌功能团的组成及时空动态[J].生态学报,2002,22(6):935-942.
[26]师光禄,刘贤谦,王满,等.枣树昆虫群落结构及其综合治理效果研究[J].林业科学,1998,34(4):58-63.
[27]师光禄,曹挥,戈峰,等.不同枣园生态系统中昆虫群落及其多样性[J].林业科学,2002,38(3):94-101.
[28]师光禄,曹挥,席银宝,等.枣园节肢动物群落优势功能集团的空间时序动态及其相关性[J].林业科学,2003,39(4):78-83.
[29]徐天森.大小年毛竹林与竹类害虫发生关系的探讨[J].森林病虫通讯,1982(1):14-17.
[30]刘怀.毛竹竹冠节肢动物群落及竹裂爪螨、竹盲走螨生物学生态学研究[D].西南农业大学博士毕业论文.2001:1-3.
[31]张飞萍,蔡秋锦,钟景辉,等.竹缺爪螨实验种群生命表的研究[J].林业科学,2001,37(3):101-105.
[32]刘怀.赵志棋.竹裂爪螨实验种群生命表研究[J].西南农业大学学报,1999,21(6):556-560.
[33]张飞萍,蔡秋锦,钟景辉,等.毛竹叶螨及其天敌捕食螨生态位的研究[J].林业科学,2001,37(2):56-61.
[34]丁岩钦.论害虫种群的生态控制[J].生态学报,1993,17(2):99-106.
[35]戈峰.害虫生态调控的原理与方法[J].生态学杂志,1998,17(2):38-42.
[36] Vereijken,P. From integrated control to integrated farming.Agric[J].Ecosystem Environment,1986,26:17-38.
[37] Whitten,W.J. Pest management in 2000:What we night learn from the twentieth century.In :S .A .Kadirand H.S .Barlow eds.Pest management and the environment in 2000[J].London:International Wallingford,1993:9-44.
[38] Pimental, D. Low-input sustainable agriculture using ecological management practices, Agric [J]. Ecosystem Environment, 1989,27:3 -24.
[39]唐启义,冯明光.实用统计分析及其DPS数据处理系统[M].北京:科学出版社,2002.
[40]尤民生,王海川,杨广.农业害虫的持续控制[J].福建农业大学学报,1999,28(4):434-444.
[41]张真,吴东亮,王淑芬.马尾松林昆虫群落动态及稳定性研究[J].林业科学,1998,34(1):65-71.
[42]张真,王淑芬,吴东亮,等.马尾松林食叶类群昆虫多样性及相互关系[J].昆虫知识,2005,42(1):36-40.
[43] Kimmins JP..Biodiversity and its relationship to ecosystem health and integrity[J]. Forestry Chronicle, 1997,73(2): 229-232.
[44]董文霞,张钟宁,李生才.不同棉田昆虫群落的比较研究[J].昆虫知识,2001,38(2):112-116.
[45]楼一平,盛炜彤,萧江华.我国毛竹林长期立地生产力研究问题的评述[J].林业科学研究,1999,12(2):172-178.
[46]楼一平,吴良如,李瑞成,等.竹木混交林改为毛竹纯林经营后的林分生长动态[J].林业科学研究,1997,10(1):35-41.
[47]师光禄,曹挥,戈峰,等.不同枣园生态系统中昆虫群落及其多样性[J].林业科学,2002,38(3):94-101.
[48]万方浩,陈常铭.综防区与化防区稻田害虫天敌群落组成及多样性研究[J].生态学报, 1986,6(2):159-170.
[49]张飞萍,陈清林,侯有明,尤民生.毛竹林冠层与林下层节肢动物类群的关系[J]生态学报,2005,25(10):2623-2628.
[50]张飞萍,陈清林,施友文,等.毛竹林林下植被、竹叶化学成分与节肢动物群落的关系[J].林业科学,2006,42(8):50-56.
[51]张飞萍,陈清林,吴庆锥,等.毛竹林节肢动物群落的组成与结构[J].生态学报,2005,25(9):2272-2283.
[52]张飞萍,陈清林,尤民生,等.毛竹林经营干扰、林下植物与冠层螨类之间的关系[J].林业科学,2004,40(5):143-150.
[53]张飞萍,侯有明,尤民生.不同管理措施对毛竹林节肢动物群落结构和组成的影响[J].昆虫学报,2005,48(6):928-934.
[54]张飞萍,侯有明,尤民生.管理措施对毛竹林节肢动物群落害虫与天敌相互作用的影响[J].林业科学,2007,43(10):90-94.
[55]张飞萍,尤民生.不同林分类型毛竹林节肢动物群落的多样性与稳定性[J].昆虫学报,2007,50(1):31-37.
[56]张飞萍,尤民生.林丹烟剂对毛竹林冠与林下层节肢动物共有种及其多样性的影响[J].应用与环境生物学报,2007,13(4):501-506.
[57]张飞萍,张思禄,尤民生.林丹烟剂干扰下毛竹林节肢动物群落的结构与组成[J].生态学报,2007,27(3):1026-1034.
[58]赵志模,刘映红,张昌伦.重庆市郊不同种植制度菜地昆虫群落结构研究[J].植物保护学报, 1994,2(1):39-45.
[59]铁俊德.昆虫与植物的关系[M].北京:科学出版社,1987.
[60]钦俊德,王琛柱.昆虫与植物的关系[J].昆虫学报,2001,44(3):360-365.
[61]汤德良,王琛柱,罗林儿,等[J].昆虫与植物的关系.中国科学,2000,30(5):5ll-5l6.
[62]王琛柱,钦俊德.论昆虫与植物相互作用与进化的关系[J].昆虫学报,2001,44(3):360-364.
[63]王琛柱,钦俊德.昆虫与植物相互作用的研究进展[J].世界农业,1998.
[64]钦俊德.昆虫与植物关系的研究进展[J].动物学报,1995,41(1):12-20.
[65] Coley, PD. Herbivory and defensive characteristics of tree species in a lowland tropical forest[J]. Ecological Monographs 1983, 53(2): 209-233.
[66] Lowman MD. Temporal and spatial variability in sect grazing of the canopies of five Australian rainforest tree species[J]. Australian J. of Ecology, 1987,10: 7-24.
[67]孙谷畴.亚热带季风常绿阔叶林和次生林植物虫食的研究[J].广西植物,1990,10(3):256-260.
[68]郑征.西双版纳热带季节雨林林窗内幼树叶生长与虫食动态[J].植物生态学报,2001,25(6):679-686.
[69]于晓东.辽东栎叶片取食形状多样性及其变化模式[J].植物生态学报,2001,25(5):553-560.
[70]蔡志权,曹坤芳.热带森林植物幼叶抗虫食防卫方式研究的现状及进展[J].广西植物,2002,22(5):474-480.
[71] Kursar TA & PD Coley. Convergence in defense syndromes of young leaves in tropical rainforests [J]. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology, 2003, 31: 929-949.
[72] Coley, PD & JA, Barone. Herbivory and plant defenses in tropical forests [J]. nnu.Rev.Ecol.Syst, 1996, 27:305-35.
[73]李继东,毕会涛,冯建灿,等.毛白杨无性系有机物质含量和酶活性与抗性关系研究[J].河南科学,2006,24(4):517-520.
[74]李淑玲,刘美青,李继东,等.毛白杨无性系树皮有机物质含量与抗性关系的研究[J].河南农业大学学报,2001,35(5):216-220.
[75]张潮巨.毛竹受害后化学物质含量的变化及其对刚竹毒蛾种群参数的影响[J].华东昆虫学报,2006,15(4):281-283.
[76]张飞萍,邓秀明,陈清林,等.毛竹尖胸沫蝉危害对毛竹枝叶黄酮和单宁含量的影响[J].竹子研究汇刊,2003,22(1):43-46.
[77]黄炜东.两色绿刺蛾为害对毛竹营养物质的影响[J].竹子研究汇刊,2006,25(4):24-27.
[78]薛皎亮,谢映平,刘计权,等.鞘蛾危害后诱导华北落叶松体内化学物质变化的研究[J],林业科学,2000,36(4):46-50.
[79]吴兴德.栗瘿蜂危害下锥栗叶片中单宁含量的变化[J].福建林学院学报,2005,25(4):365-367.
[80]杨勇,陈顺立,吴晖,等.栗瘿蜂危害下锥栗叶片中黄酮含量的变化[J].福建林学院学报,2005,25(2):125-127.
[81] Theis N & M Lerdau. The evolution of function in plant secondary metabolites[J]. International Journal of Plant Science, 2003,164: S93-S102.
[82] Iwasa Y et al. Optimal level of chemical defense decreasing with leaf age[J]. Theoretical Population Biology, 1996, 50:124-148.
[83] Stamp N. Out of the quagmire of plant defense hypotheses [J]. Quarterly Review of Biology, 2003,78: 23-55.
[84] Aide TM. Dry season leaf production: an escape from herbivory [J]. Biotropica, 1992, 24: 532-537.
[85] Aide TM. Patterns of leaf development and herbivory in a tropical understory community [J]. Ecology, 1993, 74: 455-466.
[86]张志达,刘红,李世东,等.中国竹林培育[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1998.
[87]郑郁善,洪伟.毛竹经营学[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社.1998.
[88]陈嵘.竹的种类及栽培利用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1982.
[89]陈兴福.毛竹培育与利用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1996.
[90]温太辉.竹类经营[M].北京:农业出版社,1965.
[91]宛志泸,方升佐.立地条件与毛竹生长发育关系的研究[J].竹类研究,1990.
[92]朱建华,陈顺立,张再福.森林病虫害预测预报[M].厦门:厦门大学出版社,2002.
[93]张飞萍,陈清林,陈顺立,等.毛竹主要食叶害虫研究进展[J].竹子研究汇刊.2002,21(3):55-60.
[94]中国科学院动物研究所,浙江农业大学.天敌昆虫图册[M].科学出版社,1978.
[95]周尧.昆虫图集[M].河南:科学技术出版社,2001.
[96]孟庆华,陈汉彬.中国蚊虫分类系统和检索表[M].北京:科学出版社,1986.
[97]萧采瑜.中国蝽类昆虫鉴定手册(半翅目异亚目)第一册[M].北京:科学出版社,1977.
[98]萧采瑜.中国蝽类昆虫鉴定手册(半翅目异亚目)第二册[M].北京:科学出版社,1981.
[99]中科院动物所.浙江农业大学.天敌昆虫图册[M].北京:科学出版社,1978.
[100] Grcssit,J.L,Kimoto.中国叶甲科检索表(华立中译)[M].广东:广东省佛山地区林业局印,1981.
[101]赵修复.中国姬蜂分类纲要[M].北京:科学出版社,1976.
[102]赵修复.寄生蜂分类纲要[M].北京:科学出版社1987.
[103]范滋德.中国常见蝇类检索表[M].北京:科学出版杜,1965.
[104]钟觉民.昆虫分类图谱[M].南京:江苏科技出版杜,1985.
[105]张执中.森林昆虫学(第二版)[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1991.
[106]南开大学.中山大学等.昆虫学(上册)[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1980.
[107]湖北省农业科学院植保所.水稻害虫及其天敌图册[M].武汉:湖北人民出版社,1978.
[108]胡金林.中国农业蜘蛛[M].天津:天津科技出版社,1983.
[109]邓国藩主编.中国农业昆虫(上册)[M].北京:农业出版社,1986.
[110]邓国藩主编.中国农业昆虫(下册)[M].北京:农业出版社,1987.
[111]王福钧,严国光.农业仪器分析法[M].北京:农业出版社,1982.
[112]黄京华.丛生竹黄酮类化合物的分析研究及其在分类上的应用[J].竹子研究汇刊,1993,12(1):18-27.
[113]韩富根,刘学芝,焦桂珍.用福林法测定烟叶中总酚含量的探讨[J].河南农业大学学报,1993,27(1):95-98.
[114]北京医学院.中草药成分化学[M].上海:上海科技出版社,1983.
[115]中科学院上海药物所.中草药有效成分提取与分离[M].上海:上海科技出版社,1983.
[116]阚毓铭.中药化学实验操作技术[M].北京:中国医药科技出版社,1988.