北京低山风景区残次林评价与改造研究
|
摘要
本研究以森林生态学、系统科学和景观规划为理论基础,以风景区残次林样地调查为基础数据,区分四种风景区残次林群落类型,对北京低山风景区残次林群落结构特征和植被进行了分析,同时构建风景区残次林判断指标,采用正态分析及等距分组法确定评价指标标准,利用层次分析法确定指标权重,根据调查数据对北京风景区残次常绿+落叶林、风景区残次落叶灌丛或小乔木林、风景区残次落叶阔叶林和风景区残次常绿林四种残次林类型进行残次等级判定。最后对四种风景区残次林群落类型进行改造研究,并且以鹫峰森林公园沐容亭周边风景区残次林为例,判断其残次等级,提出具体的改造设计规划,为北京低山的风景区残次林改造建设提供依据。本论文主要研究结论如下：
(1)区分四种风景区残次林群落类型,对风景区残次常绿+落叶林、风景区残次落叶灌丛或小乔木林、风景区残次落叶阔叶林和残次常绿型风景林进行结构特征分析。
(2)对风景区残次林进行植被分析,得出如下结论：四种风景区残次林类型的多样性指数、均匀度指数、丰富综合度指数比较表现为：多样性指数的变化基本一致,均匀度指数表现为风景区残次落叶阔叶林最大,风景区残次常绿+落叶林最小,风景区残次灌丛或小乔木林和残次常绿型风景林几乎是相等的。T-Jsw表现为风景区残次灌丛或小乔木林>风景区残次落叶阔叶林>残次常绿型风景林>风景区残次常绿+落叶林；丰富综合度指数T-Jsw和T-Jgi两种指数在四种类型风景区残次林的比较上有差异,但都表现为最小值为风景区残次常绿+落叶林。
(3)提出风景区残次林的概念,解释说明其内涵。构建了北京低山风景区残次林评价指标体系。
(4)得到风景区残次林等级评价指标层各指标权重的总排序,有AP=(0.13750.1125 0.0374 0.0202 0.0354 0.0171 0.0165 0.0191 0.0168 0.0202 0.02210.0156 0.0295 0.0494 0.047 0.0635 0.0901 0.0999 0.0874 0.06627)
对样地评价,统计结果表明,样地风景区二级残次林最多,比例为35%,风景区非残次林和风景区一级残次林的样地少,分别占7%和8%,三次风景区残次林样地的占27.5%。
经过评价风景区残次常绿+落叶阔叶林,属于风景区一级残次林；风景区残次落叶阔叶林,属于风景区二级残次林。风景区残次落叶灌丛或小乔木林,属于风景区一级残次林；风景区残次常绿林,属于风景区二级残次林；总体风景区残次林,属于风景区一级残次林。
(5)从风景区残次林的改造的原则和目标入手,根据立地条件、群落特征、游憩功能、视觉景观质量这四个目标为出发点,合理选择树种。提出残次常绿型风景林、风景区残次落叶阔叶林、风景区残次常绿+落叶阔叶型林和残次灌丛或小乔型风景林不同改造方式,且具体细分为远景设计、近景设计和观景平台周边设计三个层次。
提出风景区残次林营建技术措施,从苗木的选择、苗木的规格要求、树种调剂、替代、改造的技术措施和改造施工的要点都做了详细的说明。
(6)以沐容亭风景区残次林改造为例,判断沐容亭风景区残次林残次等级,依据残次等级进行分区改造规划设计,为风景区残次林改造提供理论和现实依据。
Based on theories of forest ecology and systemic science and planning of landscape forest, and according to the consisting of basic scenic spot relict aesthetic forest plots investigation data, community structure of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest and vegetation characteristics was analyzed, as same time the index of compatibility of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was constructed. Normal analysis and isometric group method were used for determining evaluation index. AHP was used for determining index weight. According to survey data, The grade of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was determined to four vegetation communities of evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest and scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest. Finally, modification technology of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was studied, and the transformation planning was proposed, and taking the MuRrong pavilion of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest for example. There were some research conclusions:
(1) Structural characteristics of four vegetation communities was analyzed about evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest and scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest.
(2) The total number of species manifested as the scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest> the evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest. Seedlings of each types tree, based on analysis of species important value in shrub layer, was rare, do not both play important position, Seedlings tree of Ulmus macrocarpa and Locust were found in the shrub layer of the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest, which important value was over 2%. Constructive species, which success toward to climax community, the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest in low mountain of Beijing, was deficient. Diversity index, evenness index and richness index were compared about four types of the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest. Changes were almost consistent about diversity index. Evenness index of scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest was the maximum, and evenness index of evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest was the minimum. All kinds of index were almost equivalent about the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest and the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest. T-JSW was represented that the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest>the evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest, richness index of T-JSW and T-Jgi was different, the evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest was both the minimum on richness index of T-Jsw and T-Jgi.
(3) Concept and content of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was explained. Evaluation index system of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, which included target layer, rule layer and index level, was initially built by collecting information and data in low mountain of Beijing.
(4) The general ranking of index weight about evaluation layer on the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was AP= (0.1375 0.1125 0.0374 0.0202 0.0354 0.0171 0.0165 0.0191 0.0168 0.0202 0.0221 0.0156 0.0295 0.0494 0.047 0.0635 0.0901 0.0999 0.0874 0.06627)
According to the Statistics, the second scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was the most, make up 35% of total, the Non- scenic spot relict aesthetic forest and the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest were the minimum, make up 7% and 8%, the third scenic spot relict aesthetic forest make up 27.5% of total plot.
The evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest was the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest was the second scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest was the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest was the second scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest.
(5) Starting with principles and objectives of the transformation of the scenic spot relict aesthetic, and based on site condition, community characteristics, recreational function and vision of landscape quality, Species was reasonable choice, four transformation of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest were proposed, which were consist of four levels about design of prospect, design of close-range and design of sightseeing platform peripheral Areas.
Technical measure of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was proposed, specification requirements of seedling, dispensing seedling, modification measures and transformation construction points were all detailed explained.
(6) The transformation planning was proposed about MuRrong pavilion of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, which offering the realistic basis for transformation of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest.
(1)区分四种风景区残次林群落类型,对风景区残次常绿+落叶林、风景区残次落叶灌丛或小乔木林、风景区残次落叶阔叶林和残次常绿型风景林进行结构特征分析。
(2)对风景区残次林进行植被分析,得出如下结论：四种风景区残次林类型的多样性指数、均匀度指数、丰富综合度指数比较表现为：多样性指数的变化基本一致,均匀度指数表现为风景区残次落叶阔叶林最大,风景区残次常绿+落叶林最小,风景区残次灌丛或小乔木林和残次常绿型风景林几乎是相等的。T-Jsw表现为风景区残次灌丛或小乔木林>风景区残次落叶阔叶林>残次常绿型风景林>风景区残次常绿+落叶林；丰富综合度指数T-Jsw和T-Jgi两种指数在四种类型风景区残次林的比较上有差异,但都表现为最小值为风景区残次常绿+落叶林。
(3)提出风景区残次林的概念,解释说明其内涵。构建了北京低山风景区残次林评价指标体系。
(4)得到风景区残次林等级评价指标层各指标权重的总排序,有AP=(0.13750.1125 0.0374 0.0202 0.0354 0.0171 0.0165 0.0191 0.0168 0.0202 0.02210.0156 0.0295 0.0494 0.047 0.0635 0.0901 0.0999 0.0874 0.06627)
对样地评价,统计结果表明,样地风景区二级残次林最多,比例为35%,风景区非残次林和风景区一级残次林的样地少,分别占7%和8%,三次风景区残次林样地的占27.5%。
经过评价风景区残次常绿+落叶阔叶林,属于风景区一级残次林；风景区残次落叶阔叶林,属于风景区二级残次林。风景区残次落叶灌丛或小乔木林,属于风景区一级残次林；风景区残次常绿林,属于风景区二级残次林；总体风景区残次林,属于风景区一级残次林。
(5)从风景区残次林的改造的原则和目标入手,根据立地条件、群落特征、游憩功能、视觉景观质量这四个目标为出发点,合理选择树种。提出残次常绿型风景林、风景区残次落叶阔叶林、风景区残次常绿+落叶阔叶型林和残次灌丛或小乔型风景林不同改造方式,且具体细分为远景设计、近景设计和观景平台周边设计三个层次。
提出风景区残次林营建技术措施,从苗木的选择、苗木的规格要求、树种调剂、替代、改造的技术措施和改造施工的要点都做了详细的说明。
(6)以沐容亭风景区残次林改造为例,判断沐容亭风景区残次林残次等级,依据残次等级进行分区改造规划设计,为风景区残次林改造提供理论和现实依据。
Based on theories of forest ecology and systemic science and planning of landscape forest, and according to the consisting of basic scenic spot relict aesthetic forest plots investigation data, community structure of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest and vegetation characteristics was analyzed, as same time the index of compatibility of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was constructed. Normal analysis and isometric group method were used for determining evaluation index. AHP was used for determining index weight. According to survey data, The grade of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was determined to four vegetation communities of evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest and scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest. Finally, modification technology of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was studied, and the transformation planning was proposed, and taking the MuRrong pavilion of scenic spot relict aesthetic forest for example. There were some research conclusions:
(1) Structural characteristics of four vegetation communities was analyzed about evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest, scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest and scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest.
(2) The total number of species manifested as the scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest> the evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest. Seedlings of each types tree, based on analysis of species important value in shrub layer, was rare, do not both play important position, Seedlings tree of Ulmus macrocarpa and Locust were found in the shrub layer of the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest, which important value was over 2%. Constructive species, which success toward to climax community, the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest in low mountain of Beijing, was deficient. Diversity index, evenness index and richness index were compared about four types of the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest. Changes were almost consistent about diversity index. Evenness index of scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest was the maximum, and evenness index of evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest was the minimum. All kinds of index were almost equivalent about the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest and the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest. T-JSW was represented that the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest>the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest>the evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest, richness index of T-JSW and T-Jgi was different, the evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest was both the minimum on richness index of T-Jsw and T-Jgi.
(3) Concept and content of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was explained. Evaluation index system of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, which included target layer, rule layer and index level, was initially built by collecting information and data in low mountain of Beijing.
(4) The general ranking of index weight about evaluation layer on the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was AP= (0.1375 0.1125 0.0374 0.0202 0.0354 0.0171 0.0165 0.0191 0.0168 0.0202 0.0221 0.0156 0.0295 0.0494 0.047 0.0635 0.0901 0.0999 0.0874 0.06627)
According to the Statistics, the second scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was the most, make up 35% of total, the Non- scenic spot relict aesthetic forest and the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest were the minimum, make up 7% and 8%, the third scenic spot relict aesthetic forest make up 27.5% of total plot.
The evergreen and deciduous aesthetic forest was the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict deciduous aesthetic forest was the second scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict shrub and small tree aesthetic forest was the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict evergreen aesthetic forest was the second scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was the first order scenic spot relict aesthetic forest.
(5) Starting with principles and objectives of the transformation of the scenic spot relict aesthetic, and based on site condition, community characteristics, recreational function and vision of landscape quality, Species was reasonable choice, four transformation of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest were proposed, which were consist of four levels about design of prospect, design of close-range and design of sightseeing platform peripheral Areas.
Technical measure of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest was proposed, specification requirements of seedling, dispensing seedling, modification measures and transformation construction points were all detailed explained.
(6) The transformation planning was proposed about MuRrong pavilion of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest, which offering the realistic basis for transformation of the scenic spot relict aesthetic forest.
引文
1. 北京师范大学生物系.北京植物志：第1卷[M].北京：北京出版社,1984：281-282.
2. 北京师范大学生物系.北京植物志：第2卷[M].北京：北京出版社,1984：794-795.
3. 蔡锡安,彭少麟,赵平,等.三种乡土树种在二种林分改造模式下的生理生态比较[J].生态学杂志,2005,24(3)：243-250.
4. 常宗强.祁连山水源涵养林枯枝落叶层水文生态功能[J].西北林学院学报,2001,16
5. 陈北光,苏志尧.广东八宝山常绿阔叶林物种多样性分析[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版),1995,16(4)：32-36.
6. 陈北光,张木明,苏志尧,等.广东大东山常绿阔叶林物种多样性分析[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版),1997,18(4)：59-63.
7. 陈俊愉,刘师汉.园林花卉[M].上海：上海科学技术出版社,1980.
8. 陈守万,杨冬生.关于水土保持残次林改造的技术要点[J],四川林业科技,1991,12(3)：28-32
9. 但新球.森林景观资源美学价值评价指标体系的研究[J].中南林业调查规划,1995,13(3)：44-48.
10.邓辅唐,吕小玲,邓辅商.高速公路边坡生态恢复研究进展[J].中国水土保持,2005,11：48-50.
11.董清福,洪丽娟,唐建军,等.高速公路建设对路域生态系统中生物的影响及生物廊道设计的意义[J].科技通报2007,23(2)：289-293.
12.范世香,蒋德明,阿拉木萨,等.论森林在水源涵养中的作用[J].辽宁林业科技,2001(5)：22-24.
13.甘静.北京山区森林健康评价[D].北京林业大学博士学位论文,2007.
14.古炎坤.从森林生态学观点浅谈广东营造马尾松林及其林分改造问题[J].广东林业科技,1995,11(3)：125-134
15.郭小平.晋西黄土区主要造林树种幼树适生性研究[J].河北林果研究,1998,13(4)45-49
16.国家林业局.低效林改造技术规程[J].国家林业局发布,2007,10月1日实施.
17.何明月.低效、残次防护林的近自然林经营技术[J].林业调查规划,2008,33(3)：84-88.
18.胡建民,左长清,谢颂华.水土保持生态修复效益监测探讨[J].中国水利,2005：48-50.
19.胡正昌.次生林经营[J],中国林业出版社,1981,14(6)：67-72.
20.姜汉侨,段昌群,杨树华.植物生态学(第一版)[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2004.
21.江凌,吕光辉,汪溪远,等.城市化进程中的绿洲生态系统稳定性评价探讨[J].干旱区资源与环境,2006,20(2)：78-82.
22.亢新刚.森林资源经营管理[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2001.
23.兰林江.德兴市改造天然残次林恢复常绿阔叶林经验[J].江西林业科技,1991,4)：21-23.
24.蓝肖,黄大勇,曹艳云,等.人工促进马尾松林天然更新技术[J].广西林业科学,2003,32(4)：188-190.
25.李春阳,周晓峰.帽儿山森林景观质量评价[J].东北林业大学学报(自然科学版),1991(6)：91-95.
26.李翠环,余树全,周国模.亚热带常绿阔叶林植被恢复研究进展[J].浙江林学院学报,2002,19(3)：325-329.
27.李金荣,刘刚.风景林景观效果的量化评价及提高风景等级的措施[J].东北林业大学学报,2006,34(4)：90-92.
28.李景文.森林生态学[M].北京：中国林业出版社,1994.
29.李庆旭,刘光瑗,邵麟惠.层析分析法在高速公路生态环境影响评价中的应用[J].冰川冻土2007,29(4)：653-658.
30.李铁民,杨静.低价值林分改造的理论与实践[J].山西林业科技,1999(4)：124-126.
31.李铁民.太行山低质残次林判定标准[J].山西林业科技.2000(3).
32.李文松.三明市梅列区北山生态风景林综合评价及其营建技术研究[D].福建农林大学硕士学位论文,2007.
33.李晓秀.北京山生态环境质量评价体系初探[J].自然资源,1997(5)：31-34.
34.李意德.海南岛尖峰岭热带山地雨林的群落结构特征[J].热带亚热带植物学报,1997,5(1)：18-26.
35.林中大,莫东亮.深圳市龙岗区生态公益林改造设计及效果初探[J].广东林业科技,2003,19(3)：41-44.
36.刘昌明.嘉陵江流域低山区的残次林调查研究[J].四川林业科技,1993,14(2)：65-70.
37.刘东兰.美国国有林生态系统经营[J].世界林业研究,1999,(3)：47-54.
38.刘惠明,林伟强,张璐.景观动态研究概述[J].广东林业科技,2004,20(1)：67-70.
39.刘惠明,杨燕琼,罗富,等.广州市帽峰山森林公园森林景观多样性分析[J].生态科学,2003,22(1)：30-33.
40.刘明昌.嘉陵江流域低山区的残次林调查研究[J].四川林业科技,1993,14(2)：65-70.
41.刘玉莲,殷学波.樱花品种园艺学性状的综合评价[J].江苏农学院学报,1996.17：39-43.
42.刘泽东,梅加才,单和卫.江阴要塞森林公园林相改造技术研究初报江苏林业科技,26(3)：40-41.
43.路端正.北京植物新资料[J].北京农学院学报,2002,17(3)：19-21
44.陆兆苏.南京市钟山风景区森林经理的实践和研究[J].华东森林经理,1991,(1)：1-6.
45.陆兆苏,余国宝,张治强,等.紫金山风景林的动态及其经营对策[J].南京林学院学报(自然科学版),1985(3)：11-13.
46.陆兆苏,赵德海,赵仁,等.南京市钟山风景区森林经理的实践和研究[J].华东森林经理,1991,5(1)：1-6.
47.陆兆苏,赵德海,赵仁涛,等.南京市钟山风景区森林经理的实践和研究[J].华东森林经理,1991,(1)：12-17.
48.陆兆苏.按照风景林的特点建设森林公园[J].华东森林经理,1994,8(2)：12-17.
49.罗晓华.国内低效林研究综述[J].四川林业科技,2004,25(2)：31-34.
50.罗跃初,韩单恒,王宏昌,等.辽西半干旱区几种人工林生态系统涵养水源功能研究[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(6)：91 9-922.
51.吕勇,汪新良,饶兴旺,等.低价低效次生林改造技术的研究[J].林业资源管理,2000(6)：30-36.
52.马雪华,杨茂端,胡星粥.亚热带杉木马尾松人工林水文功能的研究[J].林业科学.1993,29(3)：199-206.
53.马雪华.森林水文学[M]北京：中国林业出版社,1993.
54.毛德华,夏军,黄友波.西北地区生态修复的若十基木问题探讨[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(1)：15-28.
55.穆彬,谢阳,江楠,等.道路生态影响评价方法研究：以兰海高速公路为例[J].环境科学2007,28(12)：2889-2895.
56.倪淑萍,施德法.普陀山风景区森林景观研究[J].华东森林经理,1999,10(1)：58-63.
57.欧阳君祥.低质低效冷杉林的分类与评价[J].中南林学院学报(自然科学版),2003,23(1)：6-8.
58.潘树林,王丽,辜彬.论边坡的生态恢复[J].生态学杂志,2005,(2)：217-221.
59.潘庭华.石林县低质低效林改造探讨[J].内蒙古林业调查设计,2008,31(2)：65-67.
60.彭少麟,申卫军,戴智明,等.马占相思人工林温湿效应的时空动态[J].热带植物学报,2001,9(4)：277-283.
61.蒲勇平.长江流域生态修复工程的意义及对策[J].水土保持通报,2002,22(5)：9-11.
62.秦华.旺苍县鼓城山森林公园景观评价[J].西南农业大学学报(自然科学版),1993,(15)6：527-530.
63.青阳县,严文忠.国外低效林成因与改造[J].安徽林业,2006,(2)：31.
64.饶良懿,朱金兆.防护林空间配置研究进展[J].中国水土保持科学,2005,3(2)：102-106.
65.任宪威,施光孚,高武.松山自然保护区考察专集[M].哈尔滨：东北林业大学出版社,1990.
66.茹正忠,冯选记,高伯慰,等.山地风景林不同树种的造林效果分析[J].林业科技通讯,2001,(10)：7-9.
67.石春娜,王立群.我国森林资源质量评价体系研究进展[J].世界林业研究,2007,20(2)：68-73.
68.宋力,何兴元,徐文铎,等.城市森林景观美景度的测定[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(6)：621-624.
69.苏树权.黄旗山林相改造设计[Z].广东省林业调查规划院,2007.
70.苏雪痕.植物造景[M].北京：中国林业出版社,1998.
71.苏志尧,陈北光,古炎坤.粤西八宝山森林群落的组成和结构特征[J].广西植物,1995,15(2)：124-130.
72.粟娟,蓝盛芳.评估森林综合效益的新方法能值分析法[J].世界林业研究,2000,13(1)：32-37.
73.孙凡,袁红叶,李天云,等.重庆雪宝山自然保护区AHP生态评价[J].西南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2006,28(4)：569-572.
74.孙立达,朱金兆.水土保持林体系综合效益研究与评价[M].北京中国科学技术出版社,1997,26-28.
75.孙晓光.彩叶植物在保定市园林绿地中的应用[J].河北林业科技,2010,(3)：25-26.
76.田执民,论残次林的形成原因及其改造方向[J].经济技术协作信息,2008,(11)：84.
77.万志洲,李晓储,徐海兵,等.南京中山陵风景区常绿阔叶树种引进及风景林林相改造技术的研究[J].江苏林业科技,2001,28(5)：22-27.
78.王伯荪,彭少麟.鼎湖山森林群落分析及群落演替的线性系统与预测[J].中山大学学报：自然科学版,1985(4)：75-80.
79.王超,翟明普,金莹杉.国内外风景林研究现状及趋势[J].林业调查规划,2006,31(5)：48-52.
80.王超,翟明普,马润国.基于空间结构单元的风景林抚育间伐研究.林业调查规划,2006,31(6)：6-11.
81.王光贵,徐高福,徐高翔.千岛湖生态风景林建设的调查研究[J].江苏林业科技,2002,29(1)：55-57.
82.王海迪,唐德瑞.小流域防护林对位配置优化模式研究[J].内蒙古林学院学报,1999,3(1)1-10.
83.王菁黎,罗菊春.风景林植物群落质量的综合评价[J].福建林学院学报(自然科学版),2004,24(4)：379-384.
84.王礼先,解明曙.山地防护林水土保持水文生态效益及其信息系统[M].北京：中国林业出版社,1998：1-19.
85.王世忠.辽宁西部地区油松低价水土保持林早期诊断技术[J].东北林业大学学报(自然科学版).2002,30(2)：13-17.
86.王贤荣.早樱种系的分类及其观赏价值[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2000.24(6)：44-46.
87.王晓俊.关于风景评价中心理物理学方法局限性的探讨[J].自然资源学报,1996,11(2)：170-176.
88.王雁,陈鑫峰.心理物理学方法在国外森林景观评价中的应用.林业科学,1999.35(5)：110-11.49.
89.王玉霞.大青沟自然保护区生态评价[J].内蒙古农业大学学报(自然科学版),2005,26(3)：50-53.
90.翁友恒.厦门市生态风景林建设与评价[J].华东森林经理,2001,15(1)：52-54.50.
91.吴承照,曹霞.景观资源量化评价的主要方法及比较[J].旅游科学,2005,19(1)：32-39.
92.吴克选.低效林人工改造技术浅议[J].江西林业科技,2002,(2)：21-23.
93.吴南生,翟明普,杜天真,等.北京市风景游憩林主要建设类型及其植物配置模式研究[J].生态经济.2003,(3)：62-65.
94.吴南生.北京西山风景游憩林抚育理论与技术研究[D].北京林业大学博士学位论文,2007.
95.吴钦孝,赵鸿雁,刘向东,等.森林枯枝落叶层涵养水源保持水土的作用评价[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报,1998,4(2)：23-27.
96.吴征镒.中国种子植物属的分布区类型[J].云南植物研究,1991,(增刊Ⅳ)：1-39.
97.肖笃宁,李晓文.试论景观规划的目标、任务和基本原则[J].生态学杂志,998,(3)：46-52.
98.肖水清.天然阔叶树残次林改造技术的初步研究[J].江西林业科技,1998,(6)：7-8.
99.邢伟,程丽秋.加强森林抚育、低效林改造是恢复森林生态系统的有效途径[J].林业科技情报,2007,39(3)：6-8.
100.邢振宇,陈树敏.赤峰市土壤[M].内蒙古：内蒙古人民出版社,1990：202-211.
101.徐宪立,耿红,张科利,等.西部地区高速公路发展规划生态环境影响评价——指标体系构建及评价方法探讨[J].公路交通科技,2006,23(7)：154-158.
102.徐兴友,张风娟,孟宪东,等.老岭自然保护区观赏植物资源[J].河北科技师范学院学报(自然科学版),2006,20(4)：9-13.
103.薛建辉,任青山,阮宏华.森林生态学[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2006：127,130,133.
104.杨加志,苏志尧,陈北光,等.大屏障森林公园次生常绿阔叶林的结构特征[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2005,26(1)：89-92.
105.杨加志,苏志尧,许月明.东莞大屏障森林公园的现状植被及林分改造对策分析[J].生态科学,2004,23(2)：144-146.
106.杨学云.浅议我国人工林的近自然林经营[J].中南林业调查规划,2005,24(4)：7-9.
107.杨祯禄,胡庭兴,李贤伟.马尾松材积生长量及经济效益的预测[J]四川农业大学学报(自然科学版),1993,(03)：31-34.
108.叶亚平,刘鲁君.中国省域生态环境质量评价指标体系研究[J].环境科学研究,2000(3)：33-36.
109.余济云,曾思齐,李志辉,等.湘东丘陵区马尾松低质低效次生林改造经营模式研究[J],湖南林业科技,2002,29(1)：6-9.
110.于景利.残次林迹地更新树种的研究[J].辽宁林业科技,997,(3)：23-25.
111.于汝元,马风新.多效风景林[J].中国林业,2000,(5).
112.苑国城,苑洪涛,王秀枝.残次林模拟自然林改造[J].中国林业,2006,(2)：33-34.
113.云南省林业厅,关于加快推进低效林改造工作的意见[J].云南林业,2009,30(2)：32-33.
114.张宏达,王伯荪,张超常,等.广东高要鼎湖山植物群落之研究[J].中山大学学报：自然科学版,1955(3)：1 59-226.
115.张健.三江流域残次林类型划分及制定标准研究[M].科学出版社,1993.
116.张建国,余建辉.生态林业的效益观-林业综合效益初步[J].林业经济问题,1991(3)：1-8.
117.章俊华.规划设计学中的调查分析法-AHP法[[J].中国园林,2003,(4)：37-40.
118.张璐,林伟强,陈北光,等.广州帽峰山次生林群落结构特征[J].华南农业大学学报：自然科学 版,2003,24(3)：53-56.
119.张明庆,杜育林,任阳.北京什刹海地区的物候季节[J].首都师范大学学报(自然科学版),2007.28(3)：78-80.
120.张荣,翟明普,等.国内外风景游憩林抚育研究进展.北京林业大学学报.2004(2)：109-113.
121.张涛.低效(质)林改造的方法与效果分析[J].林业勘察设计,2004,3：30.
122.张晓萍.问卷调查法在森林公园景观评价及旅游管理中的应用台湾农业探索.2006(1)38-40.
123.张银龙,俞元春,张金池.天然林保护依据的探讨[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),1999,(2)：57-61.
124.赵德海.风景林美学评价方法的研究[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),1990,14(4)：50-55.
125.赵惠勋,周晓峰,王义泓,等.森林质量评价标准和评价指标[J].东北林业大学学报(自然科学版),2000,9(5)：58-61.
126.赵其国,骆永明.开展我国东南沿海经济快速发展地区资源与环境质量问题研究建议.土壤,2000(4)：169-187.
127.郑佳丽,胡建忠.北川河流域中国沙棘的分布、组成与群落学特征[J].水土保持研究,2007,(5)：59-63.
128.中国科学院《中国自然地理》编辑委员会.中国自然地理.植物地理(上册)[M].北京：科学出版社,1983
129.中国科学院植物研究所.中国高等植物图鉴(1-5)册[M].北京：科学出版社,1994.
130.中国科学院植物研究所.中国高等植物图鉴(补编)：第1卷[M].北京：科学出版社,1982：444-445.
131.中国科学院中国植物志编辑委员会.中国植物志[M].北京：科学出版社,1986.
132.钟全林,周华盛.森林景观质量评价理论、内容与方法[J].华东森林经理,2000,14(4)：37-39.
133.周海彦.印刷设计实用美术配色色谱[M].广东：深圳海天出版社,1997.
134.周立江.残次林评判与改造途径的探讨[J].四川林业科技,2004,25(1)：16-21.
135.朱丽晖,李冬,邢宝振.辽东山区天然次生林枯落物层的水文生态功能[J].辽宁林业科技,2001(1)：36-38.
136. Ainslie W B.Rapid wetland functional assessment.its role and utility in the regulatory arena. Water. Air &Soil Pollution,1994,3-4:237-248.
137. Armando A.Apan.Trop ical landscape characterization and analysis for forest rehabilitation p lanning using satellite data and GIS [J].Landscape and U rban Planning,1996,34(1):45-54.
138. Brinson M M Developing an approach for assessing the functions of wetlands. In: Mitsch(ed).Global wetlands:old word and new. Elsevier, Amsterdam,1995.
139. Dutta R K,Agrawal M.Restoration of opencast coal mine spoil by planting exotic tree species:a case study in dry tropical region [J].Ecological Engineering 2003,21:143-151.
140. Edgardo O.Adema, Daniel E.Buschiazzo, Francisco J.Babinec.Mechanical contof shrubs in a semiarid region of Argentina and its effect on soil water contand grassland productivity Agricultural Water Management,2004,68(2):185-194.
141. Fielder C E,Keegan C E,Wichman D P,et al.Product and economic implications of ecological restoration [J].Forest Products Journal 1999,49(2):19-24.
142. Grant C D,Campbell C J,Charnock N R.Selection of species suitable for descenic spot relict mine site rehabilitation in New South Wales,Australia [J].Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 2002, 139:215-235.
143. Heather P.Griscom, P.M.S.A shton, Graeme P.Berlyn.Seedling survival and growth of native tree species in pastures:Implications for dry tropical forest rehabilitation in central Panama [J].Forest Ecology and Management,2005,218(123):306-318.
144. Hodacova D,Prach K.Spoil heaps from brown coalmining:Technical reclamation versus spontaneous revegetation [J].Restoration Ecology 2003,11:385-391.
145. Khater C,Martin A,Maillet J.Spontaneous vegetation dynamics and restoration prospects for limestone quarries in Lebanon [J].Applied Vegetation Science 2003,6:199-204.
146. Larson, L.S.andD.B.mazzarese.Rapid assessment of wetlands:history and application to management.In. WJ.Mitch, Ed. Global Wetlands. Elsevier Sci.Pub.1994.625-636.
147. Li Xiaoping,Zhang Liquan,Zhang Zheng.Soil bioengineering and the ecological restoration of riverbanks at the Airport Town,Shanghai,China [J].Eclological Engineering,2006,26:304-314.
148. Noble P S.Root distribution and seasonal production in the northwestern Sonar Desert for a C3 shrub,a CQ bunch grass and a CAM leaf succulent.American Jour Crop of Botany,1997,84:94-99.
149. Olander L P,Scatena F N,Silver W L.Impacts of disturbance initiated by road construction in a subtropical cloud forest in the Luquillo Experimental Forest,Puerto Rico [J].Forest Ecology and Management,1998,109:33-49.
150. Pastorok R A.,MacDonald A,Sampson J R,et al.An ecological decision framework for environmental restoration projects [J].Ecological Engineering 1997,(9):89-107.
151. Pielou E C.An introduction to mathematical ecology [M].New York:John W iley&Sons,1969:128.
152. Rentch J S,Fortney R H,Stephenson S L,et al.Vegetation-site relationships of roadside plant communities in West Virginia,USA [J] Journal of Applied Ecology 2005,42:129-138.
153. Salter P J.Goode J E.Crop responses to water at different stage of growth.EnglaCommonwealth Agricultural Bureaux,1967.
154. Schamberger,M.L,Short,C,Farmer,A.Evaluating Wetlands as Wildlife abitat,Wetland Function and Simms P H,Yanful E K.Some insights into the performance of an experimental soil cover near London,Ontario [J].Canadian Geotechnical Journal,1999,36:846-860.
155. Values; The State of Our Understanding, P.E.Greeson, J.R.Clark,and J.E,Clark eds Minneapolis, Minn.:American Water Resources Association,1979,74-83.
2. 北京师范大学生物系.北京植物志：第2卷[M].北京：北京出版社,1984：794-795.
3. 蔡锡安,彭少麟,赵平,等.三种乡土树种在二种林分改造模式下的生理生态比较[J].生态学杂志,2005,24(3)：243-250.
4. 常宗强.祁连山水源涵养林枯枝落叶层水文生态功能[J].西北林学院学报,2001,16
5. 陈北光,苏志尧.广东八宝山常绿阔叶林物种多样性分析[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版),1995,16(4)：32-36.
6. 陈北光,张木明,苏志尧,等.广东大东山常绿阔叶林物种多样性分析[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版),1997,18(4)：59-63.
7. 陈俊愉,刘师汉.园林花卉[M].上海：上海科学技术出版社,1980.
8. 陈守万,杨冬生.关于水土保持残次林改造的技术要点[J],四川林业科技,1991,12(3)：28-32
9. 但新球.森林景观资源美学价值评价指标体系的研究[J].中南林业调查规划,1995,13(3)：44-48.
10.邓辅唐,吕小玲,邓辅商.高速公路边坡生态恢复研究进展[J].中国水土保持,2005,11：48-50.
11.董清福,洪丽娟,唐建军,等.高速公路建设对路域生态系统中生物的影响及生物廊道设计的意义[J].科技通报2007,23(2)：289-293.
12.范世香,蒋德明,阿拉木萨,等.论森林在水源涵养中的作用[J].辽宁林业科技,2001(5)：22-24.
13.甘静.北京山区森林健康评价[D].北京林业大学博士学位论文,2007.
14.古炎坤.从森林生态学观点浅谈广东营造马尾松林及其林分改造问题[J].广东林业科技,1995,11(3)：125-134
15.郭小平.晋西黄土区主要造林树种幼树适生性研究[J].河北林果研究,1998,13(4)45-49
16.国家林业局.低效林改造技术规程[J].国家林业局发布,2007,10月1日实施.
17.何明月.低效、残次防护林的近自然林经营技术[J].林业调查规划,2008,33(3)：84-88.
18.胡建民,左长清,谢颂华.水土保持生态修复效益监测探讨[J].中国水利,2005：48-50.
19.胡正昌.次生林经营[J],中国林业出版社,1981,14(6)：67-72.
20.姜汉侨,段昌群,杨树华.植物生态学(第一版)[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2004.
21.江凌,吕光辉,汪溪远,等.城市化进程中的绿洲生态系统稳定性评价探讨[J].干旱区资源与环境,2006,20(2)：78-82.
22.亢新刚.森林资源经营管理[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2001.
23.兰林江.德兴市改造天然残次林恢复常绿阔叶林经验[J].江西林业科技,1991,4)：21-23.
24.蓝肖,黄大勇,曹艳云,等.人工促进马尾松林天然更新技术[J].广西林业科学,2003,32(4)：188-190.
25.李春阳,周晓峰.帽儿山森林景观质量评价[J].东北林业大学学报(自然科学版),1991(6)：91-95.
26.李翠环,余树全,周国模.亚热带常绿阔叶林植被恢复研究进展[J].浙江林学院学报,2002,19(3)：325-329.
27.李金荣,刘刚.风景林景观效果的量化评价及提高风景等级的措施[J].东北林业大学学报,2006,34(4)：90-92.
28.李景文.森林生态学[M].北京：中国林业出版社,1994.
29.李庆旭,刘光瑗,邵麟惠.层析分析法在高速公路生态环境影响评价中的应用[J].冰川冻土2007,29(4)：653-658.
30.李铁民,杨静.低价值林分改造的理论与实践[J].山西林业科技,1999(4)：124-126.
31.李铁民.太行山低质残次林判定标准[J].山西林业科技.2000(3).
32.李文松.三明市梅列区北山生态风景林综合评价及其营建技术研究[D].福建农林大学硕士学位论文,2007.
33.李晓秀.北京山生态环境质量评价体系初探[J].自然资源,1997(5)：31-34.
34.李意德.海南岛尖峰岭热带山地雨林的群落结构特征[J].热带亚热带植物学报,1997,5(1)：18-26.
35.林中大,莫东亮.深圳市龙岗区生态公益林改造设计及效果初探[J].广东林业科技,2003,19(3)：41-44.
36.刘昌明.嘉陵江流域低山区的残次林调查研究[J].四川林业科技,1993,14(2)：65-70.
37.刘东兰.美国国有林生态系统经营[J].世界林业研究,1999,(3)：47-54.
38.刘惠明,林伟强,张璐.景观动态研究概述[J].广东林业科技,2004,20(1)：67-70.
39.刘惠明,杨燕琼,罗富,等.广州市帽峰山森林公园森林景观多样性分析[J].生态科学,2003,22(1)：30-33.
40.刘明昌.嘉陵江流域低山区的残次林调查研究[J].四川林业科技,1993,14(2)：65-70.
41.刘玉莲,殷学波.樱花品种园艺学性状的综合评价[J].江苏农学院学报,1996.17：39-43.
42.刘泽东,梅加才,单和卫.江阴要塞森林公园林相改造技术研究初报江苏林业科技,26(3)：40-41.
43.路端正.北京植物新资料[J].北京农学院学报,2002,17(3)：19-21
44.陆兆苏.南京市钟山风景区森林经理的实践和研究[J].华东森林经理,1991,(1)：1-6.
45.陆兆苏,余国宝,张治强,等.紫金山风景林的动态及其经营对策[J].南京林学院学报(自然科学版),1985(3)：11-13.
46.陆兆苏,赵德海,赵仁,等.南京市钟山风景区森林经理的实践和研究[J].华东森林经理,1991,5(1)：1-6.
47.陆兆苏,赵德海,赵仁涛,等.南京市钟山风景区森林经理的实践和研究[J].华东森林经理,1991,(1)：12-17.
48.陆兆苏.按照风景林的特点建设森林公园[J].华东森林经理,1994,8(2)：12-17.
49.罗晓华.国内低效林研究综述[J].四川林业科技,2004,25(2)：31-34.
50.罗跃初,韩单恒,王宏昌,等.辽西半干旱区几种人工林生态系统涵养水源功能研究[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(6)：91 9-922.
51.吕勇,汪新良,饶兴旺,等.低价低效次生林改造技术的研究[J].林业资源管理,2000(6)：30-36.
52.马雪华,杨茂端,胡星粥.亚热带杉木马尾松人工林水文功能的研究[J].林业科学.1993,29(3)：199-206.
53.马雪华.森林水文学[M]北京：中国林业出版社,1993.
54.毛德华,夏军,黄友波.西北地区生态修复的若十基木问题探讨[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(1)：15-28.
55.穆彬,谢阳,江楠,等.道路生态影响评价方法研究：以兰海高速公路为例[J].环境科学2007,28(12)：2889-2895.
56.倪淑萍,施德法.普陀山风景区森林景观研究[J].华东森林经理,1999,10(1)：58-63.
57.欧阳君祥.低质低效冷杉林的分类与评价[J].中南林学院学报(自然科学版),2003,23(1)：6-8.
58.潘树林,王丽,辜彬.论边坡的生态恢复[J].生态学杂志,2005,(2)：217-221.
59.潘庭华.石林县低质低效林改造探讨[J].内蒙古林业调查设计,2008,31(2)：65-67.
60.彭少麟,申卫军,戴智明,等.马占相思人工林温湿效应的时空动态[J].热带植物学报,2001,9(4)：277-283.
61.蒲勇平.长江流域生态修复工程的意义及对策[J].水土保持通报,2002,22(5)：9-11.
62.秦华.旺苍县鼓城山森林公园景观评价[J].西南农业大学学报(自然科学版),1993,(15)6：527-530.
63.青阳县,严文忠.国外低效林成因与改造[J].安徽林业,2006,(2)：31.
64.饶良懿,朱金兆.防护林空间配置研究进展[J].中国水土保持科学,2005,3(2)：102-106.
65.任宪威,施光孚,高武.松山自然保护区考察专集[M].哈尔滨：东北林业大学出版社,1990.
66.茹正忠,冯选记,高伯慰,等.山地风景林不同树种的造林效果分析[J].林业科技通讯,2001,(10)：7-9.
67.石春娜,王立群.我国森林资源质量评价体系研究进展[J].世界林业研究,2007,20(2)：68-73.
68.宋力,何兴元,徐文铎,等.城市森林景观美景度的测定[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(6)：621-624.
69.苏树权.黄旗山林相改造设计[Z].广东省林业调查规划院,2007.
70.苏雪痕.植物造景[M].北京：中国林业出版社,1998.
71.苏志尧,陈北光,古炎坤.粤西八宝山森林群落的组成和结构特征[J].广西植物,1995,15(2)：124-130.
72.粟娟,蓝盛芳.评估森林综合效益的新方法能值分析法[J].世界林业研究,2000,13(1)：32-37.
73.孙凡,袁红叶,李天云,等.重庆雪宝山自然保护区AHP生态评价[J].西南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2006,28(4)：569-572.
74.孙立达,朱金兆.水土保持林体系综合效益研究与评价[M].北京中国科学技术出版社,1997,26-28.
75.孙晓光.彩叶植物在保定市园林绿地中的应用[J].河北林业科技,2010,(3)：25-26.
76.田执民,论残次林的形成原因及其改造方向[J].经济技术协作信息,2008,(11)：84.
77.万志洲,李晓储,徐海兵,等.南京中山陵风景区常绿阔叶树种引进及风景林林相改造技术的研究[J].江苏林业科技,2001,28(5)：22-27.
78.王伯荪,彭少麟.鼎湖山森林群落分析及群落演替的线性系统与预测[J].中山大学学报：自然科学版,1985(4)：75-80.
79.王超,翟明普,金莹杉.国内外风景林研究现状及趋势[J].林业调查规划,2006,31(5)：48-52.
80.王超,翟明普,马润国.基于空间结构单元的风景林抚育间伐研究.林业调查规划,2006,31(6)：6-11.
81.王光贵,徐高福,徐高翔.千岛湖生态风景林建设的调查研究[J].江苏林业科技,2002,29(1)：55-57.
82.王海迪,唐德瑞.小流域防护林对位配置优化模式研究[J].内蒙古林学院学报,1999,3(1)1-10.
83.王菁黎,罗菊春.风景林植物群落质量的综合评价[J].福建林学院学报(自然科学版),2004,24(4)：379-384.
84.王礼先,解明曙.山地防护林水土保持水文生态效益及其信息系统[M].北京：中国林业出版社,1998：1-19.
85.王世忠.辽宁西部地区油松低价水土保持林早期诊断技术[J].东北林业大学学报(自然科学版).2002,30(2)：13-17.
86.王贤荣.早樱种系的分类及其观赏价值[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2000.24(6)：44-46.
87.王晓俊.关于风景评价中心理物理学方法局限性的探讨[J].自然资源学报,1996,11(2)：170-176.
88.王雁,陈鑫峰.心理物理学方法在国外森林景观评价中的应用.林业科学,1999.35(5)：110-11.49.
89.王玉霞.大青沟自然保护区生态评价[J].内蒙古农业大学学报(自然科学版),2005,26(3)：50-53.
90.翁友恒.厦门市生态风景林建设与评价[J].华东森林经理,2001,15(1)：52-54.50.
91.吴承照,曹霞.景观资源量化评价的主要方法及比较[J].旅游科学,2005,19(1)：32-39.
92.吴克选.低效林人工改造技术浅议[J].江西林业科技,2002,(2)：21-23.
93.吴南生,翟明普,杜天真,等.北京市风景游憩林主要建设类型及其植物配置模式研究[J].生态经济.2003,(3)：62-65.
94.吴南生.北京西山风景游憩林抚育理论与技术研究[D].北京林业大学博士学位论文,2007.
95.吴钦孝,赵鸿雁,刘向东,等.森林枯枝落叶层涵养水源保持水土的作用评价[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报,1998,4(2)：23-27.
96.吴征镒.中国种子植物属的分布区类型[J].云南植物研究,1991,(增刊Ⅳ)：1-39.
97.肖笃宁,李晓文.试论景观规划的目标、任务和基本原则[J].生态学杂志,998,(3)：46-52.
98.肖水清.天然阔叶树残次林改造技术的初步研究[J].江西林业科技,1998,(6)：7-8.
99.邢伟,程丽秋.加强森林抚育、低效林改造是恢复森林生态系统的有效途径[J].林业科技情报,2007,39(3)：6-8.
100.邢振宇,陈树敏.赤峰市土壤[M].内蒙古：内蒙古人民出版社,1990：202-211.
101.徐宪立,耿红,张科利,等.西部地区高速公路发展规划生态环境影响评价——指标体系构建及评价方法探讨[J].公路交通科技,2006,23(7)：154-158.
102.徐兴友,张风娟,孟宪东,等.老岭自然保护区观赏植物资源[J].河北科技师范学院学报(自然科学版),2006,20(4)：9-13.
103.薛建辉,任青山,阮宏华.森林生态学[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2006：127,130,133.
104.杨加志,苏志尧,陈北光,等.大屏障森林公园次生常绿阔叶林的结构特征[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2005,26(1)：89-92.
105.杨加志,苏志尧,许月明.东莞大屏障森林公园的现状植被及林分改造对策分析[J].生态科学,2004,23(2)：144-146.
106.杨学云.浅议我国人工林的近自然林经营[J].中南林业调查规划,2005,24(4)：7-9.
107.杨祯禄,胡庭兴,李贤伟.马尾松材积生长量及经济效益的预测[J]四川农业大学学报(自然科学版),1993,(03)：31-34.
108.叶亚平,刘鲁君.中国省域生态环境质量评价指标体系研究[J].环境科学研究,2000(3)：33-36.
109.余济云,曾思齐,李志辉,等.湘东丘陵区马尾松低质低效次生林改造经营模式研究[J],湖南林业科技,2002,29(1)：6-9.
110.于景利.残次林迹地更新树种的研究[J].辽宁林业科技,997,(3)：23-25.
111.于汝元,马风新.多效风景林[J].中国林业,2000,(5).
112.苑国城,苑洪涛,王秀枝.残次林模拟自然林改造[J].中国林业,2006,(2)：33-34.
113.云南省林业厅,关于加快推进低效林改造工作的意见[J].云南林业,2009,30(2)：32-33.
114.张宏达,王伯荪,张超常,等.广东高要鼎湖山植物群落之研究[J].中山大学学报：自然科学版,1955(3)：1 59-226.
115.张健.三江流域残次林类型划分及制定标准研究[M].科学出版社,1993.
116.张建国,余建辉.生态林业的效益观-林业综合效益初步[J].林业经济问题,1991(3)：1-8.
117.章俊华.规划设计学中的调查分析法-AHP法[[J].中国园林,2003,(4)：37-40.
118.张璐,林伟强,陈北光,等.广州帽峰山次生林群落结构特征[J].华南农业大学学报：自然科学 版,2003,24(3)：53-56.
119.张明庆,杜育林,任阳.北京什刹海地区的物候季节[J].首都师范大学学报(自然科学版),2007.28(3)：78-80.
120.张荣,翟明普,等.国内外风景游憩林抚育研究进展.北京林业大学学报.2004(2)：109-113.
121.张涛.低效(质)林改造的方法与效果分析[J].林业勘察设计,2004,3：30.
122.张晓萍.问卷调查法在森林公园景观评价及旅游管理中的应用台湾农业探索.2006(1)38-40.
123.张银龙,俞元春,张金池.天然林保护依据的探讨[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),1999,(2)：57-61.
124.赵德海.风景林美学评价方法的研究[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),1990,14(4)：50-55.
125.赵惠勋,周晓峰,王义泓,等.森林质量评价标准和评价指标[J].东北林业大学学报(自然科学版),2000,9(5)：58-61.
126.赵其国,骆永明.开展我国东南沿海经济快速发展地区资源与环境质量问题研究建议.土壤,2000(4)：169-187.
127.郑佳丽,胡建忠.北川河流域中国沙棘的分布、组成与群落学特征[J].水土保持研究,2007,(5)：59-63.
128.中国科学院《中国自然地理》编辑委员会.中国自然地理.植物地理(上册)[M].北京：科学出版社,1983
129.中国科学院植物研究所.中国高等植物图鉴(1-5)册[M].北京：科学出版社,1994.
130.中国科学院植物研究所.中国高等植物图鉴(补编)：第1卷[M].北京：科学出版社,1982：444-445.
131.中国科学院中国植物志编辑委员会.中国植物志[M].北京：科学出版社,1986.
132.钟全林,周华盛.森林景观质量评价理论、内容与方法[J].华东森林经理,2000,14(4)：37-39.
133.周海彦.印刷设计实用美术配色色谱[M].广东：深圳海天出版社,1997.
134.周立江.残次林评判与改造途径的探讨[J].四川林业科技,2004,25(1)：16-21.
135.朱丽晖,李冬,邢宝振.辽东山区天然次生林枯落物层的水文生态功能[J].辽宁林业科技,2001(1)：36-38.
136. Ainslie W B.Rapid wetland functional assessment.its role and utility in the regulatory arena. Water. Air &Soil Pollution,1994,3-4:237-248.
137. Armando A.Apan.Trop ical landscape characterization and analysis for forest rehabilitation p lanning using satellite data and GIS [J].Landscape and U rban Planning,1996,34(1):45-54.
138. Brinson M M Developing an approach for assessing the functions of wetlands. In: Mitsch(ed).Global wetlands:old word and new. Elsevier, Amsterdam,1995.
139. Dutta R K,Agrawal M.Restoration of opencast coal mine spoil by planting exotic tree species:a case study in dry tropical region [J].Ecological Engineering 2003,21:143-151.
140. Edgardo O.Adema, Daniel E.Buschiazzo, Francisco J.Babinec.Mechanical contof shrubs in a semiarid region of Argentina and its effect on soil water contand grassland productivity Agricultural Water Management,2004,68(2):185-194.
141. Fielder C E,Keegan C E,Wichman D P,et al.Product and economic implications of ecological restoration [J].Forest Products Journal 1999,49(2):19-24.
142. Grant C D,Campbell C J,Charnock N R.Selection of species suitable for descenic spot relict mine site rehabilitation in New South Wales,Australia [J].Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 2002, 139:215-235.
143. Heather P.Griscom, P.M.S.A shton, Graeme P.Berlyn.Seedling survival and growth of native tree species in pastures:Implications for dry tropical forest rehabilitation in central Panama [J].Forest Ecology and Management,2005,218(123):306-318.
144. Hodacova D,Prach K.Spoil heaps from brown coalmining:Technical reclamation versus spontaneous revegetation [J].Restoration Ecology 2003,11:385-391.
145. Khater C,Martin A,Maillet J.Spontaneous vegetation dynamics and restoration prospects for limestone quarries in Lebanon [J].Applied Vegetation Science 2003,6:199-204.
146. Larson, L.S.andD.B.mazzarese.Rapid assessment of wetlands:history and application to management.In. WJ.Mitch, Ed. Global Wetlands. Elsevier Sci.Pub.1994.625-636.
147. Li Xiaoping,Zhang Liquan,Zhang Zheng.Soil bioengineering and the ecological restoration of riverbanks at the Airport Town,Shanghai,China [J].Eclological Engineering,2006,26:304-314.
148. Noble P S.Root distribution and seasonal production in the northwestern Sonar Desert for a C3 shrub,a CQ bunch grass and a CAM leaf succulent.American Jour Crop of Botany,1997,84:94-99.
149. Olander L P,Scatena F N,Silver W L.Impacts of disturbance initiated by road construction in a subtropical cloud forest in the Luquillo Experimental Forest,Puerto Rico [J].Forest Ecology and Management,1998,109:33-49.
150. Pastorok R A.,MacDonald A,Sampson J R,et al.An ecological decision framework for environmental restoration projects [J].Ecological Engineering 1997,(9):89-107.
151. Pielou E C.An introduction to mathematical ecology [M].New York:John W iley&Sons,1969:128.
152. Rentch J S,Fortney R H,Stephenson S L,et al.Vegetation-site relationships of roadside plant communities in West Virginia,USA [J] Journal of Applied Ecology 2005,42:129-138.
153. Salter P J.Goode J E.Crop responses to water at different stage of growth.EnglaCommonwealth Agricultural Bureaux,1967.
154. Schamberger,M.L,Short,C,Farmer,A.Evaluating Wetlands as Wildlife abitat,Wetland Function and Simms P H,Yanful E K.Some insights into the performance of an experimental soil cover near London,Ontario [J].Canadian Geotechnical Journal,1999,36:846-860.
155. Values; The State of Our Understanding, P.E.Greeson, J.R.Clark,and J.E,Clark eds Minneapolis, Minn.:American Water Resources Association,1979,74-83.