河北省廊涿高速公路抗旱植物筛选及地表覆盖研究
|
摘要
本文以河北省廊涿高速公路为例,盆栽试验与野外实验相结合为该公路中央隔离带和边坡绿化筛选抗旱性植物,并分析了陶粒覆盖抗旱技术对土壤温度、含水量及植物光合作用的影响,为该公路选择适宜绿化植物及地表覆盖技术提供理论参考。主要研究结论如下：
(1)中央隔离带绿化5种候选植物在水分胁迫下大叶黄杨、紫叶小檗的表观形态变化最大,侧柏、小叶黄杨变化较小。大叶黄杨的ΨL、Gs、Ci、Pn、Tr、WUE、Fo、Fv、Fv/Fm、Fv/Fo在水分胁迫下的平均变化速率最大,紫叶小檗的Fm平均变化速率最大,侧柏各指标的变化速率均较小。边坡绿化5候选植物在水分胁迫下肥皂草、太行菊的表观形态变化最大,八宝景天、马蔺变化较小,太行菊的ΨL、Ci、WUE、Fo、Fv/Fm在水分胁迫下的平均变化速率最大,肥皂草的Pn、Tr、Gs、Fv、Fv/Fo平均变化速率最大,八宝景天各指标的平均变化速率均较小。对每种植物建立了所测指标与土壤含水量之间的回归方程。
(2)根据水分胁迫下Gs和Ci变化方向的差异判断W1为大叶黄杨光合作用的降低由气孔限制转为非气孔因素的分界线,其光合器官已受损,W2为紫叶小檗、小叶黄杨的分界线,W3为月季、侧柏分界线。八宝景天、马蔺以W3作为分界线,五叶地锦、肥皂草和太行菊以W2为分界线。CK时,大叶黄杨的WUE最高,月季、小叶黄杨、侧柏在W2时最高,紫叶小檗在W1时最高。八宝景天、马蔺在W2时WUE最高,五叶地锦、肥皂草和太行菊在W1时最高。植物WUE最高时的土壤含水量越低,抗旱性越强。根据植物的光合器官受损分界线和WUE最高时的控水程度,可初步判断中央隔离带5种植物大叶黄杨的抗旱性较差,侧柏、月季的抗旱性较强。边坡5种植物八宝景天、马蔺抗旱性较强,而五叶地锦、肥皂草和太行菊抗旱性较弱。
(3)以各种植物在水分胁迫下变化速率为原始数据,利用主成分分析法综合评价了供试植物的抗旱性。中央隔离带5种候选植物抗旱性大小排序为：侧柏>小叶黄杨>月季>紫叶小檗>大叶黄杨,聚类分析结果为：侧柏、小叶黄杨、月季为抗旱性较强的植物,紫叶小檗为抗旱性中等的植物,大叶黄杨为抗旱性较差的植物。边坡绿化5种候选植物抗旱性大小排序为：八宝景天>马蔺>五叶地锦>太行菊>肥皂草。聚类分析结果为：八宝景天、马蔺为抗旱性较强的植物,五叶地锦为抗旱性中等的植物,太行菊、肥皂草为抗旱性较差的植物。
(4)分析了廊涿高速公路试验路段的气象因子及裸地土壤含水量,表明水分是本区植物存活和生长的主要限制因子。中央隔离带5种候选植物野外种植在水分亏缺状态下WUE日均值排序为：侧柏>小叶黄杨>月季>紫叶小檗>大叶黄杨。存活率排序为：侧柏>小叶黄杨>月季>紫叶小檗>大叶黄杨。边坡绿化5种候选植物野外种植水分亏缺状态下WUE日均值排序为：八宝景天>马蔺>五叶地锦>太行菊>肥皂草,存活率排序为：八宝景天>马蔺>五叶地锦>太行菊>肥皂草。10种植物的野外试验结果和盆栽抗旱性综合评价保持了一致性。
(5)从0cm到15cm土层,陶粒覆盖对土壤温度的影响随着土层的加深而减弱,夏季陶粒覆盖减弱日变化幅度效果明显,但对日均值影响较小,对5cm以上的浅土层表现为降温作用,15cm处表现为升温作用,M2的保温效果好于M1。陶粒覆盖增大了土壤含水量,减弱了不同土层、不同月份之间的差距,M2效果好于M1；从10cm土层到60cm土层,土壤含水量的排序均为M2>M1>MD,随着土层的加深,陶粒覆盖对土壤含水量的影响逐渐降低,越干旱的月份,陶粒覆盖保水效果越明显。
(6)陶粒覆盖对月季、大叶黄杨的Pn、Tr、WUE均产生了影响,提高了月季、大叶黄杨的Pn、Tr日均值,使其日变化峰值出现时间发生变化,但对WUE影响要远远小于对Pn、Tr的影响,M2对植物光合的影响大于M1。陶粒覆盖通过对植物光合作用的影响,从而影响植物生长,大大提高了紫叶小檗、侧柏、小叶黄杨、大叶黄杨、月季五种植物的成活率,增加了植物的地径、株高增长量,M2的效果均好于Ml
(7)通过本文研究结果,本人认为中央隔离带的绿化植物材料应选侧柏,小叶黄杨和月季。边坡绿化植物应选八宝景天、马蔺和五叶地锦。考虑经济成本,一层陶粒覆盖(M1)即可达到预期效果。
Selection of drought-resistance plants was studied by means of pot and field test in order to solve greening plants of slope and central green belt in Langzhuo highway in this paper, and clay aggregate mulch how to affect soil temperature, soil water content and plant photosynthesis was analyzed. So this paper would provide a theoretical reference for appropriate plants and mulching technique in Langzhou highway. The main conclusions were as follows:
(1)For five candidate plants of central green belt, Euonymus japonicus L and Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea had apparent morphological changes under water stress, Platycladus orientalis Franco and Buxus sinica had small morphological changes under water stress. Euonymus japonicus L had the maximum average changing rate inΨL,Gs, Ci, Pn, Tr, WUE,Fo, Fv,Fv/Fm, Fv/Fo under water stress. Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea had the maximum average changing rate in Fm. Platycladus orientalis Franco had smaller average changing rate in each index. For five candidate plants of slope, Opisthopappus taihangensis had the maximum average changing rate inΨL,Ci, WUE, Fo, Fv/Fm under water stress.Saponaria officinalis Linn had the maximum average changing rate in Pn, Tr,Gs, Fv, Fv/Fo, Sedum spectabile Boreau had smaller average changing rate in each index. The regression equation was established between indices measured and soil water content.
(2)According to the direction difference of change of Gs and Ci under water stress, W1 was the boundary of Euonymus japonicus L between stomatal limitation and non-stomatal factors of photosynthesis decreased, and Photosynthetic organs of Euonymus japonicus L was damaged under the condition of W1. W2 were the boundaries of Euonymus japonicus and Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea. W3 were the boundaries of Platycladus orientalis Franco and Rosa chinensis Jacq. W3 were the boundaries of Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis. W2 were the boundaries of Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch, Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn. WUE of Euonymus japonicus L was the highest in the condition of CK. WUE of Rosa chinensis Jacq, Euonymus japonicus L and Platycladus orientalis Franco were the highest in the condition of W2. WUE of Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea was the highest in the condition of W1. WUE of Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis were the highest in the condition of W2. WUE of Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch, Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn were the highest in the condition of W1. The lower the soil water content were, the more drough the plants were when WUE of plants were highest. According to the boundaries of Photosynthetic organ damaged and level of soil water content, preliminary judgments could be decided that drought-resistance of Euonymus japonicus L was poor and Platycladus orientalis Franco was good for five candidate plants of central green belt, drought-resistance of Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch,Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn were poor and Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis were good for five candidate plants of slope.
(3) The drought resistance of plants was evaluated by principal component analysis method according to average changing rate of each plant under water stress. The drought resistance order of five candidate plants of central green belt was as follows:Platycladus orientalis Franco>Euonymus japonicus L>Rosa chinensis Jacq>Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea> Euonymus japonicus L. The results of cluster analysis were that Platycladus orientalis Franco, Euonymus japonicus L and Rosa chinensis Jacq were high drought resistance plants, Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea as medium drought resistance plant and Euonymus japonicus L as weak drought resistance plant. The drought resistance order of five candidate plants of slope was as follows:Sedum spectabile Boreau>Iris lactea var. chinensis> Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch> Opisthopappus taihangensis> Saponaria officinalis Linn. The results of cluster analysis were that Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis were high drought resistance plants, Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch as medium drought resistance plant, Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn as weak drought resistance plant.
(4)This paper analyzed meteorological data and bare soil water content of Langzhuo highway and found that water was the main limiting factor of plant survival and growth in this area. For five candidate plants of central green belt in field test, the order of WUE daily average presented as: Platycladus orientalis Franco>Euonymus japonicus L>Rosa chinensis Jacq>Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea> Euonymus japonicus L. The order of survival rate presented as:Platycladus orientalis Franco> Euonymus japonicus L> Rosa chinensis Jacq> Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea>Euonymus japonicus L. For five candidate plants of slope in field test, the order of WUE daily average presented as:Sedum spectabile Boreau> Iris lactea var. chinensis> Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch>Opisthopappus taihangensis>Saponaria officinalis Linn. The order of survival rate presented as:Sedum spectabile Boreau>Iris lactea var. chinensis> Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch>Opisthopappus taihangensis>Saponaria officinalis Linn. The results of field tests consisted with comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance in pots.
(5)The effect of clay aggregate mulching on soil temperature decreased with soil depth from Ocm to 15cm. It was obvious that clay aggregate mulching decreased diurnal range of soil temperature but it had less effect on the daily average in summer. clay aggregate mulching had a cooling effect above 5cm,but had a heating effect at 15cm.. M2 balanced soil temperature better than M1. Clay aggregate mulching increased soil water content, reduced soil water content disparity of different soil depth and different months, M2 had better effect than M1.The order of soil water content from 10cm to 60cm depth was as follow:M2>M1>MD. The effect of clay aggregate mulching on soil water content decreased with soil depth.The more months were drought, the more effects of clay aggregate mulching keeping soil water were obvious.
(6)Clay aggregate mulching had an impact on Pn, Tr and WUE of Euonymus japonicus L. and Rosa chinensis Jacq. It improve the daily average of Pn and Tr of Euonymus japonicus L. and Rosa chinensis Jacq and made diurnal peak time to change. But clay aggregate mulching had much less impact on WUE than Pn and Tr. M2 had greater impact on photosynthesis than M1. Clay aggregate mulching affected plants growth through affecting plants growth photosynthesis, so clay aggregate mulching greatly improved the survival rates of Euonymus japonicus L, Platycladus orientalis Franco, Rosa chinensis Jacq, Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea and Euonymus japonicus L and increased the growth of diameter at breast and height of five plants. M2 showed better results than M1.
(7) According to this researth, I think Platycladus orientalis Franco, Euonymus japonicus L and Rosa chinensis Jacq should be chosen for the central green belt and Sedum spectabile Boreau, Iris lactea var. chinensis and Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch should be chosen for the slope in Langzhuo highway. Considering the economic costs, a layer of Clay aggregate mulching (M1) could achieve the desired purpose.
(1)中央隔离带绿化5种候选植物在水分胁迫下大叶黄杨、紫叶小檗的表观形态变化最大,侧柏、小叶黄杨变化较小。大叶黄杨的ΨL、Gs、Ci、Pn、Tr、WUE、Fo、Fv、Fv/Fm、Fv/Fo在水分胁迫下的平均变化速率最大,紫叶小檗的Fm平均变化速率最大,侧柏各指标的变化速率均较小。边坡绿化5候选植物在水分胁迫下肥皂草、太行菊的表观形态变化最大,八宝景天、马蔺变化较小,太行菊的ΨL、Ci、WUE、Fo、Fv/Fm在水分胁迫下的平均变化速率最大,肥皂草的Pn、Tr、Gs、Fv、Fv/Fo平均变化速率最大,八宝景天各指标的平均变化速率均较小。对每种植物建立了所测指标与土壤含水量之间的回归方程。
(2)根据水分胁迫下Gs和Ci变化方向的差异判断W1为大叶黄杨光合作用的降低由气孔限制转为非气孔因素的分界线,其光合器官已受损,W2为紫叶小檗、小叶黄杨的分界线,W3为月季、侧柏分界线。八宝景天、马蔺以W3作为分界线,五叶地锦、肥皂草和太行菊以W2为分界线。CK时,大叶黄杨的WUE最高,月季、小叶黄杨、侧柏在W2时最高,紫叶小檗在W1时最高。八宝景天、马蔺在W2时WUE最高,五叶地锦、肥皂草和太行菊在W1时最高。植物WUE最高时的土壤含水量越低,抗旱性越强。根据植物的光合器官受损分界线和WUE最高时的控水程度,可初步判断中央隔离带5种植物大叶黄杨的抗旱性较差,侧柏、月季的抗旱性较强。边坡5种植物八宝景天、马蔺抗旱性较强,而五叶地锦、肥皂草和太行菊抗旱性较弱。
(3)以各种植物在水分胁迫下变化速率为原始数据,利用主成分分析法综合评价了供试植物的抗旱性。中央隔离带5种候选植物抗旱性大小排序为：侧柏>小叶黄杨>月季>紫叶小檗>大叶黄杨,聚类分析结果为：侧柏、小叶黄杨、月季为抗旱性较强的植物,紫叶小檗为抗旱性中等的植物,大叶黄杨为抗旱性较差的植物。边坡绿化5种候选植物抗旱性大小排序为：八宝景天>马蔺>五叶地锦>太行菊>肥皂草。聚类分析结果为：八宝景天、马蔺为抗旱性较强的植物,五叶地锦为抗旱性中等的植物,太行菊、肥皂草为抗旱性较差的植物。
(4)分析了廊涿高速公路试验路段的气象因子及裸地土壤含水量,表明水分是本区植物存活和生长的主要限制因子。中央隔离带5种候选植物野外种植在水分亏缺状态下WUE日均值排序为：侧柏>小叶黄杨>月季>紫叶小檗>大叶黄杨。存活率排序为：侧柏>小叶黄杨>月季>紫叶小檗>大叶黄杨。边坡绿化5种候选植物野外种植水分亏缺状态下WUE日均值排序为：八宝景天>马蔺>五叶地锦>太行菊>肥皂草,存活率排序为：八宝景天>马蔺>五叶地锦>太行菊>肥皂草。10种植物的野外试验结果和盆栽抗旱性综合评价保持了一致性。
(5)从0cm到15cm土层,陶粒覆盖对土壤温度的影响随着土层的加深而减弱,夏季陶粒覆盖减弱日变化幅度效果明显,但对日均值影响较小,对5cm以上的浅土层表现为降温作用,15cm处表现为升温作用,M2的保温效果好于M1。陶粒覆盖增大了土壤含水量,减弱了不同土层、不同月份之间的差距,M2效果好于M1；从10cm土层到60cm土层,土壤含水量的排序均为M2>M1>MD,随着土层的加深,陶粒覆盖对土壤含水量的影响逐渐降低,越干旱的月份,陶粒覆盖保水效果越明显。
(6)陶粒覆盖对月季、大叶黄杨的Pn、Tr、WUE均产生了影响,提高了月季、大叶黄杨的Pn、Tr日均值,使其日变化峰值出现时间发生变化,但对WUE影响要远远小于对Pn、Tr的影响,M2对植物光合的影响大于M1。陶粒覆盖通过对植物光合作用的影响,从而影响植物生长,大大提高了紫叶小檗、侧柏、小叶黄杨、大叶黄杨、月季五种植物的成活率,增加了植物的地径、株高增长量,M2的效果均好于Ml
(7)通过本文研究结果,本人认为中央隔离带的绿化植物材料应选侧柏,小叶黄杨和月季。边坡绿化植物应选八宝景天、马蔺和五叶地锦。考虑经济成本,一层陶粒覆盖(M1)即可达到预期效果。
Selection of drought-resistance plants was studied by means of pot and field test in order to solve greening plants of slope and central green belt in Langzhuo highway in this paper, and clay aggregate mulch how to affect soil temperature, soil water content and plant photosynthesis was analyzed. So this paper would provide a theoretical reference for appropriate plants and mulching technique in Langzhou highway. The main conclusions were as follows:
(1)For five candidate plants of central green belt, Euonymus japonicus L and Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea had apparent morphological changes under water stress, Platycladus orientalis Franco and Buxus sinica had small morphological changes under water stress. Euonymus japonicus L had the maximum average changing rate inΨL,Gs, Ci, Pn, Tr, WUE,Fo, Fv,Fv/Fm, Fv/Fo under water stress. Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea had the maximum average changing rate in Fm. Platycladus orientalis Franco had smaller average changing rate in each index. For five candidate plants of slope, Opisthopappus taihangensis had the maximum average changing rate inΨL,Ci, WUE, Fo, Fv/Fm under water stress.Saponaria officinalis Linn had the maximum average changing rate in Pn, Tr,Gs, Fv, Fv/Fo, Sedum spectabile Boreau had smaller average changing rate in each index. The regression equation was established between indices measured and soil water content.
(2)According to the direction difference of change of Gs and Ci under water stress, W1 was the boundary of Euonymus japonicus L between stomatal limitation and non-stomatal factors of photosynthesis decreased, and Photosynthetic organs of Euonymus japonicus L was damaged under the condition of W1. W2 were the boundaries of Euonymus japonicus and Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea. W3 were the boundaries of Platycladus orientalis Franco and Rosa chinensis Jacq. W3 were the boundaries of Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis. W2 were the boundaries of Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch, Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn. WUE of Euonymus japonicus L was the highest in the condition of CK. WUE of Rosa chinensis Jacq, Euonymus japonicus L and Platycladus orientalis Franco were the highest in the condition of W2. WUE of Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea was the highest in the condition of W1. WUE of Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis were the highest in the condition of W2. WUE of Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch, Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn were the highest in the condition of W1. The lower the soil water content were, the more drough the plants were when WUE of plants were highest. According to the boundaries of Photosynthetic organ damaged and level of soil water content, preliminary judgments could be decided that drought-resistance of Euonymus japonicus L was poor and Platycladus orientalis Franco was good for five candidate plants of central green belt, drought-resistance of Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch,Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn were poor and Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis were good for five candidate plants of slope.
(3) The drought resistance of plants was evaluated by principal component analysis method according to average changing rate of each plant under water stress. The drought resistance order of five candidate plants of central green belt was as follows:Platycladus orientalis Franco>Euonymus japonicus L>Rosa chinensis Jacq>Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea> Euonymus japonicus L. The results of cluster analysis were that Platycladus orientalis Franco, Euonymus japonicus L and Rosa chinensis Jacq were high drought resistance plants, Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea as medium drought resistance plant and Euonymus japonicus L as weak drought resistance plant. The drought resistance order of five candidate plants of slope was as follows:Sedum spectabile Boreau>Iris lactea var. chinensis> Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch> Opisthopappus taihangensis> Saponaria officinalis Linn. The results of cluster analysis were that Sedum spectabile Boreau and Iris lactea var. chinensis were high drought resistance plants, Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch as medium drought resistance plant, Opisthopappus taihangensis and Saponaria officinalis Linn as weak drought resistance plant.
(4)This paper analyzed meteorological data and bare soil water content of Langzhuo highway and found that water was the main limiting factor of plant survival and growth in this area. For five candidate plants of central green belt in field test, the order of WUE daily average presented as: Platycladus orientalis Franco>Euonymus japonicus L>Rosa chinensis Jacq>Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea> Euonymus japonicus L. The order of survival rate presented as:Platycladus orientalis Franco> Euonymus japonicus L> Rosa chinensis Jacq> Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea>Euonymus japonicus L. For five candidate plants of slope in field test, the order of WUE daily average presented as:Sedum spectabile Boreau> Iris lactea var. chinensis> Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch>Opisthopappus taihangensis>Saponaria officinalis Linn. The order of survival rate presented as:Sedum spectabile Boreau>Iris lactea var. chinensis> Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch>Opisthopappus taihangensis>Saponaria officinalis Linn. The results of field tests consisted with comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance in pots.
(5)The effect of clay aggregate mulching on soil temperature decreased with soil depth from Ocm to 15cm. It was obvious that clay aggregate mulching decreased diurnal range of soil temperature but it had less effect on the daily average in summer. clay aggregate mulching had a cooling effect above 5cm,but had a heating effect at 15cm.. M2 balanced soil temperature better than M1. Clay aggregate mulching increased soil water content, reduced soil water content disparity of different soil depth and different months, M2 had better effect than M1.The order of soil water content from 10cm to 60cm depth was as follow:M2>M1>MD. The effect of clay aggregate mulching on soil water content decreased with soil depth.The more months were drought, the more effects of clay aggregate mulching keeping soil water were obvious.
(6)Clay aggregate mulching had an impact on Pn, Tr and WUE of Euonymus japonicus L. and Rosa chinensis Jacq. It improve the daily average of Pn and Tr of Euonymus japonicus L. and Rosa chinensis Jacq and made diurnal peak time to change. But clay aggregate mulching had much less impact on WUE than Pn and Tr. M2 had greater impact on photosynthesis than M1. Clay aggregate mulching affected plants growth through affecting plants growth photosynthesis, so clay aggregate mulching greatly improved the survival rates of Euonymus japonicus L, Platycladus orientalis Franco, Rosa chinensis Jacq, Berberis thumbergii cv.atropurpurea and Euonymus japonicus L and increased the growth of diameter at breast and height of five plants. M2 showed better results than M1.
(7) According to this researth, I think Platycladus orientalis Franco, Euonymus japonicus L and Rosa chinensis Jacq should be chosen for the central green belt and Sedum spectabile Boreau, Iris lactea var. chinensis and Parthenocissus quinquefolia(L.)Planch should be chosen for the slope in Langzhuo highway. Considering the economic costs, a layer of Clay aggregate mulching (M1) could achieve the desired purpose.
引文
1.包宝祥.北京市城市绿地耐旱性地被植物的筛选[D].内蒙古农业大学,2008.
2.卜万锁等.覆盖对果园土壤水热状况及树体生长发育的影响[J].华北农学报,1994,6(3)：107-111.
3.曹生奎,冯起,司建华.植物水分利用效率研究方法综述[J].中国沙漠,2009,29(5)：853-858.
4.曹艳平,朱立新,贾克功.叶水势、丙二醛含量及保护酶活性与桃砧木抗旱性的关系[J].北京农学院学报,2005,22(3)：7-11.
5.常宏志.节水覆盖措施下桃园杂草发生的物候学规律[J].延安大学学报(自然科学版),2007,26(4)：68-72.
6.陈建.四种灌木植物光和效率对土壤水分的响应过程与机制[D].山东农业大学,2008.
7.陈珂.蛇莓等四种地被植物抗旱性研究[D],北京林业大学,2008.
8.陈绍光,李燕南,王沙生.空气和土壤干旱对不同杨树种类无性系生长及光合作用的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,1996,18(3)：35-41.
9.陈素英,张喜英,胡春胜,等.秸秆覆盖对夏玉米生长过程及水分利用的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2002,20(4)：55-66.
10.陈素英,张喜英,刘梦雨.玉米秸秆覆盖麦田下的土壤温度和上壤水分动态规律[J].中国农业气象,2002,23(4)：34-37.
11.陈万兴,王书宏,张晓.肥皂草的嫩枝扦插繁殖和栽培管理技术[J].山西农业科学2009,37(4)：50-52.
12.陈晓燕,王晓燕,杨强胜等.应用PV技术对7种园林树种耐旱性的研究[J].内蒙古农业大学学报,2007,28(2)：41-45.
13.陈有民.园林树木学[M].中国林业出版社,2006.
14.陈玉娟,王成,郄光发等.有机覆盖物对城市绿地土壤水分和温度的影响[J].中国城市林业,2009,7(3)：52-55.
15.程嘉翎,段建丽,王娜等.聚乙二醇模拟水分胁迫对桑树种子萌发和生理的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2006,34(24)：6420-6422.
16.程林梅,李古林,高洪文.水分胁迫对白羊草光合生理特性的影响[J].中国农学通报,2004,20(6)：238-240
17.崔向新,蒙仲举,高永等.不同材料覆盖的土壤蒸发效果分析[J].水上保持通报,2009,29(4)：81-83.
18.单长卷,郝文芳,梁宗锁等.不同土壤干旱程度对刺槐幼苗水分生理和生长指标的影响[J].西北农业学报,2005,14(2)：44—49.
19.邓勋飞,张后勇,何勇.水稻叶水势与不同水分处理定量关系研究[J].浙汀大学学报(农业与生命科学版),2005,31(5)：581-586.
20.丁华娇,应求是,章丹峰等.四种阴生地被植物的抗旱性比较研究[J].黑龙江农业科学 2008(3)：84-86.
21.董文渊.石中高速公路南段中分带绿化工程应用滴灌技术研究初探[J].辽宁交通科技,2005，11：75-77.
22.杜菁昀,杜占池,崔骁勇.内蒙古典型草原地区常见植物光合、蒸腾速率和水分利用效率的比较研究[J].草业科学,2003,20(6)：11-15.
23.樊赢.关于高速公路绿化几个问题的探讨[J].河南交通科技,1997(9)：22-24.
24.方玉东,张志国,胡业翠.不同覆盖物对建植结缕草草坪杂草的影响[J].草业科学,2002,19(2)：69-69.
25.费蓉葆.三种地被植物抗旱性初步研究[D].东北林业大学,2007.
26.冯敏.红壤丘陵区地面覆盖与柑桔产量及品质关系的研究[J].湖南农学院学报,1990,16(2)：141-149.
27.冯强,胡聃,李娜等.典型城区与郊区环境大叶黄杨气体交换及叶绿素荧光特性比较[J].生态学报,2009,29(7)：3477-3484.
28.付爱红,陈亚宁等.干旱、盐胁迫下的植物水势研究与进展[J].中国沙漠,2005,25(5)：744-750.
29.高辉远,邹琦,程炳嵩.大豆光合日变化的类型及其影响因素[J].大豆科学,1992,11：219-225
30.高俊风.植物生理学试验技术[M].西安：世界图书出版社,2000：36.
31.高丽霞,陈阳春,郑元彦.3种观赏藤本植物耐旱性研究[J].防护林科技,2007,4：45-47
32.高秀萍,张勇强,童兆平,等.覆盖秸秆对梨树几项水分生理指标的影响[J].山西农业科学,2001,29(2)：59-61.
33.高延军,张喜英,陈素英,等.冬小麦叶片水分利用生理机制的研究[J].华北农学报,
34.巩杰,黄高宝,陈利顶等.旱作麦田秸秆覆盖的生态效应综合研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2003,21(3)：69-73.
35.顾文芸.高速公路路体绿化[D].南京：南京林业大学,2003：25-37.
36.郭春芳,孙云,唐玉海等.水分胁迫对茶树叶片叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2009,17(3)：560-564.
37.郭慧,吕长平等.园林植物抗旱性研究进展[J].安徽农学通报,2009,15(7)：53-55.
38.郭连生,田有亮.4种针叶幼树光合速率、蒸腾速率与土壤含水量的关系及其抗旱性研究[J].应用生态学报,1994,5(1)：32-36.
39.郭连生,田有亮.压力—容积分析法在植物水分生理与抗旱性研究中的应用进展[J].内蒙古林学院学报,1990,(1)：3743.
40.郭连生,田有亮.9种针阔叶幼树的蒸腾速率、叶水势与环境因子关系的研究[J].生态学报,1992，12(1)：47-52.
41.郭连生,田有亮.八种针阔叶幼树清晨叶水势与土壤含水量的关系及其抗旱性研究[J].生态学杂志,1992,11(3)：4-7
42.郭卫华,李波,张新时.水分胁迫对沙棘和中间锦鸡儿蒸腾作用影响的比较[J].生态学报,2007.27(1)：4132-4040.
43.郭宪,金玉美,连海明等.麦秸覆盖对杂草萌发及玉米产量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(9)：2584-2585.
44.韩君,刘丽敏.大同地区高速公路绿化植物选择[J].科技情报开发与经 济,2009,19(23)：196-197.
45.韩玉杰,徐志防,叶万辉等.不同类型喀斯特植物的荧光特征及抗旱性比较[J].广西植物,2007,27(6)：9]8-922.
46.郝亦荣.生态垫覆盖对沙地土壤及林木生长影响[D].北京林业大学硕士学位论文.北京：北京林业大学图书馆,2005
47.侯连涛,焦念元,韩宾等.不同覆盖方式对土壤水分分布的影响[J].灌溉排水学报,2007,26(1)：47-50.
48.胡光胜.城市园林绿化的节水问题[J].城乡建设,2001,(4)：38.
49.胡继超,姜东,曹卫星.短期干旱对水稻叶水势、光合作用及干物质分配的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(1)：63-67.
50.胡学华,蒲光兰,肖千文等.水分胁迫下李树叶绿素荧光动力学特性研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2007,15(1)：75-77.
51.胡永红,张启翔,封培波.宿根花卉抗寒、耐热鉴定研究[J].中国园林,2004(6)：75-77.
52.户连荣,郎南军,郑科.植物抗旱性研究进展及发展趋势[J].安徽农业科学,2008,37(7)：2652-2654.
53.黄刚.高速公路中央分隔带绿化渗灌技术研究[D].山东大学,2008.
54.黄华宏,陈奋学,童再康等.矮生杉木光合特性及叶绿素荧光参数研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2009,31(2)：69-73.
55.黄颜梅,张健,罗承德.树木抗旱性研究(综述)[J].四川农业大学学报,1997,15(1)：49-54.
56.冀天会,张灿军,杨子光等.冬小麦叶绿索荧光参数与品种抗旱性的关系[J].麦类作物学报,2005,25(4)：64-66.
57.姜好胜,秦韶梅等.果园白三叶草种植技术[J].北方果树,2001,(3)：21.
58.蒋光藻,谭和平,黄苹.茶园杂草生态控制技术研究[J].西南农业学报,2003,16(3)：57-60.
59.康国芳,杨路华,李经伟.水分胁迫对小麦叶绿素a荧光参数的影响[J].2008,47(1)：22-24.
60.柯世省,杨敏文.水分胁迫对云锦杜鹃光合生理和光温响应的影响[J].园艺学报,2007,34(4)：959-964.
61.柯世省.干旱胁迫对夏蜡梅光合特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2007,27(6)：1209-1215.
62.孔详娟.国内外节水现状与节水措施[J].建设科技,2007(11)：48-49
63.郎有忠,胡健等.抗旱型稻根系形态与机能的研究[J].扬州大学学报2003,24(4)：58-61.
64.黎祜琛,邱治军.树木抗旱性及抗旱造林技术研究综述[J].世界林业研究,2003,16(4)：17-22.
65.李斌,李成,何高等.稻草覆盖对大麦生育特性的影响及高产配套技术[J].大麦科学,2004(1)：16-18.
66.李吉跃.PV技术在油松、侧柏苗木抗旱特征研究中应用[J].北京林业大学学报,1989.11(1)：3-11.
67.李吉跃.太行山区主要造林树种耐早特性的研究(Ⅴ)-耐旱生产力[J].北京林业大学学报,1999,21(3)：1-8.
68.李继文,王进鑫,张慕黎.干早及复水对刺槐叶水势的影响[J].西北林学院学报2009,21(3)：33-36
69.李进,张秀伏.利用梯度分析技术对12种锦鸡儿属植物抗旱性的定量研究[J].中国沙漠,1996,16(4)：356-359.
70.李俊杰,黄畴,杨立煜.节水灌溉技术在西部干旱地区高速公路绿化工程中的应用[J].公路,2003，2：121-126.
71.李禄军,蒋志荣,邵玲玲等.生态垫覆盖对沙丘土壤温度的影响[J].水土保持通报,2009,29(2)：140-143.
72.李鹏,李占斌,赵忠,等.渭北黄土高原不同立地上刺槐根系分布特征研究[J].水土保持通报,2002,22(5)：15-19
73.李荣,张睿,贾志宽.不同覆盖材料对耕层土壤温度及玉米出苗的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2009,27(3)：13-17.
74.李生秀等.中国旱地农业[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2003.
75.李晓,冯伟,曾晓春.叶绿素荧光分析技术及应用进展[J].西北植物学报,2006,26(10)：2186-2196
76.李艳秋,夏新莉,尹伟伦.水分胁迫对4种草坪草光合色素及叶绿素荧光参数的影响[J].河南农业科学,2007,(1)：69-73.
77.李援农,范兴科,樊惠芳,等.地膜覆盖灌水对土壤水分变化及作物生长的影响[J].水土保持研究,2002,9(2)：45-47.
78.李云霞.五种园林地被植物抗旱性初步研究[D]甘肃农业大学,2009.
79.李志军,罗青红,伍维模等.干旱胁迫对胡杨和灰叶胡杨光合作用及叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J].干旱区研究,2009,26(1)：45-52.
80.李自强,赵学仁,李宏.宁夏石中高速公路北段中央分隔带环保绿化植物选择的数理分析[J].宁夏农林科技,2003(5)：17-20.
81.梁君瑛,周金星,马履一等.水分胁迫下实生桑苗光合特性的研究[J].河北林果研究,2008,23(1)：1-4.
82.梁俊波,于欢.高速公路绿化节水抗旱技术[J].山东林业科技,2010,1：80-81
83.梁明霞.华北地区植被屋面植物材料筛选的初步研究[D].北京林业大学,2009.
84.廖飞勇,谢瑛,覃事妮等.常吉高速公路边坡绿化的植物选择[J].北方园艺2010(2)：142-144
85.廖光瑶SPAC的水势热力学系统[J].四川林业科技,1999,12(1)：47-52.
86.刘惠芬,高玉葆,张强等.土壤干旱胁迫对不同种群羊草光合及叶绿素荧光的影响[J].农业环境科学学报,2005,24(2)：209-213.
87.刘巧玲.街道绿化带土壤覆盖保水技术实验研究[D].新疆农业大学,2006.
88.刘仁涛,毕润成,任佳.翅果油树幼苗抗旱性[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(12)：1528-1531
89.刘旭胜.松针作为上壤改良物和地面覆盖物对越橘生长的影响[D].大连理工大学,2008.
90.刘莹、蔡祈明.大豆根系形态及苗期耐旱根系性状的研究[J].河北工程大学学报,2009,26(3)：81-84.
91.刘郁林,彭素琴.不同种金银花幼苗对水分胁迫的生理反应[J].赣南师范学院学报,2006,(6)：85-87.
92.鲁敏.部分园林植物对大气污染物吸收净化的研究[J].山东建筑工程学院学报,2002.2(6)：杨勇,曹斌,王荣印.保水剂在公路绿化中的应用技术研究[J].华东公路,2002,(3)：74-76.
93.吕迎霞.国外公路绿化及相关标准现状.公路交通科技,2007(7)： 5-8.
94.罗俊,张木清,吕建林,等.水分胁迫对不同甘蔗品种叶绿素a荧光动力学的影响[J].福建
95.马宗斌,李伶俐,方卫平等.麦秆覆盖对土壤温度变化和棉花生长发育的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,2004,38(4)：155-158.
96.毛学森,曾江海.硬覆盖对土壤水热传输及作物生长发育影响的试验研究[J].生态学杂志,2000,19(2)：68-71.
97.毛玉林.覆盖对土壤微环境的影响及其在农业上的应用[J].草业科学,1998,15(6)：69-70.
98.门旗,李毅,冯广平.地膜覆盖对土壤棵间蒸发影响的研究[J].灌溉排水学报,2003,22(2)：17-25.
99.孟玉平,曹秋芬,横田清.针叶树废材覆盖控制苹果园和越橘园杂草发生的研究[J].山西农业科学2002,30(1)：66-69.
100.潘瑞炽.植物生理学(第五版)[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2004：15-17
101.蒲光兰,周兰英,胡学华等.干旱胁迫对金太阳杏叶绿素荧光动力学参数的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2005,23(3)：44-48.
102.钱莲文,郭建宏等.干旱胁迫对常绿杨光合特性及生长量的影响[J].福建林学院学报2009,29(1)：57-61.
103.冉辛拓,郝宝锋,张新生.干旱过程中苹果茎水势和叶水势的变化研究[J].河北农业科学,2009,13(4)：16-17,
104.山寺喜成,安保昭,吉田宽,著.罗晶,等编译.恢复自然环境绿化工程概论[M].北京：中国科学技术出版社,1997：23-37.
105.尚富德,董美芳,袁王俊.桂花叶解剖结构的研究[J].西北植物学报2003,23(12)：2207-2210
106.邵麟惠,于应文,张德罡.灌木抗旱机理研究[J].草业科学,2007,24(3)：22-27.
107.邵社刚,付美兰.西北地区高速公路绿化树种选择及其栽植技术[J].公路交通科技,2002,19(4)：156-158.
108.申艳梅.景天科植物的耐旱性及其机理研究[D].内蒙古农业大学,2010.
109.沈淑红,倪琪.节水型园林-城市可持续发展的必然要求[J].中国园林,2003,19(12)：54-57.
110.沈淑红,倪琪.节水型园林-城市可持续发展的必然要求[J].中国园林,2003,19(12)：54-57.
111.史刚荣,赵金丽,马成仓.淮北相山不同群落中3种禾草叶片的生态解剖[J].草业学报,
112.史燕山,骆建霞,王煦等.5种草本地被植物抗旱性研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报,33(5)：130-134.
113.宋凤斌,戴俊荣.干旱胁迫下秸秆覆盖增强玉米耐旱性的研究[J].中国沙漠,2001,21(1)：58-61
114.宋丽华,张凯.应用PV技术评价银川市7种针叶绿化树种抗旱性[J].西北农业学报2009,18(2)：225-229
115.苏兴.北京地区几种蔷薇属植物的抗旱性研究[D].北京林业大学,2007.
116.隋益虎,赵勋.不同覆盖方式的上壤温、湿度变化及对紫甘蓝早熟栽培的影响[J].土壤,2000(3)：155-160.
117.孙谷畴,赵平等.亚热带森林演替树种叶片气孔导度对环境水分的水力响应[J].生态学报,2009，29(2)：698-676.
118.孙建霞.京沪高速公路某穿越居民区段环境噪声调查[J].环境与健康杂志,2001(6)： 349-354.
119.孙书存等.恢复生态学[M].化学工业出版社,2004.
120.孙彦楠,周广柱,祝龙.不同抗旱措施在干旱半干旱地区公路绿化中的应用研究[J].安徽农业科技,2006,34(3)：468-469.
121.孙彦楠,周广柱,祝龙.抗旱造林技术的应用研究[J].林业科学,2006,,22(2)：118-120.
122.孙志虎,王庆成.应用PV技术对北方4种阔叶树抗旱性的研究[J].林业科学,2003,39(2)：33-38
123.覃鹏,刘叶菊,曾淑华等.高海拔地区烟草光合作用的日变化[J].亚热带植物科学,2004,33(3)：16-18.
124.覃鹏,杨志稳,孔治有等.干旱对烟草旺长期光合作用的影响[J].亚热带植物科学,2004,33(2)：5-7.
125.汤章城.植物对水分胁迫的反应和适应性植物对干旱的反应和适应性[J].植物生理学通,1983,(4)：1-7.
126.唐甜甜,赵林森,董燕.水分胁迫对滇润楠和香樟幼苗叶绿素荧光和叶水势的影响[J].西北林学院学报,2007,22(4)：16-20
127.田有亮,郭连生.应用PV技术对7种针阔叶幼树抗旱性的研究[J].应用生态学报,1990,1(2)：114-119.
128.田治国.陕西关中地区园林植物抗逆性研究[D].西北农林科技大学,2009.
129.脱云飞,费良军,杨路华等.秸秆覆盖对夏玉米农田土壤水分与热量影响的模拟研究[J].农业工程学报,2007,23(6)：27-32.
130.王改玲,郝明德,李仲谨.不同覆盖物和蒸发抑制剂对土壤蒸发影响的研究初报[J].水土保持研究,2003,10(1)：134.
131.王国富,李连国等.沙棘叶片表面形态特征与抗旱性的关系[J].园艺学报,2006,33(6)：1310-1312.
132.王海珍,韩蕊莲,梁宗锁等.上壤干旱对辽东栎、大叶细裂槭幼苗生长及水分利用的影响[J].西北植物学报,2003,23(8)：1377-1382.
133.王慧杰,冯瑞云,张志军等.不同有机覆盖物对土壤水分蒸发的影响[J].山西农业科学2009,37(6)：42-44,49.
134.王继强,李吉跃,刘娟娟.八个绿化树种水分状况与水力结构的季节变化[J].北京林业大学学报,2005,27(4)：43-49.
135.王建伟,周凌云.土壤水分变化对金银花叶片生理生态特征的影响[J].上壤,2007,39(3)：479-482.
136.王进.覆盖对山地李园土壤性状和树体生长发育的影响[D].西南大学,2008.
137.王进鑫,黄宝龙,罗伟祥.局部覆盖条件下干旱过程对土壤水分蒸发的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2004,32(9)：106-109.
138.王进鑫,黄宝龙,罗伟祥.局部覆盖条件下干旱过程对土壤水分蒸发的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2004,32(9)：106-110.
139.王俊,李风民,贾宇.半干旱地区播前灌溉和地膜覆盖对春小麦产量形成的影响[J].中国沙漠,2004,24(1)：77-82.
140.王连平,王汉荣,茹水江等.芦笋田杂草及地膜覆盖除草作用研究[J].江西农业学报2006,18(4)：126-128
141.王淼,李秋荣,郝占庆等.土壤水分变化对长白山主要树种蒙古栎幼树生长的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(10)：1765-1770
142.王明权,李效栋,景明.覆盖免耕的节水效应与土壤温度的变化[J].甘肃农业大学学报,2007,42(1)：119-122.
143.王强,陈存根,钱红格等.水分胁迫对6种苗木光合生理特性的影响[J].水土保持通报,29(2)：144-145.
144.王琼,宋桂龙,韩烈保等.5种野生护坡植物的抗旱综合性评价[J].福建农林大学学报,2008,37(2)：153-157.
145.王荣堂,张竹青,王有宁.地膜覆盖对蒸腾蒸发的影响[J].湖北农学院学报,2002,22(2)：101-103,114.
146.王万里.植物对水分胁迫的响应[J].植物生理学通迅,1981,5：55-64.
147.王文焰,张健丰,王全九,等.黄土浑水入渗能力的试验研究[J].水土保持学报,1994,8(1)：59-62.
148.王怡.三种抗旱植物叶片解剖结构的对比观察[J].四川林业科技,2003,24(1)：64-67.
149.王颖,魏国印,张志强等.7种园林树种光合参数及水分利用效率的研究[J].河北农业大学学报,2006,29(6)：44-48.
150.王玉涛.北京城市优良抗旱节水植物材料的筛选与评价研究[D].北京林业大学,2008.
151.王忠.植物生理学[M].北京：中国农业出版社,1999,452-455.
152.魏显威.中国高等级公路交通噪声污染及其防治[J].空气和噪音污染2004(3)：12-15.
153.温达志,周国逸,张德强等.四种禾本科牧草植物蒸腾速率与水分利用效率的比较[J].热带亚热带植物学报,2000,增刊,67-76.
154.温国胜,吉川贤,张国盛等.干旱胁迫条件下臭柏的生长[J].内蒙古农业大学学报,2004,
155.吴从林,黄介生,沈荣开.地膜覆盖在冬小麦生育期内增温保墒作用的试验研究[J].中国农村水利水电,2001,(8)：7-9.
156.吴婕,朱钟麟,郑家国,等.秸秆覆盖还田对土壤理化性质及作物产量的影响[J].西南农业学报,2006,19(2)：192-195.
157.吴涌泉,屈明,孙芬等.秸秆覆盖对土壤理化性状、微生物及生态环境的影响[J].中国农学通报2009,25(14)：263-268
158.武维华.植物生理学[M].科学出版社,2003
159.夏明忠.高粱根系形态和杭旱性的关系[J].植物和土攘,1989,119(2)：217-221.
160.夏艳君.茶园不同覆盖措施的土壤生态效应研究[D].湖南农业大学,2006.
161.肖润林,彭晚霞,王久荣,等.稻草覆盖对红壤丘陵茶园的生态调控效应[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(5)：507-511.
162.肖润林,向佐湘,徐华勤等.间种白三叶草和稻草覆盖控制丘陵茶园杂草效果[J].农业工程学报,2008,24(11)：183-187.
163.谢会成,朱西存.水分胁迫对栓皮栎幼苗生理特性及生长的影响[J].山东林业科技,2004,(2)：6-8.
164.谢贤健,兰代萍,白景文.三种野生岩生草本植物的抗旱性综合评价[J].草业科学,2009,18(4)：75-80.
165.谢贤群.我国主要类型地区农业生态系统作物需水、耗水、水分利用效率研究[C].北京,气象出版社,1996：64-81.
166.辛娟.高速公路边坡生态防护技术研究[D].长安大学,2006.
167.熊广忠.公路绿化初步探讨[J].中国公路学报,1995,8(3)：38-44.
168.徐炳成,山仑,黄占斌.草坪草对干旱胁迫的反应及适应性研究进展[J].中国草地,2001,23(2)：55-61.
169.徐克学.生物数学[M].北京：科学出版社,1999.
170.徐胜利,陈小青,陈青云.荒漠绿洲香梨园生草覆盖节水省肥效应的研究[J].新疆农业科学,2004,9(4)：164-168.
171.许大全.光合作用效率[M].上海,上海科学技术出版社,2002.
172.许香春.麻地膜覆盖对上壤生态及作物生长发育的影响[D].中国农业科学院.
173.闫海龙,张希明,许浩等.塔里木沙漠公路防护林3种植物光合特性对干旱胁迫的响应[J].生态学报2010,30(10)：2519—2528
174.严昌荣,韩兴国,陈灵芝.六种木本植物水分利用效率和其小生境关系研究[J].生态学报,2001，21(11)：1952-1956.
175.杨朝选,焦国利,王新峰.干旱过程中桃树茎和叶水势的变化[J].果树科学,1999,16(4)：267-271.
176.杨静慧,杨焕婷.苹果树植物叶片角质层厚度与植物抗旱性[J].天津农学院学报,1996,3(3)：27-29.
177.杨茂仁,季蒙,崔清涛等.北方地区高速公路绿化设计与工程技术研究[J].内蒙古林业科技,2003,(3)：44-48.
178.杨鑫光,傅华,张洪荣等.水分胁迫对霸王苗期叶水势和生物量的影响[J].草业学报,15(2)：37-41.
179.姚健，王丁，张显松.不同地表覆盖方式对土壤水分、温度及幼苗生长的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2009,33(5)：7-11.
180.姚青云,张淑娥.滴灌技术在西部早区高速公路中分带绿化工程中的应用[J].农业科学研究,2005,26(4)：50-52.
181.叶慧海.发达国家的公路建设与环境保护[J].公路环境,2006,3(11)：45-60.
182.殷海善,王改玲.膨润土改性沥青覆盖地而的水分效应试验[J].干旱地区农业研究,2000,18(3)：83-86.
183.殷晓洁,李玉灵,卜志国等.华北地区几种常见园林绿化树种节水性和抗旱性评价[J].河北农业大学学报,2008,31(4)：22-29.
184.张道远,尹林克,潘伯荣.柽柳属植物抗旱性能研究及其应用潜力评价[J].中国沙漠,2003,23(3)：252-256.
185.张福计,李林英,龚怀勋等.4个造林树种抗早特性的初步研究[J].山西林业科技,1990,9：42-46.
186.张国芳.偃麦属植物光和特性及其抗旱性鉴定研究[D].中国农业科学院,2006.
187.张华,王百田,郑培龙.黄土半干旱区不同土壤水分条件下刺槐蒸腾速率的研究[J].水土保持学报,2006,20(2)：122-125.
188.张慧斌,林松苍.果园不同管理方法比较试验[J].福建果树,1985(4)：42-45
189.张建国,李吉跃,沈国舫著.树木耐早特性及其机理研究[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2000.
190.张明炷,石秀兰.不同土水势对油菜的影响及适宜灌水势值研究[J].农田水利,1992,5：8-11.
191.张岁岐,山仑.植物水分利用效率及其研究进展[J].干旱地区农业研究,2002,20(4)：1-5
192.张玮宏.大庆地区三种地被植物的引种及抗旱性研究[D].东北林业大学,2008.
193.张义,谢永生,郝明德等.不同地表覆盖方式对苹果园土壤性状及果树生长和产量的影响[J].农业工程学报,2010,21(2)：279-286.
194.张正斌.作物抗旱节水的生理遗传育种基础[M].北京：科学出版社,2003：1-60
195.赵军营,王利军,牛铁泉等.苹果幼苗部分根系水分胁迫对光合作用主要参数的影响[J].果树学报,2005,22(5)：446-449.
196.郑本暖,叶功富,卢昌义等.干旱胁迫对4种植物蒸腾特性的影响[J].亚热带植物科学,2007,36(1)：36-38.
197.郑淑霞,上官周平.8种阔叶树种叶片气体交换特征和叶绿素荧光特性比较[J].生态学报,2006,26(4)：1080-1087
198.钟继洪,廖观荣等.不同土壤水分条件下幼龄桉树生理生态特点分析[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(5)：126-128.
199.种秀灵.高速公路生态绿化植物的选择研究[D].武汉理工大学,2007.
200.朱教君,康宏樟,李智辉.不同水分胁迫方式对沙地樟子松幼苗光合特性的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,2006,28(2)：57-62.
201.朱教君,康宏樟,李智辉等.水分胁迫对不同年龄沙地樟子松幼苗存活与光合特性影响[J].生态学报,2005,25(10)：2527-2533.
202.朱万泽,薛建辉,王金锡.台湾桤木种源对水分胁迫的光合响应及其抗旱性[J].水土保持
203.庄丽,陈亚宁,陈明等.模糊隶属法在塔里木河荒漠植物抗旱性评价中的应用[J].干旱区地理,2005,28(3)：367-372.
204.邹凯.不同覆盖栽培模式对烟田土壤环境和烤烟生长及产质量的影响[D].广西大学,2008.
205.左轶璆,郭连生.运用PV技术研究树种的抗旱性[J].阴山学刊,2009,23(2)：27-30.
206. Atkinson C J, Policarpo, Webster M,et al. Drought tolerance of clonal Malus determined from measurements of stomatal conductance and leaf water potential[J].Tree Physiol,2000,20:557-563.
207. Beard J B. Turf grass:Science and Culture [M]. Englewood Cliffs,1973.
208. Bierhuizen J F,Slatyer R O.Effects of atmospheric concentration of water vapor and CO2 in determining transpiration photosynthesis relationships of cotton leaves [J]. Gricultural Biology, 2007,58:163-181
209. Blackman P G, DavisW J. Root to shoot communication in maize Plants of the effeet of soil drying[J].ExP Bot,1985,36:39-48.
210. Bohn B A, Kershner J L.Establishing aquatic restoration priorities using a watershed approach[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2002,64(4):355-363
211. Boucher J F, Munson AD, Bernier PY. Foliar absorption of dew influences shootwater potential and root growth in Pinus strobes seedlings[J] Tree Physiology,1995,(15):819-823.
212. Campbell C A, Lafond G.P, Zentner R P,et al. Influence of fertilizer and straw baling on soil organic matter in a thin black chernozem in western Canada[J].Soil Biology and Biochemistry,1991,23(5):443-446.
213. Castal JR,Feree E. Response of yong almond trees to two drought periods in the field[J]. Hort Sci, 1982,57:175-187
214. Cornic G. Drought stress inhibits photosynthesis by decreasing stomatal aperture-not by affecting ATP synthesis[J].Trends in Plant Science,2000,5(5):187-188
215. Cowan I R,Lange O L,Green G A.Carbon-dioxide exchange in lichens:determination of transport and carboxylation characteristics[J].Planta,1992,187:282-294.
216. Cregg B M, Zhang J W. Physiology and morphology of Pinus sylvestrisfrom diverse sources under cyclic drought stress [J]. Forest Ecology and Management,2001,154:131-139.
217. Davies W J, Zhang J. Root signals and the regulation of growth and development of plants in drying soil[J].Ann.Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.,1991,42:55-C76.
218. Denmead 0 T,Shaw R H. Availability of soilwater to plant as affected by soil moisture content and meteorological conditions[J].Agronomy,1962,54:385-390
219. Dominique C, Bergmann,Fred D.Sack Stomtal development[J].The Annual Review of Plant Biology,2007,58:163-181
220. Downton W J. Osmotic adjustment during water stress protects the photosynthetic apparatus against photoinhabition [J].Plant Sci Lett,1983,30:137-143
221.Fank J H. The primary productivity of lawns in a temperate environment [J]. Appl End,1980,17:109-114.
222. Farquhar G D, Sharkey T D. Stomata conductance and photosynthesis[J]. Ann Rev Plant Physiol,1982,33:317-319.
223. Fischer R A.Growth and water limitation to dryland wheat yield in Australia:A physiological framework [J].Aust Inst Agric Sci,1979,45:83-94.
224. Forman, R.T.T. Estimate of the area affected ecologically by the road system in the United States[J].Conservation Biology,2000 (14):31-35.
225. Garcia A, Gonzalez MC. Morphological marker for the earlyselection of drought-tolerant rice varieties[J].Cultivate Tropical.1997,18:(2):47-50.
226. Gamier E,Berger A.Testing water potential in peach trees as an indicator of water stress[J]. Hort Sci,1985,60(1):47-56
227. Gina Brito, Armando Costa, Henrique M A C, etal. Response of Olea europarate asp. Maderensis in vitro shoots exposed to osmotic stress[J]. Scientia Horticulturae,2003,97:411-417.
228. Groenevelt P H, Van Straaten P, Rasiah V,et al. Modifications in evaporation parameters by rock mulches[J]. Soil Technology,1989,(2):279-285.
229. Hays K L,Barber J F,Kenna M P,etc. Drought avoidance mechanisms of selected bermudagrass genotyps[J]. Hort,Sci,1991,26 (2):180-182.
230. Heitholt J J.Water use efficiency and dry matter distribution in nitrogen and water-stressed winter wheat[J].Agron,989,81:464-469
231.Heschel M S,Donohue K,Hausmann N,et al..Population differentiation and natural selection for water-use efficiency in impatiens capensis(Balsaminaceae)[J].International Journal of Plant Science,2002,163(6):907-912
232. Holmgren M.Combined effects of shade and drought on tulip poplar seedlings:trade-off in tolerance or facilitation[J].Oikos,2000,90:67-78.
233. Horton R.Aguirre-Luna O.Wirenga P J.Observed and predicted two-dimensional soil temperature distributions under a row crop[J].Soil Sci.Soc.Am.J.1984,48:1147-1152.
234. Hugo A P,FABIO M D, Agnaldo R M C,et al. Drought tolerance is associated with rooting depth and stomatal control of water use in clones of coffea canephora[J].Annals of Botany,2005,96(1):101-108
235. Jones HG,Lakso AN,Syvertsen JP. Physiological control of water status in temperate and subtropical fruit trees[J].Hort Reviews,1985,7:301-304
236. Jongdee. B, Fukai. S, Cooper. M.Leaf water potential and osmotic adjustment as physiological traits to improve drought tolerance in rice [J].Field Corps Research,2002,76:153-163.
237. Jose Froment, Gerald Domon. Viewer appreciation of highway landscapes:The contribution of ecologically managed embankments in Quebec, Canada[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006(78):14-32
238. Kalapos T, Mazsa. Juniper shade enables terricolous and mosses to maintain high photochemical efficiency in a semiarid temperate sand grassland[J]. Photosynthetica,2001,39(2):263-268.
239. KELES Y, NCEL I.Response of antioxidative defence system to temperature and water stress combinations in wheat seedlings[J].Plant Science,2002,163:783-790.
240. Kowalik P,Borghetti M,Borselli L,etc. Diurnal water relations of beeeh trees in the mountains of Italy[J]. Agrieultural and Forest Meteorology,1997,84(1-2):11-23.
241. Kramer P J & Kozlowski T T. Physiology of trees(second edition)[M].New York: McGraw-Hill,1979.
242. Kramer P J. Plant and soil water relationships:a modern synthesis[M]. New York:McGrow-Hill Book Co,1969.
243. Kramer P J. Water Relations of Plants[M]. New York:Academic Press,1983:405-409.
244. Krause G H, Weis E. Chlorophyll fluorescence and photosynthesis:The basis[J]. Annu.Rev. Plant Physiol.Plant Mol.Biol,1991,42:313-349.
245. KuPPers M. Carbon relations and competition between woody species in central European hedgerow[J].Oceologia,1984,64:332-343.
246. Larcher W. Physiological plant ecology(fourth edition)[M].New York:Heidelberg Springer-Verlag, 2003,231-245.
247. Levitt J.Respones of plants to environmental stress[M]. Academic Press,1972.
248. Li Yinguo, Chen Jianxiang. Effect of coverture on variations of soil temperature in hilly citzvs orchard [J]. Journal of Southwest Agricultural University,1996,18(3):23-25
249. Liang Y L,Zhang C E,Guo D W.Mulch types and their benefit in cropland ecosystems on the loess Plateau in China[J].Plant Nutr.2002,25(5):945-955.
250. Liu F L, Andersen M N, Jensen C R. Root signal controlspod growth in drought-stressed soybean during the critical,abortion-sensitive phase of pod development[J].Field Crops Research,2004,85 (3):159-166.
251. LIU Y, DENG L Q. The Drought resistance of the main tree Species in relation with their root Characteristics in the Western Areas of Liaoning Province [J].Journal of Sheng yang Agheultural University,1995,26(2):171-176.
252. Marcum K B,Engelke M C,Morton S J,etc. Rooting characteristics and associated drought resistance of zoysiagrass [J]. Agron J,1995,87:534-538.
253. Maria J C, Dulce C, Maria M D. Response to seasonal drought in three cultivars of Ceratonia siliqua:leaf growth and water relations [J]. Tree Physiology,2001,(21):645-653.
254. Massaccl A, Jones H G. Use of simultaneous analysis of gas-exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence quenching for analyzing the effects of water stress on photosynthesis in apple leaves[J].Trees-Structure-and-Function,1990,4(1):1-8
255.Medrano H.,Escalona J M,Bota J,et al..Regulation of photosynthesis of C3 plants in response to progressive drought:stomatal conductance as a reference parameter[J].Annals of Botany,2002,89(7):895-905
256. Mohammadreza Ghaffarzadeh.Tillage effect on soil water content and com yeld in strip intercropping system[J].Agronomy Journal,1997,89(6):893-899.
257. Monnevux P,Rekika D,Acevedo E. Effect of drought on leaf gas exchange, carbon isotope discrimination, transpi-ration efficiency and productivity in field grown durum wheat genotypes[J].Plant Science,2006,170:867-872.
258. Morte A, Lovisolo C, Schubert A. Effect of drought stress on growth and water relations of the mycorrhizal association Helianthemum almeriense-Terfezia claveryi[J].Mycorrhiza,2000, 10:115-119.
259. Mrema A F, Granhall U. Sennerby-Forsse plant growth, leaf water potential, nitrogenase activity and nodule anatomy in Leucaena leucocephalaas affected by water stress and nitrogen availability[J].Trees-Structure and Function,1997,12(1):42-48.
260. Naor A.Relationship between leaf and stem water potential and stomatal conductance in three field-grown woody species[J].Hort Sci & Biotechnology,1998,73:431-436
261. Pearce,D M. Practical water saving for growers, landscapers and garden centres[J].International Water and Irrigation Review,1994,(4):10-13.
262. Romic D,Romic M,Borosic J,Poljak M.Mulching decreases nitrate leaching in bell pepper cultivation[J].Water Manag.2003,60:87-97.
263. Rouhi V, Samson R, LemeurR, VanDamme P. Photosynthetic gas exchange characteristics in three differentalmond speciesduring droughtstress and subsequent recovery[J].. Environmental and Experimental Botany,2007,59(2):117-129.
264. Sanchez F J, Manzanares M, deAndresE E, etc.Turgor maintenanee,osmotie Adjustment and soluble sugar and Proline aceumulation in 49 Pea cultivars in response to water stress[J].Field Crops Research,1998,59(3):225-235.
265. Schreber U, Bilger W,Neubauer C. Chlorophyll fluorescence as a non-destructive indicator for rapid assessment of invivo photosynthesis[J].Ecological Studies,1994,100:49-70.
266. Seilre J R. Photosynthesis and transpiration of loblolly pine seedlings as influenced by moisture-stress conditioning [J]. Forest Sci,1985,31(3):742-749.
267. Sera, Bozena. Road vegetation in Central Europe-an example from the Czech Republic [J]. biology,2008,63(6):1085-1088.
268. Sorochan J C, Rogers N J. The effect of mulch type for rutrgrfass establishment withinaerfined wood fiber matover Plastic [J]. Journal of Environmental Horticulutre,2001,19(2):61-64
269. Steduto p, Katerji N, Puertos-molina H.Water-use efficiency of sweet sorghum under water stress conditions:Gas-exchange investigations at leaf and canopy scales[J].Field Crops Research,1997,54:221-234.
270. Tackett J C, Pearson R W. Soil characteristics of soil crusts formed by simulated rainfall [J]. Soil Sci,2004,49:407-413.
271. Tardieu F, Davies W J. Stomatal response to abscisic acid is a function of current plant water status [J].Plant Physiol,1992,98:540-C545.
272. Thomas K D,Reid WJ,Comena P G. Vegetation management using Polyehtylene mulch mats and Glyphosate herbicide in a eoastal British Columbia hybrid poplar plantation:four-year growth response[J]. Western Journal of Applied Forestry,2001,16(1):26-30.
273. Tim Horberry, Janet Anderson. Driver distraction:The effects of concurrent in-vehicle tasks, road environment complexity and age on driving performance [J]. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2006(38):185-191.
274. Townley Smith TF, Hurd EA.Testing and selecting for drought resistance in wheat [J].Stress Physiology in crop plants,1979,10:447-464.
275. Turner N C. Adaptation to water deficits:a changing perspective[J].Australian Journal Plant Physiology,1986,13(2):175-190.
276. Vankooten O, Snelj F H.The use of chlorophyll fluorescence nomenclature in plant stress physiology[J].Photosynth.Res,1990,25(4):147-150.
277. White D A, Beadle C L, Worledge D. Leaf water relations of Eucalyptus globulus ssp.globulus and E. nitens:seasonal, drought and species effects [J]. Tree Physiology,1996,(16):469-476.
278. Xianli Xu, Keli Zhang, Yaping Kong. Effectiveness of erosion control measures along the Qinghai-Tibet highway, Tibetan plateau, China [J]. Transportation Research Part D2005(11): 302-309
279. XU D Q, SHEN Y K. Photosynthetic efficiency and crop yield[A].New York:Marcel Dekker,2002:821-834.
280. YU Fang-yuan,Robert D Guy. Variable chlorophyll fluorescence in response to water plus heat stress treatments in three coniferous tree seedlings [J]. Journal of Forestry Research,2004, 15(1):24-28.
281. Zhai S,liang Y l,Zhang X et al.Effects of soil mulching on cucumber quality,water use efficiency and soil environment in greening house J].Trans Case,2008,24(3):65-70.
282. ZHOU H Y. Physioecological characteristic of four dominant plants species in kerqin sandland. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2000,11(4):587-590
283. Zhu L H, Peppel A V D, Li X Y,et al. Changes of leaf water potential and endogenous cytokinins in young apple trees treated with or without paclobutrazol under drought conditions[J].Scientia Horticulturae,2004,99(2):133-141.
284. Zhuang Shun-yao, Yin Bin, Zhu Zhao-liang.A simulation study on effect of surface film-forming material on water evaporation [J].Pedosphere,2001,11(1):67-72.
2.卜万锁等.覆盖对果园土壤水热状况及树体生长发育的影响[J].华北农学报,1994,6(3)：107-111.
3.曹生奎,冯起,司建华.植物水分利用效率研究方法综述[J].中国沙漠,2009,29(5)：853-858.
4.曹艳平,朱立新,贾克功.叶水势、丙二醛含量及保护酶活性与桃砧木抗旱性的关系[J].北京农学院学报,2005,22(3)：7-11.
5.常宏志.节水覆盖措施下桃园杂草发生的物候学规律[J].延安大学学报(自然科学版),2007,26(4)：68-72.
6.陈建.四种灌木植物光和效率对土壤水分的响应过程与机制[D].山东农业大学,2008.
7.陈珂.蛇莓等四种地被植物抗旱性研究[D],北京林业大学,2008.
8.陈绍光,李燕南,王沙生.空气和土壤干旱对不同杨树种类无性系生长及光合作用的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,1996,18(3)：35-41.
9.陈素英,张喜英,胡春胜,等.秸秆覆盖对夏玉米生长过程及水分利用的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2002,20(4)：55-66.
10.陈素英,张喜英,刘梦雨.玉米秸秆覆盖麦田下的土壤温度和上壤水分动态规律[J].中国农业气象,2002,23(4)：34-37.
11.陈万兴,王书宏,张晓.肥皂草的嫩枝扦插繁殖和栽培管理技术[J].山西农业科学2009,37(4)：50-52.
12.陈晓燕,王晓燕,杨强胜等.应用PV技术对7种园林树种耐旱性的研究[J].内蒙古农业大学学报,2007,28(2)：41-45.
13.陈有民.园林树木学[M].中国林业出版社,2006.
14.陈玉娟,王成,郄光发等.有机覆盖物对城市绿地土壤水分和温度的影响[J].中国城市林业,2009,7(3)：52-55.
15.程嘉翎,段建丽,王娜等.聚乙二醇模拟水分胁迫对桑树种子萌发和生理的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2006,34(24)：6420-6422.
16.程林梅,李古林,高洪文.水分胁迫对白羊草光合生理特性的影响[J].中国农学通报,2004,20(6)：238-240
17.崔向新,蒙仲举,高永等.不同材料覆盖的土壤蒸发效果分析[J].水上保持通报,2009,29(4)：81-83.
18.单长卷,郝文芳,梁宗锁等.不同土壤干旱程度对刺槐幼苗水分生理和生长指标的影响[J].西北农业学报,2005,14(2)：44—49.
19.邓勋飞,张后勇,何勇.水稻叶水势与不同水分处理定量关系研究[J].浙汀大学学报(农业与生命科学版),2005,31(5)：581-586.
20.丁华娇,应求是,章丹峰等.四种阴生地被植物的抗旱性比较研究[J].黑龙江农业科学 2008(3)：84-86.
21.董文渊.石中高速公路南段中分带绿化工程应用滴灌技术研究初探[J].辽宁交通科技,2005，11：75-77.
22.杜菁昀,杜占池,崔骁勇.内蒙古典型草原地区常见植物光合、蒸腾速率和水分利用效率的比较研究[J].草业科学,2003,20(6)：11-15.
23.樊赢.关于高速公路绿化几个问题的探讨[J].河南交通科技,1997(9)：22-24.
24.方玉东,张志国,胡业翠.不同覆盖物对建植结缕草草坪杂草的影响[J].草业科学,2002,19(2)：69-69.
25.费蓉葆.三种地被植物抗旱性初步研究[D].东北林业大学,2007.
26.冯敏.红壤丘陵区地面覆盖与柑桔产量及品质关系的研究[J].湖南农学院学报,1990,16(2)：141-149.
27.冯强,胡聃,李娜等.典型城区与郊区环境大叶黄杨气体交换及叶绿素荧光特性比较[J].生态学报,2009,29(7)：3477-3484.
28.付爱红,陈亚宁等.干旱、盐胁迫下的植物水势研究与进展[J].中国沙漠,2005,25(5)：744-750.
29.高辉远,邹琦,程炳嵩.大豆光合日变化的类型及其影响因素[J].大豆科学,1992,11：219-225
30.高俊风.植物生理学试验技术[M].西安：世界图书出版社,2000：36.
31.高丽霞,陈阳春,郑元彦.3种观赏藤本植物耐旱性研究[J].防护林科技,2007,4：45-47
32.高秀萍,张勇强,童兆平,等.覆盖秸秆对梨树几项水分生理指标的影响[J].山西农业科学,2001,29(2)：59-61.
33.高延军,张喜英,陈素英,等.冬小麦叶片水分利用生理机制的研究[J].华北农学报,
34.巩杰,黄高宝,陈利顶等.旱作麦田秸秆覆盖的生态效应综合研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2003,21(3)：69-73.
35.顾文芸.高速公路路体绿化[D].南京：南京林业大学,2003：25-37.
36.郭春芳,孙云,唐玉海等.水分胁迫对茶树叶片叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2009,17(3)：560-564.
37.郭慧,吕长平等.园林植物抗旱性研究进展[J].安徽农学通报,2009,15(7)：53-55.
38.郭连生,田有亮.4种针叶幼树光合速率、蒸腾速率与土壤含水量的关系及其抗旱性研究[J].应用生态学报,1994,5(1)：32-36.
39.郭连生,田有亮.压力—容积分析法在植物水分生理与抗旱性研究中的应用进展[J].内蒙古林学院学报,1990,(1)：3743.
40.郭连生,田有亮.9种针阔叶幼树的蒸腾速率、叶水势与环境因子关系的研究[J].生态学报,1992，12(1)：47-52.
41.郭连生,田有亮.八种针阔叶幼树清晨叶水势与土壤含水量的关系及其抗旱性研究[J].生态学杂志,1992,11(3)：4-7
42.郭卫华,李波,张新时.水分胁迫对沙棘和中间锦鸡儿蒸腾作用影响的比较[J].生态学报,2007.27(1)：4132-4040.
43.郭宪,金玉美,连海明等.麦秸覆盖对杂草萌发及玉米产量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(9)：2584-2585.
44.韩君,刘丽敏.大同地区高速公路绿化植物选择[J].科技情报开发与经 济,2009,19(23)：196-197.
45.韩玉杰,徐志防,叶万辉等.不同类型喀斯特植物的荧光特征及抗旱性比较[J].广西植物,2007,27(6)：9]8-922.
46.郝亦荣.生态垫覆盖对沙地土壤及林木生长影响[D].北京林业大学硕士学位论文.北京：北京林业大学图书馆,2005
47.侯连涛,焦念元,韩宾等.不同覆盖方式对土壤水分分布的影响[J].灌溉排水学报,2007,26(1)：47-50.
48.胡光胜.城市园林绿化的节水问题[J].城乡建设,2001,(4)：38.
49.胡继超,姜东,曹卫星.短期干旱对水稻叶水势、光合作用及干物质分配的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(1)：63-67.
50.胡学华,蒲光兰,肖千文等.水分胁迫下李树叶绿素荧光动力学特性研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2007,15(1)：75-77.
51.胡永红,张启翔,封培波.宿根花卉抗寒、耐热鉴定研究[J].中国园林,2004(6)：75-77.
52.户连荣,郎南军,郑科.植物抗旱性研究进展及发展趋势[J].安徽农业科学,2008,37(7)：2652-2654.
53.黄刚.高速公路中央分隔带绿化渗灌技术研究[D].山东大学,2008.
54.黄华宏,陈奋学,童再康等.矮生杉木光合特性及叶绿素荧光参数研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2009,31(2)：69-73.
55.黄颜梅,张健,罗承德.树木抗旱性研究(综述)[J].四川农业大学学报,1997,15(1)：49-54.
56.冀天会,张灿军,杨子光等.冬小麦叶绿索荧光参数与品种抗旱性的关系[J].麦类作物学报,2005,25(4)：64-66.
57.姜好胜,秦韶梅等.果园白三叶草种植技术[J].北方果树,2001,(3)：21.
58.蒋光藻,谭和平,黄苹.茶园杂草生态控制技术研究[J].西南农业学报,2003,16(3)：57-60.
59.康国芳,杨路华,李经伟.水分胁迫对小麦叶绿素a荧光参数的影响[J].2008,47(1)：22-24.
60.柯世省,杨敏文.水分胁迫对云锦杜鹃光合生理和光温响应的影响[J].园艺学报,2007,34(4)：959-964.
61.柯世省.干旱胁迫对夏蜡梅光合特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2007,27(6)：1209-1215.
62.孔详娟.国内外节水现状与节水措施[J].建设科技,2007(11)：48-49
63.郎有忠,胡健等.抗旱型稻根系形态与机能的研究[J].扬州大学学报2003,24(4)：58-61.
64.黎祜琛,邱治军.树木抗旱性及抗旱造林技术研究综述[J].世界林业研究,2003,16(4)：17-22.
65.李斌,李成,何高等.稻草覆盖对大麦生育特性的影响及高产配套技术[J].大麦科学,2004(1)：16-18.
66.李吉跃.PV技术在油松、侧柏苗木抗旱特征研究中应用[J].北京林业大学学报,1989.11(1)：3-11.
67.李吉跃.太行山区主要造林树种耐早特性的研究(Ⅴ)-耐旱生产力[J].北京林业大学学报,1999,21(3)：1-8.
68.李继文,王进鑫,张慕黎.干早及复水对刺槐叶水势的影响[J].西北林学院学报2009,21(3)：33-36
69.李进,张秀伏.利用梯度分析技术对12种锦鸡儿属植物抗旱性的定量研究[J].中国沙漠,1996,16(4)：356-359.
70.李俊杰,黄畴,杨立煜.节水灌溉技术在西部干旱地区高速公路绿化工程中的应用[J].公路,2003，2：121-126.
71.李禄军,蒋志荣,邵玲玲等.生态垫覆盖对沙丘土壤温度的影响[J].水土保持通报,2009,29(2)：140-143.
72.李鹏,李占斌,赵忠,等.渭北黄土高原不同立地上刺槐根系分布特征研究[J].水土保持通报,2002,22(5)：15-19
73.李荣,张睿,贾志宽.不同覆盖材料对耕层土壤温度及玉米出苗的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2009,27(3)：13-17.
74.李生秀等.中国旱地农业[M].北京：中国农业出版社,2003.
75.李晓,冯伟,曾晓春.叶绿素荧光分析技术及应用进展[J].西北植物学报,2006,26(10)：2186-2196
76.李艳秋,夏新莉,尹伟伦.水分胁迫对4种草坪草光合色素及叶绿素荧光参数的影响[J].河南农业科学,2007,(1)：69-73.
77.李援农,范兴科,樊惠芳,等.地膜覆盖灌水对土壤水分变化及作物生长的影响[J].水土保持研究,2002,9(2)：45-47.
78.李云霞.五种园林地被植物抗旱性初步研究[D]甘肃农业大学,2009.
79.李志军,罗青红,伍维模等.干旱胁迫对胡杨和灰叶胡杨光合作用及叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J].干旱区研究,2009,26(1)：45-52.
80.李自强,赵学仁,李宏.宁夏石中高速公路北段中央分隔带环保绿化植物选择的数理分析[J].宁夏农林科技,2003(5)：17-20.
81.梁君瑛,周金星,马履一等.水分胁迫下实生桑苗光合特性的研究[J].河北林果研究,2008,23(1)：1-4.
82.梁俊波,于欢.高速公路绿化节水抗旱技术[J].山东林业科技,2010,1：80-81
83.梁明霞.华北地区植被屋面植物材料筛选的初步研究[D].北京林业大学,2009.
84.廖飞勇,谢瑛,覃事妮等.常吉高速公路边坡绿化的植物选择[J].北方园艺2010(2)：142-144
85.廖光瑶SPAC的水势热力学系统[J].四川林业科技,1999,12(1)：47-52.
86.刘惠芬,高玉葆,张强等.土壤干旱胁迫对不同种群羊草光合及叶绿素荧光的影响[J].农业环境科学学报,2005,24(2)：209-213.
87.刘巧玲.街道绿化带土壤覆盖保水技术实验研究[D].新疆农业大学,2006.
88.刘仁涛,毕润成,任佳.翅果油树幼苗抗旱性[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(12)：1528-1531
89.刘旭胜.松针作为上壤改良物和地面覆盖物对越橘生长的影响[D].大连理工大学,2008.
90.刘莹、蔡祈明.大豆根系形态及苗期耐旱根系性状的研究[J].河北工程大学学报,2009,26(3)：81-84.
91.刘郁林,彭素琴.不同种金银花幼苗对水分胁迫的生理反应[J].赣南师范学院学报,2006,(6)：85-87.
92.鲁敏.部分园林植物对大气污染物吸收净化的研究[J].山东建筑工程学院学报,2002.2(6)：杨勇,曹斌,王荣印.保水剂在公路绿化中的应用技术研究[J].华东公路,2002,(3)：74-76.
93.吕迎霞.国外公路绿化及相关标准现状.公路交通科技,2007(7)： 5-8.
94.罗俊,张木清,吕建林,等.水分胁迫对不同甘蔗品种叶绿素a荧光动力学的影响[J].福建
95.马宗斌,李伶俐,方卫平等.麦秆覆盖对土壤温度变化和棉花生长发育的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,2004,38(4)：155-158.
96.毛学森,曾江海.硬覆盖对土壤水热传输及作物生长发育影响的试验研究[J].生态学杂志,2000,19(2)：68-71.
97.毛玉林.覆盖对土壤微环境的影响及其在农业上的应用[J].草业科学,1998,15(6)：69-70.
98.门旗,李毅,冯广平.地膜覆盖对土壤棵间蒸发影响的研究[J].灌溉排水学报,2003,22(2)：17-25.
99.孟玉平,曹秋芬,横田清.针叶树废材覆盖控制苹果园和越橘园杂草发生的研究[J].山西农业科学2002,30(1)：66-69.
100.潘瑞炽.植物生理学(第五版)[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2004：15-17
101.蒲光兰,周兰英,胡学华等.干旱胁迫对金太阳杏叶绿素荧光动力学参数的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究,2005,23(3)：44-48.
102.钱莲文,郭建宏等.干旱胁迫对常绿杨光合特性及生长量的影响[J].福建林学院学报2009,29(1)：57-61.
103.冉辛拓,郝宝锋,张新生.干旱过程中苹果茎水势和叶水势的变化研究[J].河北农业科学,2009,13(4)：16-17,
104.山寺喜成,安保昭,吉田宽,著.罗晶,等编译.恢复自然环境绿化工程概论[M].北京：中国科学技术出版社,1997：23-37.
105.尚富德,董美芳,袁王俊.桂花叶解剖结构的研究[J].西北植物学报2003,23(12)：2207-2210
106.邵麟惠,于应文,张德罡.灌木抗旱机理研究[J].草业科学,2007,24(3)：22-27.
107.邵社刚,付美兰.西北地区高速公路绿化树种选择及其栽植技术[J].公路交通科技,2002,19(4)：156-158.
108.申艳梅.景天科植物的耐旱性及其机理研究[D].内蒙古农业大学,2010.
109.沈淑红,倪琪.节水型园林-城市可持续发展的必然要求[J].中国园林,2003,19(12)：54-57.
110.沈淑红,倪琪.节水型园林-城市可持续发展的必然要求[J].中国园林,2003,19(12)：54-57.
111.史刚荣,赵金丽,马成仓.淮北相山不同群落中3种禾草叶片的生态解剖[J].草业学报,
112.史燕山,骆建霞,王煦等.5种草本地被植物抗旱性研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报,33(5)：130-134.
113.宋凤斌,戴俊荣.干旱胁迫下秸秆覆盖增强玉米耐旱性的研究[J].中国沙漠,2001,21(1)：58-61
114.宋丽华,张凯.应用PV技术评价银川市7种针叶绿化树种抗旱性[J].西北农业学报2009,18(2)：225-229
115.苏兴.北京地区几种蔷薇属植物的抗旱性研究[D].北京林业大学,2007.
116.隋益虎,赵勋.不同覆盖方式的上壤温、湿度变化及对紫甘蓝早熟栽培的影响[J].土壤,2000(3)：155-160.
117.孙谷畴,赵平等.亚热带森林演替树种叶片气孔导度对环境水分的水力响应[J].生态学报,2009，29(2)：698-676.
118.孙建霞.京沪高速公路某穿越居民区段环境噪声调查[J].环境与健康杂志,2001(6)： 349-354.
119.孙书存等.恢复生态学[M].化学工业出版社,2004.
120.孙彦楠,周广柱,祝龙.不同抗旱措施在干旱半干旱地区公路绿化中的应用研究[J].安徽农业科技,2006,34(3)：468-469.
121.孙彦楠,周广柱,祝龙.抗旱造林技术的应用研究[J].林业科学,2006,,22(2)：118-120.
122.孙志虎,王庆成.应用PV技术对北方4种阔叶树抗旱性的研究[J].林业科学,2003,39(2)：33-38
123.覃鹏,刘叶菊,曾淑华等.高海拔地区烟草光合作用的日变化[J].亚热带植物科学,2004,33(3)：16-18.
124.覃鹏,杨志稳,孔治有等.干旱对烟草旺长期光合作用的影响[J].亚热带植物科学,2004,33(2)：5-7.
125.汤章城.植物对水分胁迫的反应和适应性植物对干旱的反应和适应性[J].植物生理学通,1983,(4)：1-7.
126.唐甜甜,赵林森,董燕.水分胁迫对滇润楠和香樟幼苗叶绿素荧光和叶水势的影响[J].西北林学院学报,2007,22(4)：16-20
127.田有亮,郭连生.应用PV技术对7种针阔叶幼树抗旱性的研究[J].应用生态学报,1990,1(2)：114-119.
128.田治国.陕西关中地区园林植物抗逆性研究[D].西北农林科技大学,2009.
129.脱云飞,费良军,杨路华等.秸秆覆盖对夏玉米农田土壤水分与热量影响的模拟研究[J].农业工程学报,2007,23(6)：27-32.
130.王改玲,郝明德,李仲谨.不同覆盖物和蒸发抑制剂对土壤蒸发影响的研究初报[J].水土保持研究,2003,10(1)：134.
131.王国富,李连国等.沙棘叶片表面形态特征与抗旱性的关系[J].园艺学报,2006,33(6)：1310-1312.
132.王海珍,韩蕊莲,梁宗锁等.上壤干旱对辽东栎、大叶细裂槭幼苗生长及水分利用的影响[J].西北植物学报,2003,23(8)：1377-1382.
133.王慧杰,冯瑞云,张志军等.不同有机覆盖物对土壤水分蒸发的影响[J].山西农业科学2009,37(6)：42-44,49.
134.王继强,李吉跃,刘娟娟.八个绿化树种水分状况与水力结构的季节变化[J].北京林业大学学报,2005,27(4)：43-49.
135.王建伟,周凌云.土壤水分变化对金银花叶片生理生态特征的影响[J].上壤,2007,39(3)：479-482.
136.王进.覆盖对山地李园土壤性状和树体生长发育的影响[D].西南大学,2008.
137.王进鑫,黄宝龙,罗伟祥.局部覆盖条件下干旱过程对土壤水分蒸发的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2004,32(9)：106-109.
138.王进鑫,黄宝龙,罗伟祥.局部覆盖条件下干旱过程对土壤水分蒸发的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2004,32(9)：106-110.
139.王俊,李风民,贾宇.半干旱地区播前灌溉和地膜覆盖对春小麦产量形成的影响[J].中国沙漠,2004,24(1)：77-82.
140.王连平,王汉荣,茹水江等.芦笋田杂草及地膜覆盖除草作用研究[J].江西农业学报2006,18(4)：126-128
141.王淼,李秋荣,郝占庆等.土壤水分变化对长白山主要树种蒙古栎幼树生长的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(10)：1765-1770
142.王明权,李效栋,景明.覆盖免耕的节水效应与土壤温度的变化[J].甘肃农业大学学报,2007,42(1)：119-122.
143.王强,陈存根,钱红格等.水分胁迫对6种苗木光合生理特性的影响[J].水土保持通报,29(2)：144-145.
144.王琼,宋桂龙,韩烈保等.5种野生护坡植物的抗旱综合性评价[J].福建农林大学学报,2008,37(2)：153-157.
145.王荣堂,张竹青,王有宁.地膜覆盖对蒸腾蒸发的影响[J].湖北农学院学报,2002,22(2)：101-103,114.
146.王万里.植物对水分胁迫的响应[J].植物生理学通迅,1981,5：55-64.
147.王文焰,张健丰,王全九,等.黄土浑水入渗能力的试验研究[J].水土保持学报,1994,8(1)：59-62.
148.王怡.三种抗旱植物叶片解剖结构的对比观察[J].四川林业科技,2003,24(1)：64-67.
149.王颖,魏国印,张志强等.7种园林树种光合参数及水分利用效率的研究[J].河北农业大学学报,2006,29(6)：44-48.
150.王玉涛.北京城市优良抗旱节水植物材料的筛选与评价研究[D].北京林业大学,2008.
151.王忠.植物生理学[M].北京：中国农业出版社,1999,452-455.
152.魏显威.中国高等级公路交通噪声污染及其防治[J].空气和噪音污染2004(3)：12-15.
153.温达志,周国逸,张德强等.四种禾本科牧草植物蒸腾速率与水分利用效率的比较[J].热带亚热带植物学报,2000,增刊,67-76.
154.温国胜,吉川贤,张国盛等.干旱胁迫条件下臭柏的生长[J].内蒙古农业大学学报,2004,
155.吴从林,黄介生,沈荣开.地膜覆盖在冬小麦生育期内增温保墒作用的试验研究[J].中国农村水利水电,2001,(8)：7-9.
156.吴婕,朱钟麟,郑家国,等.秸秆覆盖还田对土壤理化性质及作物产量的影响[J].西南农业学报,2006,19(2)：192-195.
157.吴涌泉,屈明,孙芬等.秸秆覆盖对土壤理化性状、微生物及生态环境的影响[J].中国农学通报2009,25(14)：263-268
158.武维华.植物生理学[M].科学出版社,2003
159.夏明忠.高粱根系形态和杭旱性的关系[J].植物和土攘,1989,119(2)：217-221.
160.夏艳君.茶园不同覆盖措施的土壤生态效应研究[D].湖南农业大学,2006.
161.肖润林,彭晚霞,王久荣,等.稻草覆盖对红壤丘陵茶园的生态调控效应[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(5)：507-511.
162.肖润林,向佐湘,徐华勤等.间种白三叶草和稻草覆盖控制丘陵茶园杂草效果[J].农业工程学报,2008,24(11)：183-187.
163.谢会成,朱西存.水分胁迫对栓皮栎幼苗生理特性及生长的影响[J].山东林业科技,2004,(2)：6-8.
164.谢贤健,兰代萍,白景文.三种野生岩生草本植物的抗旱性综合评价[J].草业科学,2009,18(4)：75-80.
165.谢贤群.我国主要类型地区农业生态系统作物需水、耗水、水分利用效率研究[C].北京,气象出版社,1996：64-81.
166.辛娟.高速公路边坡生态防护技术研究[D].长安大学,2006.
167.熊广忠.公路绿化初步探讨[J].中国公路学报,1995,8(3)：38-44.
168.徐炳成,山仑,黄占斌.草坪草对干旱胁迫的反应及适应性研究进展[J].中国草地,2001,23(2)：55-61.
169.徐克学.生物数学[M].北京：科学出版社,1999.
170.徐胜利,陈小青,陈青云.荒漠绿洲香梨园生草覆盖节水省肥效应的研究[J].新疆农业科学,2004,9(4)：164-168.
171.许大全.光合作用效率[M].上海,上海科学技术出版社,2002.
172.许香春.麻地膜覆盖对上壤生态及作物生长发育的影响[D].中国农业科学院.
173.闫海龙,张希明,许浩等.塔里木沙漠公路防护林3种植物光合特性对干旱胁迫的响应[J].生态学报2010,30(10)：2519—2528
174.严昌荣,韩兴国,陈灵芝.六种木本植物水分利用效率和其小生境关系研究[J].生态学报,2001，21(11)：1952-1956.
175.杨朝选,焦国利,王新峰.干旱过程中桃树茎和叶水势的变化[J].果树科学,1999,16(4)：267-271.
176.杨静慧,杨焕婷.苹果树植物叶片角质层厚度与植物抗旱性[J].天津农学院学报,1996,3(3)：27-29.
177.杨茂仁,季蒙,崔清涛等.北方地区高速公路绿化设计与工程技术研究[J].内蒙古林业科技,2003,(3)：44-48.
178.杨鑫光,傅华,张洪荣等.水分胁迫对霸王苗期叶水势和生物量的影响[J].草业学报,15(2)：37-41.
179.姚健，王丁，张显松.不同地表覆盖方式对土壤水分、温度及幼苗生长的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2009,33(5)：7-11.
180.姚青云,张淑娥.滴灌技术在西部早区高速公路中分带绿化工程中的应用[J].农业科学研究,2005,26(4)：50-52.
181.叶慧海.发达国家的公路建设与环境保护[J].公路环境,2006,3(11)：45-60.
182.殷海善,王改玲.膨润土改性沥青覆盖地而的水分效应试验[J].干旱地区农业研究,2000,18(3)：83-86.
183.殷晓洁,李玉灵,卜志国等.华北地区几种常见园林绿化树种节水性和抗旱性评价[J].河北农业大学学报,2008,31(4)：22-29.
184.张道远,尹林克,潘伯荣.柽柳属植物抗旱性能研究及其应用潜力评价[J].中国沙漠,2003,23(3)：252-256.
185.张福计,李林英,龚怀勋等.4个造林树种抗早特性的初步研究[J].山西林业科技,1990,9：42-46.
186.张国芳.偃麦属植物光和特性及其抗旱性鉴定研究[D].中国农业科学院,2006.
187.张华,王百田,郑培龙.黄土半干旱区不同土壤水分条件下刺槐蒸腾速率的研究[J].水土保持学报,2006,20(2)：122-125.
188.张慧斌,林松苍.果园不同管理方法比较试验[J].福建果树,1985(4)：42-45
189.张建国,李吉跃,沈国舫著.树木耐早特性及其机理研究[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2000.
190.张明炷,石秀兰.不同土水势对油菜的影响及适宜灌水势值研究[J].农田水利,1992,5：8-11.
191.张岁岐,山仑.植物水分利用效率及其研究进展[J].干旱地区农业研究,2002,20(4)：1-5
192.张玮宏.大庆地区三种地被植物的引种及抗旱性研究[D].东北林业大学,2008.
193.张义,谢永生,郝明德等.不同地表覆盖方式对苹果园土壤性状及果树生长和产量的影响[J].农业工程学报,2010,21(2)：279-286.
194.张正斌.作物抗旱节水的生理遗传育种基础[M].北京：科学出版社,2003：1-60
195.赵军营,王利军,牛铁泉等.苹果幼苗部分根系水分胁迫对光合作用主要参数的影响[J].果树学报,2005,22(5)：446-449.
196.郑本暖,叶功富,卢昌义等.干旱胁迫对4种植物蒸腾特性的影响[J].亚热带植物科学,2007,36(1)：36-38.
197.郑淑霞,上官周平.8种阔叶树种叶片气体交换特征和叶绿素荧光特性比较[J].生态学报,2006,26(4)：1080-1087
198.钟继洪,廖观荣等.不同土壤水分条件下幼龄桉树生理生态特点分析[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(5)：126-128.
199.种秀灵.高速公路生态绿化植物的选择研究[D].武汉理工大学,2007.
200.朱教君,康宏樟,李智辉.不同水分胁迫方式对沙地樟子松幼苗光合特性的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,2006,28(2)：57-62.
201.朱教君,康宏樟,李智辉等.水分胁迫对不同年龄沙地樟子松幼苗存活与光合特性影响[J].生态学报,2005,25(10)：2527-2533.
202.朱万泽,薛建辉,王金锡.台湾桤木种源对水分胁迫的光合响应及其抗旱性[J].水土保持
203.庄丽,陈亚宁,陈明等.模糊隶属法在塔里木河荒漠植物抗旱性评价中的应用[J].干旱区地理,2005,28(3)：367-372.
204.邹凯.不同覆盖栽培模式对烟田土壤环境和烤烟生长及产质量的影响[D].广西大学,2008.
205.左轶璆,郭连生.运用PV技术研究树种的抗旱性[J].阴山学刊,2009,23(2)：27-30.
206. Atkinson C J, Policarpo, Webster M,et al. Drought tolerance of clonal Malus determined from measurements of stomatal conductance and leaf water potential[J].Tree Physiol,2000,20:557-563.
207. Beard J B. Turf grass:Science and Culture [M]. Englewood Cliffs,1973.
208. Bierhuizen J F,Slatyer R O.Effects of atmospheric concentration of water vapor and CO2 in determining transpiration photosynthesis relationships of cotton leaves [J]. Gricultural Biology, 2007,58:163-181
209. Blackman P G, DavisW J. Root to shoot communication in maize Plants of the effeet of soil drying[J].ExP Bot,1985,36:39-48.
210. Bohn B A, Kershner J L.Establishing aquatic restoration priorities using a watershed approach[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2002,64(4):355-363
211. Boucher J F, Munson AD, Bernier PY. Foliar absorption of dew influences shootwater potential and root growth in Pinus strobes seedlings[J] Tree Physiology,1995,(15):819-823.
212. Campbell C A, Lafond G.P, Zentner R P,et al. Influence of fertilizer and straw baling on soil organic matter in a thin black chernozem in western Canada[J].Soil Biology and Biochemistry,1991,23(5):443-446.
213. Castal JR,Feree E. Response of yong almond trees to two drought periods in the field[J]. Hort Sci, 1982,57:175-187
214. Cornic G. Drought stress inhibits photosynthesis by decreasing stomatal aperture-not by affecting ATP synthesis[J].Trends in Plant Science,2000,5(5):187-188
215. Cowan I R,Lange O L,Green G A.Carbon-dioxide exchange in lichens:determination of transport and carboxylation characteristics[J].Planta,1992,187:282-294.
216. Cregg B M, Zhang J W. Physiology and morphology of Pinus sylvestrisfrom diverse sources under cyclic drought stress [J]. Forest Ecology and Management,2001,154:131-139.
217. Davies W J, Zhang J. Root signals and the regulation of growth and development of plants in drying soil[J].Ann.Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.,1991,42:55-C76.
218. Denmead 0 T,Shaw R H. Availability of soilwater to plant as affected by soil moisture content and meteorological conditions[J].Agronomy,1962,54:385-390
219. Dominique C, Bergmann,Fred D.Sack Stomtal development[J].The Annual Review of Plant Biology,2007,58:163-181
220. Downton W J. Osmotic adjustment during water stress protects the photosynthetic apparatus against photoinhabition [J].Plant Sci Lett,1983,30:137-143
221.Fank J H. The primary productivity of lawns in a temperate environment [J]. Appl End,1980,17:109-114.
222. Farquhar G D, Sharkey T D. Stomata conductance and photosynthesis[J]. Ann Rev Plant Physiol,1982,33:317-319.
223. Fischer R A.Growth and water limitation to dryland wheat yield in Australia:A physiological framework [J].Aust Inst Agric Sci,1979,45:83-94.
224. Forman, R.T.T. Estimate of the area affected ecologically by the road system in the United States[J].Conservation Biology,2000 (14):31-35.
225. Garcia A, Gonzalez MC. Morphological marker for the earlyselection of drought-tolerant rice varieties[J].Cultivate Tropical.1997,18:(2):47-50.
226. Gamier E,Berger A.Testing water potential in peach trees as an indicator of water stress[J]. Hort Sci,1985,60(1):47-56
227. Gina Brito, Armando Costa, Henrique M A C, etal. Response of Olea europarate asp. Maderensis in vitro shoots exposed to osmotic stress[J]. Scientia Horticulturae,2003,97:411-417.
228. Groenevelt P H, Van Straaten P, Rasiah V,et al. Modifications in evaporation parameters by rock mulches[J]. Soil Technology,1989,(2):279-285.
229. Hays K L,Barber J F,Kenna M P,etc. Drought avoidance mechanisms of selected bermudagrass genotyps[J]. Hort,Sci,1991,26 (2):180-182.
230. Heitholt J J.Water use efficiency and dry matter distribution in nitrogen and water-stressed winter wheat[J].Agron,989,81:464-469
231.Heschel M S,Donohue K,Hausmann N,et al..Population differentiation and natural selection for water-use efficiency in impatiens capensis(Balsaminaceae)[J].International Journal of Plant Science,2002,163(6):907-912
232. Holmgren M.Combined effects of shade and drought on tulip poplar seedlings:trade-off in tolerance or facilitation[J].Oikos,2000,90:67-78.
233. Horton R.Aguirre-Luna O.Wirenga P J.Observed and predicted two-dimensional soil temperature distributions under a row crop[J].Soil Sci.Soc.Am.J.1984,48:1147-1152.
234. Hugo A P,FABIO M D, Agnaldo R M C,et al. Drought tolerance is associated with rooting depth and stomatal control of water use in clones of coffea canephora[J].Annals of Botany,2005,96(1):101-108
235. Jones HG,Lakso AN,Syvertsen JP. Physiological control of water status in temperate and subtropical fruit trees[J].Hort Reviews,1985,7:301-304
236. Jongdee. B, Fukai. S, Cooper. M.Leaf water potential and osmotic adjustment as physiological traits to improve drought tolerance in rice [J].Field Corps Research,2002,76:153-163.
237. Jose Froment, Gerald Domon. Viewer appreciation of highway landscapes:The contribution of ecologically managed embankments in Quebec, Canada[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006(78):14-32
238. Kalapos T, Mazsa. Juniper shade enables terricolous and mosses to maintain high photochemical efficiency in a semiarid temperate sand grassland[J]. Photosynthetica,2001,39(2):263-268.
239. KELES Y, NCEL I.Response of antioxidative defence system to temperature and water stress combinations in wheat seedlings[J].Plant Science,2002,163:783-790.
240. Kowalik P,Borghetti M,Borselli L,etc. Diurnal water relations of beeeh trees in the mountains of Italy[J]. Agrieultural and Forest Meteorology,1997,84(1-2):11-23.
241. Kramer P J & Kozlowski T T. Physiology of trees(second edition)[M].New York: McGraw-Hill,1979.
242. Kramer P J. Plant and soil water relationships:a modern synthesis[M]. New York:McGrow-Hill Book Co,1969.
243. Kramer P J. Water Relations of Plants[M]. New York:Academic Press,1983:405-409.
244. Krause G H, Weis E. Chlorophyll fluorescence and photosynthesis:The basis[J]. Annu.Rev. Plant Physiol.Plant Mol.Biol,1991,42:313-349.
245. KuPPers M. Carbon relations and competition between woody species in central European hedgerow[J].Oceologia,1984,64:332-343.
246. Larcher W. Physiological plant ecology(fourth edition)[M].New York:Heidelberg Springer-Verlag, 2003,231-245.
247. Levitt J.Respones of plants to environmental stress[M]. Academic Press,1972.
248. Li Yinguo, Chen Jianxiang. Effect of coverture on variations of soil temperature in hilly citzvs orchard [J]. Journal of Southwest Agricultural University,1996,18(3):23-25
249. Liang Y L,Zhang C E,Guo D W.Mulch types and their benefit in cropland ecosystems on the loess Plateau in China[J].Plant Nutr.2002,25(5):945-955.
250. Liu F L, Andersen M N, Jensen C R. Root signal controlspod growth in drought-stressed soybean during the critical,abortion-sensitive phase of pod development[J].Field Crops Research,2004,85 (3):159-166.
251. LIU Y, DENG L Q. The Drought resistance of the main tree Species in relation with their root Characteristics in the Western Areas of Liaoning Province [J].Journal of Sheng yang Agheultural University,1995,26(2):171-176.
252. Marcum K B,Engelke M C,Morton S J,etc. Rooting characteristics and associated drought resistance of zoysiagrass [J]. Agron J,1995,87:534-538.
253. Maria J C, Dulce C, Maria M D. Response to seasonal drought in three cultivars of Ceratonia siliqua:leaf growth and water relations [J]. Tree Physiology,2001,(21):645-653.
254. Massaccl A, Jones H G. Use of simultaneous analysis of gas-exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence quenching for analyzing the effects of water stress on photosynthesis in apple leaves[J].Trees-Structure-and-Function,1990,4(1):1-8
255.Medrano H.,Escalona J M,Bota J,et al..Regulation of photosynthesis of C3 plants in response to progressive drought:stomatal conductance as a reference parameter[J].Annals of Botany,2002,89(7):895-905
256. Mohammadreza Ghaffarzadeh.Tillage effect on soil water content and com yeld in strip intercropping system[J].Agronomy Journal,1997,89(6):893-899.
257. Monnevux P,Rekika D,Acevedo E. Effect of drought on leaf gas exchange, carbon isotope discrimination, transpi-ration efficiency and productivity in field grown durum wheat genotypes[J].Plant Science,2006,170:867-872.
258. Morte A, Lovisolo C, Schubert A. Effect of drought stress on growth and water relations of the mycorrhizal association Helianthemum almeriense-Terfezia claveryi[J].Mycorrhiza,2000, 10:115-119.
259. Mrema A F, Granhall U. Sennerby-Forsse plant growth, leaf water potential, nitrogenase activity and nodule anatomy in Leucaena leucocephalaas affected by water stress and nitrogen availability[J].Trees-Structure and Function,1997,12(1):42-48.
260. Naor A.Relationship between leaf and stem water potential and stomatal conductance in three field-grown woody species[J].Hort Sci & Biotechnology,1998,73:431-436
261. Pearce,D M. Practical water saving for growers, landscapers and garden centres[J].International Water and Irrigation Review,1994,(4):10-13.
262. Romic D,Romic M,Borosic J,Poljak M.Mulching decreases nitrate leaching in bell pepper cultivation[J].Water Manag.2003,60:87-97.
263. Rouhi V, Samson R, LemeurR, VanDamme P. Photosynthetic gas exchange characteristics in three differentalmond speciesduring droughtstress and subsequent recovery[J].. Environmental and Experimental Botany,2007,59(2):117-129.
264. Sanchez F J, Manzanares M, deAndresE E, etc.Turgor maintenanee,osmotie Adjustment and soluble sugar and Proline aceumulation in 49 Pea cultivars in response to water stress[J].Field Crops Research,1998,59(3):225-235.
265. Schreber U, Bilger W,Neubauer C. Chlorophyll fluorescence as a non-destructive indicator for rapid assessment of invivo photosynthesis[J].Ecological Studies,1994,100:49-70.
266. Seilre J R. Photosynthesis and transpiration of loblolly pine seedlings as influenced by moisture-stress conditioning [J]. Forest Sci,1985,31(3):742-749.
267. Sera, Bozena. Road vegetation in Central Europe-an example from the Czech Republic [J]. biology,2008,63(6):1085-1088.
268. Sorochan J C, Rogers N J. The effect of mulch type for rutrgrfass establishment withinaerfined wood fiber matover Plastic [J]. Journal of Environmental Horticulutre,2001,19(2):61-64
269. Steduto p, Katerji N, Puertos-molina H.Water-use efficiency of sweet sorghum under water stress conditions:Gas-exchange investigations at leaf and canopy scales[J].Field Crops Research,1997,54:221-234.
270. Tackett J C, Pearson R W. Soil characteristics of soil crusts formed by simulated rainfall [J]. Soil Sci,2004,49:407-413.
271. Tardieu F, Davies W J. Stomatal response to abscisic acid is a function of current plant water status [J].Plant Physiol,1992,98:540-C545.
272. Thomas K D,Reid WJ,Comena P G. Vegetation management using Polyehtylene mulch mats and Glyphosate herbicide in a eoastal British Columbia hybrid poplar plantation:four-year growth response[J]. Western Journal of Applied Forestry,2001,16(1):26-30.
273. Tim Horberry, Janet Anderson. Driver distraction:The effects of concurrent in-vehicle tasks, road environment complexity and age on driving performance [J]. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2006(38):185-191.
274. Townley Smith TF, Hurd EA.Testing and selecting for drought resistance in wheat [J].Stress Physiology in crop plants,1979,10:447-464.
275. Turner N C. Adaptation to water deficits:a changing perspective[J].Australian Journal Plant Physiology,1986,13(2):175-190.
276. Vankooten O, Snelj F H.The use of chlorophyll fluorescence nomenclature in plant stress physiology[J].Photosynth.Res,1990,25(4):147-150.
277. White D A, Beadle C L, Worledge D. Leaf water relations of Eucalyptus globulus ssp.globulus and E. nitens:seasonal, drought and species effects [J]. Tree Physiology,1996,(16):469-476.
278. Xianli Xu, Keli Zhang, Yaping Kong. Effectiveness of erosion control measures along the Qinghai-Tibet highway, Tibetan plateau, China [J]. Transportation Research Part D2005(11): 302-309
279. XU D Q, SHEN Y K. Photosynthetic efficiency and crop yield[A].New York:Marcel Dekker,2002:821-834.
280. YU Fang-yuan,Robert D Guy. Variable chlorophyll fluorescence in response to water plus heat stress treatments in three coniferous tree seedlings [J]. Journal of Forestry Research,2004, 15(1):24-28.
281. Zhai S,liang Y l,Zhang X et al.Effects of soil mulching on cucumber quality,water use efficiency and soil environment in greening house J].Trans Case,2008,24(3):65-70.
282. ZHOU H Y. Physioecological characteristic of four dominant plants species in kerqin sandland. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2000,11(4):587-590
283. Zhu L H, Peppel A V D, Li X Y,et al. Changes of leaf water potential and endogenous cytokinins in young apple trees treated with or without paclobutrazol under drought conditions[J].Scientia Horticulturae,2004,99(2):133-141.
284. Zhuang Shun-yao, Yin Bin, Zhu Zhao-liang.A simulation study on effect of surface film-forming material on water evaporation [J].Pedosphere,2001,11(1):67-72.