中国沙漠 ›› 2025, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (4): 43-56.DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2025.00073
刘新平1,2(), 胡鸿姣1,2,4, 何玉惠1,3, 徐远志1,2,4, 景家琪1,2,4, 张尧1,2,4
收稿日期:
2025-04-25
修回日期:
2025-06-03
出版日期:
2025-07-20
发布日期:
2025-08-18
作者简介:
刘新平(1978—),男,甘肃瓜州人,研究员,博士生导师,主要从事生态水文学与恢复生态学研究。E-mail: liuxinping@lzb.ac.cn
基金资助:
Xinping Liu1,2(), Hongjiao Hu1,2,4, Yuhui He1,3, Yuanzhi Xu1,2,4, Jiaqi Jing1,2,4, Yao Zhang1,2,4
Received:
2025-04-25
Revised:
2025-06-03
Online:
2025-07-20
Published:
2025-08-18
摘要:
干旱半干旱区陆地生态系统中,关键植物种群的动态变化是植被结构调整的核心驱动力,也是植被响应降水变化的生态基础。本研究以中国北方半干旱区科尔沁沙质草地植被为对象,通过降水变化控制实验,解析关键种群对降水变化的响应路径及其生态功能分异特征,进而识别植被结构的种群水平配置规律。结果表明:降水减少驱动多年生优势植物种被一年生植物替代,如糙隐子草(Cleistogenes squarrosa)的重要值和生态位宽度可由0.21和5.06降低至0,而降水增加仅微调各优势种的优势度。降水变化下,植被指示种功能分异明显:降水增加以多年生植物为主,如糙隐子草指示值可达0.25;降水减少以半灌木为主,如兴安胡枝子(Lespedeza bicolor)指示值可达0.23;阶段性干旱则为猪毛菜(Salsola collina)等一年生植物,指示值为0.39。植被泛化种对阶段性干旱较为敏感,植被特化种对极端降水变化较为敏感,二者生态位收缩均触发中性类群物种数占比增加以填补空缺。具有高重要值、高指示性、广生态位或特殊生态位的关键种均可对降水处理组间差异具有重要贡献。这些关键种群结构特征对降水的极端变化、减少及春季变化会更敏感。本研究强调结合降水格局与对应关键缓冲植物种来优化植被空间配置的可行性,可为半干旱沙质草地植被响应气候变化的适应性管理提供理论支撑。
中图分类号:
刘新平, 胡鸿姣, 何玉惠, 徐远志, 景家琪, 张尧. 科尔沁沙质草地关键植物种群动态对降水变化的响应[J]. 中国沙漠, 2025, 45(4): 43-56.
Xinping Liu, Hongjiao Hu, Yuhui He, Yuanzhi Xu, Jiaqi Jing, Yao Zhang. Response of key plant populations dynamics to precipitation changes in Horqin Sandy Grassland[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(4): 43-56.
分类 | 物种名 | 拉丁学名 | 相对重要值 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CK | D5 | D7 | -30%P | -60%P | +30%P | +60%P | |||
一年生 | 大果虫实 | Corispermum hyssopifolium | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.1 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
地锦 | Euphorbia humifusa | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | — | |
狗尾草 | Setaria viridis | 0.21 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.29 | 0.43 | 0.08 | 0.22 | |
虎尾草 | Chloris virgata | 0.01 | — | — | 0.01 | — | 0.01 | — | |
画眉草 | Eragrostis pilosa | 0.09 | 0.23 | — | — | — | 0.1 | 0.15 | |
蒺藜 | Cenchrus echinatus | 0.20 | 0.17 | 0.42 | 0.16 | 0.33 | 0.23 | 0.12 | |
尖头叶藜 | Chenopodium acuminatum | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.001 | |
砂蓝刺头 | Echinops gmelini | 0.01 | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
雾冰藜 | Grubovia dasyphylla | — | 0.01 | — | 0.01 | — | 0.02 | — | |
猪毛菜 | Salsola collina | 0.03 | 0.15 | 0.02 | — | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |
一二年生 | 大籽蒿 | Artemisia sieversiana | 0.03 | 0.02 | — | 0.07 | 0.03 | — | 0.06 |
多年生 | 糙隐子草 | Cleistogenes squarrosa | 0.21 | 0.08 | 0.19 | 0.15 | — | 0.23 | 0.29 |
芦苇 | Phragmites australis | — | — | — | 0.04 | — | 0.02 | — | |
砂引草 | Tournefortia sibirica | — | — | — | 0.02 | 0.05 | — | — | |
野艾蒿 | Artemisia lavandulaefolia | 0.01 | 0.02 | — | 0.08 | — | 0.05 | — | |
硬阿魏 | Ferula bungeana | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.01 | |
针茅 | Stipa capillata | 0.03 | 0.05 | — | — | — | 0.04 | 0.02 | |
猪毛蒿 | Artemisia scoparia | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | — | 0.08 | 0.04 | |
地梢瓜 | Cynanchum thesioides | 0.01 | — | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | — | 0.02 | |
兴安胡枝子 | Lespedeza bicolor | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.06 | — | 0.02 | 0.01 |
表1 沙质草地植物重要值
Table 1 Plant importance values in sandy grassland
分类 | 物种名 | 拉丁学名 | 相对重要值 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CK | D5 | D7 | -30%P | -60%P | +30%P | +60%P | |||
一年生 | 大果虫实 | Corispermum hyssopifolium | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.1 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
地锦 | Euphorbia humifusa | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | — | |
狗尾草 | Setaria viridis | 0.21 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.29 | 0.43 | 0.08 | 0.22 | |
虎尾草 | Chloris virgata | 0.01 | — | — | 0.01 | — | 0.01 | — | |
画眉草 | Eragrostis pilosa | 0.09 | 0.23 | — | — | — | 0.1 | 0.15 | |
蒺藜 | Cenchrus echinatus | 0.20 | 0.17 | 0.42 | 0.16 | 0.33 | 0.23 | 0.12 | |
尖头叶藜 | Chenopodium acuminatum | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.001 | |
砂蓝刺头 | Echinops gmelini | 0.01 | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
雾冰藜 | Grubovia dasyphylla | — | 0.01 | — | 0.01 | — | 0.02 | — | |
猪毛菜 | Salsola collina | 0.03 | 0.15 | 0.02 | — | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |
一二年生 | 大籽蒿 | Artemisia sieversiana | 0.03 | 0.02 | — | 0.07 | 0.03 | — | 0.06 |
多年生 | 糙隐子草 | Cleistogenes squarrosa | 0.21 | 0.08 | 0.19 | 0.15 | — | 0.23 | 0.29 |
芦苇 | Phragmites australis | — | — | — | 0.04 | — | 0.02 | — | |
砂引草 | Tournefortia sibirica | — | — | — | 0.02 | 0.05 | — | — | |
野艾蒿 | Artemisia lavandulaefolia | 0.01 | 0.02 | — | 0.08 | — | 0.05 | — | |
硬阿魏 | Ferula bungeana | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.01 | |
针茅 | Stipa capillata | 0.03 | 0.05 | — | — | — | 0.04 | 0.02 | |
猪毛蒿 | Artemisia scoparia | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | — | 0.08 | 0.04 | |
地梢瓜 | Cynanchum thesioides | 0.01 | — | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | — | 0.02 | |
兴安胡枝子 | Lespedeza bicolor | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.06 | — | 0.02 | 0.01 |
图2 不同降水条件下各植物种重要值的层次聚类注:CK为自然降水条件;D5和D7分别代表5月干旱和7月干旱;+30%P、-30%P、+60%P和-60%P分别代表全年降水增加30%、减少30%、增加60%和减少60%
Fig.2 Hierarchical clustering of plant species importance values across different precipitation regimes
图3 不同降水条件下各植物种指示值注:CK为自然降水条件;D5和D7分别代表5月干旱和7月干旱;+30%P、-30%P、+60%P和-60%P分别代表全年降水增加30%、减少30%、增加60%和减少60%
Fig.3 Indicator values (IndVals) of plant species under different precipitation regimes
图4 不同降水条件下植被的泛化种和特化种占比注:CK为自然降水条件;D5和D7分别代表5月干旱和7月干旱;+30%P、-30%P、+60%P和-60%P分别代表全年降水增加30%、减少30%、增加60%和减少60%
Fig.4 Proportion of generalist species and specialist species under different precipitation regimes
物种名 | 生态位宽度 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CK | D5 | D7 | -30%P | -60%P | +30%P | +60%P | |
糙隐子草 | 5.06 | 2.20 | 2.94 | 2.59 | — | 2.97 | 3.41 |
大果虫实 | 2.52 | 1.90 | 2.23 | 1.35 | 1.45 | 1.41 | 1.3 |
大籽蒿 | 2.36 | 1.27 | — | 1.49 | 1.22 | — | 1.67 |
地锦草 | 3.70 | 2.28 | 2.43 | 1.49 | 1.59 | 1.79 | — |
地梢瓜 | 1.73 | — | 1.65 | 1.43 | 1.25 | — | 1.62 |
狗尾草 | 6.58 | 2.52 | 2.8 | 3.91 | 3.32 | 2.19 | 3.4 |
兴安胡枝子 | 2.51 | 1.53 | 1.83 | 1.95 | — | 1.48 | 1.6 |
虎尾草 | 2.42 | 1.27 | — | 1.31 | — | 1.26 | — |
画眉草 | 4.54 | 3.94 | — | — | — | 2.74 | 3.77 |
蒺藜 | 6.56 | 3.35 | 4.86 | 2.97 | 3.78 | 3.25 | 2.61 |
尖头叶藜 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1.28 |
芦苇 | — | — | — | 1.91 | — | 1.41 | — |
砂蓝刺头 | 1.45 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
砂引草 | — | — | — | 1.35 | 1.46 | — | — |
雾冰藜 | — | 1.28 | — | 1.2 | — | 1.15 | — |
野艾蒿 | 2.03 | 1.61 | — | 2.66 | — | 2.57 | — |
硬阿魏 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1.27 |
针茅 | 2.15 | 2.50 | — | — | — | 1.92 | 1.77 |
猪毛菜 | 2.13 | 2.53 | 1.67 | — | 1.56 | 1.35 | 1.78 |
猪毛蒿 | 2.86 | 2.06 | 1.99 | 1.98 | — | 1.54 | 1.78 |
表2 不同降水条件下各植物种生态位宽度
Table 2 Niche breadth of plant species under differential precipitation regimes
物种名 | 生态位宽度 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CK | D5 | D7 | -30%P | -60%P | +30%P | +60%P | |
糙隐子草 | 5.06 | 2.20 | 2.94 | 2.59 | — | 2.97 | 3.41 |
大果虫实 | 2.52 | 1.90 | 2.23 | 1.35 | 1.45 | 1.41 | 1.3 |
大籽蒿 | 2.36 | 1.27 | — | 1.49 | 1.22 | — | 1.67 |
地锦草 | 3.70 | 2.28 | 2.43 | 1.49 | 1.59 | 1.79 | — |
地梢瓜 | 1.73 | — | 1.65 | 1.43 | 1.25 | — | 1.62 |
狗尾草 | 6.58 | 2.52 | 2.8 | 3.91 | 3.32 | 2.19 | 3.4 |
兴安胡枝子 | 2.51 | 1.53 | 1.83 | 1.95 | — | 1.48 | 1.6 |
虎尾草 | 2.42 | 1.27 | — | 1.31 | — | 1.26 | — |
画眉草 | 4.54 | 3.94 | — | — | — | 2.74 | 3.77 |
蒺藜 | 6.56 | 3.35 | 4.86 | 2.97 | 3.78 | 3.25 | 2.61 |
尖头叶藜 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1.28 |
芦苇 | — | — | — | 1.91 | — | 1.41 | — |
砂蓝刺头 | 1.45 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
砂引草 | — | — | — | 1.35 | 1.46 | — | — |
雾冰藜 | — | 1.28 | — | 1.2 | — | 1.15 | — |
野艾蒿 | 2.03 | 1.61 | — | 2.66 | — | 2.57 | — |
硬阿魏 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1.27 |
针茅 | 2.15 | 2.50 | — | — | — | 1.92 | 1.77 |
猪毛菜 | 2.13 | 2.53 | 1.67 | — | 1.56 | 1.35 | 1.78 |
猪毛蒿 | 2.86 | 2.06 | 1.99 | 1.98 | — | 1.54 | 1.78 |
图5 各植物种对不同降水处理组差异的贡献度占比(右上角)及显著性(左下角)注:CK为自然降水条件;D5和D7分别代表5月干旱和7月干旱;+30%P、-30%P、+60%P和-60%P分别代表全年降水增加30%、减少30%、增加60%和减少60%
Fig.5 Contribution percentage of plant species to inter-treatment dissimilarities (upper right) and corresponding significance levels
物种名 | 降水处理组 | 贡献度/% | P值 | 物种名 | 降水处理组 | 贡献度/% | P值 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
糙隐子草 | CK VS -60%P | 10.48 | 0.006 | 蒺藜 | D7 VS D5 | 14.89 | 0.014 |
糙隐子草 | D5 VS +60%P | 10.86 | 0.010 | 蒺藜 | -30%P VS D7 | 14.73 | 0.010 |
糙隐子草 | D7 VS -60%P | 9.74 | 0.044 | 蒺藜 | +60%P VS D7 | 16.00 | 0.002 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS +30%P | 11.73 | 0.003 | 尖头叶藜 | CK VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS +60%P | 14.68 | 0.001 | 尖头叶藜 | CK VS D5 | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS CK | 10.48 | 0.006 | 尖头叶藜 | D5 VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS D7 | 9.74 | 0.044 | 尖头叶藜 | D5 VS CK | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | +30%P VS -60%P | 11.73 | 0.003 | 尖头叶藜 | D7 VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | +60%P VS -60%P | 14.68 | 0.001 | 尖头叶藜 | -30%P VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | +60%P VS D5 | 10.86 | 0.010 | 尖头叶藜 | -60%P VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大果虫实 | CK VS D7 | 5.48 | 0.049 | 尖头叶藜 | +30%P VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大果虫实 | D7 VS CK | 5.48 | 0.049 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS +30%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大籽蒿 | CK VS -30%P | 4.20 | 0.047 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS -30%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大籽蒿 | -30%P VS CK | 4.20 | 0.047 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS -60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | CK VS -60%P | 12.67 | 0.018 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS CK | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | D5 VS -60%P | 17.82 | 0.001 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS D5 | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | D7 VS -60%P | 14.44 | 0.006 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS D7 | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS +30%P | 17.49 | 0.001 | 芦苇 | CK VS -30%P | 2.23 | 0.027 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS CK | 12.67 | 0.018 | 芦苇 | -30%P VS +30%P | 2.72 | 0.006 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS D5 | 17.82 | 0.001 | 芦苇 | -30%P VS CK | 2.23 | 0.027 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS D7 | 14.44 | 0.006 | 芦苇 | +30%P VS -30%P | 2.72 | 0.006 |
狗尾草 | +30%P VS -60%P | 17.49 | 0.001 | 砂引草 | CK VS -60%P | 2.31 | 0.048 |
画眉草 | D5 VS +30%P | 10.90 | 0.016 | 砂引草 | -30%P VS -60%P | 2.91 | 0.017 |
画眉草 | D5 VS +60%P | 11.00 | 0.020 | 砂引草 | -60%P VS -30%P | 2.91 | 0.017 |
画眉草 | D5 VS -30%P | 11.46 | 0.007 | 砂引草 | -60%P VS CK | 2.31 | 0.048 |
画眉草 | D5 VS -60%P | 11.46 | 0.026 | 雾冰藜 | -30%P VS +30%P | 1.38 | 0.034 |
画眉草 | D5 VS D7 | 11.46 | 0.013 | 雾冰藜 | +30%P VS -30%P | 1.38 | 0.034 |
画眉草 | D7 VS D5 | 11.46 | 0.013 | 兴安胡枝子 | CK VS -30%P | 3.10 | 0.014 |
画眉草 | -30%P VS D5 | 11.46 | 0.007 | 兴安胡枝子 | D5 VS -30%P | 3.16 | 0.024 |
画眉草 | -60%P VS D5 | 11.46 | 0.026 | 兴安胡枝子 | D7 VS -30%P | 3.16 | 0.026 |
画眉草 | +30%P VS D5 | 10.90 | 0.016 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS +30%P | 3.16 | 0.030 |
画眉草 | +60%P VS D5 | 11.00 | 0.020 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS +60%P | 3.09 | 0.038 |
蒺藜 | CK VS D7 | 14.50 | 0.004 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS -60%P | 3.09 | 0.037 |
蒺藜 | D5 VS D7 | 14.89 | 0.014 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS CK | 3.10 | 0.014 |
蒺藜 | D7 VS +60%P | 16.00 | 0.002 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS D5 | 3.16 | 0.024 |
蒺藜 | D7 VS -30%P | 14.73 | 0.010 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS D7 | 3.16 | 0.026 |
蒺藜 | D7 VS CK | 14.50 | 0.004 | 兴安胡枝子 | -60%P VS -30%P | 3.09 | 0.037 |
兴安胡枝子 | +30%P VS -30%P | 3.16 | 0.030 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS -30%P | 0.46 | 0.001 |
兴安胡枝子 | +60%P VS -30%P | 3.09 | 0.038 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS -60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 |
野艾蒿 | -30%P VS +30%P | 5.44 | 0.025 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS CK | 0.46 | 0.001 |
野艾蒿 | +30%P VS -30%P | 5.44 | 0.025 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS D5 | 0.46 | 0.001 |
硬阿魏 | CK VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS D7 | 0.46 | 0.001 |
硬阿魏 | CK VS D5 | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS +30%P | 5.99 | 0.016 |
硬阿魏 | D5 VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS -30%P | 7.34 | 0.003 |
硬阿魏 | D5 VS CK | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS -60%P | 6.69 | 0.010 |
硬阿魏 | D7 VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS D7 | 6.36 | 0.017 |
硬阿魏 | -30%P VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D7 VS D5 | 6.36 | 0.017 |
硬阿魏 | -60%P VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | -30%P VS D5 | 7.34 | 0.003 |
硬阿魏 | +30%P VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | -60%P VS D5 | 6.69 | 0.010 |
硬阿魏 | +60%P VS +30%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | +30%P VS D5 | 5.99 | 0.016 |
表3 显著贡献降水处理组间差异的植物种
Table 3 Identification of plant species significantly contributing to inter-treatment dissimilarities
物种名 | 降水处理组 | 贡献度/% | P值 | 物种名 | 降水处理组 | 贡献度/% | P值 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
糙隐子草 | CK VS -60%P | 10.48 | 0.006 | 蒺藜 | D7 VS D5 | 14.89 | 0.014 |
糙隐子草 | D5 VS +60%P | 10.86 | 0.010 | 蒺藜 | -30%P VS D7 | 14.73 | 0.010 |
糙隐子草 | D7 VS -60%P | 9.74 | 0.044 | 蒺藜 | +60%P VS D7 | 16.00 | 0.002 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS +30%P | 11.73 | 0.003 | 尖头叶藜 | CK VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS +60%P | 14.68 | 0.001 | 尖头叶藜 | CK VS D5 | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS CK | 10.48 | 0.006 | 尖头叶藜 | D5 VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | -60%P VS D7 | 9.74 | 0.044 | 尖头叶藜 | D5 VS CK | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | +30%P VS -60%P | 11.73 | 0.003 | 尖头叶藜 | D7 VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | +60%P VS -60%P | 14.68 | 0.001 | 尖头叶藜 | -30%P VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
糙隐子草 | +60%P VS D5 | 10.86 | 0.010 | 尖头叶藜 | -60%P VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大果虫实 | CK VS D7 | 5.48 | 0.049 | 尖头叶藜 | +30%P VS +60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大果虫实 | D7 VS CK | 5.48 | 0.049 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS +30%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大籽蒿 | CK VS -30%P | 4.20 | 0.047 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS -30%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
大籽蒿 | -30%P VS CK | 4.20 | 0.047 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS -60%P | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | CK VS -60%P | 12.67 | 0.018 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS CK | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | D5 VS -60%P | 17.82 | 0.001 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS D5 | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | D7 VS -60%P | 14.44 | 0.006 | 尖头叶藜 | +60%P VS D7 | 0.08 | 0.001 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS +30%P | 17.49 | 0.001 | 芦苇 | CK VS -30%P | 2.23 | 0.027 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS CK | 12.67 | 0.018 | 芦苇 | -30%P VS +30%P | 2.72 | 0.006 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS D5 | 17.82 | 0.001 | 芦苇 | -30%P VS CK | 2.23 | 0.027 |
狗尾草 | -60%P VS D7 | 14.44 | 0.006 | 芦苇 | +30%P VS -30%P | 2.72 | 0.006 |
狗尾草 | +30%P VS -60%P | 17.49 | 0.001 | 砂引草 | CK VS -60%P | 2.31 | 0.048 |
画眉草 | D5 VS +30%P | 10.90 | 0.016 | 砂引草 | -30%P VS -60%P | 2.91 | 0.017 |
画眉草 | D5 VS +60%P | 11.00 | 0.020 | 砂引草 | -60%P VS -30%P | 2.91 | 0.017 |
画眉草 | D5 VS -30%P | 11.46 | 0.007 | 砂引草 | -60%P VS CK | 2.31 | 0.048 |
画眉草 | D5 VS -60%P | 11.46 | 0.026 | 雾冰藜 | -30%P VS +30%P | 1.38 | 0.034 |
画眉草 | D5 VS D7 | 11.46 | 0.013 | 雾冰藜 | +30%P VS -30%P | 1.38 | 0.034 |
画眉草 | D7 VS D5 | 11.46 | 0.013 | 兴安胡枝子 | CK VS -30%P | 3.10 | 0.014 |
画眉草 | -30%P VS D5 | 11.46 | 0.007 | 兴安胡枝子 | D5 VS -30%P | 3.16 | 0.024 |
画眉草 | -60%P VS D5 | 11.46 | 0.026 | 兴安胡枝子 | D7 VS -30%P | 3.16 | 0.026 |
画眉草 | +30%P VS D5 | 10.90 | 0.016 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS +30%P | 3.16 | 0.030 |
画眉草 | +60%P VS D5 | 11.00 | 0.020 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS +60%P | 3.09 | 0.038 |
蒺藜 | CK VS D7 | 14.50 | 0.004 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS -60%P | 3.09 | 0.037 |
蒺藜 | D5 VS D7 | 14.89 | 0.014 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS CK | 3.10 | 0.014 |
蒺藜 | D7 VS +60%P | 16.00 | 0.002 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS D5 | 3.16 | 0.024 |
蒺藜 | D7 VS -30%P | 14.73 | 0.010 | 兴安胡枝子 | -30%P VS D7 | 3.16 | 0.026 |
蒺藜 | D7 VS CK | 14.50 | 0.004 | 兴安胡枝子 | -60%P VS -30%P | 3.09 | 0.037 |
兴安胡枝子 | +30%P VS -30%P | 3.16 | 0.030 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS -30%P | 0.46 | 0.001 |
兴安胡枝子 | +60%P VS -30%P | 3.09 | 0.038 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS -60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 |
野艾蒿 | -30%P VS +30%P | 5.44 | 0.025 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS CK | 0.46 | 0.001 |
野艾蒿 | +30%P VS -30%P | 5.44 | 0.025 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS D5 | 0.46 | 0.001 |
硬阿魏 | CK VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 硬阿魏 | +60%P VS D7 | 0.46 | 0.001 |
硬阿魏 | CK VS D5 | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS +30%P | 5.99 | 0.016 |
硬阿魏 | D5 VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS -30%P | 7.34 | 0.003 |
硬阿魏 | D5 VS CK | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS -60%P | 6.69 | 0.010 |
硬阿魏 | D7 VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D5 VS D7 | 6.36 | 0.017 |
硬阿魏 | -30%P VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | D7 VS D5 | 6.36 | 0.017 |
硬阿魏 | -60%P VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | -30%P VS D5 | 7.34 | 0.003 |
硬阿魏 | +30%P VS +60%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | -60%P VS D5 | 6.69 | 0.010 |
硬阿魏 | +60%P VS +30%P | 0.46 | 0.001 | 猪毛菜 | +30%P VS D5 | 5.99 | 0.016 |
[1] | Knapp A K, Hoover D L, Wilcox K R,et al.Characterizing differences in precipitation regimes of extreme wet and dry years:implications for climate change experiments[J].Global Change Biology,2015,21(7):2624-2633. |
[2] | 张宏史,郑秋红.半干旱地区天然草地灌丛化与土壤异质性关系研究进展[J].植物生态学报,2001,25(3):366-370. |
[3] | Susanne S, Osvaldo E S.Hierarchy of responses to resource pulses in arid and semi-arid ecosystems[J].Oecologia,2004,141(2):211-220. |
[4] | 王明明,刘新平,何玉惠,等.科尔沁沙质草地生物量积累过程对降水变化的响应模拟[J].生态学报,2020,40(11):3656-3665. |
[5] | Luo Y Q, Zhao X Y, Zuo X A,et al.Plant responses to warming and increased precipitation in three categories of dune stabilization in northeastern China[J].Ecological Research,2017,32(6):887-898. |
[6] | 张腊梅,刘新平,赵学勇,等.科尔沁固定沙地植被特征对降雨变化的响应[J].生态学报,2014,34(10):2737-2745. |
[7] | Song J, Liang Z H, Li X G,et al.Precipitation changes alter plant dominant species and functional groups by changing soil salinity in a coastal salt marsh[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2024,368:122235. |
[8] | Kirk R W, Zheng S, Gherardi G L,et al.Asymmetric responses of primary productivity to precipitation extremes:a synthesis of grassland precipitation manipulation experiments[J].Global Change Biology,2017,23(10):4376-4385. |
[9] | Pan S Y, Zhang W L, Li Y,et al.Unveiling novel perspectives on niche differentiation and plasticity in rhizosphere phosphorus forms of submerged macrophytes with different stoichiometric homeostasis[J].Water Research,2023,246:120679. |
[10] | Yue X F, Zhang T H, Li Y Q.Effects of rainfall regime during the growing season on the annual plant communities in semiarid sandy land,Northeast China[J].Global Ecology and Conservation,2023,43:e02456. |
[11] | 苗百岭,梁存柱,史亚博,等.降水变化对内蒙古典型草原地上生物量的影响[J].植物生态学报,2019,43(7):557-565. |
[12] | Hautier Y, Tilman D, Isbell F,et al.Anthropogenic environmental changes affect ecosystem stability via biodiversity[J].Science,2015,348(6232):336-340. |
[13] | 何玉惠,刘新平,胡鸿姣,等.降水和放牧对沙质草地优势植物出苗和存活的影响[J].中国沙漠,2025,45(1):103-111. |
[14] | Liu X P, He Y H, Sun S S,et al.Restoration of sand-stabilizing vegetation reduces deep percolation of precipitation in semi-arid sandy lands,Northern China[J].Catena,2022,208:105728. |
[15] | Liu X P, Luo Y Q, Cheng L,et al.Effect of root and mycelia on fine root decomposition and release of carbon and nitrogen under artemisia halodendron in a semi-arid sandy grassland in China[J].Frontiers in Plant Science,2021,12:698054. |
[16] | 刘新平,赵学勇,何玉惠,等.一种野外增减雨试验装置:201220126834.3[P].2012-11-21. |
[17] | 郭倩.草地群落植物种等级划分及重要值方法改进[D].兰州:兰州大学,2017. |
[18] | Pei L, Wu Z, Qian Y Q,et al.Plant community stability,indicator species and their driving factors at a gradient of grazing intensity in an alpine meadow [J].Ecological Indicators,2024,162:112012. |
[19] | Sun R B, Chen Y, Han W X,et al.Different contribution of species sorting and exogenous species immigration from manure to soil fungal diversity and community assemblage under long-term fertilization[J].Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2020,151:108049. |
[20] | Zhang J, Zhang B G, Liu Y Q,et al.Distinct large-scale biogeographic patterns of fungal communities in bulk soil and soybean rhizosphere in China[J].Science of the Total Environment,2018,644:791-800. |
[21] | 万凌凡,刘国华,樊辉,等.青藏高原东南部森林群落生态位特征与物种多样性的影响因素[J].生态学报,2024,44(13):5658-5668. |
[22] | Huxman T E, Snyder K A, Tissue D,et al.Precipitation pulses and carbon fluxes in semiarid and arid ecosystems[J].Oecologia,2004,141(2):211-220. |
[23] | 甄博,郭相平,陆红飞,等.分蘖期旱涝交替胁迫对水稻生理指标的影响[J].灌溉排水学报,2017,36(5):36-40. |
[24] | Cai F, Zhang Y S, Mi N,et al.Maize (Zea mays L.) physiological responses to drought and rewatering,and the associations with water stress degree[J].Agricultural Water Management,2020,241:106379. |
[25] | 龚金玉,马致远,胡琛,等.综合生态系统管理的生态阈值理论研究进展[J].生态学报,2024,44(22):10499-10511. |
[26] | 洪光宇,王晓江,苏庆溥,等.毛乌素沙地流动沙丘土壤水分模拟及渗漏特征[J].中国沙漠,2023,43(2):288-298. |
[27] | Zuo X A, Zhao S L, Cheng H,et al.Functional diversity response to geographic and experimental precipitation gradients varies with plant community type[J].Functional Ecology,2021,35(9):2119-2132. |
[28] | Huot C, Zhou Y, Philp J N M,et al.Root depth development in tropical perennial forage grasses is related to root angle,root diameter and leaf area[J].Plant and Soil,2020,456(1/2):145-158. |
[29] | Shan C, Dongdong D, Yubo L,et al.Genome-wide association study presents insights into the genetic architecture of drought tolerance in maize seedlings under field water-deficit conditions[J].Frontiers in Plant Science,2023,14:1165582. |
[30] | 游旭,杨浩.糙隐子草生态学研究进展[J].草地学报,2016,24(4):726-730. |
[31] | 孙启忠,韩桂荣,李志勇,等.科尔沁沙地达乌里胡枝子生物量研究[J].中国草地,2001,23(4):22-27. |
[32] | 郭文婷,王国华,缑倩倩,等.河西走廊荒漠绿洲过渡带3种典型一年生藜科植物构件生长及生物量分配特征[J].草业学报,2022,31(2):25-38. |
[33] | 刘菊红,王忠武,韩国栋.重度放牧对荒漠草原主要植物种间关系及群落稳定性的影响[J].生态学杂志,2019,38(9):2595-2602. |
[34] | 王晓悦,许艺馨,李春环,等.长期降水量变化下荒漠草原植物生物量、多样性的变化及其影响因素[J].植物生态学报,2023,47(4):479-490. |
[35] | Sun J X, Zhou H B, Cheng H N,et al.Distinct strategies of the habitat generalists and specialists in the Arctic sediments: assembly processes,co-occurrence patterns,and environmental implications[J].Marine Pollution Bulletin,2024,205:116603. |
[36] | Yu Y, Penuelas J, Sardans J,et al.Water addition but not reduction alters plant biomass-diversity relationship[J].Global Change Biology,2024,30(7):e17430. |
[37] | 李周园,叶小洲,王少鹏.生态系统稳定性及其与生物多样性的关系[J].植物生态学报,2021,45(10):1127-1139. |
[38] | 党承林.植物群落的冗余结构:对生态系统稳定性的一种解释[J].生态学报,1998,18(6):103-110. |
[39] | 丁潇然.狗尾草叶水力系统与光合生理沿降水梯度带的调整与协同[D].杭州:浙江农林大学,2022. |
[40] | 王坤芳,彭爽,纪明山.入侵植物少花蒺藜草及其伴生植物的光合特性研究[J].河北农业大学学报,2016,39(1):43-48. |
[41] | 秦洁,鲍雅静,李政海,等.退化草原糙隐子草根系特征及地上高度对水分梯度的响应[J].中国草地学报,2015,37(3):80-86. |
[42] | 杨浩,罗亚晨.糙隐子草功能性状对氮添加和干旱的响应[J].植物生态学报,2015,39(1):32-42. |
[43] | Yu S Y, Wang W S, Liang H X,et al.Characterizing the nonlinear dynamics of hydrological systems based on global recurrence analysis[J].Journal of Hydrology,2025,654:132817. |
[1] | 张晶, 左小安, 吕朋. 生长季降水格局变化对科尔沁沙地典型生境植物群落结构、功能和地上生物量的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2024, 44(4): 1-13. |
[2] | 卢燕, 吴万平, 曾勇. 天山北麓绿洲荒漠过渡带优势植物的生态位特征与种间联结[J]. 中国沙漠, 2024, 44(2): 254-263. |
[3] | 张甜, 贾荣亮, 高艳红, 孙靖尧, 赵芸, 刘立超. 沙坡头人工固沙植被演替过程中主要结皮生物生态位和种间关联变化特征[J]. 中国沙漠, 2021, 41(4): 100-108. |
[4] | 何远政, 黄文达, 赵昕, 吕朋, 王怀海. 气候变化对植物多样性的影响研究综述[J]. 中国沙漠, 2021, 41(1): 59-66. |
[5] | 尹宪志, 王毅荣, 罗汉, 任余龙, 王田田, 王研峰. 1960—2019年甘肃大气水更新与地面降水空间分布的关系[J]. 中国沙漠, 2020, 40(6): 61-70. |
[6] | 董雪, 李永华, 张正国, 李思瑶, 包岩峰, 郝玉光, 姚斌. 甘肃酒泉荒漠戈壁灌木群落优势物种生态位特征[J]. 中国沙漠, 2020, 40(4): 138-145. |
[7] | 李香云, 岳平, 郭新新, 张蕊, 赵生龙, 张森溪, 王少昆, 左小安. 荒漠草原植物群落光合速率对水氮添加的响应[J]. 中国沙漠, 2020, 40(1): 116-124. |
[8] | 常红, 刘彤, 王大伟, 纪孝儒. 气候变化下中国西北干旱区梭梭(Haloxylon ammodendron)潜在分布[J]. 中国沙漠, 2019, 39(1): 110-118. |
[9] | 杨晓东, 龚雪伟, 朱丽安, 吕光辉. 胡杨(Populus euphratica)水分再分配与其伴生种多样性和生态位的关系[J]. 中国沙漠, 2017, 37(5): 933-941. |
[10] | 王希义, 徐海量, 潘存德, 凌红波, 张沛. 塔里木河下游优势草本植物与地下水埋深的关系[J]. 中国沙漠, 2016, 36(1): 216-224. |
[11] | 霍 红, 冯 起, 苏永红, 司建华, 席海洋, 鱼腾飞. 额济纳绿洲植物群落种间关系和生态位研究[J]. 中国沙漠, 2013, 33(4): 1027-1033. |
[12] | 张 瑾1, 陈文业2, 张继强2, 赵 明2, 吴三雄1, 王志广1, 袁海峰1, 窦英杰1, 康建军2, 罗文莉2. 甘肃敦煌西湖荒漠湿地生态系统优势植物种群分布格局及种间关联性[J]. 中国沙漠, 2013, 33(2): 349-357. |
[13] | 班卫强1, 严 成1*, 尹林克1, 杨美琳1,2, 王忠臣3. 古尔班通古特沙漠南缘不同立地条件植物多样性和优势种群生态位特征研究[J]. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(6): 1632-1638. |
[14] | 陈 英, 张仁陟, 张 军. 土地利用可持续发展位理论构建与应用[J]. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(2): 574-579. |
[15] | 周洪华;陈亚宁*;李卫红. 塔里木河下游绿洲-荒漠过渡带植物多样性特征及优势种群分布格局[J]. 中国沙漠, 2009, 29(4): 688-696. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||
©2018中国沙漠 编辑部
地址: 兰州市天水中路8号 (730000)
电话:0931-8267545
Email:caiedit@lzb.ac.cn;desert@lzb.ac.cn