Please wait a minute...
img

官方微信

高级检索
中国沙漠  2018, Vol. 38 Issue (2): 324-328    DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2016.00165
生物与土壤     
围封对退化沙质草地植物群落的影响
熊炳桥1, 赵丽娅1,2, 高丹丹2
1. 湖北大学 资源环境学院, 湖北 武汉 430062;
2. 区域开发与环境响应湖北省重点实验室, 湖北 武汉 430062
Effect of Enclosure on the Structure of Plant Community in Degraded Sandy Grasslands of Eastern Inner Mongolia
Xiong Bingqiao1, Zhao Liya1,2, Gao Dandan2
1. School of Resources and Environmental Science, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China;
2. Hubei Key Laboratory of Regional Development and Environmental Response, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China
 全文: PDF(889 KB)  
摘要: 对科尔沁沙地围封草地和放牧草地群落的种类组成、结构和多样性等特征进行比较研究。结果表明:(1)围封草地盖度、密度、地上生物量、高度均优于放牧草地(P<0.01)。与放牧相比,围封使植被盖度、密度、高度和地上生物量分别提高了237%、429%、77%和218%,植物群落结构得到明显改善。(2)与放牧草地相比,围封草地物种数增加了69%,多年生草本、灌木类种数和重要值均高于放牧草地。放牧草地的优势植物种依次是大果虫实(Corispermum macrocarpum)、狗尾草(Setaria viridis)、差巴嘎蒿(Artemisia halodendron),重要值占72%;而围封草地优势植物种依次是达乌里胡枝子(Lespedeza davurica)、糙隐子草(Cleistogenes squarrosa)、虎尾草(Chloris virgate)和画眉草(Eragrostis pilosa),重要值占57%,大果虫实、狗尾草和差巴嘎蒿逐渐处于群落的次要地位,取而代之的是与其环境条件相匹配的优质豆科和禾本科植物。围封使物种组成多样化,科属组成复杂化,优势物种发生了变化,群落结构和功能得到改善,沙地植被得以恢复。(3)围封草地的Shannon-Wiener指数、Simpson指数、Margalef指数、均匀度指数均大于放牧草地。围封增加了群落的物种多样性,群落的稳定性得以提高。
关键词: 退化沙质草地围封放牧群落结构功能    
Abstract: This paper examined the effects of enclosure management on the structure of community in degraded sandy grasslands. Several conclusions were drawn from this study. (1)The coverage, density, aboveground biomass and average height of the fencing grassland were all superior to those of the grazing grassland, and there was a significant different(P<0.01). Compared with the grazing grassland, coverage of the fencing grassland increased by 237%, density, height and aboveground biomass respectively increased by 429%, 77% and 218%. The structure of community was significantly improved by enclosure. (2) Compared with the grazing grassland, the species of the fenced grassland increased by 69%. Species and important values of perennial herbs and shrubs in the fencing grassland were higher than the grazing grassland. The dominant species of grazing grassland were Corispermum macrocarpum, Setaria viridis and Artemisia halodendron, the ration of important value accounted for 72%. Lespedeza davurica, Cleistogenes squarrosa, Chloris virgate and Eragrostis pilosa were the dominant species of fencing grassland, their important value accounted for 57%. In the fencing grassland, the largest families were Leguminosa and Gramineae plants, which were adapted to their growing environment. C. macrocarpum, S. viridis and A. halodendron were gradually in a secondary status. By enclosure, Species composition of the community was diversified, the structure and function were improved,and desertification of sandy grasslands was restored. (3) The Shannon-Wiener index, Simpson index, Margalef index and evenness index of the fencing grassland were all larger than those of the grazing grassland. Enclosure increased the species diversity and stability of community.
Key words: degraded sandy grasslands    enclosure    grazing    community structure    function
收稿日期: 2016-10-08 出版日期: 2018-03-20
ZTFLH:  Q948  
基金资助: 国家自然科学基金项目(31070370);湖北省教育厅重点项目(D2015003);湖北省科技厅软科学专项(2013BDF034);生物资源绿色转化湖北省协同创新中心项目
通讯作者: 赵丽娅(E-mail:zhaoly0128@hubu.edu)     E-mail: zhaoly0128@hubu.edu
作者简介: 熊炳桥(1990-),男,河南信阳人,硕士研究生,研究方向为环境生态学和生态保护规划。E-mail:502854200@qq.com
服务  
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章  
熊炳桥
赵丽娅
高丹丹

引用本文:

熊炳桥, 赵丽娅, 高丹丹. 围封对退化沙质草地植物群落的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2018, 38(2): 324-328.

Xiong Bingqiao, Zhao Liya, Gao Dandan. Effect of Enclosure on the Structure of Plant Community in Degraded Sandy Grasslands of Eastern Inner Mongolia. JOURNAL OF DESERT RESEARCH, 2018, 38(2): 324-328.

链接本文:

http://www.desert.ac.cn/CN/10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2016.00165        http://www.desert.ac.cn/CN/Y2018/V38/I2/324

[1] 李笑春,仝川,陈智,等.恢复退化草地生态功能与可持续发展——以浑善达克沙地为例[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2004,14(3):80-84.
[2] 鄂慧芳.内蒙古草原生态环境与畜牧业发展的评价研究[J].内蒙古统计,2013(6):24-26.
[3] 赵哈林,赵学勇,张铜会,等.北方农牧交错区沙漠化的生物过程研究[J].中国沙漠,2002,22(4):309-315.
[4] Loeser M R R,Sisk T D,Crews T E.Impact of Grazing Intensity during Drought in an Arizona Grassland[J].Conservation Biology,2007,21(1):87-97.
[5] 李军保.围封对昭苏马场春秋草场植被和土壤的影响[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学,2008.
[6] 杨勇,刘爱军,李兰花,等.围封对内蒙古典型草原群落特征及土壤性状的影响[J].草业学报,2016(5):21-29
[7] Mekuria W,Veldkamp E,Haile M,et al.Effectiveness of exclosures to restore degraded soils as a result of overgrazing in Tigray,Ethiopia[J].Journal of Arid Environments,2007,69(2):270-284.
[8] 闫玉春,唐海萍,辛晓平,等.围封对草地的影响研究进展[J].生态学报,2009,29(9):5039-5046.
[9] Golodets C,Kigel J,Sternberg M.Recovery of plant species composition and ecosystem function after cessation of grazing in a Mediterranean grassland[J].Plant & Soil,2009,329(1):365-378.
[10] 吕朋,左小安,张婧,等.放牧强度对科尔沁沙地沙质草地植被的影响[J].中国沙漠,2016,36(1):34-39.
[11] 苏永中,赵哈林.科尔沁沙地不同土地利用和管理方式对土壤质量性状的影响[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(10):1681-1686.
[12] 周欣,左小安,赵学勇,等.科尔沁沙地沙丘固定过程中植物生物量及土壤特性[J].中国沙漠,2015,35(1):81-89.
[13] 赵丽娅,李兆华,李锋瑞,等.科尔沁沙地植被恢复演替进程中群落土壤种子库研究[J].生态学报,2005,25(12):3204-3211.
[14] 裴世芳,傅华,陈亚明,等.放牧和围封下霸王灌丛对土壤肥力的影响[J].中国沙漠,2004,24(6):763-767.
[15] 苏永中,赵哈林.持续放牧和围封对科尔沁退化沙地草地碳截存的影响[J].环境科学,2003,24(4):23-28.
[16] 高敏,马香丽,杨晋宇,等.围封对冀北山地华北落叶松人工林土壤动物群落结构的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版,2016,44(3):141-152.
[17] 肖金玉,蒲小鹏,徐长林.禁牧对退化草地恢复的作用[J].草业科学,2015,32(1):138-145.
[18] 吕世海,冯长松,高吉喜,等.呼伦贝尔沙化草地围封效应及生物多样性变化研究[J].草地学报,2008,16(5):442-447.
[19] 单贵莲,徐柱,宁发,等.围封年限对典型草原群落结构及物种多样性的影响[J].草业学报,2008,17(6):1-8.
[20] 高凯,朱铁霞,韩国栋.围封年限对内蒙古羊草——针茅典型草原植物功能群及其多样性的影响[J].草业学报,2013,22(6):39-45.
[21] Altesor A,Oesterheld M,Leoni E,et al.Effect of grazing on community structure and productivity of a Uruguayan grassland[J].Plant Ecology,2005,179(1):83-91.
[22] Huston M A.Biological Diversity:the Coexistence of Species on Changing Landscapes[M].New York,USA:Cambridge University Press,1993.
[23] 李学斌,陈林,李国旗,等.干旱半干旱地区围栏封育对甘草群落特征及其分布格局的影响[J].生态学报,2013,33(13):3995-4001.
[1] 李婷, 张威, 刘光琇, 陈拓. 荒漠土壤微生物群落结构特征研究进展[J]. 中国沙漠, 2018, 38(2): 329-338.
[2] 石磊, 李陇堂, 张冠乐, 杨萍, 高秀云, 赵云鹏. 基于适宜性分析的沙漠旅游主体功能区划——以宁夏中卫市沙坡头区为例[J]. 中国沙漠, 2018, 38(2): 437-443.
[3] 李宗杰, 田青, 宋玲玲. 甘肃省摩天岭北坡木本植物叶性状变异及关联[J]. 中国沙漠, 2018, 38(1): 149-156.
[4] 刘任涛, 郗伟华, 刘佳楠, 赵娟, 常海涛. 沙地柠条(Caragana)灌丛微生境节肢动物群落特征[J]. 中国沙漠, 2018, 38(1): 117-125.
[5] 代景忠, 闫瑞瑞, 卫智军, 乌仁其其格, 辛晓平, 刘文亭. 施肥对羊草(Leymus chinensis)割草场功能群物种丰富度和重要值的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2017, 37(3): 453-461.
[6] 张建鹏, 李玉强, 赵学勇, 张铜会, 佘倩楠, 刘敏, 魏水莲. 围封对沙漠化草地土壤理化性质和固碳潜力恢复的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2017, 37(3): 491-499.
[7] 尤南山, 蒙吉军. 基于生态敏感性和生态系统服务的黑河中游生态功能区划与生态系统管理[J]. 中国沙漠, 2017, 37(1): 186-197.
[8] 宋彦涛, 乌云娜, 张靖, 霍光伟, 张凤杰. 放牧强度对克氏针茅(Stipa krylovii)草原植被景观格局的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2016, 36(3): 674-680.
[9] 毛伟, 李玉霖, 孙殿超, 王少昆. 养分和水分添加后沙质草地不同功能群植物地上生物量变化对群落生产力的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2016, 36(1): 27-33.
[10] 孙殿超, 李玉霖, 赵学勇, 罗亚勇, 毕京东. 围封和放牧对科尔沁沙质草地净生态系统碳交换量的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2016, 36(1): 93-102.
[11] 吕朋, 左小安, 张婧, 周欣, 连杰, 刘良旭. 放牧强度对科尔沁沙地沙质草地植被的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2016, 36(1): 34-39.
[12] 孙殿超, 李玉霖, 赵学勇, 毛伟, 岳祥飞. 放牧及围封对科尔沁沙质草地土壤呼吸的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2015, 35(6): 1620-1627.
[13] 周欣, 左小安, 赵学勇, 刘川, 吕朋. 科尔沁沙地中南部34种植物叶功能性状及其相互关系[J]. 中国沙漠, 2015, 35(6): 1489-1495.
[14] 韦惠兰, 郭达. 玛曲高寒草甸生态系统的动态变化及其驱动力[J]. 中国沙漠, 2015, 35(5): 1413-1420.
[15] 王晓朦, 乌云娜, 宋彦涛, 霍光伟, 徐志超, 道日娜. 放牧对克氏针茅(Stipa krylovii)草原土壤物理、化学及微生物性状的影响[J]. 中国沙漠, 2015, 35(5): 1193-1199.