珍稀濒危植物江南油杉群落乔木层主要树种种间关联性分析
作者:
基金项目:

福建君子峰自然保护区维管植物资源调查项目(KH200237A);福建省特色林木种质资源评价与监测信息应用项目(2021FKJ17)资助


Interspecific Association Analysis of Dominant Tree Species of Rare and Endangered Plant in Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis Community
Author:
  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献 [35]
  • |
  • 相似文献 [20]
  • | | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    基于2×2列联表,采用方差比率法(Rv)、x2检验、Pearson相关系数检验和Spearman秩相关系数检验等方法,对福建君子峰国家级自然保护区江南油杉(Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis)群落乔木层主要树种进行种间关联性分析,并通过主成分分析(PCA)划分生态种组。结果表明,21种主要树种总体表现为不显著负关联,且江南油杉与其他物种多呈不显著相关。210个种对中,正相关的有110对,负相关的有81对,不相关的有19对,正负比1.36。绝大多数种对间呈不显著相关,显著率仅为0.48%,物种间相互独立。Pearson相关系数和Spearman秩相关系数检验结果具有一致性,负相关种对数大于正相关种对数,绝大多数种对不显著,显著率分别为6.19%和7.14%。与x2检验相比,Pearson相关系数和Spearman秩相关系数检验方式更加灵敏。运用PCA二维排序可将主要树种划分为4个生态种组,同一生态种组内物种的生态习性和资源需求相似,多呈正相关,种对间相互依赖共存;不同生态种组间物种多呈负相关,种对间相互竞争。江南油杉群落乔木层主要树种的种间关联性较为松散,大多数物种为独立分布,幼苗存在更新障碍,且幼树个体竞争压力较大,种群规模呈逐渐缩小的趋势。为促进江南油杉种群正常生长与更新,应对江南油杉幼苗进行重点保护。

    Abstract:

    The correlations of dominant tree species of Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis community in Junzifeng Nature Reserve, Fujian Province were analyzed by using 2×2 contingency table, variance ratio (Rv), x2-test, Pearson correlation coefficient test and Spearman rank correlation coefficient test, and the ecological species groups were divided based on principal component analysis (PCA). The results showed that there was not significant negative correlations existed among the 21 dominant tree species, and Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis had not significant association with other species. Among 210 species pairs, 110 species pairs were positively correlated, 81 species pairs were negatively correlated, and 19 species pairs were unrelated, with a positive-negative ratio of 1.36. Most species pairs were not significantly correlated each other, and the significantly correlated rate was only 0.48%. The results of Pearson and Spearman rank correlation coefficient test were similar. The number of negative correlation species pairs was greater than that of positive correlation species pairs, and most species pairs were not significantly, and the significantly rates were 6.19% and 7.14%, respectively. Compared with x2-test, the other two test were more sensitive. The dominant tree species could be divided into four ecological species groups by PCA two-dimensional sequence. The ecological habits and resource requirements of species in the same group were similar, most of them were positively correlated, and interde-pendence coexisted. There was a negative correlation among species in different ecological species groups, and species pairs competed with each other. The interspecific association of dominant tree species of Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis community was relatively non-significant, and most species were independently distributed. The seedlings were difficult to renew, saplings face greater competitive pressure, and population size is gradually shrinking trend. In order to promote the normal growth and regeneration of Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis population, the seedlings should be protected.

    参考文献
    [1] ZHANG J, CAIWEN D J, SUONAN C R, et al. The correlation and niche of survival community of Kengyilia thoroldiana in Maduo County, Qinghai Province[J]. Pratacult Sci, 2019, 36(11):2752-2765.[张静, 才文代吉, 索南才仁, 等. 青海玛多梭罗以礼草生存群落种间关联及生态位[J]. 草业科学, 2019, 36(11):2752-2765. doi:10. 11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2019-0310.]
    [2] WU P, PENG X Q, YANG S R, et al. Spatial distribution patterns and correlation of Tamarix chinensis population in coastal wetlands of Shandong, China[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2019, 43(9):817-824.[吴盼, 彭希强, 杨树仁, 等. 山东省滨海湿地柽柳种群的空间分布格局及其关联性[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(9):817-824. doi:10.17521/cjpe.2018.0186.]
    [3] SU S J, LIU J F, HE Z S, et al. Ecological species groups and inter-specific association of dominant tree species in Daiyun Mountain National Nature Reserve[J]. J Mount Sci, 2015, 12(3):637-646. doi:10.1007/s11629-013-2935-7.
    [4] LUO Y H, WU J S, WANG X Y, et al. Understanding ecological groups under landscape fragmentation based on network theory[J]. Landscape Urban Plan, 2021, 210:104066. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104066.
    [5] GAO W, HUANG Y R, LIN J L, et al. Interspecific correlations among dominant populations of natural forest of endangered species Betula fujianensis[J]. Sci Silv Sin, 2021, 57(10):1-14.[高伟, 黄雍容, 林建丽, 等. 濒危树种闽桦天然林优势种群种间相关性[J]. 林业科学, 2021, 57(10):1-14. doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.20211001.]
    [6] WEN X H, WANG Q B, PAN H, et al. Interspecific associations of the main tree populations of the Cryptomeria fortunei community in Tianbaoyan[J]. J Forest Environ, 2022, 42(1):1-10.[温鑫鸿, 王其炳, 潘辉, 等. 天宝岩柳杉群落主要乔木种群的种间联结性[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2022, 42(1):1-10. doi:10.13324/j.cnki.jfcf.2022.01.001.]
    [7] YE Q P, ZHANG W H, YU S C, et al. Interspecific association of the main tree populations of the Quercus acutissima community in the Qiaoshan forest area[J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2018, 38(9):3165-3174.[叶权平, 张文辉, 于世川, 等. 桥山林区麻栎群落主要乔木种群的种间联结性[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(9):3165-3174. doi:10.5846/stxb201706131071.]
    [8] National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Ministry of Agri-culture and Rural Affairs of the People's Republic China. Perspectives from the list of national key protected wild plant[EB/OL]. (2021-09-08)[2022-05-13].[国家林业和草原局, 农业农村部. 国家重点保护野生植物名录[EB/OL]. (2021-09-08)[2022-05-13]. http://www.orestry.gov.cn/main/5461/20210908/162515850572900.html.]
    [9] YANG M M, HE W G, CHEN W R, et al. Phenotypic traits diversity analysis of seeds of candidate superior trees of Keteleeria cyclolepis[J]. J Fujian For Sci Technol, 2020, 47(4):18-21.[杨淼淼, 何文广, 陈文荣, 等. 江南油杉优树种子表型性状的多样性分析[J]. 福建林业科技, 2020, 47(4):18-21. doi:10.13428/j.cnki.fjlk.2020.04.004.]
    [10] LIU X S, XIAO Y F, WANG Y, et al. Anatomical structures of vegetative organs of Keteleeria fortunei (Murr.) Carr. var. cyclolepis (Flous) Silba and its ecological adaptability[J]. Plant Sci J, 2020, 38(1):39-46.[刘雄盛, 肖玉菲, 王勇, 等. 江南油杉营养器官的解剖结构及其生态适应性[J]. 植物科学学报, 2020, 38(1):39-46. doi:10. 11913/PSJ.2095-0837.2020.10039.]
    [11] LIU F, ZHOU L T, JIANG Y, et al. Physiological response from different provenances of Keteleeria fortunei seedlings to drought stress[J]. J CS Univ For Technol, 2018, 38(11):35-45.[刘菲, 周隆腾, 蒋燚, 等. 不同种源江南油杉幼苗对干旱胁迫的生理响应[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2018, 38(11):35-45. doi:10.14067/j.cnki.1673-923x. 2018.11.006.]
    [12] ZHANG P, PANG S J, LIU S L, et al. Effects of slow release fertilizer on growth of Keteleeria fortunei seedlings cultured in container[J]. J NW Agric For Univ (Nat Sci), 2021, 49(9):92-98.[张培, 庞圣江, 刘士玲, 等. 缓释肥对江南油杉容器苗生长的影响[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 49(9):92-98. doi:10.13207/j.cnki. jnwafu.2021.09.011.]
    [13] HE Y H, JIANG Y, HUANG R L, et al. Spatial structure of fine root biomass and its response to soil moisture of Keteleeria cyclolepis Flous[J]. J CS Univ For Technol, 2021, 41(1):151-158.[何应会, 蒋燚, 黄荣林, 等. 江南油杉细根生物量空间分布及其对土壤水分的响应[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2021, 41(1):151-158. doi:10.14067/j. cnki.1673-923x.2021.01.016.]
    [14] LIU X S, JIANG Y, WEI S X, et al. Establishment of the ISSR-PCR reaction system and primers screening in Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis[J]. Guangxi For Sci, 2017, 46(3):266-270.[刘雄盛, 蒋燚, 韦铄星, 等. 江南油杉ISSR-PCR反应体系建立与引物筛选[J]. 广西林业科学, 2017, 46(3):266-270. doi:10.19692/j.cnki.gfs.2017.03. 007.]
    [15] LI Q, HUANG R L, LIU X S, et al. Community structure charac-teristics of Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis natural forest in Nandan County, Guangxi[J]. Guangxi For Sci, 2019, 48(2):183-189.[李强, 黄荣林, 刘雄盛, 等. 广西南丹县江南油杉天然林群落结构特征[J]. 广西林业科学, 2019, 48(2):183-189. doi:10.19692/j.cnki.gfs. 2019.02.009.]
    [16] LUO J W. Community structure and plant diversity of Keteleeria fortunei var. cyclolepis in Guangze County of Fujian Province[J]. Prot For Sci Technol, 2016(4):11-16.[罗金旺. 福建光泽江南油杉群落结构与植物多样性[J]. 防护林科技, 2016(4):11-16. doi:10.13601/j. issn.1005-5215.2016.04.003.]
    [17] SUN J J, SHEN A H, HUANG Y J, et al. Quantitative classification and ordination of Zelkova schneideriana habitat in Zhejiang Province[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci), 2019, 43(4):85-93.[孙杰杰, 沈爱华, 黄玉洁, 等. 浙江省大叶榉树生境地群落数量分类与排序[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 43(4):85-93. doi:10.3969/j. issn.1000-2006.201809027.]
    [18] WANG C H, CHEN X, WANG B Z, et al. Population structure and dynamics of Reevesia pubescens var. xuefengensis in the Gaowangjie National Nature Reserve of Hunan Province[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci), 2022, 46(3):57-64.[王春晖, 陈昕, 王本忠, 等. 湖南高望界国家级自然保护区雪峰山梭罗种群结构与动态特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 46(3):57-64. doi:10.12302/j.issn. 1000-2006.202105012.]
    [19] SCHLUTER D. A variance test for detecting species associations, with some example applications[J]. Ecology, 1984, 65(3):998-1005. doi:10.2307/1938071.
    [20] WANG B S, PENG S L. Studies on the measuring techniques of interspecific association of lower-subtropical evergreen-broadleaved forests. I. The exploration and the revision on the measuring formulas of interspecific association[J]. Acta Phytoecol Geobot Sin, 1985, 9(4):274-285.[王伯荪, 彭少麟. 南亚热带常绿阔叶林种间联结测定技术研究, Ⅰ. 种间联结测式的探讨与修正[J]. 植物生态学与地植物学丛刊, 1985, 9(4):274-285.]
    [21] ZHANG J T. Quantitative Ecology[M]. 2nd ed. Beijing:Science Press, 2011:105-109.[张金屯. 数量生态学[M]. 第2版. 北京:科学出版社, 2011:105-109.]
    [22] JIN S, WU K S. Niche and interspecific association of dominant species in herb layer of burned Pinus tabuliformis forest in the southern Taihang Mountain of northern China[J]. J Beijing For Univ, 2021, 43(4):35-46.[金山, 武楷帅. 太行山南段油松林火烧迹地优势草本生态位及种间关系[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2021, 43(4):35-46. doi:10.12171/j.1000-1522.20210044.]
    [23] DU R Q. Biostatistics[M]. Beijing:Higher Education Press, 1999:277-278.[杜荣骞. 生物统计学[M]. 北京:高等教育出版社, 1999:277-278.]
    [24] TU H R, LI J F, YANG L T, et al. Interspecific associations of the main tree populations of the Cyclobalanopsis glauca community in Karst hills of Guilin, southwest China[J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2019, 30(1):67-76.[涂洪润, 李娇凤, 杨丽婷, 等. 桂林岩溶石山青冈群落主要乔木树种的种间关联[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(1):67-76. doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.201901.018.]
    [25] XU M H, LIU M, ZHAI D T, et al. A review of contents and methods used to analyze various aspects of plant interspecific associations[J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2016, 36(24):8224-8233.[徐满厚, 刘敏, 翟大彤, 等. 植物种间联结研究内容与方法评述[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(24):8224-8233. doi:10.5846/stxb201505311092.]
    [26] GU L, GONG Z W, LI W Z. Niches and interspecific associations of dominant populations in three changed stages of natural secondary forests on Loess Plateau, P. R. China[J]. Sci Rep, 2017, 7(1):6604. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-06689-9.
    [27] LIU L T, WANG X D, WEN Q, et al. Interspecific associations of plant populations in rare earth mining wasteland in southern China[J]. Int Biodeteriorat Biodegradat, 2017, 118:82-88. doi:10.1016/j.ibiod.2017. 01.011.
    [28] YANG Z J, ZHANG Q D, LI H, et al. Inter-specific correlations among dominant populations of woody Syringa reticulata communities in Wulu Mountain Nature Reserve, Shanxi Province of China[J]. Plant Sci J, 2013, 31(1):42-48.[杨兆静, 张钦弟, 李豪, 等. 山西五鹿山自然保护区暴马丁香群落木本植物种间联结性分析[J]. 植物科学学报, 2013, 31(1):42-48. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1142.2013.10042.]
    [29] JIN J Y, QIN W G, TAN W N, et al. Interspecific association among dominant populations in endangered plant Kmeria septentrionalis communities[J]. J W China For Sci, 2013, 42(3):86-94.[金俊彦, 覃文更, 谭卫宁, 等. 濒危植物单性木兰群落主要种群种间联结性研究[J]. 西部林业科学, 2013, 42(3):86-94. doi:10.16473/j.cnki.xbly kx1972.2013.03.001.]
    [30] JIAN M F, LIU Q, ZHU D, et al. Inter-specific correlations among dominant populations of tree layer species in evergreen broad-leaved forest in Jiulianshan Mountain of subtropical China[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2009, 33(4):672-680.[简敏菲, 刘琪, 朱笃, 等. 九连山常绿阔叶林乔木优势种群的种间关联性分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2009, 33(4):672-680. doi:10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2009.04.005.]
    [31] ZHU L J, SU Z X, WANG W W, et al. Numerical analysis on inter-specific relationships in Davidia involucrata community in Sanjiang Wolong Nature Reserve[J]. Chin J Ecol, 2005, 24(10):1167-1171.[朱利君, 苏智先, 王伟伟, 等. 卧龙自然保护区三江珙桐群落种间关系的数量分析[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005, 24(10):1167-1171.]
    [32] CHEN Q, CHEN J, ZHONG J J, et al. Interspecific association and functional group classification of the dominant populations in shrub layer in secondary forest of Pinus tabuliformis in Qinling Mountain, China[J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2018, 29(6):1736-1744.[陈倩, 陈杰, 钟娇娇, 等. 秦岭山地油松天然次生林灌木层主要种群种间联结性与功能群划分[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(6):1736-1744. doi:10. 13287/j.1001-9332.201806.004.]
    [33] LIU R H, JIANG Y, CHANG B, et al. Interspecific associations and correlations among the main woody plants in a Pterocarya stenoptera community in a riparian zone of Lijiang River, Guilin, southwest China[J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2018, 38(19):6881-6893.[刘润红, 姜勇, 常斌, 等. 漓江河岸带枫杨群落主要木本植物种间联结与相关分析[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(19):6881-6893. doi:10.5846/stxb201802270396.]
    [34] DING W H, LI X Z, JIANG J Y, et al. Numerical analysis of inter-specific relationships in the estuary salt marsh plant community of southern Chongming Dongtan, Shanghai[J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2016, 27(5):1417-1426.[丁文慧, 李秀珍, 姜俊彦, 等. 崇明东滩南部河口盐沼植物群落种间关系的数量分析[J]. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(5):1417-1426. doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.201605.006.]
    [35] JIANG Y, LIU F, LIU X S, et al. Preservation and evaluation of germplasm resources of precious local tree species Keteleeria fortune var. cyclolepis and construction of strong seedling breeding system[J]. Guangxi For Sci, 2022, 51(1):1-9.[蒋燚, 刘菲, 刘雄盛, 等. 珍贵乡土树种江南油杉种质资源保存评价及壮苗繁育体系构建技术[J]. 广西林业科学, 2022, 51(1):1-9. doi:10.19692/j.issn.1006-1126.20220101.]
    引证文献
    网友评论
    网友评论
    分享到微博
    发 布
引用本文

陈绪辉,叶宝鉴,潘标志,林碧华,罗敏贤,肖丽芳,刘宝,何宗明,郑世群.珍稀濒危植物江南油杉群落乔木层主要树种种间关联性分析[J].热带亚热带植物学报,2023,31(1):21~30

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:214
  • 下载次数: 535
  • HTML阅读次数: 552
  • 引用次数: 0
历史
  • 收稿日期:2022-05-30
  • 最后修改日期:2022-09-15
  • 在线发布日期: 2023-02-24
  • 出版日期: 2023-01-20
文章二维码