不同密度下辽东栎幼苗子叶丢失及其对幼苗存活和生长的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00831

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

在宁夏六盘山区龙潭林区华北落叶松(Larix principis-rupprechtii )人工林的不同样带, 按6个密度梯度(3.24、2.56、1.96、1.44、1.00和0.64株·m^-2)移栽萌发生根的辽东栎(Quercus wutaishanica)幼苗, 研究了啮齿动物对幼苗子叶取食的密度效应及其对幼苗存活与生长的影响。结果表明, 辽东栎幼苗的子叶留存率随着幼苗密度的增大而减小。2个高密度处理(3.24和2.56株·m^-2)的幼苗子叶留存率分别在移栽6周和5周后稳定在最低水平, 分别为8.64%和7.81%; 而2个较低密度处理(1.44和0.64株·m^-2)的幼苗在最后一次观测时子叶留存率仍很高, 分别为44.44%和31.25%, 且二者均显著高于其他密度处理(p < 0.05)。受啮齿动物取食的影响, 在从高到低的不同密度处理下, 幼苗的主根留存率分别为64.16%、80.46%、87.23%、80.25%、69.84%和69.84%; 在1.44株·m^-2处理下, 顶芽留存率最高(25.23%), 显著大于3.24株·m^-2处理(4.19%) (p < 0.05), 其他密度处理的顶芽留存率均不足20%。子叶被动物取食的幼苗和子叶完整幼苗的最终留存率基本一致, 仅在个别密度处理的某一观测时期差异显著; 顶芽被动物取食的幼苗留存率略低于顶芽完整幼苗的留存率, 但个别密度处理完全相反; 不同类型幼苗的留存率随时间推移而上下波动, 可能与幼苗顶芽被动物取食后萌生形成新芽有关。幼苗的株高、基径、叶片数和单株叶面积均随密度的减小而略有增大, 但除株高外, 其他3个生长参数均在1.44株·m^-2处理时最大, 与子叶是否被动物取食有一定的对应关系, 即高密度下更多的幼苗丢失了供应其生长所需营养物质的子叶, 从而影响了幼苗的早期生长。研究结果不仅丰富了“负密度效应”理论和种群更新的“增补限制”理论, 也可为六盘山区退化辽东栎灌丛和辽东栎次生林的恢复及生态系统管理提供参考。

关键词: 子叶取食, 密度效应, 六盘山区, 辽东栎, 啮齿动物, 幼苗存活与生长

Abstract:

Aims Our objective are to explore cotyledon predation by rodents and its effects on survival and growth of Quercus wutaishanica seedlings under different densities, and to disclose the potential bottlenecks limiting seedling recruitment and natural regeneration of populations.
Methods We transplanted Q. wutaishanica seedlings at six densities of 3.24, 2.56, 1.96, 1.44, 1.00 and 0.64 individuals·m^-2 in a Larix principis-rupprechtii plantation of China’s Dadaogou forest region, Liupan Mountains. We surveyed retention rate of seedling cotyledon (RRC), retention rates of taproot (RRT) and apical bud (RRA) after cotyledon predation by rodents and retention rates of cotyledon- and apical bud-predated (RRCP, RRAP) and cotyledon- and apical bud-remained seedlings (RRCR, RRAR). At the end of the experiments, we harvested all surviving seedlings and determined seedling height (SH), basal stem diameter (BSD), leaf number (LN), taproot length, leaf area per seedling (LAPS), total dry mass, root shoot ratio and specific leaf area.
Important findings Density effect of cotyledon predation on Q. wutaishanica seedlings was observed and the RRC decreased with increase of seedling density. Six and five weeks after transplanting, the RRCs of two higher densities (3.24 and 2.56 individual·m^-2) stabilized at their minimums (8.64% and 7.81%), while those of two lower densities (1.44 and 0.64 individual·m^-2) were still higher at the last cotyledon survey and were signifycantly higher than those of all other density treatments (p < 0.05). The RRA was the highest (25.23%) in 1.44 individual·m^-2density and was higher (4.19%) than that in 3.24 individual·m^-2 density (p < 0.05), and all other densities resulted in < 20% of RRA. Significant difference between RRCP and RRCR was detected only on certain survey dates of individual density. RRAP was slightly lower than RRAR, and individual density exhibited the inverse. The fluctuation of retention rate of different seedling types may have be resulted from new germinated sprouts after apical buds were gnawed. SH, BSD, LN and LAPS all increased slightly with density decrease. The maxima of all parameters except SH were detected under the density of 1.44 individual·m^-2and, to some extent, were related to whether cotyledon was predated by rodents or not, indicating that more seedlings grown at higher density lost their cotyledons and thus exerted influence on seedling growth.

Key words: cotyledon predation, density effect, Liupan Mountains, Quercus wutaishanica, rodent, seedling survival and growth

闫兴富, 周立彪, 张靠稳, 周云锋. 不同密度下辽东栎幼苗子叶丢失及其对幼苗存活和生长的影响. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(8): 831-840. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00831

YAN Xing-Fu, ZHOU Li-Biao, ZHANG Kao-Wen, ZHOU Yun-Feng. Cotyledon loss and its effects on survival and growth of Quercus wutaishanica seedlings under different densities. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2012, 36(8): 831-840. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00831

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00831

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2012/V36/I8/831

图/表 5

参考文献 30

[1]	Bell T, Freckleton RP, Lewis OT (2006). Plant pathogens drive density-dependent seedling mortality in a tropical tree. Ecology Letters, 9, 569-574.
[2]	Birkedal M, Löf M, Olsson GE, Bergsten U (2010). Effects of granivorous rodents on direct seeding of oak and beech in relation to site preparation and sowing date. Forest Ecology and Management, 259, 2382-2389.
[3]	Chen HYH (1997). Interspecific responses of planted seedlings to light availability in interior British Columbia: survival, growth, allometric patterns, and specific leaf area. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 27, 1383-1393.
[4]	Cheng JR (程瑾瑞), Xiao ZS (肖治术), Zhang ZB (张知彬) (2007). Effects of burial and coating on acorn survival of Quercus variabilis and Quercus serrata under rodent predation. Chinese Journal of Ecology (生态学杂志), 26, 668-672. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	Comita LS, Hubbell SP (2009). Local neighborhood and species’ shade tolerance influence survival in a diverse seedling bank. Ecology, 90, 328-334.
[6]	den Ouden J, Jansen PA, Smit R (2005). Jays, mice and oaks: predation and dispersal of Quercus robur and Q. petraea in north-western Europe. In: Forget PM, Lambert JE, Hulme PE, Vander Wall SB eds. Seed Fate: Predation, Dispersal and Seedling Establishment. CAB International, Wallingford. 223-240.
[7]	Gao XM (高贤明), Du XJ (杜晓军), Wang ZL (王中磊) (2003). Comparison of seedling recruitment and establishment of Quercus wutaishanica in two habitats in Dongling mountainous area, Beijing. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 27, 404-411. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	Gómez JM (2004). Importance of microhabitat and acorn burial on Quercus ilex early recruitment: non-additive effects on multiple demographic processes. Plant Ecology, 172, 287-297.
[9]	Guo H (郭华), Wang XA (王孝安), Zhu ZH (朱志红) (2010). Recruitment limitations of Quercus wutaishanica seedlings in three habitats in Mt. Ziwuling. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 30, 6521-6529. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	Hoshizaki K, Miguchi H (2005). Influence of forest composition on tree seed predation and rodent responses: a comparison of monodominant and mixed temperate forests in Japan. In: Forget PM, Lambert JE, Hulme PE, Vander Wall SB eds. Seed Fate: Predation, Dispersal and Seedling Establishment. CAB International, Wallingford. 253-267.
[11]	Hoshizaki K, Suzuki W, Sasaki S (1997). Impacts of secondary seed dispersal and herbivory on seedling survival in Aesculus turbinata. Journal of Vegetation Science, 8, 735-742.
[12]	Kobe RK, Pacala SW, Silander JA Jr, Canham CD (1995). Juvenile tree survivorship as a component of shade tolerance. Ecological Applications, 5, 517-532.
[13]	Li HJ, Zhang ZB (2003). Effect of rodents on acorn dispersal and survival of the Liaodong oak (Quercus liaotungensis Koidz.). Forest Ecology and Management, 176, 387-396.
[14]	Lu JQ (路纪琪), Zhang ZB (张知彬) (2005). Effects of high and low shrubs on acorn hoarding and dispersal of Liaodong oak Quercus liaotungensis by small rodents. Acta Zoologica Sinica (动物学报), 51, 195-204. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	Nardini A, Salleo S, Lo Gullo MA, Pitt F (2000). Different responses to drought and freeze stress of Quercus ilex L. growing along a latitudinal gradient. Plant Ecology, 148, 139-147.
[16]	Nathan R, Casagrandi R (2004). A simple mechanistic model of seed dispersal, predation and plant establishment: Janzen-Connell and beyond. Journal of Ecology, 92, 733-746.
[17]	Pérez-Ramos IM, Marañón T (2008). Factors affecting post-dispersal seed predation in two coexisting oak species: microhabitat, burial and exclusion of large herbivores. Forest Ecology and Management, 255, 3506-3514. DOI URL
[18]	Peters HA (2003). Neighbour-regulated mortality: the influence of positive and negative density dependence on tree populations in species-rich tropical forests. Ecology Letters, 6, 757-765.
[19]	Queenborough SA, Burslem DFRP, Garwood NC, Valencia R (2007). Neighborhood and community interactions determine the spatial pattern of tropical tree seedling survival. Ecology, 88, 2248-2258.
[20]	Steele MA, Turner G, Smallwood PD, Wolff JO, Radillo J (2001). Cache management by small mammals: experimental evidence for the significance of acorn-embryo excision. Journal of Mammalogy, 82, 35-42.
[21]	Sun SC (孙书存), Chen LZ (陈灵芝) (2001). The effects of animal removal and groundcover on the fate of seeds of Quercus liaotungensis. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 21, 80-85. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	Sun SC, Gao XM, Chen LZ (2004). High acorn predation prevents the regeneration of Quercus liaotungensis in the Dongling Mountain region of north China. Restoration Ecology, 12, 335-342.
[23]	Vander Wall SB (1990). Food Hoarding in Animals. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
[24]	Wenny DG (2005). Post-dispersal seed fate of some cloud forest tree species in Costa Rica. In: Forget PM, Lambert JE, Hulme P, Vander Wall SB eds. Seed Fate: Predation, Dispersal and Seedling Establishment. CAB International, Wallingford. 351-362.
[25]	Yan XF (闫兴富), Du Q (杜茜), Shi C (石淳), Zhou LB (周立彪), Zhang KW (张靠稳) (2011a). Seedling regeneration of Quercus liaotungensis in Liupan Mountains, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology (植物生态学报), 35, 914-925. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	Yan XF (闫兴富), Yang J (杨晋), Si BB (思彬斌), Zhang Q (张嫱), Zhang KW (张靠稳) (2011b). Effects of litter and soil cover on Quercus liaotungensis seed predation and removal by animals. Chinese Journal of Ecology (生态学杂志), 30, 730-733. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[27]	Yu XD (于晓东), Zhou HZ (周红章), Luo TH (罗天宏), He JJ (何君舰), Zhang ZB (张知彬) (2001). Insect infestation and acorn fate in Quercus liaotungensis. Acta Entomologica Sinica (昆虫学报), 44, 518-524. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[28]	Zhang ZB (张知彬) (2001). Effect of burial and environmental factors on seedling recruitment of Quercus liaotungensis Koidz. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 21, 374-384. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[29]	Zhu Y (祝燕), Mi XC (米湘成), Ma KP (马克平) (2009). A mechanism of plant species coexistence: the negative density-dependent hypothesis. Biodiversity Science (生物多样性), 17, 594-604. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[30]	Ziegenhagen B, Kausch W (1995). Productivity of young shaded oaks (Quercus robur L.) as corresponding to shoot morphology and leaf anatomy. Forest Ecology and Management, 72, 97-108.

	子叶被取食幼苗 Cotyledon-predated seedling					子叶完整幼苗 Cotyledon-intact seedling
	2010			2011		2010			2011
	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27
3.24	13.70 ± 10.05^ab	24.21 ± 14.40^ab	22.33 ± 11.15^a	18.15 ± 6.74^a	6.84 ± 3.89^a	30.00 ± 26.46^a	47.78 ± 42.99^ab	30.00 ± 26.46^ab	3.33 ± 5.77^a	6.67 ± 11.55^a
2.56	19.61 ± 9.90^ab	32.18 ± 16.03^ab	28.78 ± 15.84^ab	15.52 ± 17.05^ab	12.42 ± 11.93^a	14.44 ± 17.10^a	10.00 ± 17.32^a	16.67 ± 15.28^a	3.33 ± 5.77^a	0.00 ± 0.00
1.96	23.14 ± 8.30^ab	32.10 ± 10.15^a	26.53 ± 11.36^ab	14.99 ± 7.68^a	13.23 ± 5.59^a	10.23 ± 9.30^a	30.68 ± 27.90^ab	33.18 ± 18.67^ab	6.06 ± 10.50^a	14.39 ± 12.92^a
1.44	28.05 ± 7.69^a	40.66 ± 5.27^a	38.09 ± 8.02^a	15.43 ± 15.55^ab	18.81 ± 8.08^a	23.44 ± 10.14^a	28.74 ± 11.18^ab	24.82 ± 17.37^a	27.83 ± 20.95^ab	12.86 ± 14.50^a
1.00	28.39 ± 20.56^ab	31.20 ± 13.43^a	29.47 ± 13.96^ab	17.31 ± 12.73^ab	17.16 ± 7.96^a	24.44 ± 21.43^a	57.78 ± 36.72^b	58.89 ± 8.39^b	41.11 ± 8.39^b	23.33 ± 25.17^a
0.64	8.59 ± 8.35^b	5.56 ± 9.62^b	13.03 ± 15.38^b	2.78 ± 4.81^b	0.00 ± 0.00	6.67 ± 11.55^a	33.89 ± 22.99^ab	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00

	子叶被取食幼苗 Cotyledon-predated seedling					子叶完整幼苗 Cotyledon-intact seedling
	2010			2011		2010			2011
	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27
3.24	13.70 ± 10.05^ab	24.21 ± 14.40^ab	22.33 ± 11.15^a	18.15 ± 6.74^a	6.84 ± 3.89^a	30.00 ± 26.46^a	47.78 ± 42.99^ab	30.00 ± 26.46^ab	3.33 ± 5.77^a	6.67 ± 11.55^a
2.56	19.61 ± 9.90^ab	32.18 ± 16.03^ab	28.78 ± 15.84^ab	15.52 ± 17.05^ab	12.42 ± 11.93^a	14.44 ± 17.10^a	10.00 ± 17.32^a	16.67 ± 15.28^a	3.33 ± 5.77^a	0.00 ± 0.00
1.96	23.14 ± 8.30^ab	32.10 ± 10.15^a	26.53 ± 11.36^ab	14.99 ± 7.68^a	13.23 ± 5.59^a	10.23 ± 9.30^a	30.68 ± 27.90^ab	33.18 ± 18.67^ab	6.06 ± 10.50^a	14.39 ± 12.92^a
1.44	28.05 ± 7.69^a	40.66 ± 5.27^a	38.09 ± 8.02^a	15.43 ± 15.55^ab	18.81 ± 8.08^a	23.44 ± 10.14^a	28.74 ± 11.18^ab	24.82 ± 17.37^a	27.83 ± 20.95^ab	12.86 ± 14.50^a
1.00	28.39 ± 20.56^ab	31.20 ± 13.43^a	29.47 ± 13.96^ab	17.31 ± 12.73^ab	17.16 ± 7.96^a	24.44 ± 21.43^a	57.78 ± 36.72^b	58.89 ± 8.39^b	41.11 ± 8.39^b	23.33 ± 25.17^a
0.64	8.59 ± 8.35^b	5.56 ± 9.62^b	13.03 ± 15.38^b	2.78 ± 4.81^b	0.00 ± 0.00	6.67 ± 11.55^a	33.89 ± 22.99^ab	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00

	顶芽被取食幼苗 Apical bud-predated seedling					顶芽完整幼苗 Apical bud-intact seedling
	2010			2011		2010			2011
	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27
3.24	14.53 ± 10.91^ab	22.84 ± 11.84^a	22.84 ± 11.84^a	17.71 ± 5.91^a	6.28 ± 2.88^a	20.83 ± 36.08^a	25.00 ± 43.30^a	20.83 ± 36.08^a	12.50 ± 21.65^a	8.33 ± 14.43^a
2.56	17.93 ± 9.66^ab	28.01 ± 13.04^a	27.20 ± 14.92^a	12.71 ± 13.05^ab	8.10 ± 5.33^ab	38.89 ± 9.62^a	59.26 ± 8.49^a	37.04 ± 33.95^a	22.22 ± 25.46^a	22.22 ± 25.46^a
1.96	17.82 ± 5.33^a	30.21 ± 10.29^a	23.92 ± 13.08^a	14.55 ± 9.77^ab	12.39 ± 4.68^ab	60.48 ± 10.72^a	62.38 ± 15.67^a	40.95 ± 40.03^a	18.10 ± 20.27^a	18.10 ± 20.27^a
1.44	24.22 ± 13.71^ab	38.17 ± 13.82^a	33.05 ± 12.13^a	17.24 ± 18.41^ab	22.79 ± 7.71^b	29.17 ± 26.02^a	47.22 ± 29.26^a	50.00 ± 0.00^a	4.17 ± 7.22^a	4.17 ± 7.22^a
1.00	22.30 ± 15.17^ab	24.44 ± 9.18^a	24.44 ± 9.18^a	14.68 ± 13.06^ab	12.46 ± 5.77^ab	41.67 ± 38.19^a	41.67 ± 38.19^a	37.50 ± 33.07^a	29.17 ± 26.02^a	16.67 ± 28.88^a
0.64	7.04 ± 6.12^b	7.04 ± 6.12^b	13.70 ± 15.17^a	3.33 ± 5.77^b	0.00 ± 0.00	16.67 ± 28.88^a	16.67 ± 28.88^a	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00

	顶芽被取食幼苗 Apical bud-predated seedling					顶芽完整幼苗 Apical bud-intact seedling
	2010			2011		2010			2011
	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27	July 21	August 22	September 27	July 15	September 27
3.24	14.53 ± 10.91^ab	22.84 ± 11.84^a	22.84 ± 11.84^a	17.71 ± 5.91^a	6.28 ± 2.88^a	20.83 ± 36.08^a	25.00 ± 43.30^a	20.83 ± 36.08^a	12.50 ± 21.65^a	8.33 ± 14.43^a
2.56	17.93 ± 9.66^ab	28.01 ± 13.04^a	27.20 ± 14.92^a	12.71 ± 13.05^ab	8.10 ± 5.33^ab	38.89 ± 9.62^a	59.26 ± 8.49^a	37.04 ± 33.95^a	22.22 ± 25.46^a	22.22 ± 25.46^a
1.96	17.82 ± 5.33^a	30.21 ± 10.29^a	23.92 ± 13.08^a	14.55 ± 9.77^ab	12.39 ± 4.68^ab	60.48 ± 10.72^a	62.38 ± 15.67^a	40.95 ± 40.03^a	18.10 ± 20.27^a	18.10 ± 20.27^a
1.44	24.22 ± 13.71^ab	38.17 ± 13.82^a	33.05 ± 12.13^a	17.24 ± 18.41^ab	22.79 ± 7.71^b	29.17 ± 26.02^a	47.22 ± 29.26^a	50.00 ± 0.00^a	4.17 ± 7.22^a	4.17 ± 7.22^a
1.00	22.30 ± 15.17^ab	24.44 ± 9.18^a	24.44 ± 9.18^a	14.68 ± 13.06^ab	12.46 ± 5.77^ab	41.67 ± 38.19^a	41.67 ± 38.19^a	37.50 ± 33.07^a	29.17 ± 26.02^a	16.67 ± 28.88^a
0.64	7.04 ± 6.12^b	7.04 ± 6.12^b	13.70 ± 15.17^a	3.33 ± 5.77^b	0.00 ± 0.00	16.67 ± 28.88^a	16.67 ± 28.88^a	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00	0.00 ± 0.00