植物生态学报 ›› 2006, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (4): 601-609.DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2006.0079
收稿日期:
2005-01-06
接受日期:
2005-11-17
出版日期:
2006-01-06
发布日期:
2006-07-30
通讯作者:
梁宗锁
作者简介:
*E-mail:liangzs@ms.iswe.ac.cn基金资助:
DU Feng, LIANG Zong-Suo*(), SHAN Lun, CHEN Xiao-Yan
Received:
2005-01-06
Accepted:
2005-11-17
Online:
2006-01-06
Published:
2006-07-30
Contact:
LIANG Zong-Suo
摘要:
猪毛蒿(Artemisia scoparia)通常是黄土丘陵区撂荒演替前期群落优势种,在无人为干扰的情况下,猪毛蒿群落通常会向冰草(Agropyron cristatum)群落或阿尔泰狗娃花(Heteropappus altaicus)群落,或长芒草(Stipa bungeana)群落等演替。该文通过河阶地和梁峁阴坡中猪毛蒿生长特征的调查和种内、种间竞争田间试验,从植物竞争角度对猪毛蒿群落的演替机制给予了解释。结果表明:1)两类样地中猪毛蒿的生长都趋于小型化,有少数大个体和多数小个体,都存在异速生长现象,说明两类样地存在竞争,且对猪毛蒿的生长形态具有塑造作用; 2)由于单位地上生物量竞争效应排除了立地条件和个体大小的影响,因而比总竞争效应更能说明种对间的相对竞争能力。梁峁阴坡地和一、二级河阶地三种立地条件下,7种测试植物中对猪毛蒿的相对竞争能力以演替后期多年生植物较高,而演替前期一年生植物较低,说明演替后期种对前期种的竞争抑制是演替驱动力之一; 3)以各测试植物对猪毛蒿单位重量竞争抑制程度平均值来看,以梁峁阴坡地最大,二级河阶地次之,一级河阶地最小,说明立地条件越差,土壤资源可利用水平越低,竞争越激烈; 4)一级河阶地和梁峁阴坡地各测试植物对猪毛蒿的竞争等级发生了显著变化,说明环境条件差别较大时,植物的竞争等级会发生变化。
杜峰, 梁宗锁, 山仑, 陈小燕. 黄土丘陵区不同立地条件下猪毛蒿种内、种间竞争. 植物生态学报, 2006, 30(4): 601-609. DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2006.0079
DU Feng, LIANG Zong-Suo, SHAN Lun, CHEN Xiao-Yan. INTRASPECFIC AND INTERSPECFIC COMPETITION OF ARTEMISIA SCOPARIA UNDER DIFFERENT SITE CONDITIONS IN THE HILLY REGION OF LOESS PLATEAU. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2006, 30(4): 601-609. DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2006.0079
调查和试验地点 Investigation and experiment sites | 土壤水分含量(%) Soil moisture content | 土壤养分 Soil nutrients | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0~20 cm | 20~40 cm | 40~60 cm | 有机质 Organic (g·kg-1) | 全氮 Total N (g·kg-1) | 速效氮 Active N (mg·kg-1) | 速效磷 Active P (mg·kg-1) | 速效钾 Active K (mg·kg-1) | ||||
新庄科一级河阶地 The lowest river terrace in Xinzhuangke | 10.55 | 10.12 | 11.15 | 7.86 | 0.77 | 20.36 | 4.89 | 122.16 | |||
千腰岘梁峁阴坡 Northern mound land in Qianyaoxian | 6.04 | 7.28 | 7.74 | 5.42 | 0.39 | 16.45 | 2.08 | 74.62 | |||
仁台沟一级河阶地 The lowest river terrace in Rentaihou | 14.76 | 15.20 | 15.83 | 11.25 | 0.63 | 20.21 | 1.66 | 71.01 | |||
仁台沟二级河阶地 Lower river terrace in Rentaigou | 9.06 | 10.79 | 11.28 | 7.52 | 0.59 | 17.08 | 1.87 | 68.43 |
表1 研究地点土壤水分、养分概况
Table 1 Summary of soil moisture and nutrition in investigation and experiment sites
调查和试验地点 Investigation and experiment sites | 土壤水分含量(%) Soil moisture content | 土壤养分 Soil nutrients | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0~20 cm | 20~40 cm | 40~60 cm | 有机质 Organic (g·kg-1) | 全氮 Total N (g·kg-1) | 速效氮 Active N (mg·kg-1) | 速效磷 Active P (mg·kg-1) | 速效钾 Active K (mg·kg-1) | ||||
新庄科一级河阶地 The lowest river terrace in Xinzhuangke | 10.55 | 10.12 | 11.15 | 7.86 | 0.77 | 20.36 | 4.89 | 122.16 | |||
千腰岘梁峁阴坡 Northern mound land in Qianyaoxian | 6.04 | 7.28 | 7.74 | 5.42 | 0.39 | 16.45 | 2.08 | 74.62 | |||
仁台沟一级河阶地 The lowest river terrace in Rentaihou | 14.76 | 15.20 | 15.83 | 11.25 | 0.63 | 20.21 | 1.66 | 71.01 | |||
仁台沟二级河阶地 Lower river terrace in Rentaigou | 9.06 | 10.79 | 11.28 | 7.52 | 0.59 | 17.08 | 1.87 | 68.43 |
图1 不同立地条件下猪毛蒿高度和地上生物量频次分布图 图中左侧为河阶地,右侧为梁峁坡地
Fig.1 Frequency histogram of height and aboveground biomass of Artemisia scoparia under different standing conditions In the figure, left side is river terrace old-field and right side is northern mound old-field
地点 | 测试植物 Test species | 目标种 Phytometer | 样本数N | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sites | 植物种名 | 地上生物量(FWg/穴) | 高度 | 地上生物量(FWg/穴) | ||||
Species | Aboveground biomass | Height (cm) | Aboveground biomass | |||||
per bunch | per bunch | |||||||
平均 | 标准差 | 平均 | 标准差 | 平均 | 标准差 | |||
Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |||
梁峁阴坡 | 无 No | 100.49 | 28.66 | 255.58 | 110.46 | 27 | ||
Northern | ||||||||
mound land | ||||||||
狗尾草Setaria viridis | 6.2 | 1.82 | 94.14 | 27.85 | 238.45 | 99.47 | 15 | |
猪毛蒿 Artemissia scoparia | 210.84 | 135.41 | 45.82 | 24.03 | 14.42 | 9.79 | 22 | |
冰草Agropyron cristatum | 2.23 | 2 | 98.18 | 20.01 | 212.97 | 86.56 | 25 | |
阿尔泰狗娃Heteropappus altaicus | 32.54 | 25.53 | 72.11 | 14.67 | 117.3 | 87.66 | 19 | |
长芒草Stipa bungeana | 5.46 | 3.85 | 87.25 | 15.89 | 189.86 | 91.47 | 13 | |
中华隐子草 Ceistogenes squarrosa | 42.51 | 26.13 | 42.2 | 15.4 | 60.07 | 30.2 | 16 | |
白羊草Bothriochloa ischaemum | 67.89 | 52.57 | 38.05 | 1756 | 41.24 | 27.38 | 12 | |
一级河阶地 | 无 No | 91.56 | 31.99 | 243.19 | 139.01 | 13 | ||
The lowest river | ||||||||
treeace | ||||||||
狗尾草S. viridis | 3.58 | 2.56 | 88.87 | 27.58 | 240.07 | 120.33 | 12 | |
猪毛蒿 A. scoparia | 134.25 | 78.89 | 71.26 | 31.07 | 48.36 | 22.52 | 9 | |
冰草A. cristatum | 6.46 | 4.19 | 88.47 | 35.78 | 200.54 | 130.13 | 8 | |
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 30.45 | 20.05 | 78.65 | 33.6 | 112.23 | 64.7 | 12 | |
长芒草S. bungeana | 20.47 | 13.88 | 79.46 | 25.66 | 160.27 | 90.52 | 11 | |
中华隐子草 C.squarrosa | 30.51 | 10.42 | 50.26 | 25.09 | 76.12 | 40.56 | 12 | |
白羊草B. ischaemum | 30.55 | 22.37 | 53.63 | 28.32 | 69.46 | 35.04 | 8 | |
二级河阶地 | 无 No | 129.11 | 23.79 | 277.67 | 131.15 | 10 | ||
Lower river | ||||||||
terrace | ||||||||
狗尾草S. viridis | 10.14 | 3.22 | 120.15 | 26.75 | 246.5 | 128.62 | 9 | |
猪毛蒿 A. scoparia | 156.3 | 75.28 | 88.49 | 36.76 | 38.99 | 20.18 | 12 | |
冰草A. cristatum | 8.46 | 5.18 | 110.35 | 26.03 | 213.85 | 140.49 | 9 | |
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 40.35 | 24.57 | 80.17 | 42.03 | 97.46 | 68.74 | 11 | |
长芒草S. bungeana | 20.2 | 10.69 | 96.44 | 26.35 | 195.86 | 103.33 | 12 | |
中华隐子草 C. squarrosa | 36.9 | 20.48 | 39.45 | 27.26 | 57.81 | 39.68 | 8 |
表2 不同立地条件下猪毛蒿种内、种间竞争及其测试植物的生长特征
Table 2 Growth traits of Artemisia scoparia with and without test species
地点 | 测试植物 Test species | 目标种 Phytometer | 样本数N | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sites | 植物种名 | 地上生物量(FWg/穴) | 高度 | 地上生物量(FWg/穴) | ||||
Species | Aboveground biomass | Height (cm) | Aboveground biomass | |||||
per bunch | per bunch | |||||||
平均 | 标准差 | 平均 | 标准差 | 平均 | 标准差 | |||
Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |||
梁峁阴坡 | 无 No | 100.49 | 28.66 | 255.58 | 110.46 | 27 | ||
Northern | ||||||||
mound land | ||||||||
狗尾草Setaria viridis | 6.2 | 1.82 | 94.14 | 27.85 | 238.45 | 99.47 | 15 | |
猪毛蒿 Artemissia scoparia | 210.84 | 135.41 | 45.82 | 24.03 | 14.42 | 9.79 | 22 | |
冰草Agropyron cristatum | 2.23 | 2 | 98.18 | 20.01 | 212.97 | 86.56 | 25 | |
阿尔泰狗娃Heteropappus altaicus | 32.54 | 25.53 | 72.11 | 14.67 | 117.3 | 87.66 | 19 | |
长芒草Stipa bungeana | 5.46 | 3.85 | 87.25 | 15.89 | 189.86 | 91.47 | 13 | |
中华隐子草 Ceistogenes squarrosa | 42.51 | 26.13 | 42.2 | 15.4 | 60.07 | 30.2 | 16 | |
白羊草Bothriochloa ischaemum | 67.89 | 52.57 | 38.05 | 1756 | 41.24 | 27.38 | 12 | |
一级河阶地 | 无 No | 91.56 | 31.99 | 243.19 | 139.01 | 13 | ||
The lowest river | ||||||||
treeace | ||||||||
狗尾草S. viridis | 3.58 | 2.56 | 88.87 | 27.58 | 240.07 | 120.33 | 12 | |
猪毛蒿 A. scoparia | 134.25 | 78.89 | 71.26 | 31.07 | 48.36 | 22.52 | 9 | |
冰草A. cristatum | 6.46 | 4.19 | 88.47 | 35.78 | 200.54 | 130.13 | 8 | |
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 30.45 | 20.05 | 78.65 | 33.6 | 112.23 | 64.7 | 12 | |
长芒草S. bungeana | 20.47 | 13.88 | 79.46 | 25.66 | 160.27 | 90.52 | 11 | |
中华隐子草 C.squarrosa | 30.51 | 10.42 | 50.26 | 25.09 | 76.12 | 40.56 | 12 | |
白羊草B. ischaemum | 30.55 | 22.37 | 53.63 | 28.32 | 69.46 | 35.04 | 8 | |
二级河阶地 | 无 No | 129.11 | 23.79 | 277.67 | 131.15 | 10 | ||
Lower river | ||||||||
terrace | ||||||||
狗尾草S. viridis | 10.14 | 3.22 | 120.15 | 26.75 | 246.5 | 128.62 | 9 | |
猪毛蒿 A. scoparia | 156.3 | 75.28 | 88.49 | 36.76 | 38.99 | 20.18 | 12 | |
冰草A. cristatum | 8.46 | 5.18 | 110.35 | 26.03 | 213.85 | 140.49 | 9 | |
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 40.35 | 24.57 | 80.17 | 42.03 | 97.46 | 68.74 | 11 | |
长芒草S. bungeana | 20.2 | 10.69 | 96.44 | 26.35 | 195.86 | 103.33 | 12 | |
中华隐子草 C. squarrosa | 36.9 | 20.48 | 39.45 | 27.26 | 57.81 | 39.68 | 8 |
地点 Sites | 测试植物 Test species | 高度 Height | 地上生物量 Biomass above ground | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PU | RC | PU | RC | RCIPergram | ||||
梁峁阴坡地 Northern mound land | 狗尾草Setaria viridis | 0.491 2 | 0.063 2 | 0.616 6 | 0.067 0 | 0.010 8 | ||
猪毛蒿 Artemisia scoparia | 0.000 1 | 0.544 0 | 0.000 1 | 0.943 6 | 0.004 5 | |||
冰草Agropyron cristatum | 0.739 5 | 0.023 0 | 0.106 3 | 0.166 7 | 0.074 8 | |||
阿尔泰狗娃Heteroppus altaicus | 0.000 1 | 0.282 4 | 0.000 1 | 0.541 0 | 0.016 6 | |||
长芒草Stipa bungeana | 0.068 7 | 0.131 8 | 0.062 9 | 0.257 1 | 0.047 1 | |||
中华隐子草 Cleistogenes squarrosa | 0.000 1 | 0.580 1 | 0.000 1 | 0.765 0 | 0.018 0 | |||
白羊草Bothriochloa ischaemum | 0.000 1 | 0.621 4 | 0.000 1 | 0.838 6 | 0.012 4 | |||
一级河阶地 The lowest river terrace | 狗尾草S. viridis | 0.824 5 | 0.029 4 | 0.960 2 | 0.012 8 | 0.003 6 | ||
猪毛蒿 A. scoparia | 0.154 4 | 0.221 7 | 0.000 8 | 0.801 1 | 0.006 0 | |||
冰草A. cristatum | 0.839 2 | 0.033 7 | 0.531 8 | 0.175 4 | 0.027 1 | |||
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 0.335 3 | 0.141 0 | 0.014 7 | 0.538 5 | 0.017 7 | |||
长芒草S. bungeana | 0.324 1 | 0.132 2 | 0.193 5 | 0.341 0 | 0.016 7 | |||
中华隐子草 C.squarrosa | 0.001 6 | 0.451 1 | 0.002 6 | 0.687 0 | 0.022 5 | |||
白羊草B. ischaemum | 0.012 7 | 0.414 3 | 0.002 0 | 0.714 4 | 0.023 4 | |||
二级河阶地 Lower river terrace | 狗尾草S. viridis | 0.450 1 | 0.069 4 | 0.715 8 | 0.112 3 | 0.011 1 | ||
猪毛蒿 A.scoparia | 0.031 5 | 0.314 6 | 0.003 1 | 0.859 6 | 0.005 5 | |||
冰草A. cristatum | 0.453 8 | 0.145 3 | 0.482 9 | 0.229 8 | 0.027 2 | |||
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 0.004 3 | 0.379 1 | 0.017 5 | 0.649 0 | 0.016 1 | |||
长芒草S. bungeana | 0.104 7 | 0.253 0 | 0.256 8 | 0.294 6 | 0.014 6 | |||
中华隐子草 C.squarrosa | 0.000 1 | 0.694 4 | 0.004 8 | 0.791 8 | 0.021 5 |
表3 不同立地条件下各测试植物对猪毛蒿的相对竞争强度及其对猪毛蒿生长的影响
Table 3 The significance level of Artemisia scoparia traits under different test species' competition
地点 Sites | 测试植物 Test species | 高度 Height | 地上生物量 Biomass above ground | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PU | RC | PU | RC | RCIPergram | ||||
梁峁阴坡地 Northern mound land | 狗尾草Setaria viridis | 0.491 2 | 0.063 2 | 0.616 6 | 0.067 0 | 0.010 8 | ||
猪毛蒿 Artemisia scoparia | 0.000 1 | 0.544 0 | 0.000 1 | 0.943 6 | 0.004 5 | |||
冰草Agropyron cristatum | 0.739 5 | 0.023 0 | 0.106 3 | 0.166 7 | 0.074 8 | |||
阿尔泰狗娃Heteroppus altaicus | 0.000 1 | 0.282 4 | 0.000 1 | 0.541 0 | 0.016 6 | |||
长芒草Stipa bungeana | 0.068 7 | 0.131 8 | 0.062 9 | 0.257 1 | 0.047 1 | |||
中华隐子草 Cleistogenes squarrosa | 0.000 1 | 0.580 1 | 0.000 1 | 0.765 0 | 0.018 0 | |||
白羊草Bothriochloa ischaemum | 0.000 1 | 0.621 4 | 0.000 1 | 0.838 6 | 0.012 4 | |||
一级河阶地 The lowest river terrace | 狗尾草S. viridis | 0.824 5 | 0.029 4 | 0.960 2 | 0.012 8 | 0.003 6 | ||
猪毛蒿 A. scoparia | 0.154 4 | 0.221 7 | 0.000 8 | 0.801 1 | 0.006 0 | |||
冰草A. cristatum | 0.839 2 | 0.033 7 | 0.531 8 | 0.175 4 | 0.027 1 | |||
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 0.335 3 | 0.141 0 | 0.014 7 | 0.538 5 | 0.017 7 | |||
长芒草S. bungeana | 0.324 1 | 0.132 2 | 0.193 5 | 0.341 0 | 0.016 7 | |||
中华隐子草 C.squarrosa | 0.001 6 | 0.451 1 | 0.002 6 | 0.687 0 | 0.022 5 | |||
白羊草B. ischaemum | 0.012 7 | 0.414 3 | 0.002 0 | 0.714 4 | 0.023 4 | |||
二级河阶地 Lower river terrace | 狗尾草S. viridis | 0.450 1 | 0.069 4 | 0.715 8 | 0.112 3 | 0.011 1 | ||
猪毛蒿 A.scoparia | 0.031 5 | 0.314 6 | 0.003 1 | 0.859 6 | 0.005 5 | |||
冰草A. cristatum | 0.453 8 | 0.145 3 | 0.482 9 | 0.229 8 | 0.027 2 | |||
阿尔泰狗娃H. altaicus | 0.004 3 | 0.379 1 | 0.017 5 | 0.649 0 | 0.016 1 | |||
长芒草S. bungeana | 0.104 7 | 0.253 0 | 0.256 8 | 0.294 6 | 0.014 6 | |||
中华隐子草 C.squarrosa | 0.000 1 | 0.694 4 | 0.004 8 | 0.791 8 | 0.021 5 |
[1] | Aerts R (1999). Interspecfic competition in natural plant communities: mechanisms, trade-offs and plant-soil feedbacks. Journal of Experimental Botany, 50, 29-37. |
[2] | Aguiar MR, Lauenroth WK, Peters DP (2001). Intensity of intra- and interspecific competition in coexisting shortgrass species. Journal of Ecology, 89, 40-47. |
[3] | Begon M, Harper JL, Townsend CR (1990). Ecology, Individuals, Populations and Communities 2nd edn. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. |
[4] | Cahill JF, Casper BB (2000). Investigating the relationship between neighbor root biomass and belowground competition: field evidence for symmetric competition belowground. Oikos, 90, 311-320. |
[5] | Casper BB, Jackson RB (1997). Plant competition underground. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 28, 545-570. |
[6] | Cheng ZH (2001). Growth and Competition of Fourteen Herb species in Experimental Microcoenosiums. Acta Botanica Sinica(植物学报), 43, 1184-1190. |
[7] | Crawley MJ, May RM(1987). Population dynamics and plant community structure: competition between annuals and perennials. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 125, 475-489. |
[8] | Davies W (1928). The factor of competition between one species and another in seeds mixtures. In: Welsh Plant Breeding Station ed. Bulletin H8. Aberystwyth, 82-149. |
[9] | Du F( 杜峰), Liang ZS( 梁宗锁), Hu LJ ( 胡莉娟) (2004). A reviews on plant competition. Chinese Journal of Ecology(生态学杂志), 23(4), 157-163. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[10] | Firbank LG, Watkinson AR(1990). On the effects of competition: from monocultures to mixtures. In: Grace JB, Tilman D eds. Perspectives on Plant Competition. Academic Press, New York, 165-192. |
[11] | Fowler N (1986). The role of competition in plant communities in arid and semiarid regions. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 17, 89-110. |
[12] | Goldberg DE (1990). Components of resources in plant communities. In: Grace JB, Tilman D eds. Perspectives on the Plant Competition. Academic Press, New York, 27-49. |
[13] | Goldberg DE (1996). Competitive ability: definitions contingency and correlated traits. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 351, 1377-1385. |
[14] | Grace JB (1989). Effects of water depth on Typha latifolia and Typha domingensis. American Journal of Botany, 76, 762-768. |
[15] | Grace JB (1995). On the measurement of plant competition intensity. Ecology, 76, 305-308. |
[16] |
Hamilton JG, Holzapfel C, Mahall BE (1999). Coexistence and interference between a native perennial grass and non-native annaul grasses in California. Oecologia, 121, 518-526.
URL PMID |
[17] | Howard TG (2001). The relationship of total and per-gram rankings in competitive effect to the natural abundance of herbaceous perennials. Journal of Ecology, 89, 110-117. |
[18] | Keddy P, Nielsen K, Weiher E, Lawson R (2002). Relative competitive performance of 63 species of terrestrial herbaceous plants. Journal of Vegetation Science, 13, 5-16. |
[19] |
Leuschner C, Hertel D, Coners H, Büttner V (2001). Root competition between beech an oak:a hypothesis. Oecologia, 126, 276-284.
URL PMID |
[20] | Li B( 李博), Chen JK( 陈家宽), Watkinson AR (1998). A literature review on plant competition. Chinese Buttetin of Botany(植物学通报), 15(4), 18-29. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[21] | Li B( 李博) (2001). Plant Competition—Studies on the Interactions Between Crop and Weed. Higher Education Press and Springer Press, Beijing, 251. (in Chinese) |
[22] | Li ZF( 李仲芳), Wang G( 王刚) (2002). The effects of intraspecific competition on the relationship between height growth and biomass of annual plants. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences)(兰州大学学报(自然科学版)), 38(2), 141-146. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[23] | Martin RA, William KL, Debrap PP (2001). Intensity of intra- and interspecific competition in coexisting shortgrass species. Journal of Ecology, 89, 40-47. |
[24] | Miller TE, Werner PA(1987). Competitive effects and response between plant species in a first year old-field community. Ecology, 68, 1201-1210. |
[25] | Negbi M, Evenari M(1961). The means of survival of some desert summer annuals. In: Plant-Water Relationships in Arid and Semiarid Conditions. UNESCO, Paris, 249. |
[26] |
Rees M, Bergelson J(1997). Asymmetric light competition and founder control in plant communities. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 184, 353-358.
DOI URL PMID |
[27] |
Rees M, Condit R, Crawley M, Pacala S, Tilman D(2001). Long-term studies of vegetation dynamics. Science, 293, 650-655.
URL PMID |
[28] | Sharitz RR, McCormick JF(1973). Population dynamics of two competition plant annual species. Ecology, 54, 723-740. |
[29] | Spillards DM(1989). Studies of Plant Competition. PhD dissertation, University of East Anglia, Norwic. |
[30] | Tang QY( 唐启义), Feng MG ( 冯明光) (1997). Practical Statistics and DPS Data Processing System. China Agricultural Press, Beijing, 407. (in Chinese) |
[31] | Tielbørger K, Kadmon R(2000). Indirect effects in a desert plant community: is competition among annuals more intense under shrub canopies? Plant Ecology, 150, 53-63. |
[32] | Tilman D(1982). Resource Competition and Community Structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. |
[33] | Tilman D(1988). Plant Strategies and the Dynamics and the Structure of Plant Communities. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. |
[34] | Turner MD, Rabinowitz D(1983). Factors affecting frequency distributions of plant mass: the absence of dominance and suppression in competing monocultures of Festuca paradoxa. Ecology, 64, 469-475. |
[35] |
Wang ZQ( 王政权), Wu GS( 吴巩胜), Wang JB( 王军邦)(2000). Application of competition index in assessing intraspecfic and interspecfic spatial relations between manchurian ash and dahurian larch. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology(应用生态学报), 11, 641-645.(in Chinese with English abstract)
URL PMID |
[36] | Weiner J, Thomas SC(1986). Size variability and competition in plant monocultures. Oikos, 47, 211-222. |
[37] | Weiner J, Thomas SC (1992). Competition and allometry in three species of annual plants. Ecology, 73, 648-656. |
[38] | Wichmann L(2001). Annual variations in competition symmetry in even-aged sitka spruce. Annals of Botany, 88, 145-151. |
[39] | Zhang ZP( 张泽浦), Fang JY( 方精云), Kan M(2000). Effects of competition on growth rate and probability of death of plant individuals: a study based on nursery experiments of Larix leptolepis populations. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica(植物生态学报), 24, 340-345. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[40] | Zou CJ( 邹春静), Xu WD( 徐文铎)(1998). Study on intraspecific and interspecfic competition of Picea mongolica. Acta Phytoecologfca Sinica (植物生态学报), 22, 269-274. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[1] | 刘艳杰, 刘玉龙, 王传宽, 王兴昌. 东北温带森林5个羽状复叶树种叶成本-效益关系比较[J]. 植物生态学报, 2023, 47(11): 1540-1550. |
[2] | 柳牧青, 杨小凤, 石钰铭, 刘雨薇, 李小蒙, 廖万金. 模拟酸雨对入侵植物豚草与伴生种鬼针草竞争关系的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(8): 932-940. |
[3] | 王广亚, 陈柄华, 黄雨晨, 金光泽, 刘志理. 着生位置对水曲柳小叶性状变异及性状间相关性的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(6): 712-721. |
[4] | 李露, 金光泽, 刘志理. 阔叶红松林3种阔叶树种柄叶性状变异与相关性[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(6): 687-699. |
[5] | 熊映杰, 于果, 魏凯璐, 彭娟, 耿鸿儒, 杨冬梅, 彭国全. 天童山阔叶木本植物叶片大小与叶脉密度及单位叶脉长度细胞壁干质量的关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(2): 136-147. |
[6] | 董楠, 唐明明, 崔文倩, 岳梦瑶, 刘洁, 黄玉杰. 不同根系分隔方式对栗和茶幼苗生长的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(1): 62-73. |
[7] | 尹晓雷, 刘旭阳, 金强, 李先德, 林少颖, 阳祥, 王维奇, 张永勋. 不同管理模式对茶树碳氮磷含量及其生态化学计量比的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(7): 749-759. |
[8] | 杨克彤, 常海龙, 陈国鹏, 俞筱押, 鲜骏仁. 兰州市主要绿化植物气孔性状特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(2): 187-196. |
[9] | 邢磊, 段娜, 李清河, 刘成功, 李慧卿, 孙高洁. 白刺不同物候期的生物量分配规律[J]. 植物生态学报, 2020, 44(7): 763-771. |
[10] | 熊星烁, 蔡宏宇, 李耀琪, 马文红, 牛克昌, 陈迪马, 刘娜娜, 苏香燕, 景鹤影, 冯晓娟, 曾辉, 王志恒. 内蒙古典型草原植物叶片碳氮磷化学计量特征的季节动态[J]. 植物生态学报, 2020, 44(11): 1138-1153. |
[11] | 陈国鹏, 杨克彤, 王立, 王飞, 曹秀文, 陈林生. 甘肃南部7种高寒杜鹃生物量分配的异速生长关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2020, 44(10): 1040-1049. |
[12] | 莫丹, 王振孟, 左有璐, 向双. 亚热带常绿阔叶林木本植物幼树阶段抽枝展叶的权衡关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2020, 44(10): 995-1006. |
[13] | 陈林, 王磊, 杨新国, 宋乃平, 李月飞, 苏莹, 卞莹莹, 祝忠有, 孟文婷. 荒漠草原猪毛蒿种群繁殖特征的土壤驱动因子分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(1): 65-76. |
[14] | 周天阳, NARAYAN Prasad Gaire, 廖礼彬, 郑莉莉, 王金牛, 孙建, 魏彦强, 谢雨, 吴彦. 青藏高原东缘两处高山树线交错带时空动态及其建群种的生态学特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2018, 42(11): 1082-1093. |
[15] | 韩玲, 赵成章, 徐婷, 冯威, 段贝贝. 不同土壤水分条件下洪泛平原湿地芨芨草叶片厚度与叶脉性状的关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(5): 529-538. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||
Copyright © 2022 版权所有 《植物生态学报》编辑部
地址: 北京香山南辛村20号, 邮编: 100093
Tel.: 010-62836134, 62836138; Fax: 010-82599431; E-mail: apes@ibcas.ac.cn, cjpe@ibcas.ac.cn
备案号: 京ICP备16067583号-19