植物生态学报 ›› 2013, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (11): 998-1009.DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00103
李帅锋1,2,苏建荣1,2,*(),刘万德1,2,郎学东1,2,张志钧1,2,苏磊1,2,贾呈鑫卓1,2,杨华景3
收稿日期:
2013-07-24
接受日期:
2013-09-25
出版日期:
2013-07-24
发布日期:
2013-11-06
通讯作者:
苏建荣
基金资助:
LI Shuai-Feng1,2,SU Jian-Rong1,2,*(),LIU Wan-De1,2,LANG Xue-Dong1,2,ZHANG Zhi-Jun1,2,SU Lei1,2,JIA Cheng-Xin-Zhuo1,2,YANG Hua-Jing3
Received:
2013-07-24
Accepted:
2013-09-25
Online:
2013-07-24
Published:
2013-11-06
Contact:
SU Jian-Rong
摘要:
以云南省思茅松(Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis)天然分布区的11个种群的16个种实性状为研究对象, 采用巢式方差分析、变异系数、相关分析和非加权配对算术平均法(UPGMA)等多种分析方法, 探讨思茅松种群间和种群内的表型变异。结果表明: 思茅松种实表型性状在种群间和种群内均存在着较丰富的差异, 种群内的变异(54.76%)大于种群间的变异(10.44%), 种群间平均分化系数为11.95%, 分化程度相对较小。球果总种子数的平均变异系数最高(35.51%), 其次是球果质量(35.1%), 种子大小的平均变异系数最小(8.86%), 成为最稳定的种实性状; 景谷县的表型多样性最丰富, 景洪市则最小。球果和种子大部分表型性状之间存在显著或极显著相关, 其中球果长和球果质量越大, 种鳞长、种子长、种翅长、千粒重、球果总种鳞数和球果总种子数就越大。生态因子中, 年平均气温对表型性状影响最大, 其次是1月平均气温和>5 ℃积温。利用种群间聚类分析可以把思茅松的11个种群分为2类4个亚类, 表型性状依据地理距离进行聚类, 聚类结果与年降水量和>5 ℃积温相关性显著。
李帅锋,苏建荣,刘万德,郎学东,张志钧,苏磊,贾呈鑫卓,杨华景. 思茅松天然群体种实表型变异. 植物生态学报, 2013, 37(11): 998-1009. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00103
LI Shuai-Feng,SU Jian-Rong,LIU Wan-De,LANG Xue-Dong,ZHANG Zhi-Jun,SU Lei,JIA Cheng-Xin-Zhuo,YANG Hua-Jing. Phenotypic variations in cones and seeds of natural Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations in Yunnan Province, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2013, 37(11): 998-1009. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2013.00103
种群 Population | 纬度 Latitude | 经度 Longitude | 海拔 Elevation (m) | 年平均气温 Mean annual air temperature (℃) | 年降水量 Annual precipitation (mm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
昌宁 CN | 24°23′ | 99°25′ | 1 450-150 0 | 14.9 | 1 259.0 |
景洪 JH | 22°26′ | 100°54′ | 1 100-120 0 | 21.8 | 1 197.6 |
耿马 GM | 23°26′ | 99°21′ | 1 170-140 0 | 18.8 | 1 311.9 |
景东 JD | 24°38′ | 100°57′ | 1 245-140 0 | 18.3 | 1 087.0 |
景谷 JG | 23°33′ | 100°30′ | 1 100-159 5 | 20.2 | 1 232.6 |
澜沧 LC | 22°13′ | 99°41′ | 1 390-147 0 | 19.0 | 1 522.6 |
梁河 LH | 24°38′ | 98°20′ | 990-105 0 | 18.3 | 1 357.1 |
勐海 MH | 22°13′ | 100°17′ | 1 100-120 0 | 18.2 | 1 363.7 |
普洱 PE | 22°45′ | 100°47′ | 1 300-137 0 | 17.7 | 1 626.5 |
云县 YX | 24°32′ | 100°12′ | 1 410-148 0 | 19.4 | 904.7 |
镇沅 ZY | 23°59′ | 101°5′ | 1 140-137 0 | 15.8 | 1 284.8 |
表1 思茅松11个天然种群的地理位置及气温和降水量
Table 1 Geographical location, air temperature, and precipitation of the sites for the 11 natural populations of Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis
种群 Population | 纬度 Latitude | 经度 Longitude | 海拔 Elevation (m) | 年平均气温 Mean annual air temperature (℃) | 年降水量 Annual precipitation (mm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
昌宁 CN | 24°23′ | 99°25′ | 1 450-150 0 | 14.9 | 1 259.0 |
景洪 JH | 22°26′ | 100°54′ | 1 100-120 0 | 21.8 | 1 197.6 |
耿马 GM | 23°26′ | 99°21′ | 1 170-140 0 | 18.8 | 1 311.9 |
景东 JD | 24°38′ | 100°57′ | 1 245-140 0 | 18.3 | 1 087.0 |
景谷 JG | 23°33′ | 100°30′ | 1 100-159 5 | 20.2 | 1 232.6 |
澜沧 LC | 22°13′ | 99°41′ | 1 390-147 0 | 19.0 | 1 522.6 |
梁河 LH | 24°38′ | 98°20′ | 990-105 0 | 18.3 | 1 357.1 |
勐海 MH | 22°13′ | 100°17′ | 1 100-120 0 | 18.2 | 1 363.7 |
普洱 PE | 22°45′ | 100°47′ | 1 300-137 0 | 17.7 | 1 626.5 |
云县 YX | 24°32′ | 100°12′ | 1 410-148 0 | 19.4 | 904.7 |
镇沅 ZY | 23°59′ | 101°5′ | 1 140-137 0 | 15.8 | 1 284.8 |
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 均方 Mean square | F值 F value | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | 随机误差 Random error | 种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | ||
CL | 2 561.48 | 767.23 | 32.95 | 3.34** | 23.28** | |
CW | 828.27 | 109.76 | 6.09 | 7.55** | 18.04** | |
CLW | 2.33 | 0.29 | 0.02 | 7.92** | 11.92** | |
CWE | 3 375.96 | 493.53 | 18.72 | 6.84** | 26.37** | |
SSL | 340.45 | 53.48 | 2.16 | 6.37** | 24.71** | |
SSW | 62.41 | 9.55 | 0.56 | 6.54** | 17.16** | |
SSLW | 0.44 | 0.21 | 0.01 | 2.07 | 19.70** | |
SL | 6.50 | 1.31 | 0.09 | 4.97** | 14.80** | |
SW | 2.21 | 0.25 | 0.04 | 8.82** | 6.95** | |
SLW | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 3.74** | 7.89** | |
SWL | 184.99 | 27.56 | 1.39 | 6.71** | 19.87** | |
SWW | 10.66 | 2.33 | 0.22 | 4.57** | 10.61** | |
SWLW | 1.55 | 0.51 | 0.03 | 3.01** | 15.68** | |
SCALE | 6 667.30 | 1 076.28 | 152.88 | 6.19** | 7.04** | |
SEED | 3 822.39 | 1 490.39 | 186.83 | 2.56** | 7.98** | |
GW | 331.62 | 63.37 | 8.54 | 5.23** | 7.42** |
表2 思茅松各种群间及种群内球果、种子表型性状的方差分析结果
Table 2 Variance analysis of phenotypic traits in cones and seeds among and within Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 均方 Mean square | F值 F value | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | 随机误差 Random error | 种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | ||
CL | 2 561.48 | 767.23 | 32.95 | 3.34** | 23.28** | |
CW | 828.27 | 109.76 | 6.09 | 7.55** | 18.04** | |
CLW | 2.33 | 0.29 | 0.02 | 7.92** | 11.92** | |
CWE | 3 375.96 | 493.53 | 18.72 | 6.84** | 26.37** | |
SSL | 340.45 | 53.48 | 2.16 | 6.37** | 24.71** | |
SSW | 62.41 | 9.55 | 0.56 | 6.54** | 17.16** | |
SSLW | 0.44 | 0.21 | 0.01 | 2.07 | 19.70** | |
SL | 6.50 | 1.31 | 0.09 | 4.97** | 14.80** | |
SW | 2.21 | 0.25 | 0.04 | 8.82** | 6.95** | |
SLW | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 3.74** | 7.89** | |
SWL | 184.99 | 27.56 | 1.39 | 6.71** | 19.87** | |
SWW | 10.66 | 2.33 | 0.22 | 4.57** | 10.61** | |
SWLW | 1.55 | 0.51 | 0.03 | 3.01** | 15.68** | |
SCALE | 6 667.30 | 1 076.28 | 152.88 | 6.19** | 7.04** | |
SEED | 3 822.39 | 1 490.39 | 186.83 | 2.56** | 7.98** | |
GW | 331.62 | 63.37 | 8.54 | 5.23** | 7.42** |
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 种群 Population | 平均值 Mean value | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CN | JH | GM | JD | JG | LC | LH | MH | PE | YX | ZY | ||
CL | 59.36 ± 8.48d | 63.95 ± 8.04abcd | 61.26 ± 10.02cd | 64.87 ± 9.45abcd | 69.47 ± 14.66a | 61.54 ± 8.63cd | 59.86 ± 10.35d | 62.32 ± 10.96bcd | 66.43 ± 9.57abc | 62.87 ± 11.61bcd | 67.91 ± 8.39ab | 63.62 ± 10.63 |
CW | 32.75 ± 2.94de | 31.43 ± 3.05e | 33.83 ± 3.59cd | 35.61 ± 3.95abc | 34.09 ± 4.56cd | 32.89 ± 3.02de | 34.50 ± 4.53bcd | 35.25 ± 4.56bc | 36.35 ± 3.62ab | 33.65 ± 5.27cd | 38.10 ± 4.25a | 34.40 ± 4.37 |
CLW | 1.81 ± 0.22bc | 2.04 ± 0.22a | 1.81 ± 0.24bc | 1.83 ± 0.21bc | 2.03 ± 0.30a | 1.87 ± 0.17b | 1.74 ± 0.20c | 1.77 ± 0.21bc | 1.83 ± 0.22bc | 1.87 ± 0.26b | 1.79 ± 0.21bc | 1.85 ± 0.24 |
CWE | 21.74 ± 6.38d | 21.38 ± 5.76d | 22.57 ± 7.49cd | 27.87 ± 8.53b | 26.84 ± 10.09bc | 22.01 ± 5.99d | 21.47 ± 7.72d | 24.78 ± 8.70bcd | 28.73 ± 9.19b | 24.57 ± 8.31bcd | 32.99 ± 8.92a | 25.00 ± 8.77 |
SSL | 23.43 ± 2.43cde | 23.07 ± 1.88de | 24.19 ± 3.27bcd | 24.89 ± 3.04abcd | 26.05 ± 5.05ab | 23.04 ± 2.38de | 24.96 ± 3.06abc | 26.00 ± 2.99ab | 26.65 ± 3.10a | 22.11 ± 4.01e | 25.90 ± 3.20ab | 24.57 ± 3.53 |
SSW | 12.39 ± 1.09cd | 12.82 ± 1.34bc | 12.35 ± 1.21cd | 13.25 ± 1.32ab | 13.28 ± 1.79ab | 12.85 ± 1.18bc | 13.33 ± 1.47ab | 13.45 ± 1.36ab | 13.78 ± 1.55a | 11.70 ± 1.66d | 13.76 ± 1.46a | 13.00 ± 1.54 |
SSLW | 1.90 ± 0.17ab | 1.81 ± 0.19b | 1.97 ± 0.24a | 1.89 ± 0.27ab | 1.95 ± 0.21a | 1.80 ± 0.16b | 1.88 ± 0.19ab | 1.94 ± 0.18a | 1.94 ± 0.20a | 1.89 ± 0.24ab | 1.89 ± 0.21ab | 1.90 ± 0.21 |
SL | 5.58 ± 0.45c | 5.66 ± 0.41bc | 5.67 ± 0.47bc | 5.68 ± 0.45bc | 6.07 ± 1.02a | 5.63 ± 0.40c | 5.68 ± 0.46bc | 5.95 ± 0.48ab | 5.88 ± 0.45abc | 5.28 ± 0.51d | 5.68 ± 0.49bc | 5.70 ± 0.58 |
SW | 3.39 ± 0.20c | 3.48 ± 0.23bc | 3.47 ± 0.22bc | 3.46 ± 0.33c | 3.44 ± 0.37c | 3.49 ± 0.20bc | 3.39 ± 0.25c | 3.67 ± 0.29a | 3.59 ± 0.27ab | 3.20 ± 0.25d | 3.39 ± 0.36c | 3.45 ± 0.29 |
SLW | 1.65 ± 0.12b | 1.63 ± 0.09b | 1.64 ± 0.11b | 1.65 ± 0.13b | 1.76 ± 0.20a | 1.62 ± 0.10b | 1.68 ± 0.12b | 1.62 ± 0.11b | 1.64 ± 0.12b | 1.66 ± 0.15b | 1.68 ± 0.16b | 1.66 ± 0.14 |
SWL | 13.63 ± 1.62cde | 13.39 ± 1.36de | 14.23 ± 2.63bcd | 15.03 ± 2.42ab | 15.25 ± 3.73ab | 12.71 ± 1.42e | 14.82 ± 2.38abc | 15.02 ± 2.09ab | 16.09 ± 2.08a | 12.55 ± 2.81e | 14.36 ± 2.50bcd | 14.28 ± 2.59 |
SWW | 6.46 ± 0.59de | 6.63 ± 0.77bcd | 6.49 ± 0.64cde | 6.76 ± 0.76abcd | 6.82 ± 0.94abcd | 6.60 ± 0.62bcd | 6.86 ± 0.74abcd | 7.00 ± 0.68ab | 7.13 ± 0.62a | 6.20 ± 0.86e | 6.85 ± 0.90abcd | 6.71 ± 0.79 |
SWLW | 2.12 ± 0.27ab | 2.03 ± 0.21bc | 2.20 ± 0.43ab | 2.25 ± 0.40a | 2.22 ± 0.37ab | 1.94 ± 0.23c | 2.17 ± 0.31ab | 2.16 ± 0.31ab | 2.26 ± 0.26a | 2.03 ± 0.39bc | 2.11 ± 0.38ab | 2.14 ± 0.34 |
SCALE | 106.91 ± 14.89bc | 95.81 ± 13.07d | 102.24 ± 17.74bcd | 100.15 ± 17.07cd | 98.16 ± 19.09d | 101.37 ± 15.48bcd | 98.65 ± 18.4cd | 99.67 ± 19.51cd | 106.87 ± 14.98bc | 119.23 ± 23.77a | 109.05 ± 14.38b | 103.47 ± 18.45 |
SEED | 55.87 ± 19.92a | 60.33 ± 18.36a | 60.46 ± 19.64a | 56.57 ± 21.41a | 45.70 ± 17.33b | 56.43 ± 16.40a | 62.92 ± 22.71a | 57.53 ± 19.70a | 65.22 ± 18.45a | 56.83 ± 25.59a | 55.32 ± 17.86a | 57.55 ± 20.43 |
GW | 17.08 ± 3.34b | 17.96 ± 3.31ab | 17.55 ± 3.21ab | 18.90 ± 4.16ab | 18.88 ± 5.77ab | 17.51 ± 3.87ab | 16.94 ± 4.27b | 19.43 ± 5.69ab | 19.95 ± 3.85a | 14.04 ± 3.12c | 17.23 ± 4.23b | 17.68 ± 4.39 |
表3 思茅松种群间、种群内球果、种子表型性状变异(平均值±标准偏差)
Table 3 Phenotypic traits variations in cones and seeds among and within Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations (mean ± SD)
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 种群 Population | 平均值 Mean value | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CN | JH | GM | JD | JG | LC | LH | MH | PE | YX | ZY | ||
CL | 59.36 ± 8.48d | 63.95 ± 8.04abcd | 61.26 ± 10.02cd | 64.87 ± 9.45abcd | 69.47 ± 14.66a | 61.54 ± 8.63cd | 59.86 ± 10.35d | 62.32 ± 10.96bcd | 66.43 ± 9.57abc | 62.87 ± 11.61bcd | 67.91 ± 8.39ab | 63.62 ± 10.63 |
CW | 32.75 ± 2.94de | 31.43 ± 3.05e | 33.83 ± 3.59cd | 35.61 ± 3.95abc | 34.09 ± 4.56cd | 32.89 ± 3.02de | 34.50 ± 4.53bcd | 35.25 ± 4.56bc | 36.35 ± 3.62ab | 33.65 ± 5.27cd | 38.10 ± 4.25a | 34.40 ± 4.37 |
CLW | 1.81 ± 0.22bc | 2.04 ± 0.22a | 1.81 ± 0.24bc | 1.83 ± 0.21bc | 2.03 ± 0.30a | 1.87 ± 0.17b | 1.74 ± 0.20c | 1.77 ± 0.21bc | 1.83 ± 0.22bc | 1.87 ± 0.26b | 1.79 ± 0.21bc | 1.85 ± 0.24 |
CWE | 21.74 ± 6.38d | 21.38 ± 5.76d | 22.57 ± 7.49cd | 27.87 ± 8.53b | 26.84 ± 10.09bc | 22.01 ± 5.99d | 21.47 ± 7.72d | 24.78 ± 8.70bcd | 28.73 ± 9.19b | 24.57 ± 8.31bcd | 32.99 ± 8.92a | 25.00 ± 8.77 |
SSL | 23.43 ± 2.43cde | 23.07 ± 1.88de | 24.19 ± 3.27bcd | 24.89 ± 3.04abcd | 26.05 ± 5.05ab | 23.04 ± 2.38de | 24.96 ± 3.06abc | 26.00 ± 2.99ab | 26.65 ± 3.10a | 22.11 ± 4.01e | 25.90 ± 3.20ab | 24.57 ± 3.53 |
SSW | 12.39 ± 1.09cd | 12.82 ± 1.34bc | 12.35 ± 1.21cd | 13.25 ± 1.32ab | 13.28 ± 1.79ab | 12.85 ± 1.18bc | 13.33 ± 1.47ab | 13.45 ± 1.36ab | 13.78 ± 1.55a | 11.70 ± 1.66d | 13.76 ± 1.46a | 13.00 ± 1.54 |
SSLW | 1.90 ± 0.17ab | 1.81 ± 0.19b | 1.97 ± 0.24a | 1.89 ± 0.27ab | 1.95 ± 0.21a | 1.80 ± 0.16b | 1.88 ± 0.19ab | 1.94 ± 0.18a | 1.94 ± 0.20a | 1.89 ± 0.24ab | 1.89 ± 0.21ab | 1.90 ± 0.21 |
SL | 5.58 ± 0.45c | 5.66 ± 0.41bc | 5.67 ± 0.47bc | 5.68 ± 0.45bc | 6.07 ± 1.02a | 5.63 ± 0.40c | 5.68 ± 0.46bc | 5.95 ± 0.48ab | 5.88 ± 0.45abc | 5.28 ± 0.51d | 5.68 ± 0.49bc | 5.70 ± 0.58 |
SW | 3.39 ± 0.20c | 3.48 ± 0.23bc | 3.47 ± 0.22bc | 3.46 ± 0.33c | 3.44 ± 0.37c | 3.49 ± 0.20bc | 3.39 ± 0.25c | 3.67 ± 0.29a | 3.59 ± 0.27ab | 3.20 ± 0.25d | 3.39 ± 0.36c | 3.45 ± 0.29 |
SLW | 1.65 ± 0.12b | 1.63 ± 0.09b | 1.64 ± 0.11b | 1.65 ± 0.13b | 1.76 ± 0.20a | 1.62 ± 0.10b | 1.68 ± 0.12b | 1.62 ± 0.11b | 1.64 ± 0.12b | 1.66 ± 0.15b | 1.68 ± 0.16b | 1.66 ± 0.14 |
SWL | 13.63 ± 1.62cde | 13.39 ± 1.36de | 14.23 ± 2.63bcd | 15.03 ± 2.42ab | 15.25 ± 3.73ab | 12.71 ± 1.42e | 14.82 ± 2.38abc | 15.02 ± 2.09ab | 16.09 ± 2.08a | 12.55 ± 2.81e | 14.36 ± 2.50bcd | 14.28 ± 2.59 |
SWW | 6.46 ± 0.59de | 6.63 ± 0.77bcd | 6.49 ± 0.64cde | 6.76 ± 0.76abcd | 6.82 ± 0.94abcd | 6.60 ± 0.62bcd | 6.86 ± 0.74abcd | 7.00 ± 0.68ab | 7.13 ± 0.62a | 6.20 ± 0.86e | 6.85 ± 0.90abcd | 6.71 ± 0.79 |
SWLW | 2.12 ± 0.27ab | 2.03 ± 0.21bc | 2.20 ± 0.43ab | 2.25 ± 0.40a | 2.22 ± 0.37ab | 1.94 ± 0.23c | 2.17 ± 0.31ab | 2.16 ± 0.31ab | 2.26 ± 0.26a | 2.03 ± 0.39bc | 2.11 ± 0.38ab | 2.14 ± 0.34 |
SCALE | 106.91 ± 14.89bc | 95.81 ± 13.07d | 102.24 ± 17.74bcd | 100.15 ± 17.07cd | 98.16 ± 19.09d | 101.37 ± 15.48bcd | 98.65 ± 18.4cd | 99.67 ± 19.51cd | 106.87 ± 14.98bc | 119.23 ± 23.77a | 109.05 ± 14.38b | 103.47 ± 18.45 |
SEED | 55.87 ± 19.92a | 60.33 ± 18.36a | 60.46 ± 19.64a | 56.57 ± 21.41a | 45.70 ± 17.33b | 56.43 ± 16.40a | 62.92 ± 22.71a | 57.53 ± 19.70a | 65.22 ± 18.45a | 56.83 ± 25.59a | 55.32 ± 17.86a | 57.55 ± 20.43 |
GW | 17.08 ± 3.34b | 17.96 ± 3.31ab | 17.55 ± 3.21ab | 18.90 ± 4.16ab | 18.88 ± 5.77ab | 17.51 ± 3.87ab | 16.94 ± 4.27b | 19.43 ± 5.69ab | 19.95 ± 3.85a | 14.04 ± 3.12c | 17.23 ± 4.23b | 17.68 ± 4.39 |
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 方差分量 Variance component | 方差分量百分比 Percentage of variance component | 表型分化系数Phenotypic differentiation coefficient | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | 随机误差Random error | 种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | 随机误差Random error | |||
CL | 7.476 | 73.428 | 32.951 | 6.566 | 64.493 | 28.941 | 7.028 | |
CW | 2.994 | 10.368 | 6.085 | 15.395 | 53.313 | 31.293 | 18.196 | |
CLW | 0.008 | 0.027 | 0.025 | 14.118 | 44.836 | 41.047 | 16.438 | |
CWE | 12.010 | 47.481 | 18.718 | 15.356 | 60.711 | 23.933 | 18.142 | |
SSL | 1.913 | 8.553 | 2.164 | 15.148 | 67.718 | 17.134 | 17.852 | |
SSW | 0.352 | 1.499 | 0.557 | 14.636 | 62.248 | 23.116 | 17.146 | |
SSLW | 0.002 | 0.034 | 0.011 | 3.311 | 73.203 | 23.486 | 3.424 | |
SL | 0.035 | 0.203 | 0.088 | 10.614 | 62.297 | 27.089 | 11.875 | |
SW | 0.013 | 0.036 | 0.036 | 15.390 | 42.118 | 42.492 | 18.189 | |
SLW | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.008 | 6.277 | 50.094 | 43.630 | 6.697 | |
SWL | 1.050 | 4.363 | 1.387 | 15.435 | 64.160 | 20.405 | 18.253 | |
SWW | 0.055 | 0.352 | 0.220 | 8.845 | 56.128 | 35.028 | 9.703 | |
SWLW | 0.007 | 0.080 | 0.033 | 5.755 | 66.902 | 27.343 | 6.107 | |
SCALE | 38.289 | 157.019 | 154.441 | 10.947 | 44.895 | 44.158 | 12.293 | |
SEED | 21.925 | 247.145 | 665.110 | 2.347 | 26.456 | 71.197 | 2.403 | |
GW | 1.759 | 9.350 | 14.787 | 6.871 | 36.529 | 56.600 | 7.378 | |
平准值 Mean value | - | - | - | 10.438 | 54.756 | 34.805 | 11.945 |
表4 思茅松表型性状的方差分量及种群间表型分化系数
Table 4 Variance component and phenotypic traits differentiation coefficient among and within Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 方差分量 Variance component | 方差分量百分比 Percentage of variance component | 表型分化系数Phenotypic differentiation coefficient | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | 随机误差Random error | 种群间 Among populations | 种群内 Within population | 随机误差Random error | |||
CL | 7.476 | 73.428 | 32.951 | 6.566 | 64.493 | 28.941 | 7.028 | |
CW | 2.994 | 10.368 | 6.085 | 15.395 | 53.313 | 31.293 | 18.196 | |
CLW | 0.008 | 0.027 | 0.025 | 14.118 | 44.836 | 41.047 | 16.438 | |
CWE | 12.010 | 47.481 | 18.718 | 15.356 | 60.711 | 23.933 | 18.142 | |
SSL | 1.913 | 8.553 | 2.164 | 15.148 | 67.718 | 17.134 | 17.852 | |
SSW | 0.352 | 1.499 | 0.557 | 14.636 | 62.248 | 23.116 | 17.146 | |
SSLW | 0.002 | 0.034 | 0.011 | 3.311 | 73.203 | 23.486 | 3.424 | |
SL | 0.035 | 0.203 | 0.088 | 10.614 | 62.297 | 27.089 | 11.875 | |
SW | 0.013 | 0.036 | 0.036 | 15.390 | 42.118 | 42.492 | 18.189 | |
SLW | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.008 | 6.277 | 50.094 | 43.630 | 6.697 | |
SWL | 1.050 | 4.363 | 1.387 | 15.435 | 64.160 | 20.405 | 18.253 | |
SWW | 0.055 | 0.352 | 0.220 | 8.845 | 56.128 | 35.028 | 9.703 | |
SWLW | 0.007 | 0.080 | 0.033 | 5.755 | 66.902 | 27.343 | 6.107 | |
SCALE | 38.289 | 157.019 | 154.441 | 10.947 | 44.895 | 44.158 | 12.293 | |
SEED | 21.925 | 247.145 | 665.110 | 2.347 | 26.456 | 71.197 | 2.403 | |
GW | 1.759 | 9.350 | 14.787 | 6.871 | 36.529 | 56.600 | 7.378 | |
平准值 Mean value | - | - | - | 10.438 | 54.756 | 34.805 | 11.945 |
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 种群 Population | 平均值 Mean value | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CN | JH | GM | JD | JG | LC | LH | MH | PE | YX | ZY | |||
CL | 14.29 | 12.57 | 16.36 | 14.56 | 21.10 | 14.02 | 17.29 | 17.59 | 14.40 | 18.47 | 12.36 | 16.70 | |
CW | 8.98 | 9.70 | 10.62 | 11.08 | 13.37 | 9.19 | 13.14 | 12.93 | 9.97 | 15.67 | 11.17 | 12.72 | |
CLW | 12.05 | 10.59 | 13.01 | 11.55 | 14.67 | 8.84 | 11.75 | 11.71 | 12.02 | 14.03 | 11.76 | 13.13 | |
CWE | 29.34 | 26.92 | 33.17 | 30.60 | 37.59 | 27.20 | 35.95 | 35.13 | 31.97 | 33.82 | 27.04 | 35.10 | |
SSL | 10.37 | 8.15 | 13.52 | 12.20 | 19.38 | 10.35 | 12.26 | 11.51 | 11.61 | 18.14 | 12.35 | 14.35 | |
SSW | 8.78 | 10.41 | 9.83 | 9.95 | 13.47 | 9.20 | 11.00 | 10.11 | 11.24 | 14.20 | 10.61 | 11.85 | |
SSLW | 9.06 | 10.35 | 12.34 | 14.08 | 10.74 | 8.92 | 9.85 | 9.42 | 10.48 | 12.79 | 11.34 | 11.29 | |
SL | 8.01 | 7.22 | 8.29 | 7.97 | 16.74 | 7.14 | 8.16 | 8.10 | 7.59 | 9.64 | 8.63 | 9.95 | |
SW | 5.87 | 6.71 | 6.27 | 9.58 | 10.80 | 5.67 | 7.33 | 7.95 | 7.49 | 7.84 | 7.61 | 8.38 | |
SLW | 7.16 | 5.34 | 6.82 | 8.01 | 11.34 | 6.20 | 6.93 | 7.07 | 7.35 | 9.14 | 9.40 | 8.25 | |
SWL | 11.87 | 10.14 | 18.50 | 16.11 | 24.45 | 11.15 | 16.03 | 13.94 | 12.91 | 22.38 | 17.42 | 18.12 | |
SWW | 9.10 | 11.68 | 9.85 | 11.30 | 13.80 | 9.46 | 10.72 | 9.75 | 8.75 | 13.96 | 13.10 | 11.75 | |
SWLW | 12.90 | 10.32 | 19.50 | 18.00 | 16.82 | 11.77 | 14.36 | 14.34 | 11.50 | 19.03 | 17.92 | 16.14 | |
SCALE | 13.93 | 13.64 | 17.35 | 17.04 | 19.45 | 15.27 | 18.65 | 19.57 | 14.01 | 19.93 | 13.19 | 17.83 | |
SEED | 35.64 | 30.44 | 32.48 | 37.84 | 37.93 | 29.06 | 36.09 | 34.35 | 28.28 | 45.02 | 32.29 | 35.51 | |
GW | 19.58 | 18.45 | 18.32 | 21.99 | 30.55 | 22.10 | 25.19 | 29.28 | 20.31 | 22.21 | 24.57 | 24.83 | |
平均值 Mean value | 13.56 | 12.66 | 15.39 | 15.74 | 19.51 | 12.85 | 15.92 | 15.80 | 13.74 | 18.52 | 15.05 | 16.62 |
表5 思茅松天然种群表型性状的变异系数
Table 5 Variation coefficients of phenotypic traits in Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 种群 Population | 平均值 Mean value | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CN | JH | GM | JD | JG | LC | LH | MH | PE | YX | ZY | |||
CL | 14.29 | 12.57 | 16.36 | 14.56 | 21.10 | 14.02 | 17.29 | 17.59 | 14.40 | 18.47 | 12.36 | 16.70 | |
CW | 8.98 | 9.70 | 10.62 | 11.08 | 13.37 | 9.19 | 13.14 | 12.93 | 9.97 | 15.67 | 11.17 | 12.72 | |
CLW | 12.05 | 10.59 | 13.01 | 11.55 | 14.67 | 8.84 | 11.75 | 11.71 | 12.02 | 14.03 | 11.76 | 13.13 | |
CWE | 29.34 | 26.92 | 33.17 | 30.60 | 37.59 | 27.20 | 35.95 | 35.13 | 31.97 | 33.82 | 27.04 | 35.10 | |
SSL | 10.37 | 8.15 | 13.52 | 12.20 | 19.38 | 10.35 | 12.26 | 11.51 | 11.61 | 18.14 | 12.35 | 14.35 | |
SSW | 8.78 | 10.41 | 9.83 | 9.95 | 13.47 | 9.20 | 11.00 | 10.11 | 11.24 | 14.20 | 10.61 | 11.85 | |
SSLW | 9.06 | 10.35 | 12.34 | 14.08 | 10.74 | 8.92 | 9.85 | 9.42 | 10.48 | 12.79 | 11.34 | 11.29 | |
SL | 8.01 | 7.22 | 8.29 | 7.97 | 16.74 | 7.14 | 8.16 | 8.10 | 7.59 | 9.64 | 8.63 | 9.95 | |
SW | 5.87 | 6.71 | 6.27 | 9.58 | 10.80 | 5.67 | 7.33 | 7.95 | 7.49 | 7.84 | 7.61 | 8.38 | |
SLW | 7.16 | 5.34 | 6.82 | 8.01 | 11.34 | 6.20 | 6.93 | 7.07 | 7.35 | 9.14 | 9.40 | 8.25 | |
SWL | 11.87 | 10.14 | 18.50 | 16.11 | 24.45 | 11.15 | 16.03 | 13.94 | 12.91 | 22.38 | 17.42 | 18.12 | |
SWW | 9.10 | 11.68 | 9.85 | 11.30 | 13.80 | 9.46 | 10.72 | 9.75 | 8.75 | 13.96 | 13.10 | 11.75 | |
SWLW | 12.90 | 10.32 | 19.50 | 18.00 | 16.82 | 11.77 | 14.36 | 14.34 | 11.50 | 19.03 | 17.92 | 16.14 | |
SCALE | 13.93 | 13.64 | 17.35 | 17.04 | 19.45 | 15.27 | 18.65 | 19.57 | 14.01 | 19.93 | 13.19 | 17.83 | |
SEED | 35.64 | 30.44 | 32.48 | 37.84 | 37.93 | 29.06 | 36.09 | 34.35 | 28.28 | 45.02 | 32.29 | 35.51 | |
GW | 19.58 | 18.45 | 18.32 | 21.99 | 30.55 | 22.10 | 25.19 | 29.28 | 20.31 | 22.21 | 24.57 | 24.83 | |
平均值 Mean value | 13.56 | 12.66 | 15.39 | 15.74 | 19.51 | 12.85 | 15.92 | 15.80 | 13.74 | 18.52 | 15.05 | 16.62 |
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | CL | CW | CLW | CWE | SSL | SSW | SSLW | SL | SW | SLW | SWL | SWW | SWLW | SCALE | SEED | GW |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CL | 1.000 | |||||||||||||||
CW | 0.683** | 1.000 | ||||||||||||||
CLW | 0.589** | -0.158** | 1.000 | |||||||||||||
CWE | 0.861** | 0.887** | 0.197* | 1.000 | ||||||||||||
SSL | 0.672** | 0.668** | 0.187** | 0.690** | 1.000 | |||||||||||
SSW | 0.526** | 0.630** | 0.029 | 0.631** | 0.661** | 1.000 | ||||||||||
SSLW | 0.304** | 0.190** | 0.209** | 0.218** | 0.585** | -0.220** | 1.000 | |||||||||
SL | 0.555** | 0.448** | 0.259** | 0.494** | 0.732** | 0.519** | 0.389** | 1.000 | ||||||||
SW | 0.386** | 0.381** | 0.099 | 0.381** | 0.550** | 0.526** | 0.138* | 0.681** | 1.000 | |||||||
SLW | 0.320** | 0.181** | 0.242** | 0.244** | 0.386** | 0.120* | 0.380** | 0.607** | -0.165** | 1.000 | ||||||
SWL | 0.611** | 0.589** | 0.184* | 0.609** | 0.927** | 0.584** | 0.573** | 0.655** | 0.486** | 0.334** | 1.000 | |||||
SWW | 0.416** | 0.547** | -0.031 | 0.521** | 0.570** | 0.886** | -0.212** | 0.490** | 0.580** | 0.021 | 0.551** | 1.000 | ||||
SWLW | 0.420** | 0.302** | 0.235** | 0.343** | 0.685** | 0.046 | 0.840** | 0.418** | 0.164** | 0.391** | 0.788** | -0.078 | 1.000 | |||
SCALE | 0.434** | 0.518** | 0.036 | 0.541** | 0.226** | 0.075 | 0.219** | 0.105 | -0.044 | 0.180** | 0.209** | 0.029 | 0.231** | 1.000 | ||
SEED | 0.235** | 0.386** | -0.087 | 0.358** | 0.170 | 0.281** | -0.096 | -0.002 | -0.051 | 0.033 | 0.129 | 0.155** | 0.032 | 0.107** | 1.000 | |
GW | 0.479** | 0.403** | 0.202** | 0.448** | 0.622** | 0.550** | 0.212** | 0.782** | 0.782** | 0.173** | 0.558** | 0.555** | 0.254** | -0.028 | -0.058 | 1.000 |
表6 思茅松群体16个种实表型性状间的相关分析
Table 6 Analysis of correlation between 16 cone and seed phenotypic traits in Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | CL | CW | CLW | CWE | SSL | SSW | SSLW | SL | SW | SLW | SWL | SWW | SWLW | SCALE | SEED | GW |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CL | 1.000 | |||||||||||||||
CW | 0.683** | 1.000 | ||||||||||||||
CLW | 0.589** | -0.158** | 1.000 | |||||||||||||
CWE | 0.861** | 0.887** | 0.197* | 1.000 | ||||||||||||
SSL | 0.672** | 0.668** | 0.187** | 0.690** | 1.000 | |||||||||||
SSW | 0.526** | 0.630** | 0.029 | 0.631** | 0.661** | 1.000 | ||||||||||
SSLW | 0.304** | 0.190** | 0.209** | 0.218** | 0.585** | -0.220** | 1.000 | |||||||||
SL | 0.555** | 0.448** | 0.259** | 0.494** | 0.732** | 0.519** | 0.389** | 1.000 | ||||||||
SW | 0.386** | 0.381** | 0.099 | 0.381** | 0.550** | 0.526** | 0.138* | 0.681** | 1.000 | |||||||
SLW | 0.320** | 0.181** | 0.242** | 0.244** | 0.386** | 0.120* | 0.380** | 0.607** | -0.165** | 1.000 | ||||||
SWL | 0.611** | 0.589** | 0.184* | 0.609** | 0.927** | 0.584** | 0.573** | 0.655** | 0.486** | 0.334** | 1.000 | |||||
SWW | 0.416** | 0.547** | -0.031 | 0.521** | 0.570** | 0.886** | -0.212** | 0.490** | 0.580** | 0.021 | 0.551** | 1.000 | ||||
SWLW | 0.420** | 0.302** | 0.235** | 0.343** | 0.685** | 0.046 | 0.840** | 0.418** | 0.164** | 0.391** | 0.788** | -0.078 | 1.000 | |||
SCALE | 0.434** | 0.518** | 0.036 | 0.541** | 0.226** | 0.075 | 0.219** | 0.105 | -0.044 | 0.180** | 0.209** | 0.029 | 0.231** | 1.000 | ||
SEED | 0.235** | 0.386** | -0.087 | 0.358** | 0.170 | 0.281** | -0.096 | -0.002 | -0.051 | 0.033 | 0.129 | 0.155** | 0.032 | 0.107** | 1.000 | |
GW | 0.479** | 0.403** | 0.202** | 0.448** | 0.622** | 0.550** | 0.212** | 0.782** | 0.782** | 0.173** | 0.558** | 0.555** | 0.254** | -0.028 | -0.058 | 1.000 |
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 海拔 Elevation (m) | 年平均气温 AMAT (℃) | 7月平均气温 MWMT (℃) | 1月平均气温 MCMT (℃) | 年降雨量 MAP (mm) | >5 ℃积温 GDD5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CL | 0.035 | 0.114* | 0.084 | 0.128* | -0.072 | 0.111* |
CW | -0.136* | 0.110 | 0.188** | 0.055 | -0.132* | 0.125* |
CLW | 0.186** | 0.042 | -0.082 | 0.117* | 0.059 | 0.017 |
CWE | -0.021 | 0.102 | 0.159** | 0.072 | -0.203** | 0.100 |
SSL | -0.169** | 0.206** | 0.198** | 0.177** | 0.007 | 0.223** |
SSW | -0.188** | 0.265** | 0.247** | 0.233** | 0.066 | 0.267** |
SSLW | -0.023 | -0.017 | -0.002 | -0.023 | -0.065 | 0.004 |
SL | 0.011 | 0.148** | -0.002 | 0.200** | 0.175** | 0.150** |
SW | -0.044 | 0.211** | 0.018 | 0.278** | 0.259** | 0.215** |
SLW | 0.047 | -0.018 | -0.007 | -0.025 | -0.045 | -0.017 |
SWL | -0.170** | 0.169** | 0.186** | 0.131* | -0.002 | 0.198** |
SWW | -0.143* | 0.227** | 0.168** | 0.218** | 0.099 | 0.227** |
SWLW | -0.104 | 0.033 | 0.104 | -0.010 | -0.080 | 0.069 |
SCALE | 0.132* | -0.169** | -0.104 | -0.171** | -0.233** | -0.189** |
SEED | -0.185** | -0.146** | 0.162** | 0.107 | 0.091 | 0.137* |
GW | 0.013 | 0.132* | 0.015 | 0.178** | 0.130* | 0.144* |
相关系数和 Summary of r | 1.873 | 2.354 | 1.952 | 2.326 | 1.948 | 2.193 |
表7 思茅松表型性状与生态因子的相关系数
Table 7 Coefficient between phenotypic traits and ecological factors in Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis populations
表型性状 Phenotypic trait | 海拔 Elevation (m) | 年平均气温 AMAT (℃) | 7月平均气温 MWMT (℃) | 1月平均气温 MCMT (℃) | 年降雨量 MAP (mm) | >5 ℃积温 GDD5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CL | 0.035 | 0.114* | 0.084 | 0.128* | -0.072 | 0.111* |
CW | -0.136* | 0.110 | 0.188** | 0.055 | -0.132* | 0.125* |
CLW | 0.186** | 0.042 | -0.082 | 0.117* | 0.059 | 0.017 |
CWE | -0.021 | 0.102 | 0.159** | 0.072 | -0.203** | 0.100 |
SSL | -0.169** | 0.206** | 0.198** | 0.177** | 0.007 | 0.223** |
SSW | -0.188** | 0.265** | 0.247** | 0.233** | 0.066 | 0.267** |
SSLW | -0.023 | -0.017 | -0.002 | -0.023 | -0.065 | 0.004 |
SL | 0.011 | 0.148** | -0.002 | 0.200** | 0.175** | 0.150** |
SW | -0.044 | 0.211** | 0.018 | 0.278** | 0.259** | 0.215** |
SLW | 0.047 | -0.018 | -0.007 | -0.025 | -0.045 | -0.017 |
SWL | -0.170** | 0.169** | 0.186** | 0.131* | -0.002 | 0.198** |
SWW | -0.143* | 0.227** | 0.168** | 0.218** | 0.099 | 0.227** |
SWLW | -0.104 | 0.033 | 0.104 | -0.010 | -0.080 | 0.069 |
SCALE | 0.132* | -0.169** | -0.104 | -0.171** | -0.233** | -0.189** |
SEED | -0.185** | -0.146** | 0.162** | 0.107 | 0.091 | 0.137* |
GW | 0.013 | 0.132* | 0.015 | 0.178** | 0.130* | 0.144* |
相关系数和 Summary of r | 1.873 | 2.354 | 1.952 | 2.326 | 1.948 | 2.193 |
图1 思茅松11个天然种群表型性状的非加权配对算术平均法聚类结果。种群缩写见表1。
Fig. 1 Un-weighted pair-group method using arithmetic averages cluster based on the phenotypic traits of 11 populations in Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis. See Table 1 for abbreviations of populations.
图2 思茅松11个种群子的CCA二维排序。种群缩写见表1, 箭头为生态因子, 缩写见表7。
Fig. 2 Two-dimensional canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) ordination of 11 populations in Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis. See Table 1 for abbreviations of populations, and Table 7 for abbreviation of ecological factors (arrowhead).
[1] |
Beaulieu J, Simon JP (1995). Variation in cone morphology and seed charcaters in Pinus strobus in Quebec. Canadian Journal of Botany, 73, 262-271.
DOI URL |
[2] | Businský R, Frantík T, Vít P (2013). Morphological evaluation of the Pinus kesiya complex (Pinaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution, 1-13, doi: 10.1007/s00606-013-0880-0. |
[3] | Chen SY, Zhao WS, Wang J (2002). The genetic diversity of natural populations and seed orchards of Pinus kesiya. Journal of Fujian Forestry Science and Technology, 29(3), 1-5. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 陈少瑜, 赵文书, 王炯 (2002). 思茅松天然种群及其种子园的遗传多样性. 福建林业科技, 29(3), 1-5.] | |
[4] |
Chen TY, Liu ZH, Lou AR (2013). Phenotypic variation in populations of Solanum rostratum in different distribution areas in China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 37, 344-353. (in Chinese with English abstract)
DOI URL |
[ 陈天翌, 刘增辉, 娄安如 (2013). 刺萼龙葵种群在中国不同分布地区的表型变异. 植物生态学报, 37, 344-353.]
DOI URL |
|
[5] |
Dangasuk OG, Panetsos KP (2004). Altitudinal and longitudinal variations in Pinus brutia(Ten.) of Ctete Island, Greece: some needle, cone and seed traits under natural habitats. New Forest, 27, 269-284.
DOI URL |
[6] | Donahue JK, Upton JL (1996). Geographic variation in leaf, cone and seed morphology of Pinus greggii in native forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 82, 145-157. |
[7] | Fu YH (1989). Climate zone of Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis was divided by use of comprehensive comparison with the error. Yunnan Forest Inventory and Planning, (3), 30-33. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 傅云和 (1989). 用误差综合比区划思茅松气候区. 云南林业调查规划, (3), 30-33.] | |
[8] |
Garcia R, Siepielski AM, Benkman CW (2009). Cone and seed trait variation in whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis; Pinaceae) and the potential for phenotypic selection. American Journal of Botany, 96, 1050-1054.
URL PMID |
[9] | Ge S, Wang MX, Chen YW (1988). An analysis of population genetic structure of masson pine by isozyme technique. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 24, 399-410. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 葛颂, 王明庥, 陈岳武 (1988). 用同工酶研究马尾松种群的遗传结构. 林业科学, 24, 399-410.] | |
[10] | Gil L, Climent J, Nanos N, Mutke S, Ortiz I, Schiller G (2002). Cone morphology variation in Pinus canariensis Sm. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 235, 35-51. |
[11] |
Gonçalves AC, Pommerening A (2012). Spatial dynamics of cone production in Mediterranean climates: a case study of Pinus pinea L. in Potugal. Forest Ecology and Management, 266, 83-93.
DOI URL |
[12] | Gu YJ, Luo JX, Wu YW, Cao XJ (2009). Phenotypic diversity in natural populations of Picea balfouriana in Sichuan, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 33, 291-301. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 辜云杰, 罗建勋, 吴远伟, 曹小军 (2009). 川西云杉天然种群表型多样性. 植物生态学报, 33, 291-301.] | |
[13] | Hamrick JL, Godt NJW (1990). Allozyme Diversity in Plant Species. Sinauer Association Inc., Sunderland, USA. 43-63. |
[14] | Hamrick JL, Godt MJW, Sherman-Broyles SL (1992). Factors influencing levels of genetic diversity in woody plant species. New Forests, 6, 95-124. |
[15] | Henttonen H, Kanninen M, Nygren M, Ojansuu R (1986). The maturation of Pinus sylvestris seeds in relation to temperature climate in Northern Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 1, 243-249. |
[16] | Li B, Gu WC, Lu BM (2002). A study on phenotypic diversity of seeds and cones characteristics in Pinus bungeana. Biodiversity Science, 10, 181-188. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 李斌, 顾万春, 卢宝明 (2002). 白皮松天然种群种实性状表型多样性研究. 生物多样性, 10, 181-188.] | |
[17] | Li W, Lin FR, Zheng YQ (2013). Phenotypic diversity of pods and seeds in natural populations of Gleditsia sinensis in southern China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 37, 61-69. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 李伟, 林富荣, 郑勇奇 (2013). 皂荚南方天然种群种实表型多样性. 植物生态学报, 37, 61-69.] | |
[18] |
Liu GF, Zang RG, Liu H, Bai ZQ, Guo ZJ, Di Y (2012). Geographic variation of seed morphological traits of Picea schrenkiana var. tianschanica in Tianshan Mountains, Xinjing of northwest China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 23, 1455-1461. (in Chinese with English abstract)
URL PMID |
[ 刘贵峰, 臧润国, 刘华, 白志强, 郭仲军, 丁易 (2012). 天山云杉种子形态性状的地理变异. 应用生态学报, 23, 1455-1461.]
URL PMID |
|
[19] | Mao JF, Li Y, Liu YJ, Liu H, Wang XR (2007). Cone and seed characteristics of Pinus densata and their adaptive fitness implications. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version), 31, 291-299. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 毛建丰, 李悦, 刘玉军, 刘灏, 王晓茹 (2007). 高山松种实性状与生殖适应性. 植物生态学报, 31, 291-299.] | |
[20] | Meunier C, Sirois L, Bégin Y (2007). Climate and Picea mariana seed maturation relationships: a multi-scale perspective. Ecological Monographs, 77, 361-376. |
[21] | Owens JN, Kittirat T, Mahalovich MF (2008). Whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis Engelm.) seed production in natural stands. Forest Ecology and Management, 255, 803-809. |
[22] |
Peng XM, Wu JC, Zheng YX, Zhang YP, Li GQ (2012). Phenotypic variation in cultivated populations of Azadirachta indica in Yunnan, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 36, 560-571. (in Chinese with English abstract)
DOI URL |
[ 彭兴民, 吴疆翀, 郑益兴, 张燕平, 李根前 (2012). 云南引种印楝实生种群的表型变异. 植物生态学报, 36, 560-571.]
DOI URL |
|
[23] |
Sorensen FC, Miles RS (1978). Cone and seed weight relationships in douglas-fir from western and central Oregon. Ecology, 59, 641-644.
DOI URL |
[24] | Sun YL, Li QM, Xie ZQ (2005). Fruiting characteristics of the endangered species Abies chensiensis. Acta Phytoecol-ogica Sinica, 29, 251-257. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 孙玉玲, 李庆梅, 谢宗强 (2005). 濒危植物秦岭冷杉结实特性的研究. 植物生态学报, 29, 251-257.] | |
[25] | Wen QZ, Yang XS, Yang ZX, Chen XM, Lai XH, Ding FH (2010). Dynamic changes in Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis forest resources in China. Resources Science, 32, 1621-1626. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 温庆忠, 杨晓松, 杨子祥, 陈晓鸣, 赖兴会, 丁福红 (2010). 中国思茅松林资源动态研究. 资源科学, 32, 1621-1626.] | |
[26] | Wheeler NC, Guries RP (1982). Population structure, genic diversity, and morphological variation in Pinus contorta Dougl. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 12, 595-606. |
[27] | Wu ZY, Zhu YC, Jiang HQ (1987). Yunnan Vegetation. Science Press, Beijing. 398. (in Chinese) |
[ 吴征镒, 朱彦丞, 姜汉侨 (1987). 云南植被. 科学出版社, 北京. 398.] | |
[28] | Xu J, Wang ZR, Chen YB, Qiu JQ (2004). An analysis of genetic parameters, characters of seed and cone, and cone yield of clones grown in a seed orchard for Pinus massoniana. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 40(4), 201-205. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 徐进, 王章荣, 陈亚斌, 丘进清 (2004). 马尾松种子园无性系结实量、种实性状及遗传参数的分析. 林业科学, 40(4), 201-205.] | |
[29] | Xu YL, Duan AA, Tang SY, Xu LH (2006). A study of fruiting characteristics of Pinus kesiya var. langbianensis in clonal seed orchard. Journal of West China Forestry Science, 35(3), 39-42. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 许玉兰, 段安安, 唐社云, 许林红 (2006). 思茅松无性系种子园结实习性研究. 西部林业科学, 35(3), 39-42.] | |
[30] | Xue JR, Jiang HQ (1986). Yunnan Forest. Yunnan Science & Technology Press, Kunming. 167. (in Chinese) |
[ 薛纪如, 姜汉侨 (1986). 云南森林. 云南科技出版社, 昆明. 167.] | |
[31] | Yu H, Ge S, Huang RF, Jiang HQ (2000). A preliminary study on genetic variation and relationships of Pinus yunnanensis and its closely related species. Acta Botanica Sinica, 42, 107-110. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 虞泓, 葛颂, 黄瑞复, 姜汉侨 (2000). 云南松及其近缘种的遗传变异与亲缘关系. 植物学报, 42, 107-110.] | |
[32] | Yu SL, Fang WW (2012). New advances in seed geography. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 36, 918-922. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 余顺利, 方伟伟 (2012). 种子地理学研究的新进展. 植物生态学报, 36, 918-922.] | |
[33] | Zeng J, Zheng HS, Gan SM, Bai JY (2005). Phenotypic variation in natural populations of Betula alnoides in Guangxi, China. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 41(2), 59-65. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 曾杰, 郑海水, 甘四明, 白嘉雨 (2005). 广西西南桦天然居群的表型变异. 林业科学, 41(2), 59-65.] | |
[34] | Zhu XD, Li TS, Liu XZ, Sun HY, Zhou CF (2006). Studies on fruiting quantity of Pinus armandii clones in the seed orchard and seed quality. Journal of Southwest Forestry College, 26(2), 48-51. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 朱晓丹, 李桐森, 刘小珍, 孙海燕, 周常富 (2006). 华山松无性系种子园结实量与种实性状的关系. 西南林学院学报, 26(2), 48-51.] |
[1] | 李文博 孙龙 娄虎 于澄 韩宇 胡同欣. 火干扰对兴安落叶松种子萌发的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2024, 48(预发表): 0-0. |
[2] | 袁涵 钟爱文 刘送平 徐磊 彭焱松. 水毛花种子萌发特性的差异及休眠解除方法[J]. 植物生态学报, 2024, 48(5): 638-650. |
[3] | 吴瀚, 白洁, 李均力, 古丽•加帕尔, 包安明. 新疆地区植被覆盖度时空变化及其影响因素分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2024, 48(1): 41-55. |
[4] | 李卫英, 章正仁, 辛雅萱, 王飞, 辛培尧, 高洁. 云南松、思茅松和卡西亚松天然种群间的针叶表型变异[J]. 植物生态学报, 2023, 47(6): 833-846. |
[5] | 张雪, 韩凤朋, 肖波, 沈思铭. 黄土高原生物结皮对地表粗糙度和灌草植物种子二次扩散的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2023, 47(12): 1668-1683. |
[6] | 董全民, 赵新全, 刘玉祯, 冯斌, 俞旸, 杨晓霞, 张春平, 曹铨, 刘文亭. 放牧方式影响高寒草地矮生嵩草种子大小与数量的关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(9): 1018-1026. |
[7] | 张敏, 朱教君. 光温条件对不同种源红松种子萌发的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(6): 613-623. |
[8] | 徐光来, 李爱娟, 徐晓华, 杨先成, 杨强强. 中国生态功能保护区归一化植被指数动态及气候因子驱动[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(3): 213-223. |
[9] | 钟雨辰, 王斌, 方中平, 徐小忠, 于明坚. 片段化景观中壳斗科植物种子捕食和扩散模式[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(2): 154-162. |
[10] | 李绍阳, 马红媛, 赵丹丹, 马梦谣, 亓雯雯. 火烧信号对种子萌发影响的研究进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(11): 1177-1190. |
[11] | 白天道, 余春兰, 甘泽朝, 赖海荣, 杨隐超, 黄厚宸, 蒋维昕. 细叶云南松种实性状变异与地理气象因子的关联[J]. 植物生态学报, 2020, 44(12): 1224-1235. |
[12] | 艾沙江•阿不都沙拉木, 迪丽娜尔•阿布拉, 张凯, 买热也木古•吐尔逊, 卡迪尔•阿布都热西提, 李玲. 喀什霸王的结实和种子萌发特性[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(5): 437-446. |
[13] | 范紫腾, 毋钰灵, 王新菊, 李太强, 高江云. 共生真菌对兰科植物种间杂交后代种子萌发的效应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(4): 374-382. |
[14] | 王祖幸, 何维明. 土埋深度影响物种水平的种子质量-种子出苗关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(10): 899-908. |
[15] | 吴小琪, 杨圣贺, 黄力, 李笑寒, 杨超, 钱深华, 杨永川. 常绿阔叶林林冠环境对栲幼苗建成的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(1): 55-64. |
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