植物生态学报 ›› 2014, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (7): 665-674.DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00062
史青茹1,2, 许洺山1,2, 赵延涛1,2, 周刘丽1,2, 张晴晴1,2, 马文济1,2, 赵绮3, 阎恩荣1,2,*()
收稿日期:
2014-01-15
接受日期:
2014-05-09
出版日期:
2014-01-15
发布日期:
2014-07-10
通讯作者:
阎恩荣
作者简介:
* E-mail: eryan@des.ecnu.edu.cn基金资助:
SHI Qing-Ru1,2, XU Ming-Shan1,2, ZHAO Yan-Tao1,2, ZHOU Liu-Li1,2, ZHANG Qing-Qing1,2, MA Wen-Ji1,2, ZHAO Qi3, YAN En-Rong1,2,*()
Received:
2014-01-15
Accepted:
2014-05-09
Online:
2014-01-15
Published:
2014-07-10
Contact:
YAN En-Rong
摘要:
枝叶的大小和数量关系表征了植物应对环境胁迫的水力结构特征, 当前, 对其在微生境间的变化规律不太清楚。该研究在浙江天童常绿阔叶林中, 按照地形的凸凹差异, 各选择了10个群落, 采用标准化主轴估计方法, 分别比较了植物枝大小(横截面积)-叶大小(总叶面积)关系、枝大小(横截面积)-枝数量(枝稠密度)关系和叶大小(单叶面积)-叶数量(生叶强度)关系在两类生境的变化。结果发现: 1)在两类生境中, 枝横截面积和总叶面积显著异速正相关(p < 0.001), 存在显著大于1的共斜率; 其回归方程截距在凹型生境显著大于凸型生境, 表明在一定枝大小下, 凹型生境比凸型生境的植物枝条支撑更大的叶面积; 2)枝横截面积与枝稠密度显著负相关(p < 0.001), 且在两生境间存在显著小于-1的共斜率; 回归方程截距在生境间无显著差异(p > 0.05), 表明凹型与凸型生境的植物在单位大小枝条配置的分枝数相同; 3)单叶面积与生叶强度显著负相关(p < 0.001), 且也在生境间存在显著小于-1的共斜率; 回归方程的截距在凹型生境显著大于凸型生境, 表明在叶片大小相同时, 凹型比凸型生境的植物在单位大小枝条上支撑的叶片数更多。综上, 与凸型生境相比, 凹型生境植物单位大小枝条更倾向于支持数量较多的大叶片。本研究证明, 植物Corner法则和叶大小-叶数量的权衡在局域尺度也具普适性。枝叶大小和叶数量配置的调整体现了植物水力结构对凸凹生境不同水分供应的选择偏好。
史青茹, 许洺山, 赵延涛, 周刘丽, 张晴晴, 马文济, 赵绮, 阎恩荣. 浙江天童木本植物Corner法则的检验: 微地形的影响. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(7): 665-674. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00062
SHI Qing-Ru, XU Ming-Shan, ZHAO Yan-Tao, ZHOU Liu-Li, ZHANG Qing-Qing, MA Wen-Ji, ZHAO Qi, YAN En-Rong. Testing of corner’s rules across woody plants in Tiantong region, Zhejiang Province: effects of micro-topography. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2014, 38(7): 665-674. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00062
图1 个体水平上凹型和凸型微生境植物枝大小-叶大小、枝大小-枝数量和叶大小-叶数量回归关系。***, p < 0.001。
Fig. 1 Regression relationships of twig size-leaf size, twig size-twig intensity, and leaf size-leafing intensity for plants in concave and convex habitats at individual level. ***, p < 0.001.
组别 Group | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 凹型生境 Concave habitat | p值 p value |
---|---|---|---|
枝横截面积-总叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-Total leaf area | 1.49 | 1.53 | 0.000 |
枝横截面积-单叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-Individual leaf area | 0.94 | 0.97 | 0.000 |
枝横截面积-枝稠密度 Twig cross-sectional area-Twig intensity | -0.24 | -0.25 | 0.579 |
单叶面积-生叶强度 Individual leaf area-Leafing intensity | 0.37 | 0.44 | 0.000 |
表1 个体水平上两种微生境植物枝叶三类关系的回归方程截距的差异性检验结果
Table 1 Results of significance test for differences in intercept in three types of twig-leaf relationships across individual plants in two types of micro-habitat
组别 Group | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 凹型生境 Concave habitat | p值 p value |
---|---|---|---|
枝横截面积-总叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-Total leaf area | 1.49 | 1.53 | 0.000 |
枝横截面积-单叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-Individual leaf area | 0.94 | 0.97 | 0.000 |
枝横截面积-枝稠密度 Twig cross-sectional area-Twig intensity | -0.24 | -0.25 | 0.579 |
单叶面积-生叶强度 Individual leaf area-Leafing intensity | 0.37 | 0.44 | 0.000 |
组别 Group | 生境类型 Habitat type | 物种数 Species number | 回归系数R2 Regression coefficient | 分组斜率(置信区间) Group slope (CIs) | 共斜率(置信区间) Common slope (CIs) | 截距 Intercept |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
枝横截面积-总叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-total leaf area | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.76*** | 1.04 (0.92-1.17)a | 1.10 (1.01-1.21)§ | 1.56b |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.81*** | 1.19 (1.04-1.36)a※ | 1.64a | ||
枝横截面积-单叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-individual leaf area | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.65*** | 0.88 (0.76-1.02)a | 0.91 (0.82-1.01) | 0.97a |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.73*** | 0.94 (0.80-1.10)a | 1.03a | ||
枝横截面积-枝稠密度 Twig cross-sectional area-twig intensity | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.63*** | -1.55 (-1.80- -1.34)a※ | -1.57 (-1.72- -1.43)§ | 0.09a |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.72*** | -1.57 (-1.77- -1.40)a※ | 0.04a | ||
单叶面积-生叶强度 Individual leaf area-leafing intensity | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.66*** | -1.33 (-1.55- -1.14)a※ | -1.28 (-1.43- -1.15)§ | 0.26a |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.85*** | -1.23 (-1.45- -1.05)a※ | 0.33a |
表2 物种水平上凹型和凸型微生境植物枝大小-叶大小、枝大小-枝数量和叶大小-叶数量标准主轴估计回归参数
Table 2 Summary of regression parameters based on standardized major axis estimation for scaling relationships of twig size-leaf size, twig size-twig intensity, and leaf size-leafing intensity for plant species in concave and convex habitats
组别 Group | 生境类型 Habitat type | 物种数 Species number | 回归系数R2 Regression coefficient | 分组斜率(置信区间) Group slope (CIs) | 共斜率(置信区间) Common slope (CIs) | 截距 Intercept |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
枝横截面积-总叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-total leaf area | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.76*** | 1.04 (0.92-1.17)a | 1.10 (1.01-1.21)§ | 1.56b |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.81*** | 1.19 (1.04-1.36)a※ | 1.64a | ||
枝横截面积-单叶面积 Twig cross-sectional area-individual leaf area | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.65*** | 0.88 (0.76-1.02)a | 0.91 (0.82-1.01) | 0.97a |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.73*** | 0.94 (0.80-1.10)a | 1.03a | ||
枝横截面积-枝稠密度 Twig cross-sectional area-twig intensity | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.63*** | -1.55 (-1.80- -1.34)a※ | -1.57 (-1.72- -1.43)§ | 0.09a |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.72*** | -1.57 (-1.77- -1.40)a※ | 0.04a | ||
单叶面积-生叶强度 Individual leaf area-leafing intensity | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 65 | 0.66*** | -1.33 (-1.55- -1.14)a※ | -1.28 (-1.43- -1.15)§ | 0.26a |
凹型生境 Concave habitat | 45 | 0.85*** | -1.23 (-1.45- -1.05)a※ | 0.33a |
生境类型 Habitat type | 个体水平 Individual level | 物种水平 Species level | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
凸型生境 Convex habitat | 凹型生境 Concave habitat | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 凹型生境 Concave habitat | ||
总叶面积 Total leaf area (mm2) | 68.68 ± 3.14b | 96.66 ± 5.26a | 136.90 ± 26.09b | 208.80 ± 60.57a | |
单叶面积 Individual leaf area (mm2) | 13.96 ± 0.47b | 18.00 ± 0.70a | 26.86 ± 4.84a | 32.46 ± 7.21a | |
枝横截面积 Twig cross-sectional area (mm2) | 1.84 ± 0.07b | 2.25 ± 0.09a | 3.15 ± 0.41a | 3.16 ± 0.59a | |
枝稠密度 Twig intensity (No.·mm-3) | 0.09 ± 0.04a | 0.08 ± 0.07a | 0.82 ± 1.49a | 0.82 ± 0.18a | |
生叶强度 Leafing intensity (No.·mm-3) | 0.13 ± 0.004a | 0.11 ± 0.004b | 0.07 ± 0.01a | 0.07 ± 0.01a |
表3 凹型和凸型微生境中的功能性状(平均值±标准误差)
Table 3 Trait values for plants in concave and convex habitats (mean ± SE)
生境类型 Habitat type | 个体水平 Individual level | 物种水平 Species level | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
凸型生境 Convex habitat | 凹型生境 Concave habitat | 凸型生境 Convex habitat | 凹型生境 Concave habitat | ||
总叶面积 Total leaf area (mm2) | 68.68 ± 3.14b | 96.66 ± 5.26a | 136.90 ± 26.09b | 208.80 ± 60.57a | |
单叶面积 Individual leaf area (mm2) | 13.96 ± 0.47b | 18.00 ± 0.70a | 26.86 ± 4.84a | 32.46 ± 7.21a | |
枝横截面积 Twig cross-sectional area (mm2) | 1.84 ± 0.07b | 2.25 ± 0.09a | 3.15 ± 0.41a | 3.16 ± 0.59a | |
枝稠密度 Twig intensity (No.·mm-3) | 0.09 ± 0.04a | 0.08 ± 0.07a | 0.82 ± 1.49a | 0.82 ± 0.18a | |
生叶强度 Leafing intensity (No.·mm-3) | 0.13 ± 0.004a | 0.11 ± 0.004b | 0.07 ± 0.01a | 0.07 ± 0.01a |
[1] |
Ackerly DD, Donoghue MJ (1988). Leaf size, sapling allometry, and Corner’s rules: phylogeny and correlated evolution in maples ( Acer). The American Naturalist, 152, 767-791.
DOI URL PMID |
[2] | Bond WJ, Midgley J (1988). Allometry and sexual differences in leaf size. The American Naturalist, 131, 901-910. |
[3] | Bragg JG, Westoby M (2002). Leaf size and foraging for light in a sclerophyll woodland. Functional Ecology, 16, 633-639. |
[4] | Brouat C, Gibernau M, Amsellem L, McKey D (1998). Corner’s rules revisited: ontogenetic and interspecific patterns in leaf-stem allometry. New Phytologist, 139, 459-470. |
[5] | Callaway RM, Delucia EH, Schlesinger WH (1994). Biomass allocation of montane and desert ponderosa pine: an analog for response to climate change. Ecology, 75, 1474-1481. |
[6] | Corner EJH (1949). The durian theory or the origin of the modern tree. Annals of Botany, 13, 367-414. |
[7] | Enquist BJ, West GB, Charnov EL, Brown JH (1999). Allometric scaling of production and life-history variation in vascular plants. Nature, 401, 907-911. |
[8] | Falster DS, Warton DI, Wright IJ (2006). User’s Guide to SMATR: Standardised Major Axis Tests & Routines Version 2.0. http://www.bio.mq.edu.au/ecology/SMATR/. Cited 2014-01-13. |
[9] | Falster DS, Westoby M (2003). Leaf size and angle vary widely across species: What consequences for light interception? New Phytologist, 158, 509-525. |
[10] | Gartner BL (1991). Stem hydraulic properties of vines vs. shrubs of western poison oak, Toxicodendron diversilobum. Oecologia, 87, 180-189. |
[11] | Givnish TJ (1987). Comparative studies of leaf form: assessing the relative roles of selective pressures and phylogenetic constraints. New Phytologist, 106(Suppl.), 131-160. |
[12] | Harvey PH, Pagel MD (1991). The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. |
[13] | Huston MA (1994). Biological Diversity: the Coexistence of Species on Changing Landscape. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. |
[14] | Jones RH, Sharitz RR, Dixon PM, Segal DS, Schneider RL (1994). Woody plant regeneration in four floodplain forests. Ecological Monographs, 64, 345-367. |
[15] | Kleiman D, Aarssen LW (2007). The leaf size/number trade-off in trees. Journal of Ecology, 95, 376-382. |
[16] | Li CY, Berninger F, Koskela J, Sonninen E (2000). Drought responses of Eucalyptus microtheca provenances depend on seasonality of rainfall in their place of origin. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 27, 231-238. |
[17] | Li H, Reynolds JF (1995). On definition and quantification of heterogeneity. Oikos, 73, 280-283. |
[18] | Liao JX, Chen J, Jiang MX, Huang HD (2012). Leaf traits and persistence of relict and endangered tree species in a rare plant community. Functional Plant Biology, 39, 512-518. |
[19] | Liu ZG, Cai YL, Li K (2008). Studies on the leaf size-twig size spectrum of subtropical evergreen board-leaved woody species. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version), 32, 363-369. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[刘志国, 蔡永立, 李恺 (2008). 亚热带常绿阔叶林植物叶-小枝的异速生长. 植物生态学报, 32, 363-369.] | |
[20] |
McCulloh KA, Sperry JS (2005). Patterns in hydraulic architecture and their implications for transport efficiency. Tree Physiology, 25, 257-267.
URL PMID |
[21] | Milla R (2009). The leafing intensity premium hypothesis tested across clades, growth forms and altitudes. Journal of Ecology, 97, 972-983. |
[22] | Moles AT, Westoby M (2000). Do small leaves expand faster than large leaves, and do shorter expansion times reduce herbivore damage? Oikos, 90, 517-524. |
[23] | Niklas KJ (1992). Plant Biomechanics: an Engineering Approach to Plant Form and Function. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. |
[24] | Niklas KJ (1994). Plant Allometry: the Scaling of Form and Process. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. |
[25] | Normand F, Bissery C, Damour G, Lauri PÉ (2008). Hydraulic and mechanical stem properties affect leaf-stem allometry in mango cultivars. New Phytologist, 178, 590-602. |
[26] | Olson ME, Aguirre-Hernández R, Rosell JA (2009). Universal foliage-stem scaling across environments and species in dicot trees: plasticity, biomechanics and Corner’s rules. Ecology Letters, 12, 210-219. |
[27] | Pickup M, Westoby M, Basden A (2005). Dry mass costs of deploying leaf area in relation to leaf size. Functional Ecology, 19, 88-97. |
[28] | Pitman EJG (1939). A note on normal correlation. Biometrika, 31, 9-12. |
[29] | Preston KA, Ackerly DD (2003). Hydraulic architecture and the evolution of shoot allometry in contrasting climates. American Journal of Botany, 90, 1502-1512. |
[30] | Reich PB, Oleksyn J (2004). Global patterns of plant leaf N and P in relation to temperature and latitude. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 11001-11006. |
[31] | Reynolds HL, Hungate BA, Chapin III FS, D’Antonio CM (1997). Soil heterogeneity and plant competition in an annual grassland. Ecology, 78, 2076-2090. |
[32] | Silvertown J (2004). Plant coexistence and the niche. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19, 605-611. |
[33] | Song YC, Wang XR (1995). Vegetation and Flora of Tiantong National Forest Park Zhejiang Province. Shanghai Scientific and Technical Document Publishing House, Shanghai. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[宋永昌, 王祥荣 (1995). 浙江天童国家森林公园的植被和区系. 上海科学技术文献出版社, 上海.] | |
[34] | Sprugel DG, Hinckley TM, Schaap W (1991). The theory and practice of branch autonomy. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 22, 309-334. |
[35] |
Sun SC, Jin DM, Shi PL (2006). The leaf size-twig size spectrum of temperate woody species along an altitudinal gradient: an invariant allometric scaling relationship. Annals of Botany, 97, 97-107.
URL PMID |
[36] | Tilman D (1994). Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology, 75, 2-16. |
[37] | Vandermeer JH (1972). Niche theory. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 3, 107-132. |
[38] | Villar-Salvador P, Castro-Díez P, Pérez-Rontomé C, Montserrat-Martí G (1997). Stem xylem features in three Quercus (Fagaceae) species along a climatic gradient in NE Spain. Trees, 12, 90-96. |
[39] | Warton DI, Weber NC (2002). Common slope tests for bivariate errors-in-variables models. Biometrical Journal, 44, 161-174. |
[40] | Warton DI, Wright IJ, Falster DS, Westoby M (2006). Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry. Biological Reviews, 81, 259-291. |
[41] |
West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1997). A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science, 276, 122-126.
URL PMID |
[42] | West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1999). A general model for the structure and allometry of plant vascular systems. Nature, 400, 664-667. |
[43] | Westoby M, Falster DS, Moles AT, Vesk PA, Wright IJ (2002). Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 33, 125-159. |
[44] |
Westoby M, Wright IJ (2003). The leaf size-twig size spectrum and its relationship to other important spectra of variation among species. Oecologia, 135, 621-628.
URL PMID |
[45] | White PS (1983a). allometry and its implications for the adaptive architecture of trees. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 110, 203-212. |
[46] | White PS (1983b). Evidence that temperate East North American evergreen woody plants follow Corner’s rules. New Phytologist, 95, 139-145. |
[47] | Whitman T, Aarssen LW (2010). The leaf size/number trade-off in herbaceous angiosperms. Journal of Plant Ecology, 3, 49-58. |
[48] | Xu Y, Yang XD, Xie YM, Xu YL, Chang SX, Yan ER (2012). Twig size-number trade-off among woody plants in Tiantong region, Zhejiang Province of China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 36, 1268-1276. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[许月, 杨晓东, 谢一鸣, 徐艺露, Chang SX, 阎恩荣 (2012). 浙江天童木本植物小枝的“大小-数量”权衡. 植物生态学报, 36, 1268-1276.] | |
[49] | Yan ER, Milla R, Aarssen LW, Wang XH (2012). Functional relationships of leafing intensity to plant height, growth form and leaf habit. Acta Oecologica, 41, 20-29. |
[50] |
Yan ER, Wang XH, Chang SX, He FL (2013). Scaling relationships among twig size, leaf size and leafing intensity in a successional series of subtropical forests. Tree Physiology, 33, 609-617.
DOI URL PMID |
[51] |
Yang DM, Li GY, Sun SC (2008). The generality of leaf size versus number trade-off in temperate woody species. Annals of Botany, 102, 623-629.
DOI URL PMID |
[52] | Yang DM, Li GY, Sun SC (2009). The effects of leaf size, leaf habit, and leaf form on leaf/stem relationships in plant twigs of temperate woody species. Journal of Vegetation Science, 20, 359-366. |
[53] | Zhang N, Wang XH, Zheng ZM, Ma ZP, Yang QS, Fang XF, Xie YB (2012). Spatial heterogeneity of soil properties and its relationships with terrain factors in broadleaved forest in Tiantong of Zhejiang Province, East China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 23, 2361-2369. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[张娜, 王希华, 郑泽梅, 马遵平, 杨庆松, 方晓峰, 谢玉彬 (2012). 浙江天童常绿阔叶林土壤的空间异质性及其与地形的关系. 应用生态学报, 23, 2361-2369.] |
[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] | 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. |
[3] | 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. |
[4] | 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. |
[5] | 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. |
[6] | 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. |
[7] | 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. |
[8] | 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. |
[9] | 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. |
[10] | 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. |
[11] | 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. |
[12] | 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. |
[13] | 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. |
[14] | 王杨, 徐文婷, 熊高明, 李家湘, 赵常明, 卢志军, 李跃林, 谢宗强. 檵木生物量分配特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(1): 105-114. |
[15] | 李晓红, 徐健程, 肖宜安, 胡文海, 曹裕松. 武功山亚高山草甸群落优势植物野古草和芒异速生长对气候变暖的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2016, 40(9): 871-882. |
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