植物生态学报 ›› 2014, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (9): 929-940.DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00087
所属专题: 生态化学计量
收稿日期:
2014-03-11
接受日期:
2014-06-03
出版日期:
2014-03-11
发布日期:
2014-09-22
通讯作者:
张元明
基金资助:
XIAO Yao1,2,TAO Ye1,ZHANG Yuan-Ming1,*()
Received:
2014-03-11
Accepted:
2014-06-03
Online:
2014-03-11
Published:
2014-09-22
Contact:
ZHANG Yuan-Ming
摘要:
荒漠草本植物是荒漠生态系统物种多样性的主体, 对其生物量分配及叶片化学计量特征随植物生长的变化规律的研究有助于深入了解荒漠草本植物生存策略和功能特征。该文选择古尔班通古特沙漠4种优势草本(2种短命植物, 2种一年生长营养期植物)为研究对象, 通过野外原位多时段取样, 对比研究了四者生物量分配、叶片N-P化学计量学随植物生长的变化特征, 以及二者之间的关系。结果表明, 在生物量累积过程中, 4种植物根冠比逐渐减小, 地上与地下生物量间的相关生长关系也发生变化, 其中琉苞菊(Hyalea pulchella)和角果藜(Ceratocarpus arenarius)的相关生长指数先增加后减小, 并趋于稳定, 而尖喙牻牛儿苗(Erodium oxyrrhynchum)和沙蓬(Agriophyllum squarrosum)的相关生长指数由小到大并趋于等速生长。琉苞菊叶片N、P含量呈逐渐增长趋势, 而另外3种植物呈下降趋势, 表明所研究的荒漠植物在生长过程中, 叶片N-P化学计量发生改变, 叶片化学计量特征与生物量指标的相关性较弱。
肖遥,陶冶,张元明. 古尔班通古特沙漠4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期的生物量分配与叶片化学计量特征. 植物生态学报, 2014, 38(9): 929-940. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00087
XIAO Yao,TAO Ye,ZHANG Yuan-Ming. Biomass allocation and leaf stoichiometric characteristics in four desert herbaceous plants during different growth periods in the Gurbantünggüt Desert, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2014, 38(9): 929-940. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2014.00087
物种 Species | 生长期 Growth period | 样本量 No. of samples | 地上生物量 Aboveground biomass (g) | 地下生物量 Belowground biomass (g) | 总生物量 Total biomass (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | April 18 | 33 | 0.026 4 ± 0.003 7a | 0.007 7 ± 0.000 7a | 0.034 1 ± 0.004 3a |
April 28 | 35 | 0.094 4 ± 0.006 8ab | 0.010 2 ± 0.000 7a | 0.104 6 ± 0.007 2ab | |
May 8 | 33 | 0.212 4 ± 0.016 4ab | 0.031 0 ± 0.003 3b | 0.243 4 ± 0.019 4ab | |
May 18 | 40 | 0.328 0 ± 0.023 2b | 0.055 4 ± 0.003 9c | 0.383 3 ± 0.026 8b | |
May 31 | 40 | 1.431 0 ± 0.179 8c | 0.145 9 ± 0.014 2d | 1.577 0 ± 0.192 8c | |
尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | April 28 | 35 | 0.018 4 ± 0.001 4a | 0.004 9 ± 0.000 3a | 0.023 3 ± 0.001 6a |
May 8 | 40 | 0.051 3 ± 0.004 7a | 0.010 8 ± 0.000 9b | 0.062 1 ± 0.005 4a | |
May 18 | 40 | 0.113 6 ± 0.008 6b | 0.025 1 ± 0.002 1c | 0.138 7 ± 0.010 6b | |
May 31 | 36 | 0.265 4 ± 0.011 3c | 0.024 3 ± 0.003 0c | 0.289 7 ± 0.012 3c | |
角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | April 28 | 29 | 0.009 1 ± 0.001 0a | 0.001 9 ± 0.000 1a | 0.010 9 ± 0.001 1a |
May 8 | 40 | 0.017 8 ± 0.001 4a | 0.003 9 ± 0.000 3a | 0.021 7 ± 0.001 7a | |
May 18 | 40 | 0.068 3 ± 0.004 9ab | 0.009 8 ± 0.000 7a | 0.078 1 ± 0.005 4ab | |
May 31 | 40 | 0.152 7 ± 0.016 4b | 0.018 5 ± 0.001 6b | 0.171 1 ± 0.017 8b | |
June 10 | 40 | 0.407 3 ± 0.044 3c | 0.037 1 ± 0.003 2c | 0.444 4 ± 0.047 4c | |
June 27 | 32 | 1.215 0 ± 0.100 9d | 0.091 5 ± 0.006 6d | 1.307 0 ± 0.106 4d | |
沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | May 8 | 38 | 0.027 7 ± 0.002 5a | 0.005 8 ± 0.000 3a | 0.033 4 ± 0.002 8a |
May 18 | 40 | 0.125 2 ± 0.010 0a | 0.019 9 ± 0.001 5a | 0.145 1 ± 0.011 4a | |
May 31 | 40 | 0.587 3 ± 0.054 0a | 0.091 2 ± 0.008 0ab | 0.678 5 ± 0.061 4a | |
June 10 | 17 | 2.364 0 ± 0.320 3b | 0.254 6 ± 0.032 3b | 2.618 0 ± 0.351 2b | |
June 27 | 24 | 14.720 0 ± 1.486 0c | 1.598 0 ± 0.207 1c | 16.320 0 ± 1.680 0c |
表1 4种植物不同生长期的生物量
Table 1 Biomass of the four plants in different growth periods
物种 Species | 生长期 Growth period | 样本量 No. of samples | 地上生物量 Aboveground biomass (g) | 地下生物量 Belowground biomass (g) | 总生物量 Total biomass (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | April 18 | 33 | 0.026 4 ± 0.003 7a | 0.007 7 ± 0.000 7a | 0.034 1 ± 0.004 3a |
April 28 | 35 | 0.094 4 ± 0.006 8ab | 0.010 2 ± 0.000 7a | 0.104 6 ± 0.007 2ab | |
May 8 | 33 | 0.212 4 ± 0.016 4ab | 0.031 0 ± 0.003 3b | 0.243 4 ± 0.019 4ab | |
May 18 | 40 | 0.328 0 ± 0.023 2b | 0.055 4 ± 0.003 9c | 0.383 3 ± 0.026 8b | |
May 31 | 40 | 1.431 0 ± 0.179 8c | 0.145 9 ± 0.014 2d | 1.577 0 ± 0.192 8c | |
尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | April 28 | 35 | 0.018 4 ± 0.001 4a | 0.004 9 ± 0.000 3a | 0.023 3 ± 0.001 6a |
May 8 | 40 | 0.051 3 ± 0.004 7a | 0.010 8 ± 0.000 9b | 0.062 1 ± 0.005 4a | |
May 18 | 40 | 0.113 6 ± 0.008 6b | 0.025 1 ± 0.002 1c | 0.138 7 ± 0.010 6b | |
May 31 | 36 | 0.265 4 ± 0.011 3c | 0.024 3 ± 0.003 0c | 0.289 7 ± 0.012 3c | |
角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | April 28 | 29 | 0.009 1 ± 0.001 0a | 0.001 9 ± 0.000 1a | 0.010 9 ± 0.001 1a |
May 8 | 40 | 0.017 8 ± 0.001 4a | 0.003 9 ± 0.000 3a | 0.021 7 ± 0.001 7a | |
May 18 | 40 | 0.068 3 ± 0.004 9ab | 0.009 8 ± 0.000 7a | 0.078 1 ± 0.005 4ab | |
May 31 | 40 | 0.152 7 ± 0.016 4b | 0.018 5 ± 0.001 6b | 0.171 1 ± 0.017 8b | |
June 10 | 40 | 0.407 3 ± 0.044 3c | 0.037 1 ± 0.003 2c | 0.444 4 ± 0.047 4c | |
June 27 | 32 | 1.215 0 ± 0.100 9d | 0.091 5 ± 0.006 6d | 1.307 0 ± 0.106 4d | |
沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | May 8 | 38 | 0.027 7 ± 0.002 5a | 0.005 8 ± 0.000 3a | 0.033 4 ± 0.002 8a |
May 18 | 40 | 0.125 2 ± 0.010 0a | 0.019 9 ± 0.001 5a | 0.145 1 ± 0.011 4a | |
May 31 | 40 | 0.587 3 ± 0.054 0a | 0.091 2 ± 0.008 0ab | 0.678 5 ± 0.061 4a | |
June 10 | 17 | 2.364 0 ± 0.320 3b | 0.254 6 ± 0.032 3b | 2.618 0 ± 0.351 2b | |
June 27 | 24 | 14.720 0 ± 1.486 0c | 1.598 0 ± 0.207 1c | 16.320 0 ± 1.680 0c |
图2 4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期根冠比(R/S)变化(平均值±标准误差)。同一物种不同字母表示差异显著(p < 0.05)。
Fig. 2 Changes in root to shoot ratio (R/S) of the four desert herbs in different growth periods (mean ± SE). Different letters indicate significant differences within species (p < 0.05).
图3 4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期地上生物量(AGB)与地下生物量(BGB)间的相关生长关系。
Fig. 3 Allometric relationships between aboveground (AGB) and belowground biomass (BGB) of the four desert herbs in different growth periods.
物种 Species | 生长期 Growth period | R2 | p | 相关生长指数(平均值±标准误差) Allometric scaling exponent α (mean ± SD) | 等速生长检验 Test of isometry | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F | p | |||||
琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | April 18 | 0.461 | <0.000 1 | 0.542 ± 0.146c | 24.440 | 0.000 |
April 28 | 0.425 | <0.000 1 | 0.821 ± 0.220b | 2.273 | 0.141 | |
May 8 | 0.768 | <0.000 1 | 1.536 ± 0.271a | 26.161 | 0.000 | |
May 18 | 0.794 | <0.000 1 | 0.996 ± 0.149b | 0.003 | 0.960 | |
May 31 | 0.816 | <0.000 1 | 0.942 ± 0.133b | 0.739 | 0.395 | |
尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | April 28 | 0.444 | <0.000 1 | 0.700 ± 0.185b | 7.872 | 0.008 |
May 8 | 0.672 | <0.000 1 | 0.958 ± 0.180a | 0.215 | 0.646 | |
May 18 | 0.744 | <0.000 1 | 1.148 ± 0.191a | 2.838 | 0.100 | |
May 31 | 0.869 | <0.000 1 | 1.047 ± 0.132a | 0.558 | 0.460 | |
角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | April 28 | 0.707 | <0.000 1 | 0.721 ± 0.154b | 10.221 | 0.004 |
May 8 | 0.692 | <0.000 1 | 1.058 ± 0.193a | 0.388 | 0.537 | |
May 18 | 0.618 | <0.000 1 | 0.852 ± 0.173ab | 2.582 | 0.116 | |
May 31 | 0.846 | <0.000 1 | 0.840 ± 0.108b | 7.520 | 0.009 | |
June 10 | 0.844 | <0.000 1 | 0.703 ± 0.091b | 31.576 | 0.000 | |
June 27 | 0.736 | <0.000 1 | 0.854 ± 0.163ab | 2.868 | 0.101 | |
沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | May 8 | 0.813 | <0.000 1 | 0.699 ± 0.102b | 25.809 | 0.000 |
May 18 | 0.739 | <0.000 1 | 0.854 ± 0.143b | 3.682 | 0.063 | |
May 31 | 0.839 | <0.000 1 | 0.954 ± 0.126ab | 0.529 | 0.472 | |
June 10 | 0.907 | <0.000 1 | 0.937 ± 0.157ab | 0.695 | 0.418 | |
June 27 | 0.802 | <0.000 1 | 1.166 ± 0.229a | 2.632 | 0.119 |
表2 4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期地上与地下生物量间的相关生长指数及等速生长检验
Table 2 Allometric scaling exponents and the test of isometry between above- and belowground biomass of the four desert herbs in different growth periods
物种 Species | 生长期 Growth period | R2 | p | 相关生长指数(平均值±标准误差) Allometric scaling exponent α (mean ± SD) | 等速生长检验 Test of isometry | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F | p | |||||
琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | April 18 | 0.461 | <0.000 1 | 0.542 ± 0.146c | 24.440 | 0.000 |
April 28 | 0.425 | <0.000 1 | 0.821 ± 0.220b | 2.273 | 0.141 | |
May 8 | 0.768 | <0.000 1 | 1.536 ± 0.271a | 26.161 | 0.000 | |
May 18 | 0.794 | <0.000 1 | 0.996 ± 0.149b | 0.003 | 0.960 | |
May 31 | 0.816 | <0.000 1 | 0.942 ± 0.133b | 0.739 | 0.395 | |
尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | April 28 | 0.444 | <0.000 1 | 0.700 ± 0.185b | 7.872 | 0.008 |
May 8 | 0.672 | <0.000 1 | 0.958 ± 0.180a | 0.215 | 0.646 | |
May 18 | 0.744 | <0.000 1 | 1.148 ± 0.191a | 2.838 | 0.100 | |
May 31 | 0.869 | <0.000 1 | 1.047 ± 0.132a | 0.558 | 0.460 | |
角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | April 28 | 0.707 | <0.000 1 | 0.721 ± 0.154b | 10.221 | 0.004 |
May 8 | 0.692 | <0.000 1 | 1.058 ± 0.193a | 0.388 | 0.537 | |
May 18 | 0.618 | <0.000 1 | 0.852 ± 0.173ab | 2.582 | 0.116 | |
May 31 | 0.846 | <0.000 1 | 0.840 ± 0.108b | 7.520 | 0.009 | |
June 10 | 0.844 | <0.000 1 | 0.703 ± 0.091b | 31.576 | 0.000 | |
June 27 | 0.736 | <0.000 1 | 0.854 ± 0.163ab | 2.868 | 0.101 | |
沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | May 8 | 0.813 | <0.000 1 | 0.699 ± 0.102b | 25.809 | 0.000 |
May 18 | 0.739 | <0.000 1 | 0.854 ± 0.143b | 3.682 | 0.063 | |
May 31 | 0.839 | <0.000 1 | 0.954 ± 0.126ab | 0.529 | 0.472 | |
June 10 | 0.907 | <0.000 1 | 0.937 ± 0.157ab | 0.695 | 0.418 | |
June 27 | 0.802 | <0.000 1 | 1.166 ± 0.229a | 2.632 | 0.119 |
图4 4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期叶片N、P含量及N:P (平均值±标准误差)。不同字母表示不同生长期同一指标差异显著(p < 0.05)。
Fig. 4 Leaf N, P contents and N:P of the four desert herbs in different growth periods (mean ± SE). Different letters indicate significant differences among different growth periods for a given index (p < 0.05).
图5 4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期叶片N:P (平均值±标准误差)。不同字母表示同一物种不同生长期N:P差异显著(p < 0.05)。
Fig. 5 Leaf N:P of the four desert herbs in different growth periods (mean ± SE). Different letters indicate significant differences among different growth periods within species (p < 0.05).
物种 Species | N (%) | P (%) | N:P (%) |
---|---|---|---|
琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | 34.74 | 29.43 | 13.39 |
尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | 33.49 | 23.32 | 14.45 |
角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | 22.97 | 16.36 | 18.26 |
沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | 28.31 | 31.91 | 28.72 |
表3 4种荒漠草本植物不同生长期叶片化学计量特征的变异系数
Table 3 Coefficients of variation in the characteristics of leaf stoichiometry in the four desert herbs in different growth periods
物种 Species | N (%) | P (%) | N:P (%) |
---|---|---|---|
琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | 34.74 | 29.43 | 13.39 |
尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | 33.49 | 23.32 | 14.45 |
角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | 22.97 | 16.36 | 18.26 |
沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | 28.31 | 31.91 | 28.72 |
指标 Index | 琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | 尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | 角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | 沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | P | N:P | N | P | N:P | N | P | N:P | N | P | N:P | ||||
P | 0.951* | - | - | 0.928 | - | - | 0.910* | - | - | 0.574 | - | - | |||
N:P | 0.602 | 0.330 | - | 0.836 | 0.572 | - | 0.790 | 0.464 | - | 0.455 | -0.466 | - | |||
BGB | 0.833 | 0.753 | 0.516 | -0.955* | -0.807 | -0.905 | -0.920** | -0.720 | -0.905* | -0.599 | -0.687 | 0.125 | |||
AGB | 0.743 | 0.652 | 0.486 | -0.936 | -0.995** | -0.601 | -0.894* | -0.671 | -0.922** | -0.586 | -0.680 | 0.131 | |||
TB | 0.752 | 0.661 | 0.489 | -0.952* | -0.995** | -0.636 | -0.896* | -0.675 | -0.921** | -0.587 | -0.681 | 0.131 | |||
R/S | -0.546 | -0.392 | -0.670 | 0.868 | 0.988* | 0.454 | 0.893* | 0.901* | 0.588 | 0.288 | 0.839 | -0.624 | |||
α | 0.379 | 0.124 | 0.906* | -0.791 | -0.644 | -0.766 | 0.221 | 0.435 | -0.147 | -0.688 | -0.904* | -0.260 |
表4 4种荒漠草本植物叶片化学计量特征与生物量间的相关系数
Table 4 Correlation coefficients between leaf stoichiometry and biomass of the four desert herbs
指标 Index | 琉苞菊 Hyalea pulchella | 尖喙牻牛儿苗 Erodium oxyrrhynchum | 角果藜 Ceratocarpus arenarius | 沙蓬 Agriophyllum squarrosum | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | P | N:P | N | P | N:P | N | P | N:P | N | P | N:P | ||||
P | 0.951* | - | - | 0.928 | - | - | 0.910* | - | - | 0.574 | - | - | |||
N:P | 0.602 | 0.330 | - | 0.836 | 0.572 | - | 0.790 | 0.464 | - | 0.455 | -0.466 | - | |||
BGB | 0.833 | 0.753 | 0.516 | -0.955* | -0.807 | -0.905 | -0.920** | -0.720 | -0.905* | -0.599 | -0.687 | 0.125 | |||
AGB | 0.743 | 0.652 | 0.486 | -0.936 | -0.995** | -0.601 | -0.894* | -0.671 | -0.922** | -0.586 | -0.680 | 0.131 | |||
TB | 0.752 | 0.661 | 0.489 | -0.952* | -0.995** | -0.636 | -0.896* | -0.675 | -0.921** | -0.587 | -0.681 | 0.131 | |||
R/S | -0.546 | -0.392 | -0.670 | 0.868 | 0.988* | 0.454 | 0.893* | 0.901* | 0.588 | 0.288 | 0.839 | -0.624 | |||
α | 0.379 | 0.124 | 0.906* | -0.791 | -0.644 | -0.766 | 0.221 | 0.435 | -0.147 | -0.688 | -0.904* | -0.260 |
[1] |
Andrews M, Raven JA, Lea PJ, Sprent JI (2006). A role for shoot protein in shoot-root dry matter allocation in higher plants. Annals of Botany, 97, 3-10.
DOI URL PMID |
[2] | Andrews M, Sprent JI, Raven JA, Eady PE (1999). Relationships between shoot to root ratio, growth and leaf soluble protein concentration of Pisum sativum, Phaseolus vulgaris and Triticum aestivum under different nutrient deficiencies. Plant, Cell & Environment, 22, 949-958. |
[3] | Cheng DL, Zhong QL, Lin MC, Jin MF, Qian RF (2011). The advance of allometric studies on plant metabolic rates and biomass. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31, 2312-2320. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 程栋梁, 钟全林, 林茂兹, 金美芳, 钱瑞芳 (2011). 植物代谢速率与个体生物量关系研究进展. 生态学报, 31, 2312-2320.] | |
[4] |
Enquist BJ (2002). Universal scaling in tree and vascular plant allometry: toward a general quantitative theory linking plant form and function from cells to ecosystems. Tree Physiology, 22, 1045-1064.
DOI URL PMID |
[5] | Falster DS, Warton DI, Wright IJ (2006). SMATR: Standardized Major Axis Tests and Routines. Version 2.0. http://www.bio.mq.edu.au/ecology/SMATR. Cited 2013-11-29. |
[6] | Fan ZQ, Wang ZQ, Wu C, Sun HL, Xu WJ, Huo CF (2008). Nitrogen and biomass partitioning pattern in root and leaf of Fraxinus mandshurica seedlings. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 24, 45-51. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 范志强, 王政权, 吴楚, 孙海龙, 徐文静, 霍常富 (2008). 水曲柳苗木根系和叶片氮的分配及对生物量影响. 中国农学通报, 24, 45-51.] | |
[7] | Fang YM (1996). Plant Reproductive Ecology. Shandong University Press, Jinan. (in Chinese) |
[ 方炎明 (1996). 植物生殖生态学. 山东大学出版社, 济南.] | |
[8] |
Gilliam FS (2007). The ecological significance of the herbaceous layer in temperate forest ecosystems. BioScience, 57, 845-858.
DOI URL |
[9] | Grechi I, Vivin P, Hilbert G, Milin S, Robert T, Gaudillère JP (2007). Effect of light and nitrogen supply on internal C:N balance and control of root-to-shoot biomass allocation in grapevine. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 59, 139-149. |
[10] | Han WX, Fang JY (2008). Review on the mechanism models of allometric scaling laws: 3/4 vs. 2/3 power. Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version), 32, 951-960. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 韩文轩, 方精云 (2008). 幂指数异速生长机制模型综述. 植物生态学报, 32, 951-960.] | |
[11] |
Han WX, Fang JY, Guo DL, Zhang Y (2005). Leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry across 753 terrestrial plant species in China. New Phytologist, 168, 377-385.
DOI URL PMID |
[12] | Hao HD, Tian QS, Shi FL, Bian XY, Li F (2009). Allocated dynamics of aboveground biomass and structural biomass in Bromus inermis Leyss. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 31(4), 85-90. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 郝虎东, 田青松, 石凤翎, 卞晓燕, 李芳 (2009). 无芒雀麦地上生物量及各构件生物量分配动态. 中国草地学报, 31(4), 85-90.] | |
[13] | He JS, Han XG (2010). Ecological stoichiometry: searching for unifying principles from individuals to ecosystems. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 34, 2-6. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 贺金生, 韩兴国 (2010). 生态化学计量学: 探索从个体到生态系统的统一化理论. 植物生态学报, 34, 2-6.] | |
[14] | He YH, Zhao HL, Liu XP, Zhang TH, Yue GY (2008). Growth characteristics and biomass allocation of Setaria viridis on different types of sandy land. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 27, 504-508. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 何玉惠, 赵哈林, 刘新平, 张铜会, 岳广阳 (2008). 不同类型沙地狗尾草的生长特征及生物量分配. 生态学杂志, 27, 504-508.] | |
[15] |
Hermans C, Hammond JP, White PJ, Verbruggen M (2006). How do plants respond to nutrient shortage by biomass allocation? Trends in Plant Science, 11, 610-617.
DOI URL PMID |
[16] |
Hikosaka K, Osone Y (2009). A paradox of leaf-trait convergence: Why is leaf nitrogen concentration higher in species with higher photosynthetic capacity? Journal of Plant Research, 122, 245-251.
DOI URL PMID |
[17] | Koerselman W, Meuleman AFM (1996). The vegetation N:P ratio: a new tool to detect the nature of nutrient limitation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 33, 1441-1450. |
[18] | Li CP, Li G, Xiao CW (2007). The Application of allometric relationships in biomass estimation in terrestrial ecosystems. World Sci-Tech R & D, 29(2), 51-57. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 李春萍, 李刚, 肖春旺 (2007). 异速生长关系在陆地生态系统生物量估测中的应用. 世界科技研究与发展, 29(2), 51-57.] | |
[19] | Li YL, Mao W, Zhao XY, Zhang TH (2010). Leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry in typical desert and desertified regions, North China. Environmental Science, 31, 1716-1725. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 李玉霖, 毛伟, 赵学勇, 张铜会 (2010). 北方典型荒漠及荒漠化地区植物叶片氮磷化学计量特征研究. 环境科学, 31, 1716-1725.] | |
[20] | Lu S (2012). Effects of drought stress on plant growth and physiological traits. Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science & Technology, 39(4), 51-54. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 鲁松 (2012). 干旱胁迫对植物生长及其生理的影响. 江苏林业科技, 39(4), 51-54.] | |
[21] | Mao ZM, Zhang DM (1994). The conspectus of ephemeral flora in Northern Xinjiang. Arid Zone Research, 11(3), 1-26. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 毛祖美, 张佃民 (1994). 新疆北部早春短命植物区系纲要. 干旱区研究, 11(3), 1-26.] | |
[22] |
Niklas KJ (2005). Modelling below- and above-ground biomass for non-woody and woody plants. Annals of Botany, 95, 315-321.
DOI URL PMID |
[23] |
Niklas KJ, Enquist BJ (2001). Invariant scaling relationships for interspecific plant biomass production rates and body size. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98, 2922-2927.
DOI URL PMID |
[24] | Niu DC, Dong XY, Fu H (2011). Seasonal dynamics of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry in Stipa bungeana. Pratacultural Science, 28, 915-920. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 牛得草, 董晓玉, 傅华 (2011). 长芒草不同季节碳氮磷生态化学计量特征. 草业科学, 28, 915-920.] | |
[25] | Sterner RW, Elser JJ (2002). Ecological Stoichiometry: the Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere. Princeton University Press, Princeton. |
[26] | Sun YR, Zhu JJ, Kang HZ (2008). Effects of soil water condition on membrane lipid peroxidation and protective enzyme activities of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica seedlings. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 27, 729-734. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 孙一荣, 朱教君, 康宏樟 (2008). 水分处理对沙地樟子松幼苗膜脂过氧化作用及保护酶活性影响. 生态学杂志, 27, 729-734.] | |
[27] | Tao Y, Zhang YM (2011). Seasonal changes in species composition, richness and the aboveground biomass of three community types in Gurbantünggüt Desert, Northwestern China. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 20(6), 1-11. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 陶冶, 张元明 (2011). 3种荒漠植物群落物种组成与丰富度的季节变化及地上生物量特征. 草业学报, 20(6), 1-11.] | |
[28] | Wang DM, Yang HM (2011). Carbon and nitrogen stoichiometry at different growth stages in legumes and grasses. Pratacultural Science, 28, 921-925. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 王冬梅, 杨惠敏 (2011). 4种牧草不同生长期C、N生态化学计量特征. 草业科学, 28, 921-925.] | |
[29] | Wang KB, Shangguan ZP (2011). Seasonal variations in leaf C, N, and P stoichiometry of typical plants in the Yangou watershed in the loess hilly gully region. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31, 4985-4991. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 王凯博, 上官周平 (2010). 黄土丘陵区燕沟流域典型植物叶片C、N、P化学计量特征季节变化. 生态学报, 31, 4985-4991.] | |
[30] | Wang SQ, Yu GR (2008). Ecological stoichiometry characteristics of ecosystem carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus elements. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 28, 3937-3947. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 王绍强, 于贵瑞 (2008). 生态系统碳氮磷元素的生态化学计量学特征. 生态学报, 28, 3937-3947.] | |
[31] | Wang W, Peng SS, Fang JY (2008). Biomass distribution of natural grasslands and it response to climate change in North China. Arid Zone Research, 25, 90-97. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 王娓, 彭书时, 方精云 (2008). 中国北方天然草地的生物量分配及其对气候的响应. 干旱区研究, 25, 90-97.] | |
[32] | West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1999). A general model for the structure, and allometry of plant vascular systems. Nature, 400, 664-667. |
[33] | White J (1981). The allometric interpretation of the self- thinning rule. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 87, 475-503. |
[34] | Whitford WG (2002). Ecology of Desert Systems. Academic Press, London. |
[35] | Wu TG, Wu M, Liu L, Xiao JH (2010). Seasonal variations of leaf nitrogen and phosphorus stoichiometry of three herbaceous species in Hangzhou Bay coastal wetlands, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 34, 23-28. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 吴统贵, 吴明, 刘丽, 萧江华 (2010). 杭州湾滨海湿地3种草本植物叶片N、P化学计量学的季节变化. 植物生态学报, 34, 23-28.] | |
[36] | Wu W, He XD, Zhou QX (2010). Review on N:P stoichiometry in ecosystem. Journal of Desert Research, 30, 296-302. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 邬畏, 何兴东, 周启星 (2010). 生态系统氮磷比化学计量特征研究进展. 中国沙漠, 30, 296-302.] | |
[37] | Xu ZZ, Zhou GS (2005). Effects of soil moisture on growth characteristics of Leymus chinensis seedlings under different temperature conditions. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 24, 256-260. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 许振柱, 周广胜 (2005). 不同温度条件下土壤水分对羊草幼苗生长特性的影响. 生态学杂志, 24, 256-260.] | |
[38] | Yang HM, Wang DM (2011). Advances in the study on ecological stoichiometry in grass-environment system and its response to environmental factors. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 20(2), 244-252. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 杨惠敏, 王冬梅 (2011). 草-环境系统植物碳氮磷生态化学计量学及其对环境因子的响应研究进展. 草业学报, 20(2), 244-252.] | |
[39] | Zeng DH, Chen GS (2005). Ecological stoichiometry: a science to explore the complexity of living systems. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 29, 1007-1019. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 曾德慧, 陈广生 (2005). 生态化学计量学: 复杂生命系统奥秘的探索. 植物生态学报, 29, 1007-1019.] | |
[40] | Zhang AQ, Tan DY, Zhu JZ (2007). Study on the dynamics of biomass allocation and reproductive yield of Medicago varia cv. ‘Xinmu No. 1’. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 29(6), 48-52. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 张爱勤, 谭敦炎, 朱进忠 (2007). 新牧1号杂花苜蓿生物量分配动态及生殖产量的研究. 中国草地学报, 29(6), 48-52.] | |
[41] | Zhang LY, Chen CD (2002). On the general characteristics of plant diversity of Gurbantunggut Sandy Desert. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 22, 1923-1932. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 张立运, 陈昌笃 (2002). 论古尔班通古特沙漠植物多样性的一般特点. 生态学报, 22, 1923-1932.] | |
[42] | Zhang YM, Nie HL (2011). Effects of biological soil crusts on seedling growth and element uptake in five desert plants in Junggar Basin, western China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 35, 380-388. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 张元明, 聂华丽 (2011). 生物土壤结皮对准噶尔盆地5种荒漠植物幼苗生长与元素吸收的影响. 植物生态学报, 35, 380-388.] | |
[43] | Zhou JL, Zheng SZ, Yang C (1992). Plant Population Ecology. Higher Education Press, Beijing. (in Chinese) |
[ 周纪纶, 郑师章, 杨持 (1992). 植物种群生态学. 高等教育出版社, 北京.] | |
[44] | Zhou XB, Zhang YM, Ji XH, Downing A, Serpe M (2011). Combined effects of nitrogen deposition and water stress on growth and physiological responses of two annual desert plants in northwestern China. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 74, 1-8 |
[45] | Zhou XB, Zhang YM, Wang SS, Zhang BC, Zhang J (2011). Effect of nitrogen input on growth and photosynthetic physiology of three desert species seedlings. Journal of Desert Research, 31, 82-89. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[ 周晓兵, 张元明, 王莎莎, 张丙昌, 张静 (2011). 3种荒漠植物幼苗生长和光合生理对氮增加的响应. 中国沙漠, 31, 82-89.] |
[1] | 张玉林, 尹本丰, 陶冶, 李永刚, 周晓兵, 张元明. 早春首次降雨时间及降雨量对古尔班通古特沙漠两种短命植物形态特征与叶绿素荧光的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(4): 428-439. |
[2] | 张庆, 尹本丰, 李继文, 陆永兴, 荣晓莹, 周晓兵, 张丙昌, 张元明. 荒漠藓类植物死亡对表层土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(3): 350-361. |
[3] | 臧永新 马剑英 周晓兵 陶冶 尹本丰 沙亚古丽·及格尔 张元明. 极端干旱和降水对沙垄不同坡位、坡向短命植物地上生产力的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2022, 46(12): 1537-1550. |
[4] | 侯宝林, 庄伟伟. 古尔班通古特沙漠一年生植物的氮吸收策略[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(7): 760-770. |
[5] | 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. |
[6] | 王娇, 关欣, 张伟东, 黄苛, 朱睦楠, 杨庆朋. 杉木幼苗生物量分配格局对氮添加的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2021, 45(11): 1231-1240. |
[7] | 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. |
[8] | 刘珊杉, 周文君, 况露辉, 刘占锋, 宋清海, 刘运通, 张一平, 鲁志云, 沙丽清. 亚热带常绿阔叶林土壤胞外酶活性对碳输入变化及增温的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2020, 44(12): 1262-1272. |
[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] | 贾丙瑞. 凋落物分解及其影响机制[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(8): 648-657. |
[11] | 杨文高, 字洪标, 陈科宇, 阿的鲁骥, 胡雷, 王鑫, 王根绪, 王长庭. 青海森林生态系统中灌木层和土壤生态化学计量特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(4): 352-364. |
[12] | 汤丹丹, 吴毅, 刘文耀, 胡涛, 黄俊彪, 张婷婷. 云南哀牢山两种常见半寄生植物的生态化学计量特征及其与寄主的关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 2019, 43(3): 245-257. |
[13] | 张娜, 朱阳春, 李志强, 卢信, 范如芹, 刘丽珠, 童非, 陈静, 穆春生, 张振华. 淹水和干旱生境下铅对芦苇生长、生物量分配和光合作用的影响[J]. 植物生态学报, 2018, 42(2): 229-239. |
[14] | 宁志英, 李玉霖, 杨红玲, 孙殿超, 毕京东. 科尔沁沙地主要植物细根和叶片碳、氮、磷化学计量特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(10): 1069-1080. |
[15] | 贺合亮, 阳小成, 李丹丹, 尹春英, 黎云祥, 周国英, 张林, 刘庆. 青藏高原东部窄叶鲜卑花碳、氮、磷化学计量特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(1): 126-135. |
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