热带云雾林宿主树皮粗糙度对附生维管植物多样性和蕨类孢子附着的影响

doi:10.17521/cjpe.2025.0235

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 粗糙树皮不仅为附生维管植物提供物理支撑，也创造了多样的微生境，从而有助于提高物种多样性。以海南热带雨林国家公园霸王岭片区热带云雾林附生维管植物为研究对象, 调查21个20 m × 20 m样地内宿主树皮粗糙度、胸径及附生维管植物多样性; 实施附生维管植物孢子附着实验, 探究宿主树皮粗糙度对附生维管植物多样性和蕨类孢子附着的影响。结果显示: 宿主树皮粗糙度随树木生长而显著增加; 树皮粗糙度与宿主生长阶段对样地内所有附生维管植物、附生蕨类植物和附生兰科植物的丰富度及多度都有显著影响。其中, 树皮粗糙度对丰富度和多度的解释率分别为0-1.4%及2.8%-7.4%, 宿主生长阶段对丰富度和多度的解释率分别为3.1%-79.8%及5.4%-40.1%; 树皮粗糙度与宿主生长阶段的交互作用对附生维管植物丰富度的解释率为3.1%-5.3%, 对多度的解释率为5.4%-20.6%, 说明宿主生长阶段通过影响树皮粗糙度来影响附生植物多样性; 附生蕨类植物孢子附着数量随宿主树皮粗糙度增大而显著增加。可见, 宿主的粗糙树皮为附生维管植物提供了丰富的附着点和微生境, 促进了附生维管植物群落的构建, 对附生维管植物保育有重要意义。

关键词: 粗糙度, 附生维管植物, 宿主树, 生长阶段, 多样性, 定植

Abstract:

Aims The rough bark provides essential physical supports and creates diverse microhabitats for epiphytic vascular plants. Studying the impacts of bark roughness of host tree on the diversity and spore attachment of epiphytic vascular plants is important to understand species coexistence of these species.

Methods Epiphyte vascular diversity as well as bark roughness and diameter at breast height of host trees were investigated in 21 20 m × 20 m plots in the Bawangling area of Hainan Tropical Rainforest National Park. Also, experiments of epiphyte spore attachment were conducted using a homemade device. The effects of host tree bark roughness and diameter at breast height on the epiphytic vascular plant diversity were assessed. The effects of host tree bark roughness on the spore attachment of epiphytic vascular plants were examined.

Important findings The bark roughness of host tree significantly increased from sapling stage to adult tree stage. The bark roughness and growth stage of host trees significantly impacted on the richness and abundance of all epiphytic vascular plants, epiphytic ferns and orchidaceae. The variance proportions of species richness and abundance explained by the bark roughness ranged 0-1.4% and 2.8%-7.4%, respectively. The variance proportions of species richness and abundance explained by the growth stage ranged 3.1%-79.8% and 5.4%- 40.1%, respectively. The variance proportions of species richness and abundance explained by the interactions of bark roughness and growth stage ranged 3.1%-5.3% and 5.4%-20.6%, respectively. This results indicated that the effects of growth stage of the host tree on epiphytic vascular plant diversity were mediated by bark roughness. The number of attached spores on the host trees, moreover, significantly increased with the bark roughness. Overall, our findings show that the rough bark of host trees provides abundant attachment points and microhabitats for epiphytic vascular plants, facilitate the establishment of epiphytic vascular plant communities, and is of great significance for the conservation of epiphytic vascular plants.

Key words: roughness, vascular epiphyte, host tree, growth stage, diversity, colonization

胡光明, 肖楚楚, 欧旭, 龙文兴. 热带云雾林宿主树皮粗糙度对附生维管植物多样性和蕨类孢子附着的影响. 植物生态学报, 2026, 50(4): 929-936. DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2025.0235

HU Guang-Ming, XIAO Chu-Chu, OU Xu, LONG Wen-Xing. Impact of host tree bark roughness on epiphytic vascular plant diversity and fern spore attachment in tropical cloud forests. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2026, 50(4): 929-936. DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2025.0235

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.17521/cjpe.2025.0235

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2026/V50/I4/929

图/表 6

图1 附生维管植物孢子附着实验装置。

Fig. 1 Experimental device for the fern spore attachment.

图2 不同宿主树皮粗糙度(从左往右分别为白花含笑、赤楠、碟斗青冈、厚壳桂、木荷)。

Fig. 2 Bark roughness of different host trees (Michelia mediocris, Syzygium buxifolium, Quercus disciformis, Cryptocarya chinensis, and Schima superba from the left pannel to the right one).

表1 附生维管植物孢子附着实验中的宿主树种

Table 1 Host tree species used for the experiments of fern spore attachment

序号 No.	物种名 Species name	拉丁名 Scientific name
1	赤楠	Syzygium buxifolium
2	蚊母树	Distylium racemosum
3	黄杞	Engelhardia roxburghiana
4	碟斗青冈	Quercus disciformis
5	白花含笑	Michelia mediocris
6	岭南青冈	Quercus championii
7	陆均松	Dacrydium pectinatum
8	平托桂	Cinnamomum tsoi
9	光叶山矾	Symplocos lancifolia
10	木荷	Schima superba
11	厚壳桂	Cryptocarya chinensis
12	线枝蒲桃	Syzygium araiocladum
13	锈毛杜英	Elaeocarpus howii
14	绒毛润楠	Machilus velutina

图3 宿主不同生长阶段树皮粗糙度比较。不同小写字母表示差异显著(p < 0.001)。

Fig. 3 Comparisons of bark roughness across different growth stages of host trees. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.001).

图4 宿主树皮粗糙度和宿主生长阶段对附生维管植物丰富度和多度的解释方差比例。A, 蕨类。B, 兰科。C, 样地所有附生植物。

Fig. 4 Variance proportion of the richness and abundance of vascular epiphytic plants explained by the bark roughness and growth stages of host trees. A, Ferns. B, Orchidaceae. C, All epiphytic plants in the plot.

图5 不同粗糙度宿主间附着的蕨类植物孢子数量比较。不同小写字母表示孢子数量差异显著(p < 0.001)。

Fig. 5 Comparisons of number of fern spores across different bark roughness of host trees. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences in the number of fern spores (p < 0.001).

参考文献 41

[1]	Adhikari YP, Fischer A, Fischer HS (2016). Epiphytic orchids and their ecological niche under anthropogenic influence in central Himalayas, Nepal. Journal of Mountain Science, 13, 774-784. DOI URL
[2]	Adhikari YP, Fischer HS, Fischer A (2012). Host tree utilization by epiphytic orchids in different land-use intensities in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. Plant Ecology, 213, 1393-1412. DOI URL
[3]	Boelter CR, Dambros CS, Nascimento HEM, Zartman CE (2014). A tangled web in tropical tree-tops: effects of edaphic variation, neighbourhood phorophyte composition and bark characteristics on epiphytes in a central Amazonian forest. Journal of Vegetation Science, 25, 1090-1099. DOI URL
[4]	Cáceres MES, Lücking R, Rambold G (2007). Phorophyte specificity and environmental parameters versus stochasticity as determinants for species composition of corticolous crustose lichen communities in the Atlantic rain forest of northeastern Brazil. Mycological Progress, 6, 117-136. DOI URL
[5]	Callaway RM, Reinhart KO, Moore GW, Moore DJ, Pennings SC (2002). Epiphyte host preferences and host traits: mechanisms for species-specific interactions. Oecologia, 132, 221-230. DOI PMID
[6]	Duarte MM, Gandolfi S (2017). Diversifying growth forms in tropical forest restoration: enrichment with vascular epiphytes. Forest Ecology and Management, 401, 89-98. DOI URL
[7]	Einzmann HJR, Zotz G (2017). Dispersal and establishment of vascular epiphytes in human-modified landscapes. AoB Plants, 9, plx052. DOI: 10.1093/aobpla/plx052.
[8]	Ellis CJ, Coppins BJ (2007). Reproductive strategy and the compositional dynamics of crustose lichen communities on aspen (Populus tremula L.) in Scotland. The Lichenologist, 39, 377-391. DOI URL
[9]	Gotsch SG, Dawson TE, Draguljić D (2018). Variation in the resilience of cloud forest vascular epiphytes to severe drought. New Phytologist, 219, 900-913. DOI PMID
[10]	Hietz P, Hietz-Seifert U (1995). Composition and ecology of vascular epiphyte communities along an altitudinal gradient in central Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Vegetation Science, 6, 487-498. DOI URL
[11]	Hu YJ, Li YX (1992). Tropical Rain Forest in Hainan Island. Guangdong Higher Education Press, Guangzhou. 7-32.
	[胡玉佳, 李玉杏 (1992). 海南岛热带雨林. 广东高等教育出版社, 广州. 7-32.]
[12]	Huang MH, Shang SQ, Cui SP, Wang GJ, Luo YQ, Deng B, Wang LX (2023). Relationship between bark physical characteristics of different host trees and damage of Anoplophora glabripennis. Northwest Agricultural Journal, 32, 952-959.
	[黄铭昊, 尚素琴, 崔树鹏, 王改进, 骆有庆, 邓彬, 王立祥 (2023). 不同树种树皮物理特征与光肩星天牛危害的关系. 西北农业学报, 32, 952-959.]
[13]	Johansson D (1974). Ecology of vascular epiphytes in West African Rain Forest. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica, 59, 1-136.
[14]	Kang Y, Deng ZY, Zang RG, Long WX (2017). DNA barcoding analysis and phylogenetic relationships of tree species in tropical cloud forests. Scientific Reports, 7, 12564. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-13057-0.
[15]	Liu GF (2010). Diversity and Distribution of Vascular Epiphytes of Tropical Forests in Hainan Island, China. PhD dissertation, Chinese Academy of Forestry Sciences, Beijing.
	[刘广福 (2010). 海南岛热带森林附生维管植物多样性和分布. 博士学位论文, 中国林业科学研究院, 北京.]
[16]	Liu WY, Ma WZ, Yang LP (2006). Advances in ecological studies on epiphytes in forest canopies. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 30, 522-533. DOI URL
	[刘文耀, 马文章, 杨礼攀 (2006). 林冠附生植物生态学研究进展. 植物生态学报, 30, 522-533.] DOI
[17]	Long WX (2011). Community Structure and Assembly Mechanisms of Tropical Cloud Rainforest in Hainan Island, China. PhD dissertation, Chinese Academy of Forestry Sciences, Beijing.
	[龙文兴 (2011). 海南岛热带云雾林群落结构及组配机制研究. 博士学位论文, 中国林业科学研究院, 北京.]
[18]	López-Villalobos A, Flores-Palacios A, Ortiz-Pulido R (2008). The relationship between bark peeling rate and the distribution and mortality of two epiphyte species. Plant Ecology, 198, 265-274. DOI URL
[19]	Mehltreter K, Flores-Palacios A (2005). Host preferences of low-trunk vascular epiphytes in a cloud forest of Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 21, 651-660. DOI URL
[20]	Mitchell RJ, Hewison RL, Beaton J, Douglass JR (2021). Identifying substitute host tree species for epiphytes: the relative importance of tree size and species, bark and site characteristics. Applied Vegetation Science, 24, e12569. DOI: 10.1111/avsc.12569.
[21]	Moran RC, Russell RV (2004). The occurrence of Trichomanes godmanii (Hymenophyllaceae) on Welfia georgii (Arecaceae) at the La Selva Biological Station, Costa Rica. American Fern Journal, 94(2), 70-76. DOI URL
[22]	Nieder J, Engwald S, Klawun M, Barthlott W (2000). Spatial distribution of vascular epiphytes (including Hemiepiphytes) in a lowland Amazonian rain forest (surumoni crane plot) of Southern Venezuela. Biotropica, 32, 385-396. DOI URL
[23]	Otero JT, Aragón S, Ackerman JD (2007). Site variation in spatial aggregation and phorophyte preference in Psychilis monensis (Orchidaceae). Biotropica, 39, 227-231. DOI URL
[24]	Phillips JW, Chung AYC, Edgecombe GD, Farnon Ellwood MD (2020). Bird’s nest ferns promote resource sharing by centipedes. Biotropica, 52, 335-344. DOI URL
[25]	Sanford WW (1968). Distribution of epiphytic orchids in semi-deciduous tropical forest in southern Nigeria. Journal of Ecology, 56, 697-705. DOI URL
[26]	Schievenin DF, Santos CA, de Lima K, de Melo ACG, Engel VL, Durigan G (2024). Traits of the host trees, not community diversity, drive epiphytes abundance in tropical seasonal forests. Biota Neotropica, 24, e20231558. DOI: 10.1590/1676-0611-BN-2023-1558.
[27]	Segovia-Rivas A, Meave JA, González EJ, Pérez-García EA (2018). Experimental reintroduction and host preference of the microendemic and endangered orchid Barkeria whartoniana in a Mexican Tropical Dry Forest. Journal for Nature Conservation, 43, 156-164. DOI URL
[28]	Siaz-Torres SS, Mora-Olivo A, Arellano-Méndez LU, Vanoye- Eligio V, Flores-Rivas J, de la Rosa-Manzano E (2021). Contribution of peeling host for epiphyte abundance in two tropical dry forests in the “El Cielo Biosphere Reserve”, Mexico. Plant Species Biology, 36, 269-283. DOI
[29]	Soto Medina E, Lücking R, Bolaños Rojas A (2012). Especificidad de forófito y preferencias microambientales de los líquenes cortícolas en Cinco forófitos del bosque premontano de finca Zíngara, Cali, Colombia. Revista de Biología Tropical, 60, 843-856.
[30]	Spier L, van Dobben H, van Dort K (2010). Is bark pH more important than tree species in determining the composition of nitrophytic or acidophytic lichen floras? Environmental Pollution, 158, 3607-3611. DOI PMID
[31]	Tatsumi S, Ohgue T, Azuma WA, Nishizawa K (2023). Bark traits affect epiphytic bryophyte community assembly in a temperate forest. Plant Ecology, 224, 1089-1095. DOI
[32]	Timsina B, Rokaya MB, Münzbergová Z, Kindlmann P, Shrestha B, Bhattarai B, Raskoti BB (2016). Diversity, distribution and host-species associations of epiphytic orchids in Nepal. Biodiversity and Conservation, 25, 2803-2819. DOI URL
[33]	Wagner K, Mendieta-Leiva G, Zotz G (2015). Host specificity in vascular epiphytes: a review of methodology, empirical evidence and potential mechanisms. AoB Plants, 7, plu092. DOI: 10.1093/aobpla/plu092.
[34]	Wagner K, Wanek W, Zotz G (2021). Functional traits of a rainforest vascular epiphyte community: trait covariation and indications for host specificity. Diversity, 13, 97. DOI: 10.3390/d13020097.
[35]	Wang YC, Deng ZY, Zhang SX, Xiao CC, Feng G, Long WX, Liu JS (2022). Host tree selection by vascular epiphytes in tropical cloud forest of Hainan Island, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 46, 405-415. DOI URL
	[王艺宸, 邓芝燕, 张守信, 肖楚楚, 冯广, 龙文兴, 刘积史 (2022). 海南热带云雾林附生维管植物对宿主的选择性. 植物生态学报, 46, 405-415.] DOI
[36]	Wierzcholska S, Łubek A, Dyderski MK, Horodecki P, Rawlik M, Jagodziński AM (2024). Light availability and phorophyte identity drive epiphyte species richness and composition in mountain temperate forests. Ecological Informatics, 80, 102475. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2024.102475.
[37]	Williams VL, Witkowski ETF, Balkwill K (2007). Relationship between bark thickness and diameter at breast height for six tree species used medicinally in South Africa. South African Journal of Botany, 73, 449-465. DOI URL
[38]	Woods CL, Cardelús CL, DeWalt SJ (2015). Microhabitat associations of vascular epiphytes in a wet tropical forest canopy. Journal of Ecology, 103, 421-430. DOI URL
[39]	Zarate-García AM, Noguera-Savelli E, Andrade-Canto SB, Zavaleta-Mancera HA, Gauthier A, Alatorre-Cobos F (2020). Bark water storage capacity influences epiphytic orchid preference for host trees. American Journal of Botany, 107, 726-734. DOI PMID
[40]	Zotz G, Vollrath B (2003). The epiphyte vegetation of the palm Socratea exorrhiza: correlations with tree size, tree age and bryophyte cover. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 19, 81-90. DOI URL
[41]	Zotz G, Winkler U (2013). Aerial roots of epiphytic orchids: the velamen radicum and its role in water and nutrient uptake. Oecologia, 171, 733-741. DOI PMID