内蒙古高原典型草原区河漫滩湿地植物群落退化表征

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00010

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

草原区河流河漫滩草甸是生物多样性表现最充分和生物生产力最高的地段, 但由于过度放牧利用, 绝大部分草甸处于退化状态。该文以锡林河流域中游的河漫滩草甸为研究对象, 比较分析了围封保育湿地与放牧退化湿地的群落组成、地上生物量, 以及共有植物种的植株高度、节间长、叶长、叶宽, 土壤含水量、容重, 群落地下根量及根的分布, 土壤微生物生物量碳、氮的变化。结果表明: 1)放牧使得湿地植物群落优势种发生变化, 原有湿生植物逐渐向旱生化转变, 同时地上及地下生物量明显降低。2)退化湿地的植物呈现显著小型化现象。3)放牧退化湿地的土壤含水量较围封保育湿地低, 其垂直分布及地下根的垂直分布也发生变化。在低河漫滩, 土壤水分随土层的增加而增加, 根量也趋于深层化。但在高河漫滩湿地, 土壤含水量接近典型草原, 根未出现深层化分布趋势。4)放牧践踏引起土壤容重和土壤紧实度增加。5)放牧使得低河漫滩湿地土壤微生物生物量增加, 而在过渡区及高河漫滩湿地, 放牧使得土壤微生物生物量碳、氮含量显著降低。

关键词: 退化表征, 退化机制, 湿地退化, 锡林河

Abstract:

Aims River floodplain meadow is biologically highly productive, but excessive grazing has degraded most of it. Our objective was to analyze changes of vegetation in a Xilin River Basin (Inner Mongolia) wetland meadow to provide information for the restoration and management of degraded wetland.
Methods We compared fenced (non-grazed) and grazed sites within the wetland for vegetation and soil characteristics: plant community composition, aboveground biomass, plant height, internode length, leaf length and width of major species, plant community root biomass and distribution, soil moisture, soil bulk density, soil microbial biomass and soil carbon and nitrogen content.
Important findings Grazing affects plant dominant species, gradually replacing original wetland plants with more drought-resistant ones. It also significantly reduces the aboveground and belowground biomass. Plants in degraded wetland meadow are smaller, thus resulting in the decline in community productivity; Grazing also causes a decrease in soil moisture. In the low flood plain, soil moisture and root biomass both increase with increasing soil depth; however, in the high flood plain, soil moisture does not change with soil depth and is similar to that of the typical steppe. Soil bulk density increases as soil is compacted by animal grazing and trampling. In high and low floodplain wetlands, the changes of soil microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen between ungrazed and grazed sites are varied. In low floodplain wetlands, grazed areas have increased microbial biomass, while in high floodplain wetlands, grazed areas have significant less microbial biomass, carbon and nitrogen.

Key words: degradation characterization, degradation mechanisms, wetland degradation, Xilin River

李建玮, 王立新, 王炜, 梁存柱, 刘华民. 内蒙古高原典型草原区河漫滩湿地植物群落退化表征. 植物生态学报, 2012, 36(1): 10-18. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00010

LI Jian-Wei, WANG Li-Xin, WANG Wei, LIANG Cun-Zhu, LIU Hua-Min. Characterization of degradation of wetland plant communities on floodplain in typical steppe region of Inner Mongolia Plateau, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2012, 36(1): 10-18. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00010

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1258.2012.00010

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2012/V36/I1/10

图/表 8

图1 研究样地地形图。A1, 狭叶甜茅+散穗早熟禾群丛; B1, 灰脉薹草+针蔺群丛; C1, 灰脉薹草+狭叶甜茅群丛; D1, 羊草+黄囊薹草群丛; A2, 灰脉薹草+灰背老鹳草群丛; B2, 羊草+黄花草木犀群丛; C2, 狭叶甜茅+小糠草群丛; D2, 羊草+裂叶蒿群丛。

Fig. 1 Topographic map of the study site. A1, Glyceria spiculosa + Poa subfastigiata association; B1, Carex appendiculata + Eleocharis valleculosa association; C1, Carex appendiculata + Glyceria spiculosa association; D1, Leymus chinensis + Carex korshinskii association; A2, Carex appendiculata + Geranium vlassowianum association; B2, Leymus chinensis + Melilotus officinalis association; C2, Glyceria spiculosa + Agrostis gigantean association; D2, Leymus chinensis + Artemisia tanacetifolia association.

表1 研究样地湿地植物群落的类型及代号

Table 1 Type and code of wetland plant communities in study site

地势 Topography	围封群落 Fenced community	放牧群落 Grazed community
低河漫滩湿地 Low floodplain wetland	狭叶甜茅+散穗早熟禾 (A1) Glyceria spiculosa + Poa subfastigiata(A1)	灰脉薹草+灰背老鹳草(A2) Carex appendiculata + Geranium vlassowianum(A2)
低河漫滩湿地 Low floodplain wetland	灰脉薹草+针蔺 (B1) Carex appendiculata + Eleocharis valleculosa(B1)	羊草+黄花草木犀 (B2) Leymus chinensis + Melilotus officinalis (B2)
过渡带 Transition zone	灰脉薹草+狭叶甜茅 (C1) Carex appendiculata + Glyceria spiculosa(C1)	狭叶甜茅+小糠草 (C2) Glyceria spiculosa + Agrostis gigantean(C2)
高河漫滩湿地 High floodplain wetland	羊草+黄囊薹草 (D1) Leymus chinensis + Carex korshinskii (D1)	羊草+裂叶蒿 (D2) Leymus chinensis + Artemisia tanacetifolia (D2)

图2 研究区围栏内外地上生物量的变化(平均值±标准偏差)。A, A1、A2群丛所在的水平地带; B, B1、B2群丛所在的水平地带; C, C1、C2群丛所在的水平地带; D, D1、D2群丛所在的水平地带。A1, 狭叶甜茅+散穗早熟禾群丛; B1, 灰脉薹草+针蔺群丛; C1, 灰脉薹草+狭叶甜茅群丛; D1, 羊草+黄囊薹草群丛; A2, 灰脉薹草+灰背老鹳草群丛; B2, 羊草+黄花草木犀群丛; C2, 狭叶甜茅+小糠草群丛; D2, 羊草+裂叶蒿群丛。

Fig. 2 Changes of aboveground biomass between fenced conservation wetland and grazed degradation wetland in study site (mean ± SD). A, horizontal zone of A1 and A2 associa- tion; B, horizontal orizontal zone of B1 and B2 association; C, horizontal zone of C1 and C2 association; D, horizontal zone of D1 and D2 association. A1, Glyceria spiculosa + Poa subfastigiata association; B1, Carex appendiculata + Ele- ocharis valleculosa association; C1, Carex appendiculata + Glyceria spiculosa association; D1, Leymus chinensis + Carex korshinskii association; A2, Carex appendiculata + Gera- nium vlassowianum association; B2, Leymus chinensis + Melilotus officinalis association; C2, Glyceria spiculosa + Agrostis gigantean association; D2, Leymus chinensis + Artemisia tanacetifolia association.

表2 不同群落中植株高度、节间长度和叶片大小的差异(平均值±标准偏差) (单位: cm)

Table 2 Difference of plant height, internode length and length and width of leaf blades in different communities (mean ± SD) (unit: cm)

类别 Sort	小糠草 Agrostis gigantea		散穗早熟禾 Poa subfastigiata		狭叶甜茅 Glyceria spiculosa
类别 Sort	围封保育 Fenced conservation	放牧退化 Grazed degradation	围封保育 Fenced conservation	放牧退化 Grazed degradation	围封保育 Fenced conservation	放牧退化 Grazed degradation
植株高度 Plant height	82.21 ± 11.72	52.17 ± 5.66	56.95 ± 15.44	27.16 ± 7.77	49.48 ± 12.57	24.58 ± 6.81
第一节间 1st internode	4.12 ± 2.46	3.05 ± 1.51	6.75 ± 5.64	2.52 ± 1.86	2.75 ± 1.42	2.69 ± 1.76
第二节间 2nd internode	8.56 ± 3.86	4.94 ± 2.18	6.32 ± 3.47	2.49 ± 1.50	4.69 ± 2.94	2.6 ± 1.53
第三节间 3rd internode	12.21 ± 4.99	7.73 ± 3.60	5.58 ± 3.41	2.40 ± 1.63	8.01 ± 3.08	2.81 ± 2.05
第四节间 4th internode	14.99 ± 4.70	10.92 ± 3.95	5.40 ± 3.66	1.69 ± 1.30	-	-
叶宽 Leaf blade width	0.43 ± 0.13	0.26 ± 0.08	0.46 ± 0.12	0.43 ± 0.14	0.24 ± 0.15	0.21 ± 0.11
第一叶长 1st leaf length	6.22 ± 2.14	5.58 ± 2.25	13.14 ± 6.47	9.46 ± 4.84	5.41 ± 2.70	5.09 ± 3.15
第二叶长 2nd leaf length	8.10 ± 2.51	6.59 ± 2.26	20.93 ± 11.04	13.56 ± 6.19	8.73 ± 3.00	7.83 ± 4.07
第三叶长 3rd leaf length	9.37 ± 2.91	7.04 ± 1.90	32.34 ± 15.27	17.97 ± 8.48	13.05 ± 4.37	9.87 ± 6.04
第四叶长 4th leaf length	10.07 ± 3.62	7.30 ± 2.02	37.00 ± 15.86	20.69 ± 8.21	19.17 ± 4.93	12.35 ± 5.95
第五叶长 5th leaf length	9.54 ± 3.86	7.91 ± 1.96	35.67 ± 20.63	19.71 ± 9.14	-	-

图3 研究区域根生物量及分布的变化(平均值±标准偏差)。A, A1、A2群丛所在的水平地带; B, B1、B2群丛所在的水平地带; C, C1、C2群丛所在的水平地带; D, D1、D2群丛所在的水平地带。A1, 狭叶甜茅+散穗早熟禾群丛; B1, 灰脉薹草+针蔺群丛; C1, 灰脉薹草+狭叶甜茅群丛; D1, 羊草+黄囊薹草群丛; A2, 灰脉薹草+灰背老鹳草群丛; B2, 羊草+黄花草木犀群丛; C2, 狭叶甜茅+小糠草群丛; D2, 羊草+裂叶蒿群丛。

Fig. 3 Changes of biomass and distribution of root in study site (mean ± SD). A, horizontal zone of A1 and A2 association; B, horizontal orizontal zone of B1 and B2 association; C, horizontal zone of C1 and C2 association; D, horizontal zone of D1 and D2 association. A1, Glyceria spiculosa + Poa subfastigiata association; B1, Carex appendiculata + Eleocharis valleculosa association; C1, Carex appendiculata + Glyceria spiculosa association; D1, Leymus chinensis + Carex korshinskii association; A2, Carex appendiculata + Geranium vlassowianum association; B2, Leymus chinensis + Melilotus officinalis association; C2, Glyceria spiculosa + Agrostis gigantean association; D2, Leymus chinensis + Artemisia tanacetifolia association.

图4 研究区湿地土壤含水率。A, A1、A2群丛所在的水平地带; B, B1、B2群丛所在的水平地带; C, C1、C2群丛所在的水平地带; D, D1、D2群丛所在的水平地带。A1, 狭叶甜茅+散穗早熟禾群丛; B1, 灰脉薹草+针蔺群丛; C1, 灰脉薹草+狭叶甜茅群丛; D1, 羊草+黄囊薹草群丛; A2, 灰脉薹草+灰背老鹳草群丛; B2, 羊草+黄花草木犀群丛; C2, 狭叶甜茅+小糠草群丛; D2, 羊草+裂叶蒿群丛。 ▲, 围封保育湿地 Fenced conservation wetland; ■, 放牧退化湿地 Grazed degradation wetland; —, 围封保育湿地趋势线 Trend line of fenced conservation wetland; ---, 放牧退化湿地趋势线 Trend line of grazed degradation wetland

Fig. 4 Soil moisture of wetland in study site. A, horizontal zone of A1 and A2 association; B, horizontal orizontal zone of B1 and B2 association; C, horizontal zone of C1 and C2 association; D, horizontal zone of D1 and D2 association. A1, Glyceria spiculosa + Poa subfastigiata association; B1, Carex appendiculata + Eleocharis valleculosa association; C1, Carex appendiculata + Glyceria spiculosa association; D1, Leymus chinensis + Carex korshinskii association; A2, Carex appendiculata + Geranium vlassowianum association; B2, Leymus chinensis + Melilotus officinalis association; C2, Glyceria spiculosa + Agrostis gigantean association; D2, Leymus chinensis + Artemisia tanacetifolia association.

图5 研究区域湿地土壤容重的变化。A, A1、A2群丛所在的水平地带; B, B1、B2群丛所在的水平地带; C, C1、C2群丛所在的水平地带; D, D1、D2群丛所在的水平地带。A1, 狭叶甜茅+散穗早熟禾群丛; B1, 灰脉薹草+针蔺群丛; C1, 灰脉薹草+狭叶甜茅群丛; D1, 羊草+黄囊薹草群丛; A2, 灰脉薹草+灰背老鹳草群丛; B2, 羊草+黄花草木犀群丛; C2, 狭叶甜茅+小糠草群丛; D2, 羊草+裂叶蒿群丛。 ▲, 围封保育湿地 Fenced conservation wetland; ■, 放牧退化湿地 Grazed degradation wetland; —, 围封保育湿地趋势线 Trend line of fenced conservation wetland; ---, 放牧退化湿地趋势线 Trend line of grazed degradation wetland

Fig. 5 Changes of soil bulk density of wetland in study site. A, horizontal zone of A1 and A2 association; B, horizontal orizontal zone of B1 and B2 association; C, horizontal zone of C1 and C2 association; D, horizontal zone of D1 and D2 association. A1, Glyceria spiculosa + Poa subfastigiata association; B1, Carex appendiculata + Eleocharis valleculosa association; C1, Carex appendiculata + Glyceria spiculosa association; D1, Leymus chinensis + Carex korshinskii association; A2, Carex appendiculata + Geranium vlassowianum association; B2, Leymus chinensis + Melilotus officinalis association; C2, Glyceria spiculosa + Agrostis gigantean association; D2, Leymus chinensis + Artemisia tanacetifolia association.

表3 研究区域土壤微生物生物量碳、氮含量的变化(平均值±标准偏差)

Table 3 Changes of content of soil microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen in study area (mean ± SD)

群落 Community	土壤微生物生物量碳 Soil microbial biomass carbon		土壤微生物生物量氮 Soil microbial biomass nitrogen
群落 Community	围封保育 Fenced conservation	放牧退化 Grazed degradation	围封保育 Fenced conservation	放牧退化 Grazed degradation
A	55.88 ± 31.33	133.49 ± 9.8	3.01 ± 0.37	9.27 ± 0.37
B	86.26 ± 20.26	122.10 ± 23.74	4.67 ± 0.26	21.81 ± 2.31
C	577.17 ± 28.35	398.02 ± 39.83	40.92 ± 0.99	33.98 ± 4.52
D	359.36 ± 14.03	289.90 ± 37.11	26.84 ± 3.40	20.07 ± 0.76

参考文献 23

[1]	An N (安娜), Gao NY (高乃云), Liu CE (刘长娥) (2008). Wetland degradation in China: cause, evaluation, and protection measures. Chinese Journal of Ecology(生态学杂志), 27,821-828. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[2]	Cao Y (曹昀), Wang GX (王国祥) (2007). Effects of soil water content on germination and seedlings growth of sweet flag. Acta Ecologica Sinica(生态学报), 27,1748-1755. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	Chen M (陈敏), Wang J (王静), Bao Y (宝音) (1993). A report on vegetation features of degraded meadow in Xilin River Basin, Inner Mongolia. Chinese Bulletin of Botany(植物学通报), 10 (Suppl.1),26. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	Días-Raviña M, Acea MJ, Carballas T (1993). Microbial biomass and its contribution to nutrient concentrations in forest soils. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 25,25-31. DOI URL
[5]	Drewry JJ, Lowe JAH, Paton RJ (1999). Effect of sheep stocking intensity on soil physical properties and dry matter production on a pallic soil in Southland. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 42,493-499. DOI URL
[6]	Hou FJ (侯扶江), Chang SH (常生华), Yu YW (于应文), Lin HL (林慧龙) (2004). A review on trampling by grazed livestock. Acta Ecologica Sinica (生态学报), 24,784-789.
[7]	Hou FJ (侯扶江), Nan ZB (南志标), Xiao JY (肖金玉), Chang SH (常生华) (2002). Characteristics of vegetation, soil, and their coupling of degraded grasslands. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 13,915-922. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	Huang JG (黄金国) (2005). Present situation of wetland degeneration and protection countermeasure in Dongting Lake Area. Research of Soil and Water Conservation(水土保持研究), 12,261-263. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	Li DR (李笃仁) (1989). Practical Handbook of Soil Fertilizer (实用土壤肥料手册). China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, Beijing. (in Chinese)
[10]	Lin HL (林慧龙), Hou FJ (侯扶江), Li F (李飞) (2008). Response of underground biomass to grazing trampling in steppe grassland of Huanxian County, Gansu Province, Northwestern China. Acta Agrestia Sinica (草地学报), 16,186-191. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	Liu SR (刘书润) (1993). The feature of meadow communities in flood land of the middle reaches of the Xilin River. Chinese Bulletin of Botany(植物学通报), 10 (Suppl.1),25. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	Liu ZL (刘钟龄), Wang W (王炜), Hao DY (郝敦元), Liang CZ (梁存柱) (2002). Probes on the degeneration and recovery succession mechanisms of Inner Mongolia steppe. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment (干旱区资源与环境), 16,84-91. (in Chinese with English abstract).
[13]	Qi DC (戚登臣), Li GY (李广宇) (2007). Status, causes and protection countermeasures of wetland degradation in Maqu County in the upper Yellow River. Wetland Science (湿地科学), 5,341-347. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	Wang QL (王启兰), Cao GM (曹广民), Wang CT (王长庭) (2007). Quantitative characters of soil microbes and microbial biomass under different vegetations in alpine meadow. Chinese Journal of Ecology(生态学杂志), 26,1002-1008. ( in Chinese with English abstract).
[15]	Wang W (王炜), Liang CZ (梁存柱), Liu ZL (刘钟龄), Hao DY (郝敦元) (2000a). Analysis of the plant individual behaviour during the degradation and restoring succession in steppe community. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 24,268-274. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	Wang W (王炜), Liang CZ (梁存柱), Liu ZL (刘钟龄), Hao DY (郝敦元) (2000b). Mechanism of degradation succession in Leymus chinensis + Stipa grandis steppe community. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 24,468-472. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	Wang W (王炜), Liu ZL (刘钟龄), Hao DY (郝敦元), Liang CZ (梁存柱) (1996a). Research on the restoring succession of the degenerated grassland in Inner Mongolia I. Basic characteristics and driving force for restoration of the degenerated grassland. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 20,449-459. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	Wang W (王炜), Liu ZL (刘钟龄), Hao DY (郝敦元), Liang CZ (梁存柱) (1996b). Research on the restoring succession of the degenerated grassland in Inner Mongolia II. Analysis of the restoring processes. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 20,460-471. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	Wang XL (王宪礼), Li XZ (李秀珍) (1997). Advances in wetlands’ researches. Chinese Journal of Ecology (生态学杂志), 16,58-62. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	Wang Y, Liu RH, Gao HW, Bai J, Ling M (2010). Degenera- tion mechanism research of Suaeda heteroptera wetland of the Shuangtaizi Estuary National Nature Reserve in China. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 2,1157-1162.
[21]	Yang YX (杨永兴) (2002). New knowledge on the progress of international wetland science research and priority field and prospect of Chinese wetland science research. Advance in Earth Sciences(地球科学进展), 17,508-514. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	Zhou DM, Gong HL, Wang YY, Khan S, Zhao KY (2009). Driving forces for the marsh wetland degradation in the Honghe National Nature Reserve in Sanjiang Plain, Northeast China. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 14,101-111.
[23]	Zhou HK (周华坤), Zhao XQ (赵新全), Zhou L (周立), Liu W (刘伟), Li YN (李英年), Tang YH (唐艳鸿) (2005). A study on correlations between vegetation degradation and soil degradation in the ‘Alpine Meadow’ of the Qinghai Tibetan Plateau. Acta Prataculturae Sinica (草业学报), 14,31-40. (in Chinese with English abstract)