红葱种群地上和地下构件的密度制约调节

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.00284

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

虽然个体大小和密度的关系是植物生态学研究的中心问题, 但是大多数基础研究只观测植株地上部分的生物量, 即地上部分大小-密度关系, 而对于地下构件大小-密度关系的研究十分薄弱。因为植物个体的生长是构件变化的过程, 所以个体大小和密度的关系不仅表现为种群水平和个体水平, 也表现为构件水平。该文研究了5个密度(36、49、64、121和225株·m^-2)的红葱(Allium cepa var. proliferum)种群地下构件密度制约调节规律及其与地上构件密度制约调节规律的关系, 地下部分和全株(包括地上部分和地下部分)的密度制约调节规律, 及二者与地上部分密度制约调节规律的关系。结果表明: (1)不同密度环境下, 植物的表型可以通过各器官形态的可塑性反应发生调整; 植株地下构件和地上构件的各个特征(株高、叶片长、叶片数、鳞茎直径、分蘖重)均与密度呈显著的线性相关关系; (2)平均根、鳞茎、叶片和鞘生物量均与密度呈显著的幂函数负相关关系, 但异速指数不同: 鳞茎(-1.14)<叶片(-1.03)<根(-0.78)<鞘(-0.49), 表明地下构件的大小和地上构件的大小随密度的变化不一致; (3)平均地下、地上和个体生物量均与种群密度呈显著的幂函数负相关关系, 但异速指数不同, 分别为: -1.13、-0.95和-0.98, 表明地上部分大小和全株大小随种群密度的变化基本一致, 但与地下部分大小的变化不一致。总之, 密度制约对植株地下构件的调节作用大于地上构件, 对地下部分的调节作用大于地上部分, 红葱种群对地下资源的竞争占主导地位。

关键词: 异速, 生物量, 鳞茎, 竞争-密度效应, 密度制约, 构件, 个体大小-密度关系

Abstract:

Aims Although the relationship between size and density is central to plant ecology, research has focused on the above-ground parts of plants and few studies have examined size-density relationships of below-ground modules. Density-dependent regulation in plants can be viewed not only at population and individual levels, but also at plant part level, since growth in plants is a modular process. Our aims were to (1) investigate size-density relationships at plant part level and at individual plant level for both below- and above-ground parts of plants and (2) compare size-density relationships at the levels of plant parts and individuals.
Methods Allium cepa var. proliferum was planted in a completely random design at five plant densities (36, 49, 64, 121 and 225 plants·m^-2) and three replicates. Plot size was 5 m × 5 m. At harvest time (July 11), ten plants from each plot were destructively sampled to measure plant height, number of leaves, length of leaf blade, bulb diameter and mean weight per tiller. Each plant was separated into root, bulb, sheath and leaf blade, oven-dried for 120 h at 80 ℃, and then weighed. Regression analysis was conducted to explore the relationship between the characters measured and plant density and the allometric relationships of mean masses of below- and above-ground modules with density at plant part level and individual level.
Important findings Relationships between plant density and dry weight of root, bulb, leaf blade and sheath showed negative power functions with different allometric exponents for different plant modules: bulb (-1.14) < leaf blade (-1.03) < root (-0.78) < sheath (-0.49). Masses of below- and above-ground dry matter, as well as the whole plant, were decreased significantly with increased plant density. The allometric exponents were -1.13, -0.95 and -0.98 for below-ground, above-ground and individual plant dry matter, respectively. We concluded that the effect of density-dependent regulation on below-ground modules may be greater than that on above-ground modules. Blow-ground parts may be more closely constrained by plant density in contrast to above-ground parts and the whole plant. Consequently, competition for below-ground resources is predominant in the A. cepa var. proliferum populations.

Key words: allometry, biomass, bulb, competition-density effect, density-dependence, module, size-density relationship

黎磊, 周道玮. 红葱种群地上和地下构件的密度制约调节. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(3): 284-293. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.00284

LI Lei, ZHOU Dao-Wei. Density-dependent regulation of above- and below-ground modules in Allium cepa var. proliferum populations. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2011, 35(3): 284-293. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.00284

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.00284

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2011/V35/I3/284

图/表 5

参考文献 43

[1]	Antonovics J, Levin DA (1980). The ecological and genetic consequences of density-dependent regulation in plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 11, 411-452. DOI URL
[2]	Arenas F, Viejo RM, Fernández C (2002). Density-dependent regulation in an invasive seaweed: responses at plant and modular levels. Journal of Ecology, 90, 820-829. DOI URL
[3]	Bonser SP, Aarssen LW (2003). Allometry and development in herbaceous plants: functional responses of meristem allocation to light and nutrient availability. American Journal of Botany, 90, 404-412. DOI URL PMID
[4]	Cheplick GP (2006). A modular approach to biomass allocation in an invasive annual ( Microstegium vimineum; Poaceae). American Journal of Botany, 93, 539-545. DOI URL PMID
[5]	Cipollini DF, Schultz JC (1999). Exploring cost constraints on stem elongation in plants using phenotypic manipulation. The American Naturalist, 153, 236-242. DOI URL PMID
[6]	Damuth J (1981). Population density and body size in mammals. Nature, 290, 699-700. DOI URL
[7]	Dudley SA, Schmitt J (1996). Testing the adaptive plasticity hypothesis: density-dependent selection on manipulated stem length in Impatiens capensis. The American Naturalist, 147, 445-456. DOI URL
[8]	Enquist BJ, Brown JH, West GB (1999). Plant energetics and population density. Nature, 395, 163-165. DOI URL
[9]	Enquist BJ, Niklas KJ (2001). Invariant scaling relations across tree-dominated communities. Nature, 410, 655-660. DOI URL PMID
[10]	Gaston KJ, Blackburn T (2000). Pattern and Process in Macroecology. lackwell Science, Oxford.
[11]	Gillis PR, Ratkowsky DA (1978). The behaviour of estimators of the parameters of various yield-density relationships. Biometrics, 34, 191-198. DOI URL
[12]	Harper JL (1967). A Darwinian approach to plant ecology. Journal of Ecology, 55, 247-270. DOI URL
[13]	Harper JL (1977). Population Biology of Plants. Academic Press, London.
[14]	Hutchings MJ (1979). Weight-density relationships in ramet populations of clonal perennial herbs, with special reference to the -3/2 power law. Journal of Ecology, 67, 21-33. DOI URL
[15]	Hutchings MJ (1983). Ecology’s law in search of a theory. New Scientist, 98, 765-767.
[16]	Kays S, Harper JL (1974). The regulation of plant and tiller density in a grass sward. Journal of Ecology, 62, 97-105. DOI URL
[17]	Kira T, Ogawa H, Sakazaki N (1953). Intraspecific competition among higher plants. I. Competition-yield-density interrelationships in regularly dispersed populations. Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics Osaka City University, Series D, 7, 1-14.
[18]	Kerr G (2003). Effects of spacing on the early growth of planted Fraxinus excelsior L. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 33, 1196-1207. DOI URL
[19]	Lawton JH (1989). What is the relationship between population density and body size in animals? Oikos, 55, 429-534. DOI URL
[20]	Li B, Watkinson AR, Hara T (1996). Dynamics of competition in populations of carrot ( Daucus carota). Annals of Botany, 78, 203-214. DOI URL
[21]	Li XL (李雪林), Zhang AF (张爱峰), Wu ZX (吴忠祥), Zhao YL (赵燕良) (2001). Characteristic investigation on community density restrain of Elymus sibiricus. Qinghai Prataculture (青海草业), 10(2), 9-12. (in Chinese with English abstract).
[22]	Lonsdale WM, Watkinson AR (1983). Plant geometry and self-thinning. Journal of Ecology, 71, 285-297. DOI URL
[23]	Niklas KJ, Midgley JJ, Enquist BJ (2003). A general model for mass-growth-density relations across tree-dominated communities. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 5, 459-468.
[24]	Ogawa K (2005). Relationships between mean shoot and root masses and density in an overcrowded population of hinoki (Chamaecyparis obtusa (Sieb. et Zucc.) Endl.) seedlings. Forest Ecology and Management, 213, 391-398. DOI URL
[25]	Preston KA, Ackerly DD (2004). The Evolution of Allometry in Modular Organisms. Oxford University Press, New York.
[26]	Sachs T (1999). ‘Node counting’: an internal control of balanced vegetative and reproductive development. Plant, Cell & Environment, 22, 757-766.
[27]	Schmitt J, McCormac AC, Smith H (1995). A test of the adaptive plasticity hypothesis using transgenic and mutant plants disabled in phytochrome-mediated elongation responses to neighbors. The American Naturalist, 146, 937-953. DOI URL
[28]	Silvertown J, Charlesworth D (2001). Introduction to Plant Population Biology. Blackwell, London.
[29]	Sun ZR (孙志蓉), Zhai MP (翟明普), Wang WQ (王文全) , Li YR (李玉蓉) (2007). Effects of density on seedling growth and glycyrrhizinic acid content in Glycyrrhiza uralensis. China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica (中国中药杂志), 32, 2222-2227. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[30]	Vuorisalo T, Mutikainen P (1999). Modularity and Plant Life Histories. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
[31]	Watkinson AR (1980). Density-dependence in single-species populations of plants. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 83, 345-357. DOI URL
[32]	Watkinson AR (1984). Yield-density relationships: the influence of resource availability on growth and self-thinning in populations of Vulpia fasciculata. Annals of Botany, 53, 469-482. DOI URL
[33]	Weiner J, Berntson GM, Thomas SC (1990). Competition and growth form in a woodland annual. Journal of Ecology, 78, 459-469. DOI URL
[34]	Weiner J, Fishman L (1994). Competition and allometry in Kochia scoparia. Annals of Botany, 73, 263-271. DOI URL
[35]	Weiner J, Thomas SC (1986). Size variability and competition in plant monocultures. Oikos, 47, 211-222. DOI URL
[36]	Weiner J, Thomas SC (1992). Competition and allometry in three species of annual plants. Ecology, 73, 648-656. DOI URL
[37]	West-Eberhard MJ (2003). Developmental Plasticity and Evolution. Oxford University Press, New York.
[38]	Westoby M (1984). The self-thinning rule. Advance in Ecological Research, 14, 167-225.
[39]	White J (1979). The plant as a metapopulation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 10, 109-145. DOI URL
[40]	White J, Harper JL (1970). Correlated changes in plant size and number in plant populations. Journal of Ecology, 58, 467-485. DOI URL
[41]	Xue L, Hagihara A (2008). Density effects on organs in self-thinning Pinus densiflora Sieb. et Zucc. stands. Ecological Research, 23, 689-695. DOI URL
[42]	Yang YF (杨允菲), Fu LQ (傅林谦) (1997). Density dependence of Phalaris aruandinacea clonal population on middel mountain region of subtropical zone of China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 8, 77-82. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[43]	Yoda K, Kira T, Ogawa H, Hozumi K (1963). Self-thinning in overcrowded pure stands under cultivated and natural conditions. Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University, Series D, 14, 107-129.

x	y	方程 Equation	参数 Parameter		r	p
x	y	方程 Equation	a	b	r	p
密度 Density	株高 Plant height	L	35.72	0.06	0.85	<0.001
	叶片长 Leaf blade length	L	17.05	0.03	0.92	<0.001
	叶片数 Number of leaves	L	38.34	-0.37	-0.96	<0.001
	鳞茎直径 Bulb diameter	L	6.95	-0.01	-0.84	<0.001
	分蘖数 Number of tillers	L	11.67	-0.01	-0.24	0.40
	分蘖重 Weight per tiller	P	70.65	-0.98	-0.99	<0.001
	根生物量 Root biomass	P	22.14	-0.78	-0.98	<0.001
	鳞茎生物量 Bulb biomass	P	1 766.50	-1.14	-0.98	<0.001
	鞘生物量 Sheath biomass	P	12.50	-0.49	-0.92	<0.001
	叶片生物量 Leaf blade biomass	P	642.22	-1.03	-0.99	<0.001
	地下生物量 Below-ground biomass	P	1 855.60	-1.13	-0.97	<0.001
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	P	1 517.60	-0.98	-0.99	<0.001
	地上生物量 Above-ground biomass	P	608.47	-0.95	-0.99	<0.001

x	y	方程 Equation	参数 Parameter		r	p
x	y	方程 Equation	a	b	r	p
密度 Density	株高 Plant height	L	35.72	0.06	0.85	<0.001
	叶片长 Leaf blade length	L	17.05	0.03	0.92	<0.001
	叶片数 Number of leaves	L	38.34	-0.37	-0.96	<0.001
	鳞茎直径 Bulb diameter	L	6.95	-0.01	-0.84	<0.001
	分蘖数 Number of tillers	L	11.67	-0.01	-0.24	0.40
	分蘖重 Weight per tiller	P	70.65	-0.98	-0.99	<0.001
	根生物量 Root biomass	P	22.14	-0.78	-0.98	<0.001
	鳞茎生物量 Bulb biomass	P	1 766.50	-1.14	-0.98	<0.001
	鞘生物量 Sheath biomass	P	12.50	-0.49	-0.92	<0.001
	叶片生物量 Leaf blade biomass	P	642.22	-1.03	-0.99	<0.001
	地下生物量 Below-ground biomass	P	1 855.60	-1.13	-0.97	<0.001
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	P	1 517.60	-0.98	-0.99	<0.001
	地上生物量 Above-ground biomass	P	608.47	-0.95	-0.99	<0.001

因变量 Dependent variable	自变量 Independent variable	分析类型 Analysis type	F	p	R²
根生物量 Root biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	19.4	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	4.4	0.031	0.86
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	2.3	0.161	0.86
鳞茎生物量 Bulb biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	2 651.7	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	82.8	<0.001	1.000
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	45.4	<0.001	1.000
鞘生物量 Sheath biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	18.3	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	0.6	0.696	0.833
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	1.1	0.326	0.833
叶片生物量 Leaf blade biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	302.3	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	16.8	<0.001	0.989
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	1.1	0.326	0.989
个体生物量 Individual biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	3 241.3	<0.001	0.996
地上生物量 Above-ground biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	2 386.7	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	77.5	<0.001	0.998
	个体生物量 Individual biomass		0.1	0.725
地下生物量 Below-ground biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	1 795.1	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	77.4	<0.001	1.000
	个体生物量 Individual biomass		95.7	<0.001

因变量 Dependent variable	自变量 Independent variable	分析类型 Analysis type	F	p	R²
根生物量 Root biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	19.4	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	4.4	0.031	0.86
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	2.3	0.161	0.86
鳞茎生物量 Bulb biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	2 651.7	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	82.8	<0.001	1.000
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	45.4	<0.001	1.000
鞘生物量 Sheath biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	18.3	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	0.6	0.696	0.833
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	1.1	0.326	0.833
叶片生物量 Leaf blade biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	302.3	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	16.8	<0.001	0.989
	个体生物量 Individual biomass	协方差分析 ANCOVA	1.1	0.326	0.989
个体生物量 Individual biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	3 241.3	<0.001	0.996
地上生物量 Above-ground biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	2 386.7	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	77.5	<0.001	0.998
	个体生物量 Individual biomass		0.1	0.725
地下生物量 Below-ground biomass	密度 Density	方差分析 ANOVA	1 795.1	<0.001
	密度 Density	协方差分析 ANCOVA	77.4	<0.001	1.000
	个体生物量 Individual biomass		95.7	<0.001