刈割、施肥和浇水对高寒草甸物种多样性、功能多样性与初级生产力关系的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.01136

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

通过在高寒矮嵩草(Kobresia humilis)草甸为期4年的刈割(留茬1 cm、3 cm及不刈割)、施肥(尿素7.5 g·m^-2·a^-1+磷酸二铵1.8 g·m^-2·a^-1、不施肥)和浇水(20.1 kg·m^-2·a^-1、不浇水)控制实验, 对该生态系统中功能多样性与物种多样性的变化及其与初级生产力关系进行了研究。结果表明: 刈割和施肥显著影响植物性状和生产力, 而浇水作用微弱。刈割对物种多样性无影响, 但对不同功能多样性指数的影响不同; 施肥降低了物种多样性和以所有性状(除植株高度外)量化的功能多样性; 浇水仅对物种丰富度有微弱影响。各功能多样性的平均值能更好地反映群落物种间的功能差异。功能多样性和物种多样性呈正相关或不相关, 且二者与初级生产力的关系可表现为正相关、负相关和不相关, 说明三者间的关系是性状依赖的, 并受生境资源状况和刈割扰动的影响。植物功能性状对群落初级生产力有更加直接的影响。在考虑生物多样性对生态系统功能的影响时, 应更加注重对植物功能属性变化的研究。

关键词: 生物多样性, 生态系统功能, 放牧, 生境资源, 植物性状

Abstract:

Aims Although much attention has been paid for the relationship between the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, little is known about the ecosystem consequences of changes. In addition, the question whether species diversity (SD) can co-vary with functional diversity (FD) is unanswered. We used the Rao index to quantify FD in order to explore this question through comparison of different components of biodiversity and their effects on primary productivity (PP).
Methods A field manipulation experiment was conducted in alpine meadow at the Haibei Research Station of the Chinese Academy of Sciences from 2007 to 2010. The experiment used a split-plot design with clipping treatment in the whole plot using three clipping levels (stubbled 1 cm, 3 cm and unclipped). Subplots were treated with fertilizer (urea 7.5 g·m^-2·a^-1+ ammonium phosphate 1.8 g·m^-2·a^-1and unfertilized) and watering (20.1 kg·m^-2·a^-1and unwatered). General linear model univariate ANOVA, correlation analysis and regression analysis were used to analyze the effects of the treatments on plant functional traits, biodiversity and PP, as well as the relationship among them.
Important findings The clipping and fertilizing treatments had important effects on plant traits and PP. There were no significant differences in SD among the clipping treatments, whereas the FD quantified by distinct traits showed different trends across clipping treatments. Fertilization increased PP but decreased both SD and FD(except FD_H). Watering affected weakly only the Richness index (R). Correlation analysis indicated that the FD_{6 traits}reflected functional divergence better than the FDcalculated by the single trait. Regression analysis showed that there was a significantly positive and no correlation between SD and FD, respectively, and the relationship among SD, FD and PP followed three patterns: significantly positive, negative or no correlation, i.e., the relation forms were not only trait-dependent but also were related to disturbance and soil resources. Plant functional traits have a more direct influence on PP.

Key words: Key words biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, grazing, habitat resources, plant trait

李晓刚, 朱志红, 周晓松, 袁芙蓉, 樊瑞俭, 许曼丽. 刈割、施肥和浇水对高寒草甸物种多样性、功能多样性与初级生产力关系的影响. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(11): 1136-1147. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.01136

LI Xiao-Gang, ZHU Zhi-Hong, ZHOU Xiao-Song, YUAN Fu-Rong, FAN Rui-Jian, XU Man-Li. Effects of clipping, fertilizing and watering on the relationship between species diversity, functional diversity and primary productivity in alpine meadow of China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2011, 35(11): 1136-1147. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.01136

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1258.2011.01136

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2011/V35/I11/1136

图/表 10

图1 副区处理样方设置图。F, 仅施肥; FW, 既施肥, 又浇水; NFNW, 不施肥, 不浇水; W, 仅浇水。

Fig. 1 Quadrat design layout of subplot. F, fertilized only; FW, fertilized and watered; NFNW, unfertilized and unwatered; W, watered only.

表1 刈割、施肥和浇水对高寒草甸物种多样性和初级生产力影响的方差分析

Table 1 ANOVA for the effects of clipping, fertilizing and watering on the species diversity and primary productivity in alpine meadow

变异来源 Source of variance		自由度 df (m, n)	J		D		R		PP
变异来源 Source of variance		自由度 df (m, n)	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p
主区 Whole plot	B C	2, 4 2, 4	3.824 1.040	0.118 0.433	0.704 0.623	0.547 0.581	1.998 1.357	0.250 0.355	0.342 18.100	0.729 0.010*
副区 Subplot	F W C × F C × W F × W C × F × W	1, 18 1, 18 2, 18 2, 18 1, 18 2, 18	5.134 1.427 1.900 0.085 2.543 2.075	0.036* 0.248 0.178 0.919 0.128 0.155	6.354 1.999 1.589 1.446 2.465 1.044	0.021* 0.174 0.231 0.262 0.134 0.373	22.392 3.910 2.303 1.377 1.742 0.090	0.000** 0.064† 0.129 0.278 0.203 0.914	62.006 0.080 6.765 0.237 1.073 2.041	0.000 0.781 0.006 0.792 0.314 0.159
总变异 Total variance 35

图2 刈割、施肥和浇水对物种多样性、功能多样性和初级生产力的影响(平均值±标准误差, n = 36)。F、H1、H3、NF、NH、NW和W分别表示施肥、重度刈割、中度刈割、不施肥、不刈割、不浇水和浇水处理。标准误差上方相同的大写(或小写)字母表示处理间差异不显著(p > 0.05)。 ns 、†、*分别表示交互作用的显著性p > 0.10、0.05 < p < 0.10、p < 0.05。

Fig. 2 Effects of clipping, fertilizing and watering on the species diversity, functional diversity and primary productivity (mean ± SE, n = 36). F, H1, H3, NF, NH, NW and W indicate fertilized, stubbled 1 cm, stubbled 3 cm, unfertilized, unclipped, unwatered and watered treatments, respectively. The same upper case (or lower case) letter above error bars indicates no difference (p > 0.05) among treatments. ns, † and * indicate significance of interaction effect p > 0.10, 0.05 < p < 0.10, p < 0.05, respectively.

表2 刈割、施肥和浇水对高寒草甸功能多样性影响的方差分析

Table 2 ANOVA for the effects of clipping, fertilizing and watering on the functional diversity in alpine meadow

变异来源 Source of variance		自由度 df (m, n)	FD_AGW		FD_H		FD_A		FD_LDW		FD_SLA		FD_SLW		FD _{6 traits}
变异来源 Source of variance		自由度 df (m, n)	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p
主区 Whole plot	B C	2, 4 2, 4	0.658 6.025	0.566 0.062†	1.221 2.214	0.386 0.225	0.210 1.656	0.819 0.299	2.887 11.353	0.167 0.022*	0.247 0.074	0.792 0.930	0.510 0.235	0.635 0.801	3.379 7.975	0.138 0.040*
副区 Subplot	F W C × F C × W F × W C × F × W	1, 18 1, 18 2, 18 2, 18 1, 18 2, 18	1.475 0.298 1.089 0.126 3.756 0.140	0.240 0.592 0.358 0.883 0.068† 0.870	0.721 0.196 0.023 0.187 1.243 0.018	0.407 0.664 0.978 0.831 0.280 0.982	0.488 1.708 0.754 1.102 1.010 1.641	0.494 0.208 0.485 0.354 0.328 0.221	1.440 0.351 0.620 1.851 0.056 0.898	0.246 0.561 0.549 0.186 0.816 0.425	8.598 1.543 0.561 0.558 0.016 1.707	0.009** 0.230 0.580 0.582 0.902 0.209	8.729 0.004 0.609 0.263 0.014 1.763	0.008** 0.949 0.555 0.771 0.907 0.200	4.335 0.027 0.322 0.126 0.308 0.914	0.052† 0.871 0.729 0.882 0.586 0.419
总变异 Total variance 35

表3 群落植物功能多样性指数的相关系数

Table 3 Correlation coefficient of plant functional diversity index in community

植物性状 Plant trait	FD_AGW	FD_H	FD_A	FD_LDW	FD_SLA	FD_SLW
FD_H FD_A FD_LDW FD_SLA FD_SLW FD_{6 traits}	0.305 0.242 0.470 0.106 0.169 0.726	-0.074 0.173 -0.051 0.002 0.416**	0.644 0.023 -0.077 0.464	-0.015 -0.116 0.610**	0.855 0.575	0.560**

表4 刈割、施肥和浇水对高寒草甸植物性状值影响的方差分析

Table 4 ANOVA for the effects of clipping, fertilizing and watering on the value of plant traits in alpine meadow

变异来源 Source of variance		自由度 df (m, n)	AGW (g)		H (cm)		A (cm²)		LDW (g)		SLA (m²·kg^-1)		SLW (kg·m^-2)
变异来源 Source of variance		自由度 df (m, n)	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p	F-test	p
主区 Whole plot	B C	2, 4 2, 4	4.167 328.859	0.105 0.000**	0.368 125.486	0.713 0.000**	0.822 70.935	0.502 0.001**	0.021 115.615	0.980 0.000**	2.689 13.014	0.182 0.018*	1.885 4.109	0.265 0.107
副区 Subplot	F W C × F C × W F × W C × F × W	1, 18 1, 18 2, 18 2, 18 1, 18 2, 18	0.038 0.262 0.489 0.130 0.135 0.128	0.849 0.615 0.621 0.879 0.717 0.881	28.371 0.029 2.009 0.133 1.497 0.816	0.000** 0.868 0.163 0.877 0.237 0.458	43.711 0.888 2.037 0.199 0.668 0.358	0.000** 0.358 0.159 0.821 0.424 0.704	10.968 0.797 2.405 0.894 0.291 0.181	0.004** 0.384 0.158 0.427 0.596 0.836	10.473 3.719 2.730 0.778 1.409 2.297	0.005** 0.070† 0.092† 0.474 0.251 0.129	5.571 2.018 0.606 1.122 0.381 0.575	0.030* 0.173 0.556 0.347 0.545 0.573
总变异 Total variance 35

图3 刈割和施肥对植物性状值的影响(平均值±标准误差, n = 36)。F、H1、H3、NF、NH分别表示施肥、重度刈割、中度刈割、不施肥、不刈割。标准误差上方相同的大写(或小写)字母表示处理间差异不显著(p > 0.05)。ns和*分别表示交互作用的显著性p > 0.10和p < 0.05。

Fig. 3 Effects of clipping and fertilizing on the value of plant traits (mean ± SE, n = 36). F, H1, H3, NF, NH indicate fertilized, stubbled 1 cm, stubbled 3 cm, unfertilized, unclipped treatments, respectively. The same upper case (or lower case) letter above error bars indicates no difference (p > 0.05) among treatments. ns and * indicate significance of interaction effect p > 0.10 and p < 0.05, respectively.

表5 群落植物性状值的相关系数

Table 5 Correlation coefficients of the value of plant traits in community

植物性状 Plant trait	AGW (g)	H (cm)	A (cm²)	LDW (g)	SLA (m²·kg^-1)
H (cm) A (cm²) LDW (g) SLA (m²·kg^-1) SLW (kg·m^-2)	0.931 0.921 0.959** 0.234 0.189	0.953 0.968 0.333* 0.073	0.977** 0.405* 0.057	0.262 0.192	-0.485**

图4 刈割和施肥处理整合梯度中物种多样性、功能多样性和初级生产力(对数尺度)的关系。

Fig. 4 Relationships between species diversity, functional diversity and primary productivity (logarithmic scale) in integral gradients of clipping and fertilizing treatments.

图5 刈割和施肥处理组合梯度中物种多样性、功能多样性和初级生产力(对数尺度)的关系。

Fig. 5 Relationships between species diversity, functional diversity and primary productivity (logarithmic scale) in different gradients of clipping and fertilizing treatments.

参考文献 29

[1]	de Bello F, Lepš J, Sebastià MT (2006). Variations in species and functional plant diversity along climatic and grazing gradients. Ecography, 29,801-810.
[2]	Díaz S, Cabido M (2001). Vive la différence: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 16,646-655.
[3]	Díaz S, Symstad AJ, Chapin FS III, Wardle DA, Huenneke LF (2003). Functional diversity revealed by removal experiments. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 18,140-146.
[4]	Garnier E, Cortez J, Billès G, Navas ML, Roumet C, Debussche M, Laurent G, Blanchard A, Aubry D, Bellmann A, Neill C, Toussaint JP (2004). Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession. Ecology, 85,2630-2637.
[5]	He JS (贺金生), Fang JY (方精云), Ma KP (马克平), Huang JH (黄建辉) (2003). Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity: Why is there a discrepancy in the relationship between experimental and natural ecosystems? Acta Phytoecologica Sinica(植物生态学报), 27,835-843. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	Hillebrand H, Matthiessen B (2009). Biodiversity in a complex world: consolidation and progress in functional biodiversity research. Ecology Letters, 12,1405-1419. DOI URL PMID
[7]	Hooper DU (1998). The role of complementarity and competition in ecosystem responses to variation in plant diversity. Ecology, 79,704-719.
[8]	Lawton JH (1994). What do species do in ecosystems? Oikos, 71,367-374.
[9]	Lawton JH, Brow VK (1993). Redundancy in ecosystems. In: Schulze ED, Money HA eds. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function. Ecological Studies Analysis and Synthesis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 99,255-297.
[10]	Lepš J, de Bello F, Lavorel S, Berman S (2006). Quantifying and interpreting functional diversity of natural communities: practical considerations matter. Preslia, 78,481-501.
[11]	Li WQ (李伟绮) (2010). Effects of Available Soil Space on Functional Traits-Productivity Relationship (生境空间对植物功能多样性与生产力关系的影响). Master Degree Dissertation, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou.7-28. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	Li YN (李英年), Wang QX (王勤学), Gu S (古松), Fu YL (伏玉玲), Du MY (杜明远), Zhao L (赵亮), Zhao XQ (赵新全), Yu GR (于贵瑞) (2004). Integrated monitoring of alpine vegetation types and its primary production. Acta Geographica Sinica (地理学报), 59,40-48. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	Loreau M (2004). Does functional redundancy exist? Oikos, 104,606-611.
[14]	Ma KP (马克平), Liu YM (刘玉明) (1994). Measurement of biotic community diversity I: α diversity (Part 2). Chinese Biodiversity(生物多样性), 2,231-239. (in Chinese)
[15]	Mayfield MM, Boni MF, Daily GC, Ackerly D (2005). Species and functional diversity of native and human- dominated plant communities. Ecology, 86,2365-2372.
[16]	Naeem S (2002). Disentangling the impacts of diversity on ecosystem functioning in combinatorial experiments. Ecology, 83,2925-2935.
[17]	Petchey OL, Evans KL, Fishburn IS, Gaston KJ (2007). Low functional diversity and no redundancy in British avian assemblages. Journal of Animal Ecology, 76,977-985.
[18]	Petchey OL, Gaston KJ (2002). Functional diversity (FD), species richness and community composition. Ecology Letters, 5,402-411.
[19]	Petchey OL, Gaston KJ (2006). Functional diversity: back to basics and looking forward. Ecology Letters, 9,741-758. URL PMID
[20]	Ren JZ (任继周) (1998). Research Approaches on Grass Science (草业科学研究方法). China Agriculture Press, Beijing.15-16. (in Chinese)
[21]	Sasaki T, Okubo S, Okayasu T, Jamsran U, Ohkuro T, Takeuchi K (2009). Two-phase functional redundancy in plant communities along a grazing gradient in Mongolian rangelands. Ecology, 90,2598-2608. URL PMID
[22]	Tilman D (1982). Resource Competition and Community Structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
[23]	Weiher E, Clarke GDP, Keddy PA (1998). Community assembly rules, morphological dispersion, and the coexistence of plant species. Oikos, 81,309-322.
[24]	Zang YM (臧岳铭), Zhu ZH (朱志红), Li YN (李英年), Wang WJ (王文娟), Xi B (席博) (2009). Effects of species diversity and functional diversity on primary productivity of alpine meadow. Chinese Journal of Ecology (生态学杂志), 28,999-1005. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[25]	Zhang QG (张全国), Zhang DY (张大勇) (2003). Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: recent advances and trends. Biodiversity Science (生物多样性), 11,351-363. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	Zhao LQ (赵陆强), Wang G (王刚) (2009). Relationship between species diversity and productivity of alpine meadows in Gannan Prefecture. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences) (兰州大学学报(自然科学版)), 45,82-86, 93. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[27]	Zhao XQ (赵新全) (2009). Global Change and Ecological System in Alpine Meadow (高寒草甸生态系统与全球变化). Science Press, Beijing. 78. (in Chinese)
[28]	Zhou XS (周晓松), Zhu ZH (朱志红), Li YN (李英年), Yuan FR (袁芙蓉), Fan RJ (樊瑞俭) (2011). Research on the community compensatory mechanism under clipping, fertilizing and watering treatment in alpine meadow. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences) (兰州大学学报(自然科学版)), 47,50-57. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[29]	Zhu ZH (朱志红), Wang G (王刚) (1996). An approach to analyzing nature of community structure: with examples of alpine meadow and alpine brushland. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica(植物生态学报), 20,184-192. (in Chinese with English abstract)