[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]水曲柳和落叶松不同根序之间细根直径的变异研究
收稿日期: 2004-09-15
录用日期: 2005-01-14
网络出版日期: 2005-09-30
基金资助
国家自然科学基金重点项目(30130160)
VARIATIONS OF FINE ROOT DIAMETER WITH ROOT ORDER IN MANCHURIAN ASH AND DAHURIAN LARCH PLANTATIONS
Received date: 2004-09-15
Accepted date: 2005-01-14
Online published: 2005-09-30
细根直径大小和根序高低对细根寿命和周转估计具有重要的影响,研究不同根序之间的直径变异对认识细根直径与根序的关系具有重要意义。该文根据Pregitzer等(2002)提供的方法,研究了位于东北林业大学帽儿山实验林场尖砬沟森林培育实验站17年生水曲柳(Fraxinus mandshurica)和落叶松(Larix gmelinii)人工林细根1~5级根序的平均直径的变化、直径的最小值和最大值范围、直径的变异系数。结果表明,水曲柳和落叶松细根直径<2 mm时,包含5个根序,随着根序由小到大的增加,细根直径也在增大。各根序平均直径之间,存在较大的差异。在同一根序内,细根直径范围很大,水曲柳和落叶松一级根最小直径均<0.20 mm,最大直径分别<0.50 mm(水曲柳)和<0.70 mm(落叶松)左右。2~3级根序直径最小值在0.20~0.30 mm之间,最大值≤1.0 mm。5级根直径最小值<1.0 mm,最大值超过2.0 mm。随着根序等级增加,直径变异系数增大。一级根序的直径平均变异系数<10%,2~3级根序直径平均变异系数在10%~15%左右,4~5级根序直径的平均变异系数在20%~30%之间。因此,在细根寿命与周转研究过程中,必须同时考虑直径和根序对细根的寿命估计的影响。
王向荣, 王政权, 韩有志, 谷加存, 郭大立, 梅莉 . 水曲柳和落叶松不同根序之间细根直径的变异研究[J]. 植物生态学报, 2005 , 29(6) : 871 -877 . DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2005.0123
Fine root life-span and turnover play an important role in carbon allocation and nutrient cycling in forest ecosystems because of high levels of fine root production and consequent mortality and decomposition. Fine roots typically are defined as having the following characteristics: less than 1 or 2 mm in diameter; short life-span; and greater efficiency in accessing belowground resources than large diameter roots. However, when categorizing roots by diameter size, the position of an individual root on the complex lateral branching pattern has often been ignored, and our knowledge about relationships between branching order and root function is limited. More recently, studies on root order have found that first-order fine roots at the distal end of a root system, which has the primary function of nutrient uptake rather than storage and transport, are thinner in root diameter and have higher tissue nitrogen (N) concentrations, higher maintenance respiration rates, and lower total nonstructural carbohydrate (TNC) concentrations. Thus, the smaller diameter roots have a shorter life-span in contrast to higher order roots (which are coarser roots with larger diameter). Although either approach (diameter or root order) is reasonable to use in fine root studies, estimates of fine root life-span or turnover are much more variable when using root diameters because of the large variation in diameter sizes. The objectives of this study were (1) to examine variations of fine root diameter and diameter range (minimum-maximum) as a function of branching order from first order to fifth order; and (2) to determine the relationship between fine root diameter and root branching order and soil resource availability using two tree species, Manchurian ash (Fraxinus mandshurica) and Dahurian larch (Larix gmelinii).
This research was conducted in Maoershan Forest Research Station (45°21'-45°25'N, 127°30'-127°34' E) owned by Northeast Forestry University in Harbin, Heilongjiang, China. Both ash and larch forests were planted in 1986. In each plantation, we established three 20 m×30 m plots at an elevation of 506 m. On May 15, July 15 and September 15 of 2003, three small intact segments of the fine root system were excavated carefully at a random location in each plot. Soil blocks (20 cm×20 cm×10 cm) were excavated from the sties at depth of 0~10 cm and 11~20 cm. All intact root segments were collected from each block. Once excavated, the intact segments were put into plastic bags with ice and stored at a temperature of 0~2 ℃. In the laboratory, each individual root was dissected by branching order beginning with the distal end of the root system (labeled as the first-order) increasing sequentially with each branch from the first to higher order roots. After the dissection, length, diameter and dry weight of a given order were determined.
The results showed that mean diameters of fine roots were significantly different (p<0.001) among orders with the diameter increasing regularly from first-order to fifth-order branches in both species. The mean diameter of first-order roots was 0.26 mm for ash and 0.34 mm for larch, and fifth-order roots had average diameters of 1.54 mm and 1.70 mm for ash and larch, respectively. If fine roots were defined as having a diameter less than 1-2 mm, five orders of ash and four orders of larch would be defined as being fine roots. If the diameter of fine roots was defined as being smaller than 0.5 mm, the first three orders of ash roots and the first two orders of larch roots would be included in the fine root population. Within the same root order, there was variation within fine root diameters and there were differences between the two species. The diameter ranges of the fine roots from first order to fifth order were 0.15-0.58, 0.18-0.70, 0.26-1.05, 0.36-1.43, and 0.71-2.96 mm for ash, and 0.17-0.76, 0.23-1.02, 0.26-1.10, 0.38-1.77, and 0.84-2.80 mm for larch. The mean coefficient of variation in first-order roots was less than 10%, second- and third-order was 10%-20%, fourth- and fifth-order was 20%-30%. Thus variation in root diameter also increased with increasing root order.
These results suggest that “fine roots”, which are traditionally defined as an arbitrary diameter class (i.e., <2 mm in diameter), may be too large a size class when compared to the finest roots. The finest roots have much shorter life-spans than larger diameter roots; however, the larger roots are still considered a component of the fine root system. Root order also is important to root life-span, because variation in diameters among roots within the same order is large and diameters varied from <0.2 mm, to 0.2-0.5 mm and to >0.5 mm even in the first-order roots. Differences in the life-span between root diameter and root order affect estimates of root turnover. Therefore, based on this study, both diameter and order should be considered when estimating fine root life-span and turnover.
Key words: Fine root diameter; Root order; Life-span; Turnover; Fraxinus mandshurica; Larix gmelinii
[1] | Burton AJ, Pregitzer KS, Hendrick RL (2000). Relationships between fine root dynamics and nitrogen availability in Michigan northern hardwood forests. Oecologia, 125,389-999. |
[2] | Eissenstat DM, Caldwell MM (1988). Seasonal timing of root growth in favorable microsites. Ecology, 69,870-873. |
[3] | Eissenstat DM, Wells CE, Yanai RD (2000). Research review: building roots in a changing environment: implications for root longevity. New Phytologist, 147,32-42. |
[4] | Eissenstat DM, Yanai RD (1997). The ecology of root lifespan. Advances in Ecological Research, 27,2-59. |
[5] | Eissenstat DM, Yanai RD (2002). Root life span, efficiency and turnover. In: Waisel Y, Eshel A, Kafkafi U eds. Plant Roots: the Hidden Half 3rd edn. Dekker, New York,221-238. |
[6] | Eissenstat EM (1992). Cost and benefit of constructing roots of small diameter. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 15,763-782. |
[7] | Fahey TJ, Hughes JW (1994). Fine root dynamics in northern hardwood forest ecosystem, Hubbard Brook experimental forest, NH. Journal of Ecology, 82,533-548. |
[8] | Fitter AH, Stickland TR (1992). Architectural analysis of plant root systems Ⅲ. Studies on plants under field conditions. New Phytologist, 121,243-248. |
[9] | Fitter AH (1996). Characteristics and functions of root systems. In: Waisel, Y, Eshel E, Kafkafi U eds. Plant Roots: the Hidden Half 2nd edn. Dekker, New York,1-20. |
[10] | Forde BG, Lorenzo H (2001). The nutritional control of root development. Plant and Soil, 232,51-68. |
[11] | Friend AL, Eide MR, Hinckley TA (1990). Nitrogen stress alters root proliferation in Douglas-fir seedlings. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 20,1524-1529. |
[12] | Gill RA, Jackson RB (2000). Global patterns of root turnover for terrestrial ecosystems. New Phytologist, 147,13-31. |
[13] | Gordon WS, Jackson RB (2000). Nutrient concentration in fine roots. Ecology, 81,275-280. |
[14] | Guo DL, Mitchell RJ, Hendricks JJ (2004). Fine root branch orders respond differentially to carbon source-sink manipulations in a longleaf pine forest. Oecologia, 140,450-457. |
[15] | Liu GS (刘光崧), Jiang NH (蒋能慧), Zhang LD (张连第), Liu ZL (刘兆礼) (1996). Soil Physical and Chemical Analysis Description of Soil Profile (土壤理化分析与剖面描述). Standard Press of China, Beijing,121-135. (in Chinese) |
[16] | Mei L (梅莉), Wang ZQ (王政权), Cheng YH (程云环), Guo DL (郭大立) (2004). A review: factors influencing fine root longevity in forest ecosystems. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica (植物生态学报), 28,704-710. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[17] | Pregitzer KS, Deforest JL, Burton AJ, Allen MF, Ruess RW, Hendrick RL (2002). Fine root architecture of nine north American trees. Ecological Monographs, 72,293-309. |
[18] | Pregitzer KS, Kubiske ME, Yu CK, Hendrick RL (1997). Relationships among root branch order, carbon, and nitrogen in four temperate species. Oecologia, 111,302-308. |
[19] | Wells CE, Eissenstat DM (2003). Beyond the roots of young seedlings: the influence of age and order on fine root physiology. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 21,324-334. |
[20] | Wells CE, Glenn DM, Eissenstat DM (2002). Changes in the risk of fine-root mortality with age: a case study in peach, Prunus persica (Rosaceae). American Journal of Botany, 89,79-87. |
[21] | Wu C (吴楚), Wang ZQ (王政权), Fan ZQ (范志强) (2004). Significance of senescence study on tree roots and its advances. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (应用生态学报), 15,1276-1280. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
/
〈 |
|
〉 |