檵木生物量分配特征
收稿日期: 2016-07-04
录用日期: 2016-12-16
网络出版日期: 2017-01-23
基金资助
中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(XDA-05050302)
Biomass allocation patterns of Loropetalum chinense
Received date: 2016-07-04
Accepted date: 2016-12-16
Online published: 2017-01-23
生物量是生态系统最基本的数量特征, 其在各器官间的分配反映了植物适应环境的生长策略, 是物种进化、生物多样性保护和生态系统碳循环研究的核心问题。檵木(Loropetalum chinense)灌丛是中国亚热带灌丛生态系统最具优势的一种灌丛类型, 该研究以该灌丛建群种檵木为研究对象, 采用整株收获法在个体水平上研究了器官间的异速生长、生物量在各器官间的分配以及与个体大小、灌丛更新起源和生境因子之间的关系。研究发现: 檵木地上-地下间相对生长关系符合等速生长规律, 但随径级增大其等速生长关系可能发生变化; 较小径级檵木叶-茎、叶-根间为等速生长, 随径级增大转换为异速生长。不同灌丛起源间, 檵木叶-茎、叶-根间相对生长存在显著差异。器官间相对生长的尺度系数与生境因子无显著相关关系, 灌木层盖度和坡度通过影响檵木生长初期器官间的相对生长影响其生物量在器官间的分配。檵木平均叶质比为0.11, 茎质比为0.55, 根质比为0.34, 根冠比为0.65。随径级的增大, 茎质比(0.50-0.64)逐渐增大, 叶质比(0.12-0.08)、根质比(0.38-0.28)和根冠比(0.91-0.43)逐渐减小。在次生灌丛中, 檵木叶质比为0.12, 根质比为0.33; 在原生灌丛中, 檵木叶质比为0.07, 根质比为0.36。生物量向地上部分的分配与灌木层盖度正相关, 叶质比与坡度负相关, 根质比与年平均气温正相关。研究结果表明: 随个体增大, 檵木器官间的相对生长关系由等速生长转换为异速生长, 生物量向地上部分的分配增加, 地上生物量更多地分配到茎干中; 干扰通过影响器官间的相对生长影响生物量在各器官间的分配, 干扰导致生物量向叶的分配增加, 向根的分配减少; 光照减少促进生物量向地上部分的分配, 坡度增加导致生物量向叶的分配减少, 年平均气温升高促进生物量向根系的分配, 年降水量的变化对生物量分配无显著影响。檵木生物量分配策略在一定程度上支持了最优分配假说。
王杨, 徐文婷, 熊高明, 李家湘, 赵常明, 卢志军, 李跃林, 谢宗强 . 檵木生物量分配特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017 , 41(1) : 105 -114 . DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0217
Aims Biomass is the most fundamental quantitative character of an ecosystem. Biomass allocation patterns reflect the strategies of plants to adapt various habitat conditions and play a vital role in evolution, biodiversity conservation and global carbon cycle. Loropetalum chinense shrub is one of the most dominant shrub types in subtropical China. The objectives of this study were to quantify the allometric relationships and the biomass allocation pattern among organs, and to investigate the effects of body size, shrub regeneration origin and site factors on allometry and biomass allocation.
Methods Individual samples of L. chinense were harvested from shrublands in subtropical China and were further divided into leaves, stems and roots. The allometric relationships between different organs were modeled with standard major axis (SMA) regression and the biomass allocation to different organs was quantified. The effects of body size, shrub regeneration origin and other habitat factors on allometry and allocation were examined using Pearson’s correlation analysis and multiple linear regressions.
Important findings The isometric scaling relationships between shoot and root changed to allometric relationships with increasing basal diameter. The scaling relationships between leaf and stem and between leaf and root were isometric for smaller diameter classes, while for larger diameter classes they were allometric. These relationships were significantly different among shrub regeneration origin types. The scaling relationships between different organs were not affected by habitat factors; while the coverage of shrub layer and slope affected biomass allocation due to their influences on the allometric relationships between different organs at the initial stage of growth. The mean dry mass ratios of leaf, stem, root and the mean root to shoot ratio were 0.11, 0.55, 0.34 and 0.65, respectively. With the increase of basal diameter class, stem mass ratio (0.50-0.64) increased, while leaf mass ratio (0.12-0.08) and root mass ratio (0.38-0.28) decreased, and consequently root to shoot ratio (0.91-0.43) also decreased. In secondary shrublands, the leaf mass ratio was 0.12 and the root mass ratio was 0.33, while these values were 0.07 and 0.36 respectively in natural shrublands. The ratio of aboveground allocation was significantly correlated to shrub layer coverage (r = 0.44, p < 0.05). Leaf mass ratio was significantly correlated to slope (r = -0.36, p < 0.05) and root mass ratio was significantly correlated to mean annual temperature (r = 0.34, p < 0.05). Results showed that with the increase of body size, the scaling relationships between different organs of L. chinense changed from isometric to allometric, and more biomass was allocated to aboveground part, and concretely, to stems. Human disturbance affected biomass allocation by its influences on the allometric relationships between different organs, and by increasing biomass allocation to leaves and decreasing allocation to roots. Reduced light resource promoted the biomass allocation to aboveground part, and higher slope resulted in decreased biomass allocation to leaves, while higher mean annual temperature promoted biomass allocation to roots. The variation in annual precipitation had no significant influences on biomass allocation. The biomass allocation strategies of L. chinense partially support the optimal partitioning theory.
Key words: allometry; shrublands; subtropicalm zone; habitat factor; root/shoot ratio
[1] | Bessler H, Temperton VM, Roscher C, Buchmann N, Schmid B, Schulze ED, Weisser WW, Engels C (2009). Aboveground overyielding in grassland mixtures is associated with reduced biomass partitioning to belowground organs.Ecology, 90, 1520-1530. |
[2] | Cheng DL, Niklas KJ (2007). Above- and below-ground biomass relationships across 1534 forested communities.Annals of Botany, 99, 95-102. |
[3] | Coomes DA (2006). Challenges to the generality of WBE theory.Trendsin Ecology & Evolution, 21, 593-596. |
[4] | Duncanson LI, Dubayah RO, Enquist BJ (2015). Assessing the general patterns of forest structure: Quantifying tree and forest allometric scaling relationships in the United States.Global Ecology and Biogeography, 24, 1465-1475. |
[5] | Enquist BJ, Kerkhoff AJ, Stark SC, Swenson NG, McCarthy MC, Price CA (2007). A general integrative model for scaling plant growth, carbon flux, and functional trait spectra.Nature, 449, 218-222. |
[6] | Enquist BJ, Niklas KJ (2001). Invariant scaling relations across tree-dominated communities.Nature, 410, 655-660. |
[7] | Enquist BJ, Niklas KJ (2002). Global allocation rules for patterns of biomass partitioning in seed plants.Science, 295, 1517-1520. |
[8] | Fan FL, Zhang FS, Qu Z, Lu YH (2008). Plant carbon partitioning below ground in the presence of different neighboring species.Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 40, 2266-2272. |
[9] | Fan JW, Wang K, Harris W, Zhong HP, Hu ZM, Han B, Zhang WY, Wang JB (2009). Allocation of vegetation biomass across a climate-related gradient in the grasslands of Inner Mongolia.Journal of Arid Environments, 73, 521-528. |
[10] | Hu HF, Wang ZH, Liu GH, Fu BJ (2006). Vegetation carbon storage of major shrublands in China.Journal of Plant Ecology (Chinese Version), 30, 539-544. (in Chinese with English abstract)[胡会峰, 王志恒, 刘国华, 傅博杰 (2006). 中国主要灌丛植被碳储量. 植物生态学报, 30, 539-544.] |
[11] | Luken JO (1988). Population structure and biomass allocation of the naturalized shrub Lonicera maackii(Rupr.) Maxim. in forest and open habitats. The American Midland Naturalist, 119, 258-267. |
[12] | McCarthy MC, Enquist BJ (2007). Consistency between an allometric approach and optimal partitioning theory in global patterns of plant biomass allocation.Functional Ecology, 21, 713-720. |
[13] | McConnaughay KDM, Coleman JS (1999). Biomass allocation in plants: Ontogeny or optimality? A test along three resource gradients.Ecology, 80, 2581-2593. |
[14] | Nie XQ, Yang YH, Yang LC, Zhou GY (2016). Above- and belowground biomass allocation in shrub biomes across the northeast Tibetan Plateau.PLOS ONE, 11, e0154251. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154251. |
[15] | Niklas KJ (2004). Plant allometry: Is there a grand unifying theory?Biological Reviews, 79, 871-889. |
[16] | Perkins SR, Owens MK (2003). Growth and biomass allocation of shrub and grass seedlings in response to predicted changes in precipitation seasonality.Plant Ecology, 168, 107-120. |
[17] | Poorter H, Niklas KJ, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Poot P, Mommer L (2012). Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: Meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environmental control.New Phytologist, 193, 30-50. |
[18] | Robinson D (2004). Scaling the depths: Below-ground allocation in plants, forests and biomes.Functional Ecology, 18, 290-295. |
[19] | Ryser P, Eek L (2000). Consequences of phenotypic plasticity vs. interspecific differences in leaf and root traits for acquisition of aboveground and belowground resources.American Journal of Botany, 87, 402-411. |
[20] | Sack L, Maranon T, Grubb PJ (2002). Global allocation rules for patterns of biomass partitioning.Science, 296, 1923a. |
[21] | Shipley B, Meziane D (2002). The balanced-growth hypothesis and the allometry of leaf and root biomass allocation.Functional Ecology, 16, 326-331. |
[22] | Wang XP, Fang JY, Zhu B (2008). Forest biomass and root- shoot allocation in northeast China.Forest Ecology and Management, 255, 4007-4020. |
[23] | Warton DI, Wright IJ, Falster DS, Westoby M (2006). Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry.Biological Reviews, 81, 259-291. |
[24] | Weiner J (2004). Allocation, plasticity and allometry in plants.Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 6, 207-215. |
[25] | Xie JY, Chen LZ (1997). The studies of some aspects of biodiversity on scrubs in the warm temperate zone in China.Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 21, 197-207. (in Chinese with English abstract)[谢晋阳, 陈灵芝 (1997). 中国暖温带若干灌丛群落多样性问题的研究. 植物生态学报, 21, 197-207.] |
[26] | Yang HT, Li XR, Liu LC, Jia RL, Wang ZJ, Li XJ, Li G (2013). Biomass allocation patterns of four shrubs in desert grassland.Journal of Desert Research, 33, 1340-1348. (in Chinese with English abstract)[杨昊天, 李新荣, 刘立超, 贾荣亮, 王增加, 李小军, 李刚 (2013). 荒漠草地4种灌木生物量分配特征. 中国沙漠, 33, 1340-1348.] |
[27] | Yang YH, Luo YQ (2011). Isometric biomass partitioning pattern in forest ecosystems: Evidence from temporal observations during stand development.Journal of Ecology, 99, 431-437. |
[28] | Zhang H, Wang KL, Xu XL, Song TQ, Xu YF, Zeng FP (2015). Biogeographical patterns of biomass allocation in leaves, stems, and roots in China’s forests.Scientific Reports, 5, 15997. doi: 10.1038/srep15997. |
[29] | Zhou HK, Zhou L, Zhao XQ, Sheng ZX, Li YN, Zhou XM, Yan ZL, Liu W (2002). Study of formation pattern of below-ground biomass in Potentilla fruticosa shrub. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 11, 59-65. (in Chinese with English abstract)[周华坤, 周立, 赵新全, 沈振西, 李英年, 周兴民, 严作良, 刘伟 (2002). 金露梅灌丛地下生物量形成规律的研究. 草业学报, 11, 59-65.] |
/
〈 |
|
〉 |