Relationships between species diversity or community structure and productivity of woody-plants in a broad-leaved Korean pine forest in Jiaohe, Jilin, China

doi:10.17521/cjpe.2016.0321

Abstract

Abstract:

Aims Based on the dataset of a broad-leaved Korean pine forest in Jiaohe, Jilin Province, this research compared the influences of species diversity and community structure on productivity. We aim to explain the relationship between diversity and productivity for better forest management.
Methods We used the data of 10 973 woody-plants in a 11.76 hm² large sample plot and analyzed the correlations between 7 different indices of species diversity or community structure and productivity. Structural equation model was used to compare the effects of species diversity and community structure on productivity.
Important findings The results showed that: (1) Both species diversity and community structure had significant effects on productivity when they were considered separately in linear regression analysis, i.e. species evenness was negatively correlated with productivity, the Shannon index of community structure was positively correlated with productivity and the Gini index was negatively correlated with productivity. (2) In the structural equation model, when simultaneously considered, community structure had stronger influence on productivity than species diversity. Our research suggests that, the effects of community structure on productivity are greater than species diversity and it is important to increase community structure complexity to improve forest productivity during forest management.

http://jtp.cnki.net/bilingual/detail/html/ZWSB201711003

Key words: community structure, species diversity, forest productivity, large sample plot, structural equation model

Ling-Zhao TAN, Chun-Yu FAN, Xiu-Hua FAN. Relationships between species diversity or community structure and productivity of woody-plants in a broad-leaved Korean pine forest in Jiaohe, Jilin, China[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2017, 41(11): 1149-1156.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/10.17521/cjpe.2016.0321

https://www.plant-ecology.com/EN/Y2017/V41/I11/1149

Figures/Tables 4

References 37

[1]	Bertness MD, Leonard GH (1997). The role of positive interacttions in communities: Lessons from intertidal habitats.Ecology, 78, 1976-1989.
[2]	Bourdier T, Cordonnier T, Kunstler G, Piedallu C, Lagarrigues G, Courbaud B (2016). Tree size inequality reduces forest productivity: An analysis combining inventory data for ten European species and a light competition model.PLOS ONE, 11, e0151852. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151852. DOI URL PMID
[3]	Box GEP, Cox DR (1964). An analysis of transformations.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 26, 211-252.
[4]	Chesson P (2000). Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity.Annual Review of Ecology & Systematics, 31, 343-366. DOI URL
[5]	Christopherm G, Christophs V, Brady H, Peters C (2010). Wood net primary production resilience in an unmanaged forest transitioning from early to middle succession.Forest Ecology & Management, 260, 36-41. DOI URL
[6]	Clark JS (2010). Individuals and the variation needed for high species diversity in forest trees.Science, 327, 1129-1132. DOI URL PMID
[7]	Coomes DA, Kunstler G, Canham CD, Wright E (2009). A greater range of shade-tolerance niches in nutrient-rich forests: An explanation for positive richness-productivity relationships?Journal of Ecology, 97, 705-717. DOI URL
[8]	D?nescu A, Albrecht AT, Bauhus J (2016). Structural diversity promotes productivity of mixed, uneven-aged forests in southwestern Germany.Oecologia, 182, 319-333. DOI URL PMID
[9]	Fahey RT, Fotis AT, Woods KD (2015). Quantifying canopy complexity and effects on productivity and resilience in late-successional hemlock-hardwood forests.Ecological Applications, 25, 834-847. DOI URL PMID
[10]	Forrester DI, Bauhus J (2016). A review of processes behind diversity—Productivity relationships in forests.Current Forestry Reports, 2, 1-17. DOI URL
[11]	Fox J (2008). Applied Regression Analysis and Generalized Linear Models. 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, USA.
[12]	Fox J, Monette G (1992). Generalized collinearity diagnostics.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87, 178-183.
[13]	Hardiman BS, Bohrer G, Gough CM, Vogel CS, Curtisi PS (2011). The role of canopy structural complexity in wood net primary production of a maturing northern deciduous forest.Ecology, 92, 1818-1827. DOI URL PMID
[14]	Hardiman BS, Gough CM, Halperin A, Hofmeister KL, Nave LE, Bohrer G, Curtis P (2013). Maintaining high rates of carbon storage in old forests: A mechanism linking canopy structure to forest function.Forest Ecology & Management, 298, 111-119. DOI URL
[15]	He JS, Fang JY, Ma KP, Huang JH (2003). Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity: Why is there a discrepancy in the relationship between experimental and natural ecosystems?Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 27, 835-843. (in Chinese with English abstract)[贺金生, 方精云, 马克平, 黄建辉 (2003). 生物多样性与生态系统生产力: 为什么野外观测和受控实验结果不一致? 植物生态学报, 27, 835-843.] DOI URL
[16]	Hooper DU, Chapin FS, Ewel JJ, Hector A, Inchausti P, Lavorel S, Lawton JH, Lodge DM, Loreau M, Naeem S, Schmid B, Set?l? H, Symstad AJ, Vandermeer J, Wardle DA (2005). Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: A consensus of current knowledge.Ecological Monographs, 75, 3-35. DOI URL
[17]	Kuehne C, Weiskittel AR, Fraver S, Puettmann KJ (2015). Effects of thinning-induced changes in structural heterogeneity on growth, ingrowth, and mortality in secondary coastal Douglas-fir forests.Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 45, 1448-1461.
[18]	Lei X, Wang W, Peng C (2008). Relationships between stand growth and structural diversity in spruce-dominated forests in New Brunswick, Canada.Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 39, 1835-1847. DOI URL
[19]	Liang J, Buongiorno J, Monserud RA, Kruger EL, Zhou Me (2007). Effects of diversity of tree species and size on forest basal area growth, recruitment, and mortality.Forest Ecology & Management, 243, 116-127. DOI URL
[20]	Long JN, Shaw JD (2010). The influence of compositional and structural diversity on forest productivity.Forestry, 289, 121-128. DOI URL
[21]	Loreau M, Hector A (2001). Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments.Nature, 412, 72-76.
[22]	Maire GL, Nouvellon Y, Christina M, Ponzoni FJ, Gon?alves JLM, Bouillet JP, Laclau JP (2013). Tree and stand light use efficiencies over a full rotation of single- and mixed- species Eucalyptus grandis, and Acacia mangium plantations. Forest Ecology & Management, 288, 31-42.
[23]	Morin X, Fahse L, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Bugmann H (2011). Tree species richness promotes productivity in temperate forests through strong complementarity between species.Ecology Letters, 14, 1211-1219. DOI URL PMID
[24]	Naeem S, Bunker DE, Hector A, Loreau M, Perrings C (2009). Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Wellbeing. Oxford University Press, New York.
[25]	Parker GG, Davis MM, Chapotin SM (2002). Canopy light transmittance in Douglas-fir-western hemlock stands.Tree Physiology, 22, 147-157. DOI URL PMID
[26]	Parker GG, Harmon ME, Lefsky MA, Chen J (2004). Three- dimensional structure of an old-growth Pseudotsuga- Tsuga, canopy and its implications for radiation balance, microclimate, and gas exchange.Ecosystems, 7, 440-453. DOI URL
[27]	Pretzsch H (2014). Canopy space filling and tree crown morphology in mixed-species stands compared with monocultures.Forest Ecology & Management, 327, 251-264. DOI URL
[28]	Reich PB, Tilman D, Isbell F, Mueller K, Hobbie SE, Flynn DFB, Eisenhauer N (2012). Impacts of biodiversity loss escalate through time as redundancy fades.Science, 336, 589-592. DOI URL PMID
[29]	Ruijven JV, Berendse F (2005). Diversity-productivity relationships: Initial effects, long-term patterns, and underlying mechanisms.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 695-700. DOI URL PMID
[30]	Ryan MG, Stape JL, Binkley D, Fonseca S, Loos RA, Takahashi EN, Silva CR, Silva SR, Hakamada RE, Ferreira JM, Lima AMN, Gava JL, Leite FP, Andrade HB, Alves JM, Silva GGC (2010). Factors controlling Eucalyptus productivity: How water availability and stand structure alter production and carbon allocation.Forest Ecology & Management, 259, 1695-1703. DOI URL
[31]	Tilman D, Lehman CL, Thomson KT (1997). Plant diversity and ecosystem productivity: Theoretical considerations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 94, 1857-1861.
[32]	Tilman D, Reich PB, Knops JM (2006). Biodiversity and ecosystem stability in a decade-long grassland experiment.Nature, 441, 629-632. DOI URL PMID
[33]	Tilman D, Wedin D, Knops J (1996). Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems.Nature, 379, 718-720. DOI URL
[34]	Valladares F, Niinemets U (2008). Shade tolerance, a key plant feature of complex nature and consequences.Annual Review of Ecology Evolution & Systematics, 39, 237-257. DOI URL
[35]	Yachi S, Loreau M (2007). Does complementary resource use enhance ecosystem functioning? A model of light competition in plant communities. Ecology Letters, 10, 54-62. DOI URL PMID
[36]	Zhang Y, Chen HYH (2015). Individual size inequality links forest diversity and above-ground biomass.Journal of Ecology, 103, 1245-1252. DOI URL
[37]	Zhang Y, Chen HYH, Reich PB (2012). Forest productivity increases with evenness, species richness and trait variation: A global meta-analysis.Journal of Ecology, 100, 742-749. DOI URL

变量 Variables	范围 Range	平均值 Mean	标准偏差 Standard deviation
胸高断面积年均增长量 Annual growth of basal area (cm²·a^-1)	76.53-543.60	272.22	83.62
林冠开阔度 Canopy openness	1.12-3.99	1.87	0.38
土壤全氮 Soil total nitrogen (g·kg^-1)	0.65-1.60	0.95	0.16
土壤全磷 Soil total phosphorus (g·kg^-1)	0.33-1.09	0.79	0.12
土壤全钾 Soil total potassium (g·kg^-1)	20.40-20.90	20.70	0.01
土壤速效氮 Soil available nitrogen (mg·kg^-1)	29.93-68.81	53.65	8.48
土壤速效磷 Soil available phosphorus (mg·kg^-1)	0.09-22.01	11.94	5.59
土壤速效钾 Soil available potassium (mg·kg^-1)	206.80-236.20	226.30	5.74
土壤有机碳 Soil organic carbon (%)	5.51-13.33	9.64	1.60
土壤pH值 Soil pH value	4.38-5.32	4.88	0.25
胸高断面积密度 Basal area density (cm²·m^-2)	9.73-46.31	27.97	5.96

变量 Variables	范围 Range	平均值 Mean	标准偏差 Standard deviation
胸高断面积年均增长量 Annual growth of basal area (cm²·a^-1)	76.53-543.60	272.22	83.62
林冠开阔度 Canopy openness	1.12-3.99	1.87	0.38
土壤全氮 Soil total nitrogen (g·kg^-1)	0.65-1.60	0.95	0.16
土壤全磷 Soil total phosphorus (g·kg^-1)	0.33-1.09	0.79	0.12
土壤全钾 Soil total potassium (g·kg^-1)	20.40-20.90	20.70	0.01
土壤速效氮 Soil available nitrogen (mg·kg^-1)	29.93-68.81	53.65	8.48
土壤速效磷 Soil available phosphorus (mg·kg^-1)	0.09-22.01	11.94	5.59
土壤速效钾 Soil available potassium (mg·kg^-1)	206.80-236.20	226.30	5.74
土壤有机碳 Soil organic carbon (%)	5.51-13.33	9.64	1.60
土壤pH值 Soil pH value	4.38-5.32	4.88	0.25
胸高断面积密度 Basal area density (cm²·m^-2)	9.73-46.31	27.97	5.96

	指数 Index	计算公式 Formula	平均值 Mean value	范围 Range
物种多样性 Species diversity	物种丰富度 Species richness	$S=Ns$	8.34	4-15
	物种香农指数 Species Shannon index	$Hs=-\sum\limits_{i=1}^{Ns}{\frac{{{n}_{i}}}{N}\ \times \ ln\left( \frac{{{n}_{i}}}{N} \right)}$	1.81	1.18-2.55
	物种均匀度 Species evenness	$Es={Hs}/{ln\left( Ns \right)}\;$	0.87	0.65-0.97
群落结构变异 Variation of community structure	胸径香农指数 DBH Shannon index	$Hd=-\sum\limits_{j=1}^{Nd}{\frac{{{n}_{j}}}{N}\ \times \ ln\left( \frac{{{n}_{j}}}{N} \right)}$	2.77	2.24-3.11
	胸径均匀度 DBH evenness	$Es={Hd}/{\text{l}n\left( Nd \right)}\;$	0.94	0.70-1.11
	胸径变异系数 Coefficient of DBH variation	$VarD\,=\,100%\,\ \times \ \frac{\sqrt{\frac{1}{N}{{\left( DB{{H}_{k}}-\mu \right)}^{2}}}}{\mu }$	77.36	44.14-112.70
	胸径基尼系数 DBH Gini index	$GiniD=\frac{\sum\limits_{k=2}^{N}{\left( 2\times \ k-N-\ 1 \right)\,\ \times \ b{{a}_{k}}}}{\sum\limits_{k=2}^{N}{\left( N-\ 1 \right)\,\ \times \ b{{a}_{k}}}}$	0.39	0.24-0.51

	指数 Index	计算公式 Formula	平均值 Mean value	范围 Range
物种多样性 Species diversity	物种丰富度 Species richness	$S=Ns$	8.34	4-15
	物种香农指数 Species Shannon index	$Hs=-\sum\limits_{i=1}^{Ns}{\frac{{{n}_{i}}}{N}\ \times \ ln\left( \frac{{{n}_{i}}}{N} \right)}$	1.81	1.18-2.55
	物种均匀度 Species evenness	$Es={Hs}/{ln\left( Ns \right)}\;$	0.87	0.65-0.97
群落结构变异 Variation of community structure	胸径香农指数 DBH Shannon index	$Hd=-\sum\limits_{j=1}^{Nd}{\frac{{{n}_{j}}}{N}\ \times \ ln\left( \frac{{{n}_{j}}}{N} \right)}$	2.77	2.24-3.11
	胸径均匀度 DBH evenness	$Es={Hd}/{\text{l}n\left( Nd \right)}\;$	0.94	0.70-1.11
	胸径变异系数 Coefficient of DBH variation	$VarD\,=\,100%\,\ \times \ \frac{\sqrt{\frac{1}{N}{{\left( DB{{H}_{k}}-\mu \right)}^{2}}}}{\mu }$	77.36	44.14-112.70
	胸径基尼系数 DBH Gini index	$GiniD=\frac{\sum\limits_{k=2}^{N}{\left( 2\times \ k-N-\ 1 \right)\,\ \times \ b{{a}_{k}}}}{\sum\limits_{k=2}^{N}{\left( N-\ 1 \right)\,\ \times \ b{{a}_{k}}}}$	0.39	0.24-0.51

解释变量 Explanatory variables	估计值 Estimate
	物种多样性模型 Species diversity model	群落结构变异模型 Community structural variation model
	物种多样性模型 Species diversity model	A	B
物种均匀度 Species evenness	-0.211^*	-	-
胸径香农指数 DBH Shannon index	-	0.400^***	-
胸径基尼系数 DBH Gini index	-	-	-0.337^***
胸高断面积密度 Basal area density	0.914^***	0.756^***	0.964^***
林冠开阔度 Canopy openness	0.289^***	0.275^**	0.298^***
有机碳 Soil organic carbon	0.517^***	0.221^*	0.293^***
速效钾 Available potassium	0.991^***	0.193^*	0.241^**
速效氮 Available nitrogen	0.413^***	-	-
pH	-0.520^***	-	-
速效磷 Available phosphorus	-	0.413^***	-
全磷 Total phosphorus	-	-0.244^*	-
调整决定系数 Adjusted R²	34.67%	35.95%	31.93%
AIC值 AIC value	1 080.385	1 074.56	1 090.52