科尔沁沙地封育恢复过程中植物群落特征变化及影响因素
王明明1,2,刘新平1,3,*(
),何玉惠4,张铜会1,3,魏静5,车力木格1,2,孙姗姗1,2
),何玉惠4,张铜会1,3,魏静5,车力木格1,2,孙姗姗1,2
How enclosure influences restored plant community changes of different initial types in Horqin Sandy Land
WANG Ming-Ming1,2,LIU Xin-Ping1,3,*(),HE Yu-Hui4,ZHANG Tong-Hui1,3,WEI Jing5,Chelmge 1,2,SUN Shan-Shan1,2
),HE Yu-Hui4,ZHANG Tong-Hui1,3,WEI Jing5,Chelmge 1,2,SUN Shan-Shan1,2
图3. 科尔沁沙地不同类型封育沙地植物群落功能群重要值年际变化。FD, 固定沙丘; MD, 流动沙丘; SG, 沙质草地。AF, 一年生杂类草; AG, 一年生禾草; PF, 多年生杂类草; PG, 多年生禾草; PH, 多年生草本植物, PL, 多年生豆科植物; SH, 灌木或半灌木。k, 回归线斜率。图中仅列出了达到显著性水平(p < 0.05)的检验参数值。
Fig. 3. Interannual variation of the important value of plant community functional groups in different enclosure types of sandy lands in Horqin Sandy Land. FD, fixed dune; MD, mobile dune; SG, sandy grassland. AF, annual forbs; AG; annual grasses; PF, perennial forbs; PG, perennial grasses; PH, perennial grass layer; PL, perennial legumes; SH, shrubs or subshrubs. k, regression line slope. Only the test parameter values that reach the level of significance (p < 0.05) are listed in this figure.
