混交度在不同相邻木选取方案下的差异性研究

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2021.04.010

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了厘清林分混交度在不同相邻木选择方案下的差异,寻找不同相邻木选取方案适用于哪种林分类型的混交度求解证据,为林分空间结构相关问题的研究提供参考。依据聚集分布林分、随机分布林分、均匀分布林分及稀疏分布林分类型,在南洞庭湖区的龙虎山设置了31块样地,分别使用基于“1+4”最邻近相邻木、基于半径R(R=3.05m)圆及基于Voronoi图的方法求解了各样地的单株相邻木数、单株林木混交度及林分平均混交度值,并探究了不同方案在不同林木类型之间的相关性。1)从总体林分平均混交度的角度上看,实验样地中除了稀疏分布中基于半径R圆的相邻木选择方案求得林分平均混交度的值偏低之外,其它几种林分的平均混交度值差别均不大。2)从单株的角度上看,不同林分类型中对象林木的混交度值在不同相邻木选择方案下存在差异。3)基于“1+4”最邻近相邻木与基于Voronoi图的相邻选取方案在不同林分类型中的相关性相对较高。不同的相邻木选择方案在不同的林分类型下虽各有优势,但从总体上看,使用基于“1+4”最邻近相邻及基于Voronoi图的相邻选取方案在求解不同类型林分混交度的稳定性和精确性相对较高。

关键词: 混交度, 林分空间结构, 基于“1+4”最邻近相邻木, Voronoi图, 基于半径R圆

Abstract:

In order to clarify the difference of stand mingling degree under different adjacent tree selection schemes,and find the evidence of which stand type is suitable for different adjacent tree selection schemes,this paper can provide reference for the research of stand spatial structure related issues.31 sample plots were set up in Longhu Mountain of South Dongting Lake area according to the types of aggregated distribution stand,random distribution stand,uniform distribution stand and sparse distribution stand.The methods based on "1+4" nearest adjacent trees,radius R(R=3.05 m) circle and Voronoi diagram were used to solve the number of adjacent trees per plot,the mingling degree of single tree and the average mingling degree of stand in various places,and explore the correlation between different schemes in different forest types.1) From the point of view of the overall stand average mingling degree,the average mingling degree values of the other stands in the experimental plots were not greatly different,except that the average mingling degree value of the adjacent trees based on the radius R(R=3.05 m) circle in the sparse distribution was low.2) From the point of view of individual tree,the mingling degree values of target trees in different stand types were different under different adjacent tree selection schemes.3) The correlation between "1+4" nearest adjacent tree and Voronoi diagram was relatively high in different stand types.Different selection schemes of adjacent trees had their own advantages under different stand types,but on the whole,the stability and accuracy of the adjacent selection schemes based on "1+4" nearest adjacent tree and Voronoi diagram were relatively high in solving mingling degrees of different stand types.

Key words: mingling degree, stand spatial structure, based on "1+4" nearest adjacent tree, Voronoi diagram, based on radius R circle

中图分类号:

S750

卿东升, 张江, 李建军, 彭进香, 刘帅. 混交度在不同相邻木选取方案下的差异性研究[J]. 林业资源管理, 2021, 0(4): 69-78.

QING Dongsheng, ZHANG Jiang, LI Jianjun, PENG Jinxiang, LIU Shuai. Research on the Difference of Mingling Degree under Different Selection Schemes of Adjacent Trees[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2021, 0(4): 69-78.

图/表 12

表1

图1

图2

图3

表2

图4

表3

图5

表4

图6

表5

表6

参考文献 34

[1]	Schlamadinger B, Marland G. The role of forest and bioenergy strategies in the global carbon cycle[J]. Biomass and Bioenergy, 1996, 10(5-6):275-300. doi: 10.1016/0961-9534(95)00113-1
[2]	Pugh T A M, Lindeskog M, Smith B, et al. Role of forest regrowth in global carbon sink dynamics[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2019, 116(10):4382-4387. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1810512116
[3]	Nisbet T R. The role of forest management in controlling diffuse pollution in UK forestry[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2001, 143(1-3):215-226. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(00)00519-3
[4]	Brunner I. Ectomycorrhizas:their role in forest ecosystems under the impact of acidifying pollutants[J]. Perspectives in plant ecology,Evolution and Systematics, 2001, 4(1):13-27. doi: 10.1078/1433-8319-00012
[5]	Roland J, Taylor P D. Insect parasitoid species respond to forest structure at different spatial scales[J]. Nature, 1997, 386(6626):710-713. doi: 10.1038/386710a0
[6]	胡艳波, 惠刚盈, 戚继忠, 等. 吉林蛟河天然红松阔叶林的空间结构分析[J]. 林业科学研究, 2003(5):523-530.
[7]	González-Moreno P, Quero J L, Poorter L, et al. Is spatial structure the key to promote plant diversity in Mediterranean forest plantations?[J]. Basic and Applied Ecology, 2011, 12(3):251-259. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2011.02.012
[8]	Tang M P. Advances in study of forest spatial structure[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2010, 46(1):117-122.
[9]	Zehr S C. Public representations of scientific uncertainty about global climate change[J]. Public understanding of science, 2000, 9(2):85. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/9/2/301
[10]	Von Gadow K, Hui G. Modelling forest development[M]. Springer Science & Business Media, 1999.
[11]	汤孟平, 周国模, 陈永刚, 等. 基于Voronoi图的天目山常绿阔叶林混交度[J]. 林业科学, 2009, 45(6):1-5.
[12]	胡艳波, 惠刚盈. 优化林分空间结构的森林经营方法探讨[J]. 林业科学研究, 2006(1):1-8.
[13]	汤孟平, 唐守正, 雷相东, 等. 林分择伐空间结构优化模型研究[J]. 林业科学, 2004(5):25-31.
[14]	汤孟平, 唐守正, 雷相东, 等. 两种混交度的比较分析[J]. 林业资源管理, 2004(4):25-27.
[15]	惠刚盈, 胡艳波. 混交林树种空间隔离程度表达方式的研究[J]. 林业科学研究, 2001(1):23-27.
[16]	Ricklefs R E, He F. Region effects influence local tree species diversity[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2016, 113(3):674-679. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1523683113
[17]	Lima J S, Ballesteros-Mejia L, Lima-Ribeiro M S, et al. Climatic changes can drive the loss of genetic diversity in a Neotropical savanna tree species[J]. Global change biology, 2017, 23(11):4639-4650. doi: 10.1111/gcb.2017.23.issue-11
[18]	Zhao Zhonghua, Hui Gangying, Hu Yanbo, et al. Comparison of tree species diversity calculated[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2012, 48(11):1-8.
[19]	Mori A S. Environmental controls on the causes and functional consequences of tree species diversity[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2018, 106(1):113-125. doi: 10.1111/jec.2018.106.issue-1
[20]	Zhao Chunyan, Li Jiping, Li Jianjun. Quantitative analysis of forest stand spatial structure based on Voronoi diagram & Delaunay triangulated network[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2010, 46(6):78-84.
[21]	Li Yuanfa, Ye Shaoming, Hui Gangying, et al. Spatial structure of timber harvested according to structure-based forest management[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2014, 322:106-116. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.02.042
[22]	Daniels R F. Simple competition indices and their correlation with annual loblolly pine tree growth[J]. Forest Science, 1976, 22(4):454-456.
[23]	Sannikova N S, Sannikov S N, Petrova I V, et al. Competition factors of edificator tree stand:Quantitative analysis and synjournal[J]. Russian Journal of Ecology, 2012, 43(6):426-432. doi: 10.1134/S1067413612060070
[24]	汤孟平, 陈永刚, 施拥军, 等. 基于Voronoi图的群落优势树种种内种间竞争[J]. 生态学报, 2007(11):4707-4716.
[25]	刘帅. 天然次生林林分结构分析及多目标智能优化研究[D]. 长沙:中南林业科技大学, 2017.
[26]	方景, 孙玉军, 郭孝玉, 等. 基于Voronoi图和Delaunay三角网的杉木游憩林空间结构[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(12):1-6.
[27]	赵春燕, 李际平, 李建军. 基于Voronoi图和Delaunay三角网的林分空间结构量化分析[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(6):78-84.
[28]	曹小玉, 李际平, 封尧, 等. 杉木生态公益林林分空间结构分析及评价[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(7):37-48.
[29]	李建军, 李际平, 刘素青, 等. 红树林空间结构均质性指数[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(6):6-14.
[30]	赵中华, 惠刚盈, 袁士云, 等. 小陇山锐齿栎天然林的树种多样性和结构特征[J]. 林业科学研究, 2008(5):605-610.
[31]	李际平, 封尧, 赵春燕, 等. 基于Voronoi图的杉木生态公益林空间结构量化分析[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2014, 36(4):1-7.
[32]	Li Jianjun, Zhu Kaiwen, Liu Shuai, et al. Introducing tree neighbouring relationship factors in forest pattern spatial analysis:weighted Delaunay triangulation method[J/OL]. Journal of Forestry Research, 2021:1-11. http://Introducing tree neighbouring relationship factors in forest pattern spatial analysis:weighted Delaunay triangulation method(cnki.net).
[33]	刘玉平, 杨志高, 李丹, 等. 基于加权三角网的林分空间结构综合指数模型[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2020, 40(9):79-87.
[34]	Dong Lingbo, Wei Hongyang, Liu Zhaogang. Optimizing Forest Spatial Structure with Neighborhood-Based Indices:Four Case Studies from Northeast China[J]. Forests, 2020, 11(4).

林分类型	编号	样地大小	株数/株	株密度/(株/hm²)
聚集分布	AM1	20m×20m	58	1450
	AM2		58	1450
	AM3		72	1800
	AM4		53	1325
	AM5		49	1225
	AM6		53	1325
	AM7		75	1875
	AM8		64	1600
	AM9		57	1425
随机分布	BM1	20m×20m	68	1700
	BM2		73	1825
	BM3		59	1475
	BM4		79	1975
	BM5		55	1375
	BM6		64	1600
	BM7		62	1550
	BM8		65	1625
	BM9	40m×40m	131	819
均匀分布	CM1	20m×20m	88	2200
	CM2	18m×25m	64	1422
	CM3	25m×25m	64	1024
	CM4	25m×25m	49	784
稀疏分布	DM1	20m×20m	33	825
	DM2	25m×25m	34	544
	DM3	50m×50m	72	288
	DM4	18m×20m	25	694
	DM5	100m×100m	429	429
	DM6	50m×50m	45	180
	DM7	20m×20m	36	900
	DM8	25m×25m	34	544
	DM9	60m×60m	46	128

方法名称	最少相邻木/株	最大相邻木/株	平均相邻木/株	最大混交度值	林分平均混交度值
基于“1+4”最邻近相邻木	4	4	4	1	0.56
基于半径R圆(R=3.05m)	0	20	7	1	0.58
基于Voronoi图	2	10	6	1	0.57

方法名称	最少相邻木/株	最大相邻木/株	平均相邻木/株	最大混交度值	林分平均混交度值
基于“1+4”最邻近相邻木	4	4	4	1	0.71
基于半径R圆(R=3.05)	0	13	4	1	0.68
基于Voronoi图	2	9	6	1	0.71

方法名称	最少相邻木/株	最大相邻木/株	平均相邻木/株	最大混交度值	林分平均混交度值
基于“1+4”最邻近相邻木	4	4	4	1	0.52
基于半径R圆(R=3.05m)	1	4	3	1	0.50
基于Voronoi图	1	6	5	1	0.53

方法名称	最少相邻木/株	最大相邻木/株	平均相邻木/株	最大混交度值	林分平均混交度值
基于“1+4”最邻近相邻木	4	4	4	1	0.62
基于半径R圆(R=3.05m)	0	5	1	1	0.44
基于Voronoi图	3	10	4	1	0.62