欢迎访问林草资源研究

Forest and Grassland Resources Research >

2017 , Vol. 0 >Issue 6: 27 - 33

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2017.06.005

Integrated Management and Administration

Nutritional Quality Diagnosis and Management Strategy of Plant Community at Different Succession Stages in Northwest Guizhou

  • Shiyi QIN ,
  • Yanghua YU ,
  • Rongrong XING ,
  • Lu WANG
Expand
  • 1. School of Geography and Environmental Science,Guizhou Normal University,Guiyang 550025,China
    2. School of Karst Science/State Engineering Technoogy Institute for Karst Decertification Control,Guizhou Normal University,Guiyang 550001,China
    3. School of Resources and Environmental Engineering,Guizhou University,Guiyang 550025,China

Received date: 2017-08-10

  Revised date: 2017-10-16

  Online published: 2020-09-28

Fold

Abstract

The sustainable degradation of plant communities accelerates the process of rocky desertification in the karst area of northwest Guizhou.So it is of great significance to evaluate the plant communities’ nutrient quality for its sustainable management at this region.In this paper,The plant communities in five successional stages were used to study the 12 kinds of nutrient indicators of soil and litter to analyze the nutrient changing laws further.Besides,the integrated fertility index of each plant community was evaluated by principal component analysis to provide scientific basis for forest restoration and protection of karst degraded ecosystem.The results showed that:1) The contents of soil organic matter,total nitrogen and available nitrogen in plant communities were followed by Rhododendron simsii-Populus alba(RP)>Betula luminifera(B)>Quercus variabilis+Corylus heterophylla(QC)>Pinus yunnanensis+Populus alba-Betula luminifera(PPB)>Populus alba+Betula luminifera(PB).With the evolving of succession in the positive direction,the other soil indexes did not show any specific characteristics,and the nutrient of litter was increasing;2) The comprehensive index of nutrient quality was RP(1.510)>B(0.938)>QC(-0.737)>PB(-0.771)>PPB(-0.940).Based on the analysis of nutrient diversity and nutrient quality of plant community,the management measures such as litter protection and plant community structure improvement could be used to improve the nutrient quality of forest ecosystem.

Key words： plant community; succession; soil; litter; nutrient quality diagnosis; management

Cite this article

Shiyi QIN , Yanghua YU , Rongrong XING , Lu WANG . Nutritional Quality Diagnosis and Management Strategy of Plant Community at Different Succession Stages in Northwest Guizhou[J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2017 , 0(6) : 27 -33 . DOI: 10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2017.06.005

References

[1] 丁访军, 王兵, 钟洪明, 等. 赤水河下游不同林地类型土壤物理特性及其水源涵养功能[J]. 水土保持学报, 2009,23(3):179-231.
[2] Binkley D, Fisher R F. Ecology and management of forest soils[M].4th ed. New York:John Wiley and Songs, 2013.
[3] 刘永贤, 熊柳梅, 韦彩会, 等. 广西典型土壤上不同林分的土壤肥力分析与综合评价[J]. 生态学报, 2014,34(18):5229-5233.
[4] Crabtree B, Bayfield N. Developing sustainability indicators for mountain ecosystems:a study of the Cairngorms,Scotland[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 1998,52:1-14.
[5] 左巍, 贺康宁, 田赟, 等. 青海高寒区不同林分类型凋落物养分状况及化学计量特征[J]. 生态学杂志, 2016,35(9):2271-2278.
[6] 唐健, 覃祚玉, 王会利, 等. 广西杉木主产区连栽杉木林地土壤肥力综合评价[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2016,36(1):30-35.
[7] 朱丽琴, 黄荣珍, 段洪浪, 等. 红壤侵蚀地不同人工恢复林对土壤总有机碳和活性有机碳的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2017,37(1):249-257.
[8] 郭颖, 聂朝俊, 向仰州, 等. 不同核桃农林复合经营模式对土壤肥力的影响[J]. 土壤通报, 2016,47(2):391-397.
[9] 王钰莹, 孙娇, 刘政鸿, 等. 陕南秦巴山区厚朴群落土壤肥力评价[J]. 生态学报, 2016,36(16):5133-5141.
[10] 池永宽. 石漠化治理中农草林草空间优化配置技术与示范[D]. 贵阳:贵州师范大学, 2015.
[11] 鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M].3版. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2008.
[12] 林海明, 张文霖. 主成分分析与因子分析的异同和SPSS软件[J]. 统计研究, 2005(3):65-68.
[13] Jin Z Z, Lei J Q, Xu X W, et al. Evaluation of soil fertility of the shelter-forest land along the Tarim Desert Highway[J]. China Science Bulletin, 2008,53(S2):125-136.
[14] 张子龙, 王文全, 缪作清, 等. 主成分分析在三七连作土壤质量综合评价中的应用[J]. 生态学杂志, 2013,32(6):1636-1644.
[15] 韩兴国, 黄建辉, 娄治平. 关键种概念在生物多样性保护中的意义与存在的问题[J]. 植物学通报, 1995(S2):168-184.
[16] 张伟, 王克林, 刘淑娟, 等. 喀斯特峰丛洼地植被演替过程中土壤养分的积累及影响因素[J]. 应用生态学报, 2013,24(7):1801-1808.
[17] 宋永昌, 陈小勇. 中国东部常绿阔叶林生态系统退化机制与生态恢复[M].1版. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007.
[18] 宋新章, 江洪, 余树全, 等. 中亚热带森林群落不同演替阶段优势种凋落物分解试验[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009,20(3):537-542.
[19] 陆晓辉, 丁贵杰, 陆德辉. 人工调控措施下马尾松凋落叶化学质量变化及与分解速率的关系[J]. 生态学报, 2017,37(7):2325-2333.
[20] 赵其国, 王明珠, 何园球. 我国热带亚热带森林凋落物及其对土壤的影响[J]. 土壤, 1991(1):8-15.
[21] 张庆费, 宋永昌, 吴化前, 等. 浙江天童常绿阔叶林演替过程凋落物数量及分解动态[J]. 植物生态学报, 1999,23(3):250-255.
[22] 张璐, 文石林, 蔡泽江, 等. 湘南红壤丘陵区不同植被类型下土壤肥力特征[J]. 生态学报, 2014,34(14):3996-4005.
[23] 刘兴诏, 周国逸, 张德强, 等. 南亚热带森林不同演替阶段植物与土壤中N、P的化学计量特征[J]. 植物生态学报, 2010,34(1):64-71.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉