PDF Download

[1]PENG Shunlei,CHEN Changdong,LI Lei,et al.Comparison of Community Characteristics Between Quercus variables Forests Through Artificial Restoration and Natural restoration in Baotianman Nature Reserve[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2016,23(06):265-270.

Copy

Comparison of Community Characteristics Between Quercus variables Forests Through Artificial Restoration and Natural restoration in Baotianman Nature Reserve

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 23 Number of periods: 2016 06 Page number: 265-270 Column: Public date: 2016-12-28

Title:: Comparison of Community Characteristics Between Quercus variables Forests Through Artificial Restoration and Natural restoration in Baotianman Nature Reserve

Author(s):: PENG Shunlei¹, CHEN Changdong¹, LI Lei², LIAO Binghua¹, ZHAO Ganqing¹; 1. Key Laboratory of Ecological Restoration in the Hilly Area, Pingdingshan University, Pingdingshan, He’nan 467000, China;
2. College of Resources and Environmental Science, Pingdingshan University, Pingdingshan, He’nan 467000, China

Keywords:: Quercus variables; planted forest; secondary natural forest; importance value; species diversity; soil physical and chemical property

CLC:: Q948.1

DOI:: -

Abstract:: To understand the difference of community characteristics between the planted Quercus variables forest and secondary natural forest, and to provide reference for forest restoration, plot survey method was used to compare the community characteristics, such as species composition, important value, diversity indexes and soil properties of Quercus variables planted forest with secondary natural forest in the same age of 50 years in Baotianman Nature Reserve. The results showed as follows. (1) Quercus variables secondary natural forest consisted of 48 vascular species in 27 families and 40 genera, whereas the planted forest included 24 vascular species in 12 families and 18 genera, similarity index was very low with value of 0.36 between two communities. (2) important value in the arbor and shrub layers of Quercus variabilis secondary natural forest were lower than that of planted forest, which indicated that species richness in the arbor and shrub layers of Quercus variabilis secondary natural forest was greater than that of planted forest. (3) The Maglef index, Simpson index, Shannon-Weiner index and Pielou evenness index of arbor, shrub and herb of Quercus variables planted forest were lower than those of secondary natural forest. In the planted forest, the four diversity indexes were in the order:shrub layer > herb layer > arbor layer, while in secondary forest the indexes were in the order:shrub layer > arbor layer > herb layer. (4) Soil bulk density of Quercus variables natural secondary was lower than that of the planted forest, the TN, TP and SOM of Quercus variables natural secondary forest were greater than those of the planted forest. This study suggested that species composition, diversity index, community structure and soil properties of Quercus variables secondary natural forest were better than planted Quercus variables forest at the same restoration ages, and forest natural restoration was more superior than afforestation in Baotainman Nature Reserve.

References:: [1] Peterken G. Natural Woodland:Ecology and Conservation in Northern Temperate Regions[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1996.
[2] Hobbs R J, Arico S, Aronson J, et al. Novel ecosystems:theoretical and management aspects of the new ecological world order[J]. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2006,15(1):1-7.
[3] 张永利,鲁绍伟,杨峰伟.华北土石山区人工林与天然林结构与功能研究[J].灌溉排水学报,2007,26(6):63-68.
[4] 邢韶华,姬文元,郭宁,等.川西米亚罗林区云杉天然林与人工林的群落特征比较[J].山地学报,2010,28(2):218-225.
[5] 陈辉.33年生格氏栲人工林与天然林群落特征比较[J].福建林学院学报,2009,29(2):155-159.
[6] 赵娜,李玉灵,张劲松,等.冀北山地天然林与人工林植被物种多样性研究[J].西北林学院学报,2011,26(2):15-21.
[7] Duan R Y, Wang C, Wang X A, et al. Differences in plant species diversity between conifer(Pinus tabulaeformis)plantations and natural forests in middle of the Loess plateau[J]. Russian Journal of Ecology, 2009,40(7):501-509.
[8] 李裕元,郑纪勇,邵明安.子午岭天然林与人工林群落特征比较研究[J].西北植物学报,2005,25(12):2447-2456.
[9] 彭舜磊,王得祥.秦岭火地塘林区华山松人工林与天然次生林群落特征比较[J].西北植物学报,2009,29(11):2301-2311.
[10] 王健敏,刘娟,陈晓鸣,等.云南松天然林及人工林群落结构和物种多样性比较[J].林业科学研究,2010,23(4):515-522.
[11] 王周旭,于宁楼.北京九龙山人工林和天然次生林的土壤物理性状[J].林业资源管理,2007,8(4):89-92.
[12] 王小红,杨智杰,刘小飞,等.天然林转换成人工林对土壤团聚体稳定性及有机碳分布的影响[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(6):177-182.
[13] Luan J W, Xiang C H, Liu S R. Assessments of the impacts of Chinese fir plantation and natural regenerated forest on soil organic matter quality at Longmen mountain, Sichuan, China[J]. Geoderma, 2010,56(3/4):228-236.
[14] Michelsen A, Lisanework N, Friis I. Comparisons of understorey vegetation and soil fertility in plantations and adjacent natural forests in the Ethiopian Highlands[J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 1996,33(3):627-629.
[15] Ruiz-Jaen M C, Potvin C. Can we predict carbon stocks in tropical ecosystems from tree diversity?Comparing species and functional diversity in a plantation and a natural forest[J]. New Phytologist, 2011,189(4):978-987.
[16] 钱宝,刘凌,肖潇.土壤有机质测定方法对比分析[J].河海大学学报:自然科学版,2011,39(1):34-38.
[17] 张万儒.中国森林土壤定位研究方法[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1986.
[18] 王伯荪.植物群落学[M].北京:高,等教育出版社,1987.
[19] Liu Y, Lin K C, Vadeboncoeur M A, Chen M Z, et al. Understorey plant community and light availability in conifer plantations and natural hardwood forests in Taiwan[J]. Applied Vegetation Science, 2015,18(4):311-316.
[20] 郭剑芬,杨玉盛,陈光水,等.格氏栲天然林与人工林枯枝落叶层和粗木质残体有机化学组成研究[J].亚热带资源与环境学报,2008,3(3):40-45.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01