临安不同森林类型混交度的对比研究
|
摘要
根据2004年临安区森林资源监测的样地数据,采用基于Voronoi图的混交度,并结合方差分析,对临安区不同森林类型的混交度进行比较。结果表明:在单木水平上,人工林和天然林混交度等级从低到高依次为针叶林、阔叶林、针阔混交林。天然针叶林中,由于存在杉木和马尾松同种聚集现象,杉木和马尾松在单木零度和低度混交的比例较大为71.9%;人工针叶林中,杉木在单木零度混交占91.14%;人工阔叶林中,存在山核桃纯林,山核桃在单木零度混交中占的比例高达95.56%。在林分水平上,各森林类型不存在极强混交现象。天然林和人工林中,针阔混交林比针叶林和阔叶林有更高的林分混交度,而且混交度值域范围比较集中,说明针阔混交林树种相互隔离程度较高。人工阔叶林中,林分的零度混交全部出现在山核桃纯林;人工针叶林中,林分的低度混交则以杉木纯林为主;人工针阔混交林的林分中度混交比例最大为80%,主要是黄山松、马尾松、杉木和其他软阔叶树种等组成的混交林。
According to the plot data of forest resources monitoring in Linan District in 2004, the mixed degree based on Voronoi diagram was combined with variance analysis to compare the mixed degree of different forest types in Lin'an District. Results show that at the individual level, the mixed grades of plantation and natural forest are from coniferous forest, broad-leaved forest and coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest. In the natural coniferous forest, due to the same species aggregation of Cunninghamia lanceolata and Pinus massoniana, the proportion of Cunninghamia lanceolata and Pinus massoniana mixed at zero and low in single wood is 71.9%. In the artificial coniferous forest, Cunninghamia lanceolata mixed in the single wood accounts for 91.14%; in the artificial broad-leaved forest, there existed pure Carya cathayensis forest, and the proportion of Carya cathayensis in the single-wood zero-degree mixed is as high as 95.56%. At the forest level, there is no strong mixed phenomenon in each forest type. Among the natural forests and plantations, coniferous and broad-leaved forests have higher forest standpoints than coniferous and broad-leaved forests, and the range of mixed degree ranges is relatively concentrated, indicating that the mixed species of coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forests are highly isolated. In the artificial broad-leaved forest, the zero-degree mixed forest stands all in the pure Carya cathayensis forest; in the artificial coniferous forest, the low-degree mixed forest stands are mainly pure Cunninghamia lanceolata; the mixed mixed proportion of artificial coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest is 80%. It is mainly a mixed forest composed of Pinus taiwanensis, Pinus massoniana, Cunninghamia lanceolata and other soft broadleaved tree species.
According to the plot data of forest resources monitoring in Linan District in 2004, the mixed degree based on Voronoi diagram was combined with variance analysis to compare the mixed degree of different forest types in Lin'an District. Results show that at the individual level, the mixed grades of plantation and natural forest are from coniferous forest, broad-leaved forest and coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest. In the natural coniferous forest, due to the same species aggregation of Cunninghamia lanceolata and Pinus massoniana, the proportion of Cunninghamia lanceolata and Pinus massoniana mixed at zero and low in single wood is 71.9%. In the artificial coniferous forest, Cunninghamia lanceolata mixed in the single wood accounts for 91.14%; in the artificial broad-leaved forest, there existed pure Carya cathayensis forest, and the proportion of Carya cathayensis in the single-wood zero-degree mixed is as high as 95.56%. At the forest level, there is no strong mixed phenomenon in each forest type. Among the natural forests and plantations, coniferous and broad-leaved forests have higher forest standpoints than coniferous and broad-leaved forests, and the range of mixed degree ranges is relatively concentrated, indicating that the mixed species of coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forests are highly isolated. In the artificial broad-leaved forest, the zero-degree mixed forest stands all in the pure Carya cathayensis forest; in the artificial coniferous forest, the low-degree mixed forest stands are mainly pure Cunninghamia lanceolata; the mixed mixed proportion of artificial coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest is 80%. It is mainly a mixed forest composed of Pinus taiwanensis, Pinus massoniana, Cunninghamia lanceolata and other soft broadleaved tree species.
引文
[1]Pielou E C.Segregation and symmetry in two-species populations as studied by nearest-neighbour relationships[J].Journal of Ecology,1961,49(2):255-269.
[2]宁杨翠,郑小贤,梁雨,等.北京八达岭油松人工林结构分析[J].林业科技开发,2008,22(1):47-49.
[3]郝月兰.基于林分空间结构优化的采伐木确定方法研究[D].北京:中国林业科学研究院,2012.
[4]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,2001,14(1):23-27.
[5]贾秀红,周志翔,刘刚,等.亮叶水青冈次生林种间分离特征的研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2012,34(3):8-14.
[6]Mason W L,Connolly T,Pommerening A,et al.Spatial structure of semi-natural and plantation stands of Scots Pine(Pinus sylvestris L.)in northern Scotland[J].Forestry,2007,80(5):567-586.
[7]岳永杰,余新晓,李钢铁,等.北京松山自然保护区蒙古栎林的空间结构特征[J].应用生态学报,2009,20(8):1811-1816.
[8]汪平,贾黎明,魏松坡,等.基于Voronoi图的侧柏游憩林空间结构分析[J].北京林业大学学报,2013,35(2):39-44.
[9]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.
[10]李建,彭鹏,何怀江,等.采伐对吉林蛟河针阔混交林空间结构的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,2017,39(9):48-57.
[11]孙宇晗,王士博,王润涵,等.利用Voronoi图评价油松人工林空间结构[J].浙江农林大学学报,2018,35(5):877-884.
[12]方国景,汤孟平.天目山常绿阔叶林优势种群胸径的空间连续性分析[J].浙江农林大学学报,2014,31(5):663-667.
[13]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.
[14]彭辉,周红敏,王宏翔,等.BCI 50 hm2森林大样地2010年活立木空间结构分析[J].林业科学研究,2017,30(6):895-901.
[15]彭辉.基于BCI 50公顷大样地的森林空间结构特征研究[D].北京:中国林业科学研究院,2017.
[16]陈婷婷,徐辉,杨青,等.武夷山常绿阔叶林空间结构参数分布特征[J].生态学报,2018,38(5):1817-1825.
[17]Bettinger P,Tang M P.Tree-level harvest optimization for structure-based forest management based on the species mingling index[J].Forests,2015,6(12):1121-1144.
[18]刘德洲,王立海,侯红亚,等.凉山自然保护区平缓地带红松针阔混交林空间结构分析[J].林业科技,2013,38(3):30-33.
[19]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.
[20]王敬,韦新良,徐建,等.天目山针阔混交林林木空间分布格局特征[J].浙江农林大学学报,2014,31(5):668-675.
[21]汤孟平,娄明华,陈永刚,等.不同混交度指数的比较分析[J].林业科学,2012,48(8):46-53.
[22]赵伟明,汪雪飞,万刚,等.浅谈临安市资源植物的保护与开发利用[J].华东森林经理,2003,17(2):40-42,55.
[23]袁卫,庞皓,贾俊平,等.统计学[M].4版.北京:高等教育出版社,2014.
[24]张璐璐,贾桂民,叶建丰,等.浙江临安山核桃干腐病发生发展规律[J].浙江农林大学学报,2013,30(1):148-152.
[25]颜勇,刘强,赵淦,等.红壤丘陵区坚果林不同水土保持措施的效益:以浙江省临安山核桃林为例[J].水土保持通报,2016,36(6):200-203.
[2]宁杨翠,郑小贤,梁雨,等.北京八达岭油松人工林结构分析[J].林业科技开发,2008,22(1):47-49.
[3]郝月兰.基于林分空间结构优化的采伐木确定方法研究[D].北京:中国林业科学研究院,2012.
[4]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,2001,14(1):23-27.
[5]贾秀红,周志翔,刘刚,等.亮叶水青冈次生林种间分离特征的研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2012,34(3):8-14.
[6]Mason W L,Connolly T,Pommerening A,et al.Spatial structure of semi-natural and plantation stands of Scots Pine(Pinus sylvestris L.)in northern Scotland[J].Forestry,2007,80(5):567-586.
[7]岳永杰,余新晓,李钢铁,等.北京松山自然保护区蒙古栎林的空间结构特征[J].应用生态学报,2009,20(8):1811-1816.
[8]汪平,贾黎明,魏松坡,等.基于Voronoi图的侧柏游憩林空间结构分析[J].北京林业大学学报,2013,35(2):39-44.
[9]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.
[10]李建,彭鹏,何怀江,等.采伐对吉林蛟河针阔混交林空间结构的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,2017,39(9):48-57.
[11]孙宇晗,王士博,王润涵,等.利用Voronoi图评价油松人工林空间结构[J].浙江农林大学学报,2018,35(5):877-884.
[12]方国景,汤孟平.天目山常绿阔叶林优势种群胸径的空间连续性分析[J].浙江农林大学学报,2014,31(5):663-667.
[13]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.
[14]彭辉,周红敏,王宏翔,等.BCI 50 hm2森林大样地2010年活立木空间结构分析[J].林业科学研究,2017,30(6):895-901.
[15]彭辉.基于BCI 50公顷大样地的森林空间结构特征研究[D].北京:中国林业科学研究院,2017.
[16]陈婷婷,徐辉,杨青,等.武夷山常绿阔叶林空间结构参数分布特征[J].生态学报,2018,38(5):1817-1825.
[17]Bettinger P,Tang M P.Tree-level harvest optimization for structure-based forest management based on the species mingling index[J].Forests,2015,6(12):1121-1144.
[18]刘德洲,王立海,侯红亚,等.凉山自然保护区平缓地带红松针阔混交林空间结构分析[J].林业科技,2013,38(3):30-33.
[19]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.
[20]王敬,韦新良,徐建,等.天目山针阔混交林林木空间分布格局特征[J].浙江农林大学学报,2014,31(5):668-675.
[21]汤孟平,娄明华,陈永刚,等.不同混交度指数的比较分析[J].林业科学,2012,48(8):46-53.
[22]赵伟明,汪雪飞,万刚,等.浅谈临安市资源植物的保护与开发利用[J].华东森林经理,2003,17(2):40-42,55.
[23]袁卫,庞皓,贾俊平,等.统计学[M].4版.北京:高等教育出版社,2014.
[24]张璐璐,贾桂民,叶建丰,等.浙江临安山核桃干腐病发生发展规律[J].浙江农林大学学报,2013,30(1):148-152.
[25]颜勇,刘强,赵淦,等.红壤丘陵区坚果林不同水土保持措施的效益:以浙江省临安山核桃林为例[J].水土保持通报,2016,36(6):200-203.