红松天然更新幼苗、幼树年龄校正及生长阶段划分

doi:10.13292/j.1000-4890.202202.016

生态学杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (3): 417-426.doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202202.016

红松天然更新幼苗、幼树年龄校正及生长阶段划分

葛晓雯^1,2,朱教君^1,2*,卢德亮^1,2_,朱春雨^1,2,3,高平珍^1,2,3,杨晓燕⁴

（¹辽宁清原森林生态系统国家野外科学观测研究站，沈阳 110016；²中国科学院森林生态与管理重点实验室（沈阳应用生态研究所），沈阳 110016； ³中国科学院大学，北京 100049； ⁴沈阳农业大学林学院，沈阳 110866）

出版日期:2022-03-10 发布日期:2022-03-07

Age calibration and growth stage division for naturally regenerated seedlings and saplings of Pinus koraiensis Sieb. et Zucc.

GE Xiao-wen^1,2, ZHU Jiao-jun^1,2*, LU De-liang^1,2, ZHU Chun-yu^1,2,3, GAO Ping-zhen^1,2,3, YANG Xiao-yan⁴

(¹Qingyuan Forest CERN, National Observation and Research Station, Liaoning Province, Shenyang 110016, China; ²CAS Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Management, Institute of Applied Ecology, Shenyang 110016, China;^3University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China; ⁴College of Forestry, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang 110866, China).

Online:2022-03-10 Published:2022-03-07

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 准确获知更新个体年龄是了解更新个体状态、量化更新年龄结构、划分更新阶段的前提，对制定合理森林经营方案有重要参考价值。然而，常用于确定更新个体年龄的两种方法存在很大不足——查年轮数（N_r）法破坏性强；查轮枝数（N_w）法对很多树种(如红松Pinus koraiensis）准确性差。同时，针对更新生长阶段划分国内外缺少统一标准。为准确、高效、无损地获知红松天然更新个体年龄并合理划分生长阶段，本研究于小兴安岭长白山地区的原始阔叶红松林内，调查红松天然更新个体（共计6831株）的基径、株高，利用传统方法（查芽鳞痕或轮生枝）估计更新年龄；同时，对153株红松更新个体取样基部木段，并查数底面N_r，构建N_w和N_r之间校正模型（6种）。基于红松生物学特性，结合文献分析（53篇相关论文）划分红松更新生长阶段。结果表明，直接以N_w作为更新个体年龄低估真实年龄；通过回归模型“N_r=1.199N_w+2.962”对N_w进行校正，可获得近似真实年龄。根据年龄、株高、胸径等指标，将红松更新层划分为4个阶段：小苗（年龄≤3 a）、大苗（年龄>3 a且株高<30 cm），小幼树（30 cm≤株高<150 cm）和大幼树（株高≥150 cm且胸径<5 cm）。

关键词: 阔叶红松林, 更新层, 小苗, 大苗, 小幼树, 大幼树

Abstract: Accurately obtaining the age of regenerated individuals is the precondition for understanding regeneration status, quantifying regeneration age structure, and dividing regeneration stages, which is important for foresters to formulate reasonable forest management plan. However, two commonly used methods for age estimation of regenerated individuals have some deficiencies. Counting the number of rings (N_r) is destructive, while counting the number of whorls (N_w) lacks accuracy for many tree species including Korean pine (Pinus koraiensis). Further, the methods for growth stage division have not been uniformed. To accurately, efficiently, and non-destructively estimate the age of natural regeneration individuals of Korean pine, and divide growth stages of its regeneration layer reasonably, regeneration census including the root collar diameter and height of Korean pine (a total of 6831 individuals) was conducted in the primary mixed broadleaved-Korean pine forest in Lesser Khingan MountainsChangbai Mountains areas. Their ages were preliminarily estimated by traditional methods (counting the number of bud scars or whorls). Meanwhile, 153 regenerated individuals of Korean pine were destructively sampled by cutting base disk and counting N_r of the bottom section. Six calibration models between N_w and N_r were established. Method for growth stage division was proposed based on the biological characteristics of Korean pine and literature analysis (from 53 literatures). Results showed that directly using N_w as the age of regeneration individuals would underestimate age, while the calibrated N_w by the regression model (N_r=1.199N_w+2.962) was much closer to real age. According to the real age, height, and diameter at breast height (DBH) of regeneration individuals, the regeneration layer of Korean pine was divided into four stages, which were young seedlings (age ≤3 a), old seedlings (age >3 a and height <30 cm), small saplings (30 cm ≤ height <150 cm), and tall saplings (height≥150 cm and DBH <5 cm).

Key words: mixed broadleaved-Korean pine forest, regeneration layer, young seedling, old seedling, small sapling, tall sapling.

葛晓雯, 朱教君, 卢德亮, 朱春雨, 高平珍, 杨晓燕. 红松天然更新幼苗、幼树年龄校正及生长阶段划分[J]. 生态学杂志, 2022, 41(3): 417-426.

GE Xiao-wen, ZHU Jiao-jun, LU De-liang, ZHU Chun-yu, GAO Ping-zhen, YANG Xiao-yan. Age calibration and growth stage division for naturally regenerated seedlings and saplings of Pinus koraiensis Sieb. et Zucc.[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2022, 41(3): 417-426.

[1]	褚阔, 何海燕, 陈庆英, 蔡凤坤, 宋光, 叶吉. 长白山阔叶红松林树种间相互作用对树木生长与存活的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2022, 41(6): 1050-1055.
[2]	李格格, 刘启龙, 陈婷, 刘爽, 卢廷玉, 高梅香. 胜山阔叶红松林蚂蚁巢穴对其他地表节肢动物多样性的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2022, 41(2): 324-333.
[3]	乔志宏,侯宏宇,高梅香,卢廷玉,金光泽,吴东辉. 小兴安岭凉水阔叶红松林地表隐翅虫群落空间异质性 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(2): 500-512.
[4]	田圣贤,冯盼,杨山,刘贺永,叶吉,李慧,姜勇,张玉革. 东北阔叶红松林腐殖质层土壤阳离子交换性能及其主要影响因素 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2018, 37(9): 2549-2558.
[5]	曹琳琳1,2,3,苏宝玲1,周旺明2,3,于大炮2,3,吴健2,3,毕建华1,2,3,黄利亚4,代力民2,3*. 长白山区典型植被类型物种多样性空间分布的尺度效应 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(11): 3102-3108.
[6]	魏玉莲1*,李通1,2. 长白山阔叶红松林优势树种的木腐真菌群落结构特征 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(11): 3209-3215.
[7]	朱良军1,杨婧雯1,朱辰2,王晓春1**. 林隙干扰和升温对小兴安岭红松和臭冷杉径向生长的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(8): 2085-2095.
[8]	王晓洁,肖迪,张凯,侯继华**. 凉水天然阔叶红松林植物叶片与细根的N∶P化学计量特征 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(12): 3283-3288.
[9]	于萌萌1,2,张新建3,袁凤辉1**,何秀1,关德新1,王安志1,吴家兵1,金昌杰1. 长白山阔叶红松林三种树种树干液流特征及其与环境因子的关系 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2014, 33(7): 1707-1714.
[10]	包也1,2,孟莹莹1,2,周旺明1,于大炮1,周莉1,魏亚伟1,2,方向民1,2,代力民1**. 长白山地区不同林型红松种群生态位特征 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2014, 33(3): 555-559.
[11]	李伟1,2,白娥1**,李善龙1,2,孙建飞1,2,彭勃1,2,姜萍1. 施氮和降水格局改变对土壤CH₄和CO₂通量的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2013, 32(8): 1947-1958.
[12]	叶雨静,于大炮,王玥,周旺明,丁宏,王庆伟,王绍先,代力民. 采伐木对森林碳储量的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2011, 30(01): 66-71.
[13]	谢小魁,苏东凯,刘正纲,于大炮,周莉,代力民. 长白山原始阔叶红松林径级结构模拟 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2010, 29(08): 1477-1481.
[14]	王绪高;郝占庆;叶吉;张健;李步杭;姚晓琳 . 长白山阔叶红松林物种多度和空间分布格局的关系 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2008, 27(02): 145-150 .
[15]	田子珩;张春雨;赵秀海. 红松伐根分解过程中土壤动物动态 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2007, 26(02): 286-290 .

红松天然更新幼苗、幼树年龄校正及生长阶段划分

Age calibration and growth stage division for naturally regenerated seedlings and saplings of Pinus koraiensis Sieb. et Zucc.

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价