首页 > 硕士 > 农学 > 正文

山东沙质海岸防护林主要树种适应性评价

Study on Shelterbelt Major Species Adaptability in Shandong Sandy Coastal

作者: 专业:森林培育 导师:许景伟 年度:2010 学位:硕士  院校: 山东农业大学

Keywords

Sandy Coasts, Adaptability, Comprehensive Evaluation, Species Selection

        采用样线和典型样地调查相结合的方法,首先对山东沙质海岸地区主要造林树种的生长、生理、抗逆、观赏等指标进行了分析,在此基础上,评价了树种的各单项指标的适应性,并应用隶属函数法和层次分析法,综合评价了参选树种在生态防护和景观绿化造林方面的整体适应性,为山东沿海防护林体系建设和造林树种筛选提供了依据和参考。主要结论如下:(1)在典型树种造林试验中,5种大乔木树种的造林成活率以白蜡最高(85.6%)。在林木生长量以刺槐最高,其5年生林木胸径、树高、冠幅的生长量分别为6.3㎝、4.7m和2.3 m2,较黑松分别提高61.5%、62.1%和64.3%;5种小乔木树种造林以紫叶李的成活率最高(88.6%),其胸径和树高的生长量也最大,5年生林木生长量为6.9㎝、2.9m,较木槿分别增加63.2%、62.1%。大乔木树种生长表现为:落叶松>刺槐>刚松>绒毛白蜡>黑松>侧柏;小乔木树种其生长表现为:紫叶李>樱花>紫荆>紫薇>木槿。(2)39种参选树种生长适应性综合评价表明:树高年生长超过90cm的主要树种:大乔木树种有杨树、麻栎、刺槐等;小乔木树种有构树、樱花、紫荆等,其针叶树种普遍生长较慢在80cm左右。胸径(地径)年生长量大乔木树种生长均超过1cm(除银杏外),小乔木树种生长大于1cm的树种有樱花、黄栌等。整体来说生长适应性强的树种有:大乔木5种(绒毛白蜡、黄连木、杨树等);小乔木2种(樱花、构树);灌木4种(紫穗槐、月季、紫荆、连翘)。(3)海风是影响海边植物生长的重要因子。在海岸梯度上,树冠形状由伞形、偏冠,向锥形和卵形树冠转变;在垂直海岸梯度400m范围内随着距离的增加,黑松的形态指标,如胸径、树高、枝下高均表现出逐渐增加的趋势,其中树高变化速度最快,最高递增率为167.3%;枝死亡率逐渐变小,枝死亡率在8.525.4%之间变化。整体来说树冠形态适应性较强(4-5分)的树种有:大乔木6种(黑松、麻栎、白榆、垂柳等);小乔木5种(龙柏、紫薇、构树等)。(4)通过对8种典型绿化树种光合生理指标分析:紫薇、黄杨、黄栌、石榴光合速率日变化呈双峰曲线,且第1个高峰值比第2个高峰大。紫叶李、樱花、木槿、紫荆的日变化为单峰曲线峰值,气孔导度日变化曲线比较一致,呈“M”形,除木槿外,各树种的胞间CO2浓度的日变化曲线呈“W”形变化。(5)39种参选树种的生理适应性综合评价表明:大乔木树种中束缚水/自由水最大的是国槐(1.76),小乔木中最大的是紫薇(2.15),水分适应性较强。自然饱和亏缺在35%15%的树种有合欢、绒毛白蜡、杨树、刺槐等。蒸腾速率以刺槐的最高,为7.55 mmol·m-2·s-1,黑松、龙柏的最低,在5.0mmol·m-2·s-1以下;光合速率大于10μmol·m-2·s-1的树种中大乔木有麻栎、臭椿、旱柳、绒毛白蜡,小乔木有构树和灌木有单叶蔓荆。总体上生理适应性较强的树种有:9个大乔木树种(麻栎、臭椿、旱柳、绒毛白蜡、女贞、黑松、赤松、侧柏、雪松);1种小乔木构树;2种灌木单叶蔓荆和龙柏。(6)抗逆性综合评价表明:麻栎最耐瘠薄,其次是黑松、单叶蔓荆、柽柳、构树等,其抗性指数均在4.0以上;垂柳最耐水湿,银杏耐水湿性最差;抗寒较强的树种有白榆、合欢、麻栎、臭椿等,抗性指数在4.0以上,女贞、樱花抗寒性较弱,抗性指数低于3.0。抗风性强的树种是黑松、麻栎、白榆、紫穗槐、构树和龙柏,其抗性指数在5.04.0之间,刺槐和杨树的抗风性能较弱。综合分析其抗逆性强的树种有:6种大乔木(白榆、麻栎、臭椿、垂柳、国槐、黑松);3种小乔木(龙柏、构树、石榴);4个灌木树种(单叶蔓荆、柽柳、紫叶小檗、紫穗槐)。(7)综合分析结果表明,观赏效果较好的树种有:10种大乔木(银杏、黄连木、栾树、五角枫、女贞、合欢、臭椿、雪松、黑松、落叶松);4种小乔木(石榴、黄栌、紫叶李、紫荆),1种灌木(连翘)。通过39种参选树种的生长、生理、抗逆、观赏等适应性指标综合评价表明:用于生态防护林建设筛选的适应性较强的树种(0.5分以上):大乔木有黑松、麻栎、侧柏、女贞、刺槐、臭椿、雪松、银杏、国槐、垂柳;小乔木有紫薇、龙柏、构树、紫叶李;灌木有紫穗槐、大叶黄杨、单叶蔓荆、酸枣、月季。用于景观绿化筛选的适应性较强的树种(0.5分以上):大乔木女贞、银杏、黄连木、臭椿、国槐、侧柏、黑松、雪松;小乔木紫荆、石榴、紫薇、龙柏;灌木大叶黄杨、紫叶李。
    This paper focuses on the growth condition, physiological and anti-adversity features and enjoyment index of chief species on sandy coasts. A comprehensive evaluation analysis on the selected species’whole adaptability on the greening and afforestation was made using qualitative analysis method. Finally, we used subordinate function values and analytical hierarchy process evaluated the single index of species’adaptability. The study above provides the theoretical and practical reference to the system construction of the protection forest and screening for the afforenstation species of the study area. The principal conclusions as follows:(1)In the experiment of afforenstation about typical species, we found that Fraxinus chinensis had highest survival rate (85.6%) in the five big arbor species. The DBH, tree height, crown width of Robinia pseudoacacia which 5-years were 6.3 cm, 4.7m and 2.3 m2, which were the highest on the growth increment of forest. Respectively, these were higher than Pinus thunbergii 61.5%, 62.1% and 64.3%. Prunus cerasifera had highest survival rate (88.6%) in the five small arbor species, its DBH and tree height fastest flooding conditions, 5-year growth was 6.9 cm, 2.9m increased by 63.2%, 62.1%. compared with Hibiscus syriacus. The manifestation of big arbor species were: Larix gmelini > Robinia pseudoacacia > Pinus rigida > Fraxinus chinensis > Pinus thunbergii > Platycladus orientalis. The manifestation of small arbor species were: Prunus cerasifera > Prunus serrulata > Cercis chinensi > Lagerstroemia indica > Hibiscus syriacus.(2) Comprehensive evaluation of the growth adaptations of 39 selected specieds showed that the highest survival rate in the big arbor was Populus tomentosa, reaching 92.4%. Broussonetia papyrifera reached 93.5%, was the highest in the small arbor. Amorpha fruticosa and Vitex trifolia alao had higher survival rate in shrub species , which were the most widespread species in sandy coastal. High annual growth was slower in conifers, around 80cm. The species which come to grow more than 90cm were Populus tomentosa, Quercus acutissima, Robinia pseudoacacia, Broussonetia papyrifera, Prunus serrulata, Cercis chinensis and Amorpha fruticosa. Diameter (ground diameter) years of growth in the big tree species growth all exceeded 1cm except Ginkgo biloba. In the small arbor, only Prunus serrulata and Cotinus coggygria exceeded 1cm.Overall, growth adaptable species were as follows: Fraxinus chinensis, Pistacia chinensis, Populus tomentosa, Prunus serrulata, Broussonetia papyrifera, Amorpha fruticosa, Rosa chinensis, Cercis chinensis and Forsythia suspense and so on.(3) Sea breeze was an important influencing factor in plant growth. In the coast gradient, the crown shape was changed from umbrella, partial crown to tapered and oval crown. In the vertical shore gradient within 400m, with the increase of the distance, the morphological characters of Pinus thunbergii, such as DBH, tree height, branch under had shown high growing trend, of which the fastest changes was height and the highest increase rate was 167.3 percent. Branch mortality rates decreased and ranged in 8.5% and 25.4%. Among the influencing factors , wind stroke was the strongest, followed by cold damage and insect pests. The length of first branch and second branch in windward side was also gradually increasing. Overall, strong canopy morphological adaptability species (4-5 points) including: Pinus thunbergii, Quercus acutissima, Ulmus pumila, Salix babylonica, Sabina chinensis, Lagerstroemia indica, Broussonetia papyrifera, and so on.(4) Through analyzing on photosynthetic physiological index of eight typical greening kinds of tree, we found that the photosynthetic rate diurnal curve of Lagerstroemia indica, Euonymus japonicus,Prunus triloba and Punica granatum presented two peaks, and the first peak was higher than the second one. Prunus cerasifera, Prunus serrulata, Hibiscus syriacus and Cercis chinensis presented single peak curve, the variation in stomatal conductance curves was consistent, was "M" shape. In addition to Hibiscus syriacus , the diurnal variation curve of the intercellular CO2 of the other trees was similar to the "W" change tendency.(5) Comprehensive evaluation of the physiological adaptations of 39 species show that: Sophora japonica have the biggest bound water / free water (1.76) in big arbor, Lagerstroemia indica was the biggest (2.15)in small arbor. Natural saturation deficit of 35% to 15% of species are Albizzia julibrissin, Fraxinus chinensis, Populus tomentosa, Robinia pseudoacacia, etc. Robinia pseudoacacia’s transpiration rate is the highest, 7.55 mmol·m-2·s-1. Pinus thunbergii and Sabina chinensis’s transpiration rate is the lowest, under 5.0 mmol·m-2·s-1. Tree species that photosynthetic rate is greater than 10μmol ? m-2·s-1 are Quercus acutissima, Ailanthus altissima, Salix matsudana, Fraxinus chinensis, Broussonetia papyrifera, Vitex trifolia..As a hole, the following species had strong physiological adaptability: Fraxinus chinensis, Ailanthus altissima , Salix matsudana, Quercus acutissima, Ligustrum lucidum, Pinus thunbergii, Pinus densiflora, Platycladus orientalis, Cedrus deodara, Broussonetia papyrifera, Vitex trifolia, Sabina chinensis.(6) Comprehensive analysis and evaluation show that Quercus acutissima is the most resistant species. Pinus thunbergii, Vitex trifolia, Tamarix chinensis, Broussonetia papyrifera are also have lower requirements for the degree of soil fertility, their resistance index are all above 4.0. Salix babylonica is water tolerant tree, but Ginkgo biloba is the most intolerant ones. The cold resistance index of Ulmus pumila, Albizzia julibrissin, Quercus acutissima and Ailanthus altissima are all above 4.0, which are cold resistant trees. Ligustrum lucidum and Prunus serrulata have weak cold resistance, their resistance index below 3.0. The wind-resistant species are as follows : Pinus thunbergii, Quercus acutissima, Ulmus pumila, Amorpha fruticosa, Broussonetia papyrifera, Sabina chinensis, their resistance index between 5.0-4.0, Robinia pseudoacacia, Populus tomentosar have lower wind resistance. Though the comprehensive analysis, the strong resistance of tree species as a whole are Ulmus pumila, Quercus acutissima, Ailanthus altissima, Salix babylonica, Sophora japonica, Pinus thunbergii, Sabina chinensis, Broussonetia papyrifera, Punica granatum, Vitex trifolia, Tamarix chinensis, Berberis thunbergii, Amorpha fruticosa.(7) Though the results from comprehensive analysis show that the species of better are Ginkgo biloba, Pistacia chinensis, Acer mono, Ligustrum lucidum, Albizzia julibrissin, Ailanthus altissima, Cedrus deodara, Pinus thunbergii, Larix gmelini, Punica granatum, Cotinus coggygria, Prunus cerasifera, Cercis chinensis, Forsythia suspensea.Through comprehensive evaluation of growth condition, physiological and anti-adversity and enjoyment on 39 selected species, the better species which have good adaptability for the construction of ecological shelter forest (0.5 points) are as follows: Pinus thunbergii, Quercus acutissima, Platycladus orientalis, Ligustrum lucidum, Robinia pseudoacacia, Ailanthus altissima, Cedrus deodara, Ginkgo biloba, Salix babylonica, Sabina chinensis, Broussonetia papyrifera, Prunus cerasifera, Amorpha fruticosa, Euonymus japonicus, Vitex trifolia, Ziziphus jujuba, Rosa chinensis.The species for Landscape planting (0.5 points) are as follows: Ligustrum lucidum , Ginkgo biloba, Pistacia chinensis, Ailanthus altissima, Sophora japonica, Platycladus orientalis, Cedrus deodara, Cercis chinensis, Lagerstroemia indica, Sabina chinensis, Euonymus japonicus, Prunus cerasifera.
        

山东沙质海岸防护林主要树种适应性评价

中文摘要8-11
ABSTRACT11-14
1 引言15-24
    1.1 树种生长和形态适应性的研究进展16-17
        1.1.1 生长适应性研究16
        1.1.2 形态结构适应性研究16-17
    1.2 树种生理适应性研究进展17-19
        1.2.1 抗旱方面17-18
        1.2.2 耐寒方面18
        1.2.3 抗风方面18
        1.2.4 其他方面18-19
    1.3 树种观赏适应性研究进展19-20
        1.3.1 观赏特性的评价指标19
        1.3.2 观赏特性的评价方法19-20
    1.4 树种适应性评价体系研究进展20-21
    1.5 树种适应性研究中的问题21
    1.6 本研究内容21-22
    1.7 技术路线与创新点22-24
2 材料与方法24-31
    2.1 研究区概况24-25
        2.1.1 地理位置24
        2.1.2 气候特点24-25
        2.1.3 土壤特点25
        2.1.4 植被特点25
    2.2 研究材料25-26
    2.3 研究方法26-31
        2.3.1 样地设置26-27
        2.3.2 调查内容27-30
            2.3.2.1 生长指标测定27-28
            2.3.2.2 生理指标测定方法28-29
            2.3.2.3 树种抗逆性评价方法29
            2.3.2.4 树种观赏价值评价方法29
            2.3.2.5 树种适应性评价方法29-30
        2.3.3 数据处理方法30-31
3 结果分析31-67
    3.1 沙质海岸主要树种的生长适应性分析与评价31-36
        3.1.1 典型造林树种的生长适应性分析31-33
            3.1.1.1 大乔木树种的生长分析31-32
            3.1.1.2 小乔木树种的生长分析32-33
        3.1.2 主要树种生长适应性评价33-36
            3.1.2.1 造林成活率分析35
            3.1.2.2 树高生长量分析35
            3.1.2.3 胸径(地径)生长量分析35-36
            3.1.2.4 生长适应性综合评价36
    3.2 沙质海岸主要树种的形态适应性分析与评价36-45
        3.2.1 典型树种的形态适应性分析36-41
            3.2.1.1 不同梯度上树种树冠形态的变化37-38
            3.2.1.2 不同梯度上树高、胸径的变化38-39
            3.2.1.3 不同梯度上树种枝条的变化39-41
        3.2.2 主要树种形态适应性评价41-45
            3.2.2.1 树种冠形变化42-43
            3.2.2.2 树种树高、胸径方面的变化43
            3.2.2.3 枝方面的变化43
            3.2.2.4 形态适应性综合评价43-45
    3.3 沙质海岸主要树种的生理适应性分析与评价45-52
        3.3.1 主要树种的光合生理日变化分析45-49
            3.3.1.1 光合速率日变化45-46
            3.3.1.2 蒸腾速率和气孔导度日变化46-48
            3.3.1.3 二氧化碳浓度日变化48-49
        3.3.2 主要树种生理适应性评价49-52
            3.3.2.1 树种的束缚水/自由水分析49-50
            3.3.2.2 树种的自然饱和亏缺分析50-51
            3.3.2.3 树种的蒸腾速率分析51-52
            3.3.2.4 树种的光合速率分析52
            3.3.2.5 生理适应性综合评价52
    3.4 沙质海岸主要树种的抗逆适应性评价52-57
        3.4.1 主要树种抗逆性分析55-57
            3.4.1.1 耐瘠薄性分析55
            3.4.1.2 耐水湿性分析55-56
            3.4.1.3 抗寒性分析56
            3.4.1.4 抗风性分析56
            3.4.1.5 抗病虫害性分析56-57
        3.4.2 抗逆性综合评价57
    3.5 沙质海岸防护林主要树种的观赏适应性分析与评价57-61
        3.5.1 主要树种观赏适应性分析59-61
            3.5.1.1 树形的观赏价值分析59
            3.5.1.2 花的观赏价值分析59-60
            3.5.1.3 叶的观赏价值分析60
            3.5.1.4 果的观赏价值分析60-61
            3.5.1.5 树干的观赏价值分析61
        3.5.2 观赏价值综合评价61
    3.6 沙质海岸防护林树种的适应性综合评价61-67
        3.6.1 评价指标体系的建立61-62
        3.6.2 评价指标体系权重的确定62-63
        3.6.3 基准值与现状值的确定63-64
        3.6.4 评价指数的确定64
        3.6.5 评价结果64-67
            3.6.5.1 生态防护树种分类64-65
            3.6.5.2 景观防护树种分类65-67
4 讨论67-70
    4.1 生长适应性研究67
    4.2 生理适应性研究67-68
    4.3 树种观赏价值评价68
    4.4 树种适应性综合评价68-69
    4.5 展望69-70
5 结论70-74
    5.1 生长适应性70
    5.2 形态适应性70-71
    5.3 生理适应性71-72
    5.4 抗逆性综合72
    5.5 树种的观赏性72-73
    5.6 树种综合性73-74
参考文献74-83
附表83-86
附录86-87
致谢87-88
攻读学位期间发表论情况88
        下载全文需50


本文地址:

上一篇:木瓜扦插繁殖技术及生根机理研究
下一篇:黄河三角洲湿地大型底栖动物时空变化规律及其功能群研究

分享到: 分享山东沙质海岸防护林主要树种适应性评价到腾讯微博           收藏
评论排行
公告