濒危植物峨眉含笑的种内、种间竞争

doi:10.17520/biods.2022003

生物多样性 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (11): 22003. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2022003

• 研究报告: 植物多样性 • 上一篇下一篇

濒危植物峨眉含笑的种内、种间竞争

陈小红¹^,²^,³, 陈浩杰¹, 王雅竹¹, 肖书礼⁴, 衡小琴¹, 赵安玖¹^,²^,³^,^*()

1.四川农业大学林学院, 成都 611130
2.长江上游森林资源保育与生态安全国家林业和草原局重点实验室, 成都 611130
3.长江上游林业生态工程四川省重点实验室, 成都 611130
4.云南大学生态与环境学院, 昆明 650091

收稿日期:2022-01-04 接受日期:2022-09-16 出版日期:2022-11-20 发布日期:2022-11-15
通讯作者: 赵安玖
作者简介:* E-mail: anjiu_zhao@sicau.edu.cn
基金资助:
四川省林草局保护植物专项(2112129172)

Intraspecific and interspecific competition of the endangered plant Michelia wilsonii

Xiaohong Chen¹^,²^,³, Haojie Chen¹, Yazhu Wang¹, Shuli Xiao⁴, Xiaoqin Heng¹, Anjiu Zhao¹^,²^,³^,^*()

1. College of Forestry, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130
2. National Forestry and Grassland Administration Key Laboratory of Forest Resources Conservation and Ecological Safety on the Upper Reaches of the Yangtze River, Chengdu 611130
3. Forestry Ecological Engineering in the Upper Reaches of the Yangtze River Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu 611130
4. College of Ecology and Environmental Science, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091

Received:2022-01-04 Accepted:2022-09-16 Online:2022-11-20 Published:2022-11-15
Contact: Anjiu Zhao

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

研究植物种内、种间竞争关系是探究植物濒危原因的重要方式之一, 根据竞争来源和竞争预测模型可以制定具有针对性的保护策略。本文以雅安周公山峨眉含笑(Michelia wilsonii)野生种群为研究对象, 使用逐步扩大范围法确定峨眉含笑的竞争范围半径, 运用Hegyi单木竞争模型计算竞争指数(competition index, CI), 分析其种内、种间竞争关系。结果表明: 峨眉含笑的最适竞争范围半径是10 m, 能较好地反映其种内竞争强度; 峨眉含笑的竞争压力主要来自种内, 种内竞争指数(348.72, 62.52%)远大于种间竞争指数(209.03, 37.48%); 小树、中树阶段个体的竞争强度较大, 平均竞争指数(3.97、3.14)远高于总体平均竞争指数(2.68); 内有21种竞争木, 其中杉木(Cunninghamia lanceolata)、华中樱桃(Prunus conradinae)、细刺枸骨(Ilex hylonoma)是峨眉含笑的主要竞争树种; 胸径与竞争指数间服从指数函数关系(CI = 3.8907e^-0.048^x, R² = 0.1087, P < 0.01), 随着对象木胸径的增大, 竞争指数不断降低, 当胸径达到30 cm后, 竞争强度基本稳定。综上, 小树、中树阶段的峨眉含笑个体受到极强的种内竞争, 初入老树阶段的个体受到较强的种间竞争。为更好地保护峨眉含笑的天然种群, 降低竞争对种群更替的影响, 在林分管理中需要促进小树、中树的个体更新, 减轻植株间的竞争消耗, 加速峨眉含笑的生长和维持种群稳定。

关键词: 濒危植物, 峨眉含笑, 种内竞争, 种间竞争, 竞争指数

Abstract

Aims: Competition can affect the growth of individual trees and is a key factor that shapes the structure and drive the dynamic change of forest communities. It plays an important role in population spatial distribution patterns, population dynamics and succession process. For endangered plants, intraspecific and interspecific competition can be driving factors that cause plant mortality. Forestry management departments can formulate targeted conservation strategies based on the predicted competition sources. In order to explore endangered reasons and provide protection measures, the intraspecific and interspecific competition of a wild Michelia wilsonii (yellow lily-tree) population at Zhougong Mountain in Ya’an was studied.

Methods: The intraspecific and interspecific competitive relationship was analyzed, competition radius was determined by gradually extending range method, and competition index (CI) was calculated by using the Hegyi competition model.

Results: A radius of 10 m was the most reasonable competition range of the M. wilsoniipopulation in this study, which best reflects the intensity of intraspecific competition. The mean competition index of individuals in the small and medium diameter class (3.97 and 3.14, respectively) was greater than the total mean competition index (2.68). The competitive pressure of M. wilsonii primarily came from the intraspecies, and the intraspecific competition (348.72, 62.52%) was stronger than that of interspecific competition (209.03, 37.48%). In addition, as the diameter class increased, the intraspecific, interspecific, and total competition indices decreased. This indicated that as M. wilsonii individuals became larger, they were released from competition, and they became a dominant species of the population. The intraspecific and total competition also peaked at 7.5-12.5 cm and 32.5-37.5 cm, respectively, while interspecific competition peaked only at 32.5-37.5 cm. Of the 21 competitive trees in this population Cunninghamia lanceolata, Prunus conradinae, and Ilex hylonoma were the most important. The relationship between diameter at breast height (DBH) and competition index of M. wilsonii was approximately an exponential function (CI = 3.8907e^-0.048^x, R² = 0.1087, P < 0.01), with the competition index decreasing continuously with the increase of the objective trees’ DBH. When the DBH reached 30 cm, the competitive intensity plateaus.

Conclusion: Individual M. wilsonii in the small and medium tree stages were clustered and influenced by strong intraspecific competition. Individuals entering the old tree stage, were subjected to strong interspecific competition, and sporadic individuals grew vigorously. To better protect M. wilsoniipopulation, the relationship among forest competition, spatial patterns, and population renewal should be fully considered in stand protection and management. Appropriate human intervention measurements for the small and medium diameter class should be carried out to promote the regeneration of small and medium trees, to reduce the competitive exclusion among plants, and accelerate plant growth and conservation of population.

Key words: endangered plants, Michelia wilsonii, intraspecific competition, interspecific competition, competition index

陈小红, 陈浩杰, 王雅竹, 肖书礼, 衡小琴, 赵安玖 (2022) 濒危植物峨眉含笑的种内、种间竞争. 生物多样性, 30, 22003. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2022003.

Xiaohong Chen, Haojie Chen, Yazhu Wang, Shuli Xiao, Xiaoqin Heng, Anjiu Zhao (2022) Intraspecific and interspecific competition of the endangered plant Michelia wilsonii. Biodiversity Science, 30, 22003. DOI: 10.17520/biods.2022003.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/10.17520/biods.2022003

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/Y2022/V30/I11/22003

图/表 4

参考文献 28

[1]	Adler PB, Smull D, Beard KH, Choi RT, Furniss T, Kulmatiski A, Meiners JM, Tredennick AT, Veblen KE (2018) Competition and coexistence in plant communities: Intraspecific competition is stronger than interspecific competition. Ecology Letters, 21, 1319-1329. DOI PMID
[2]	Du XF, Tang MP, Pan JY, Shen QY, Yang F (2020) Study on competition index of different typical forest types on Lin’an region. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40, 4064-4072. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[杜秀芳, 汤孟平, 潘建勇, 沈钱勇, 杨帆 (2020) 临安区不同森林类型竞争指数比较研究. 生态学报, 40, 4064-4072.]
[3]	Fraver S, D’Amato AW, Bradford JB, Jonsson BG, Jönsson M, Esseen PA (2014) Tree growth and competition in an old-growth Picea abies forest of boreal Sweden: Influence of tree spatial patterning. Journal of Vegetation Science, 25, 374-385.
[4]	Frost I, Rydin H (2000) Spatial pattern and size distribution of the animal-dispersed tree Quercus robur in two spruce-dominated forests. Écoscience, 7, 38-44.
[5]	He F, Ma QY, Liu XL, Wang JX, He DH (2008) Characteristics of biology and geographical distribution of wild Magnoliaceae plants in Sichuan Province. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 6(Suppl.), 48-53. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[何飞, 马钦彦, 刘兴良, 王金锡, 何大洪 (2008) 四川野生木兰科植物生物学特性及其地理分布特点. 中国水土保持科学, 6(增刊), 48-53.]
[6]	He ZS, Liu JF, Zheng SQ, Xu DW, Hong W, Wu CZ, Wu ZY (2012) Competition zone of Castanopsis kawakamii seedlings by single slope change point analysis. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology, 18, 847-852. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[何中声, 刘金福, 郑世群, 徐道炜, 洪伟, 吴承祯, 吴则焰 (2012) 单一斜率变点分析格氏栲幼苗的竞争范围. 应用与环境生物学报, 18, 847-852.]
[7]	Hegyi F (1974) A simulation model for managing Jack-pine stands. In: Growth Models for Tree and Stand Simulation (ed. Fries J), pp. 74-90. Royal College of Forestry, Stockholm.
[8]	Jiang GM, Sun G, Zhang GF, Wang JW (2010) Intra- and interspecific competition of endangered plant Magnolia zenii. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 29, 201-206. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[蒋国梅, 孙国, 张光富, 王剑伟 (2010) 濒危植物宝华玉兰种内与种间竞争. 生态学杂志, 29, 201-206.]
[9]	Knapp EE, Bernal AA, Kane JM, Fettig CJ, North MP (2021) Variable thinning and prescribed fire influence tree mortality and growth during and after a severe drought. Forest Ecology and Management, 479, 118595.
[10]	Li YF, Li MX, Li X, Liu ZL, Ming AG, Lan HX, Ye SM (2021) The abundance and structure of deadwood: A comparison of mixed and thinned Chinese fir plantations. Frontiers in Plant Science, 12, 614695.
[11]	Liu YQ, Tian YH, Song HZ, Huang WL (2018) DBH and stand density regulate intraspecific competition of Larix gmelinii in eastern Inner Mongolia. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 37, 847-853. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[刘怡青, 田育红, 宋含章, 黄薇霖 (2018) 胸径和林分密度决定内蒙古东部落叶松林种内竞争. 生态学杂志, 37, 847-853.]
[12]	Luo Y, McIntire EJB, Boisvenue C, Nikiema PP, Chen HYH (2020) Climatic change only stimulated growth for trees under weak competition in central boreal forests. Journal of Ecology, 108, 36-46.
[13]	Pan LL, Semyung K, Liu YS, Zhang X, Yang XH, Shan D, Zhu YJ, Shi ZJ (2019) Tree competition, spatial pattern, and regeneration of a Mongolian pine natural forest in the southern geographical edge. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39, 3687-3699. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[潘磊磊, Semyung K, 刘艳书, 张晓, 杨晓晖, 山丹, 朱媛君, 时忠杰 (2019) 沙地樟子松天然林南缘分布区林木竞争、空间格局及其更新特征. 生态学报, 39, 3687-3699.]
[14]	Quang PM, Baynes J, Herbohn J (2020) The effect of overwood competition on the long-term survival, growth and stocking of underplanted tree species in logged tropical rainforest in north Queensland, Australia. Forest Ecology and Management, 472, 118241.
[15]	Sandoval S, Cancino J (2008) Modeling the edge effect in even-aged Monterrey pine (Pinus radiata D. Don) stands incorporating a competition index. Forest Ecology and Management, 256, 78-87.
[16]	Thorpe HC, Astrup R, Trowbridge A, Coates KD (2010) Competition and tree crowns: A neighborhood analysis of three boreal tree species. Forest Ecology and Management, 259, 1586-1596.
[17]	Tian CC, Zhou SB, Jiang XL (2006) Distribution pattern and dynamics of Alnus nepalensis and Litsea glutinosa populations in Nomascus concolor habitat. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 17, 167-170. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[田长城, 周守标, 蒋学龙 (2006) 黑长臂猿栖息地旱冬瓜和潺槁木姜子种群分布格局和动态. 应用生态学报, 17, 167-170.]
[18]	Vitali V, Brang P, Cherubini P, Zingg A, Nikolova PS (2016) Radial growth changes in Norway spruce montane and subalpine forests after strip cutting in the Swiss Alps. Forest Ecology and Management, 364, 145-153.
[19]	Wang XX, Zhang QD, Bi RC, Bai YF (2013) Intra- and inter-specific competition of rare and endangered plant Ulmus lamellosa in Shanxi Province of China. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 32, 1756-1761. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[王晓霞, 张钦弟, 毕润成, 白玉芳 (2013) 山西稀有濒危植物脱皮榆种内和种间竞争. 生态学杂志, 32, 1756-1761.]
[20]	Wang YQ, Yao K, Wang XS, Li SH, Luo XJ, Liu YL (2021) Intraspecies and interspecies competition intensity analysis of Platycarya longipes in karst area of Maolan. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 41, 880-888. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[王雁青, 姚凯, 王晓双, 李仕洪, 罗小菊, 刘映良 (2021) 茂兰喀斯特区圆果化香的种内和种间竞争强度分析. 西北植物学报, 41, 880-888.]
[21]	Xiao SL, Fu MY, Yang K, Chen XH (2019) Population structure and quantitative dynamics of an extremely small population, Michelia wilsonii, Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 39, 1279-1288. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[肖书礼, 付梦媛, 杨科, 陈小红 (2019) 极小种群野生植物峨眉含笑的种群结构与数量动态. 西北植物学报, 39, 1279-1288.]
[22]	Xu H, Liu YH (2018) Relationship between diameter class structure and intraspecific and interspecific competitions of precious and endangering plant Acer catalpifolium. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 38, 1160-1170. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[许恒, 刘艳红 (2018) 珍稀濒危植物梓叶槭种群径级结构与种内种间竞争关系. 西北植物学报, 38, 1160-1170.]
[23]	Xu JW, Shi FX, Zhang CH, Wan SZ, Wu PP, Liu SS, Mao R (2020) Difference in intra- and inter-specific competition of two endangered plant species (Toona ciliate var. pubescens and Taxus chinensis var. mairei) in the middle subtropical zone of China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 31, 1-8. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[徐佳文, 石福习, 张朝晖, 万松泽, 吴盼盼, 刘姗姗, 毛瑢 (2020) 中亚热带濒危植物毛红椿和南方红豆杉种内与种间竞争差异. 应用生态学报, 31, 1-8.] DOI
[24]	Yuan CM, Meng GT, Fang XJ, Chai Y, Li GX, Lin RT, Wang Q, Li PR (2012) Age structure and spatial distribution of the rare and endangered plant Alcimandra cathcartii. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 32, 3866-3872. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[袁春明, 孟广涛, 方向京, 柴勇, 李贵祥, 蔺汝涛, 王骞, 李品荣 (2012) 珍稀濒危植物长蕊木兰种群的年龄结构与空间分布. 生态学报, 32, 3866-3872.]
[25]	Zhang GF, Yao R, Jiang YQ, Chen FC, Zhang WY (2016) Intraspecific and interspecific competition intensity of Parrotia subaequalis in different habitats from Wanfoshan Nature Reserve, Anhui Province. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 35, 1744-1750. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[张光富, 姚锐, 蒋悦茜, 陈福程, 张文燕 (2016) 安徽万佛山不同生境下银缕梅的种内与种间竞争强度. 生态学杂志, 35, 1744-1750.]
[26]	Zhang M, Han S, Li JT, Zhang JT (2007) Study on competition relationship on Pinus tabulaeformis, Betula platyphylla and Populus davidiana natural forest in Wuling Mountain Nature Reserve. Journal of Beijing Normal University (Natural Science), 43, 184-186. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[张谧, 韩烁, 李钧涛, 张金屯 (2007) 雾灵山自然保护区油松、白桦及山杨天然林竞争关系研究. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 43, 184-186.]
[27]	Zhang XL, Ma Y, Zhao WJ, Liu XD, Jin M, Jing WM (2013) On the intraspecific competition of Picea crassifolia population in the Qilian Mountains. Arid Zone Research, 30, 242-247. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[张学龙, 马钰, 赵维俊, 刘贤德, 金铭, 敬文茂 (2013) 祁连山青海云杉种群种内竞争分析. 干旱区研究, 30, 242-247.]
[28]	Zhang ZH, Hu G, Qin C, He Y, Li YF (2016) Intraspecific and interspecific competition of dominant tree Castanopsis fissa in Qingxiushan Scenic Spot, Guangxi, Southern China. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 36(1), 67-71, 85. (in Chinese with English abstract)
	[张忠华, 胡刚, 秦川, 何炎, 李玉芳 (2016) 青秀山风景区优势种大叶栎种内与种间的竞争关系. 中南林业科技大学学报, 36(1), 67-71, 85.]

龄级 Age class	径级 DBH class (cm)	种内竞争 Intraspecific competition			种间竞争 Interspecific competition			总体竞争 Total competition
龄级 Age class	径级 DBH class (cm)	株数Number	竞争指数 CI	平均竞争指数Average of CI	株数Number	竞争指数CI	平均竞争指数Average of CI	株数Number	竞争指数CI	平均竞争指数Average of CI
III	2.5-7.5	4	12.57	3.14	10	27.15	2.72	10	39.73	3.97
IV	7.5-12.5	25	94.71	3.79	30	51.91	1.73	33	146.61	4.44
V	12.5-17.5	34	83.65	2.46	39	49.30	1.26	42	132.95	3.17
VI	17.5-22.5	38	70.91	1.87	46	41.70	0.91	50	112.61	2.25
VII	22.5-27.5	38	67.79	1.78	42	22.55	0.54	45	90.34	2.01
VIII	27.5-32.5	14	11.42	0.82	16	10.75	0.67	17	22.17	1.30
IX	32.5-37.5	5	5.14	1.03	4	3.23	0.81	5	8.37	1.67
X	37.5-42.5	5	2.24	0.45	4	2.13	0.53	5	4.37	0.87
XI	> 42.5	1	0.29	0.29	1	0.31	0.31	1	0.59	0.59
总计/均值 Total/mean		164	348.72	2.13	192	209.03	1.09	208	557.74	2.68

龄级 Age class	径级 DBH class (cm)	种内竞争 Intraspecific competition			种间竞争 Interspecific competition			总体竞争 Total competition
龄级 Age class	径级 DBH class (cm)	株数Number	竞争指数 CI	平均竞争指数Average of CI	株数Number	竞争指数CI	平均竞争指数Average of CI	株数Number	竞争指数CI	平均竞争指数Average of CI
III	2.5-7.5	4	12.57	3.14	10	27.15	2.72	10	39.73	3.97
IV	7.5-12.5	25	94.71	3.79	30	51.91	1.73	33	146.61	4.44
V	12.5-17.5	34	83.65	2.46	39	49.30	1.26	42	132.95	3.17
VI	17.5-22.5	38	70.91	1.87	46	41.70	0.91	50	112.61	2.25
VII	22.5-27.5	38	67.79	1.78	42	22.55	0.54	45	90.34	2.01
VIII	27.5-32.5	14	11.42	0.82	16	10.75	0.67	17	22.17	1.30
IX	32.5-37.5	5	5.14	1.03	4	3.23	0.81	5	8.37	1.67
X	37.5-42.5	5	2.24	0.45	4	2.13	0.53	5	4.37	0.87
XI	> 42.5	1	0.29	0.29	1	0.31	0.31	1	0.59	0.59
总计/均值 Total/mean		164	348.72	2.13	192	209.03	1.09	208	557.74	2.68

种名 Species	株数 Number	占总株数百分比 Percentage (%)	平均胸径 Average DBH (cm)	平均树高 Average height (m)	竞争指数 CI	占总竞争百分比 Percentage (%)	平均竞争指数 Average CI
峨眉含笑 Michelia wilsonii	607	42.27	17.71	11.34	348.72	62.52	0.57
杉木 Cunninghamia lanceolata	162	11.28	27.37	12.10	62.75	11.25	0.39
华中樱桃 Prunus conradinae	95	6.62	21.87	10.78	27.11	4.86	0.29
细刺枸骨 Ilex hylonoma	44	3.06	23.50	11.93	14.74	2.64	0.34
灯台树 Cornus controversa	65	4.53	13.82	8.41	14.45	2.59	0.22
日本杜英 Elaeocarpus japonicus	74	5.15	19.90	8.42	14.44	2.59	0.20
亮叶桦 Betula luminifera	62	4.32	22.39	10.32	13.71	2.46	0.22
山鸡椒 Litsea cubeba	40	2.79	24.86	10.53	8.70	1.56	0.22
野茉莉 Styrax japonicus	52	3.62	13.45	7.88	8.51	1.53	0.16
香叶树 Lindera communis	20	1.39	18.38	8.85	6.23	1.12	0.31
长蕊杜鹃 Rhododendron stamineum	24	1.67	20.90	9.25	6.07	1.09	0.25
刺楸 Kalopanax septemlobus	39	2.72	20.72	8.96	5.86	1.05	0.15
枹栎 Quercus serrata	34	2.37	15.90	9.00	5.63	1.01	0.17
毛脉南酸枣Choerospondias axillaris var. pubinervis	33	2.30	18.25	9.00	5.10	0.92	0.15
尖叶桂樱 Lauro-cerasus undulata	29	2.02	14.21	8.45	4.29	0.77	0.15
栗 Castanea mollissima	12	0.84	31.05	11.63	3.48	0.62	0.29
油樟 Cinnamomum longepaniculatum	14	0.97	20.54	7.79	2.53	0.45	0.18
瓦山栲 Castanopsis ceratacantha	11	0.77	23.85	13.64	2.25	0.40	0.20
野桐 Mallotus tenuifolius	13	0.91	20.16	11.54	2.24	0.40	0.17
青榨槭 Acer davidii	4	0.28	19.50	7.00	0.73	0.13	0.18
枇杷 Eriobotrya japonica	2	0.14	18.00	6.00	0.22	0.04	0.11
合计 Total	1,436	100	-	-	557.75	100	-

种名 Species	株数 Number	占总株数百分比 Percentage (%)	平均胸径 Average DBH (cm)	平均树高 Average height (m)	竞争指数 CI	占总竞争百分比 Percentage (%)	平均竞争指数 Average CI
峨眉含笑 Michelia wilsonii	607	42.27	17.71	11.34	348.72	62.52	0.57
杉木 Cunninghamia lanceolata	162	11.28	27.37	12.10	62.75	11.25	0.39
华中樱桃 Prunus conradinae	95	6.62	21.87	10.78	27.11	4.86	0.29
细刺枸骨 Ilex hylonoma	44	3.06	23.50	11.93	14.74	2.64	0.34
灯台树 Cornus controversa	65	4.53	13.82	8.41	14.45	2.59	0.22
日本杜英 Elaeocarpus japonicus	74	5.15	19.90	8.42	14.44	2.59	0.20
亮叶桦 Betula luminifera	62	4.32	22.39	10.32	13.71	2.46	0.22
山鸡椒 Litsea cubeba	40	2.79	24.86	10.53	8.70	1.56	0.22
野茉莉 Styrax japonicus	52	3.62	13.45	7.88	8.51	1.53	0.16
香叶树 Lindera communis	20	1.39	18.38	8.85	6.23	1.12	0.31
长蕊杜鹃 Rhododendron stamineum	24	1.67	20.90	9.25	6.07	1.09	0.25
刺楸 Kalopanax septemlobus	39	2.72	20.72	8.96	5.86	1.05	0.15
枹栎 Quercus serrata	34	2.37	15.90	9.00	5.63	1.01	0.17
毛脉南酸枣Choerospondias axillaris var. pubinervis	33	2.30	18.25	9.00	5.10	0.92	0.15
尖叶桂樱 Lauro-cerasus undulata	29	2.02	14.21	8.45	4.29	0.77	0.15
栗 Castanea mollissima	12	0.84	31.05	11.63	3.48	0.62	0.29
油樟 Cinnamomum longepaniculatum	14	0.97	20.54	7.79	2.53	0.45	0.18
瓦山栲 Castanopsis ceratacantha	11	0.77	23.85	13.64	2.25	0.40	0.20
野桐 Mallotus tenuifolius	13	0.91	20.16	11.54	2.24	0.40	0.17
青榨槭 Acer davidii	4	0.28	19.50	7.00	0.73	0.13	0.18
枇杷 Eriobotrya japonica	2	0.14	18.00	6.00	0.22	0.04	0.11
合计 Total	1,436	100	-	-	557.75	100	-

濒危植物峨眉含笑的种内、种间竞争

Intraspecific and interspecific competition of the endangered plant Michelia wilsonii

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 28

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	景昭阳, 程可光, 舒恒, 马永鹏, 刘平丽. 全基因组重测序方法在濒危植物保护中的应用[J]. 生物多样性, 2023, 31(5): 22679-.
[2]	陈敏豪, 张超, 王嘉栋, 湛振杰, 陈君帜, 栾晓峰. 北美水貂和欧亚水獭在东北地区的分布与生态位重叠[J]. 生物多样性, 2023, 31(1): 22289-.
[3]	孙哲明, 刘亚恒, 彭秋桐, 徐芷妍, 杨予静, 欧文慧, 李中强. 湖北省极小种群野生植物在原生群落中的竞争地位及保护建议[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(6): 21517-.
[4]	张光富, 熊天石, 孙婷, 李恺頔, 邵丽鸳. 江苏珍稀濒危植物的多样性、分布及保护[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(2): 21335-.
[5]	刘忠成, 张忠, 兰勇, 赵万义, 刘佳, 陈春泉, 廖文波, 王蕾. 罗霄山脉珍稀濒危重点保护野生植物的生存状况及保护策略[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(7): 867-875.
[6]	张玲玲, 刘子玥, 王瑞江. 广东兰科植物多样性保育现状[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(7): 787-795.
[7]	任海. 植物园与植物回归[J]. 生物多样性, 2017, 25(9): 945-950.
[8]	陈玉凯, 杨小波, 李东海, 龙文兴. 海南岛维管植物物种多样性的现状[J]. 生物多样性, 2016, 24(8): 948-956.
[9]	杨文忠, 向振勇, 张珊珊, 康洪梅, 史富强. 极小种群野生植物的概念及其对我国野生植物保护的影响[J]. 生物多样性, 2015, 23(3): 419-425.
[10]	张荣京, 赵哲, 苏文拔, 邢福武. 海南甘什岭保护区珍稀濒危植物的分布与评估[J]. 生物多样性, 2015, 23(1): 11-17.
[11]	耿向宗, 王波, 贾爱群, 王瑞武. 聚果榕小蜂种内竞争的化学信息调节机制初探[J]. 生物多样性, 2014, 22(2): 189-195.
[12]	李长昊, 程涛, 董文攀, 周世良. “中国珍稀濒危植物DNA条形码鉴定平台”简介[J]. 生物多样性, 2014, 22(1): 110-110.
[13]	王蕾, 施诗, 廖文波, 陈春泉, 李贞. 井冈山地区珍稀濒危植物及其生存状况[J]. 生物多样性, 2013, 21(2): 163-169.
[14]	黄宏文, 张征. 中国植物引种栽培及迁地保护的现状与展望[J]. 生物多样性, 2012, 20(5): 559-571.
[15]	王晋萍, 董丽佳, 桑卫国. 不同氮素水平下入侵种豚草与本地种黄花蒿、蒙古蒿的竞争关系[J]. 生物多样性, 2012, 20(1): 3-11.