不同程度人为干扰对古田山森林群落谱系结构的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1003.2011.07030

生物多样性 ›› 2011, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (2): 190-196. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1003.2011.07030

所属专题：中国的森林生物多样性监测

不同程度人为干扰对古田山森林群落谱系结构的影响

宋凯¹^,², 米湘成¹^,^*(), 贾琪¹^,³, 任海保¹, DanBebber⁴, 马克平¹

1 ((中国科学院植物所环境与植被变化国家重点实验室, 北京 100093)
2 (中国科学院研究生院, 北京 100049)
3 (浙江师范大学化学与生命科学学院, 浙江金华 321004)
4 (Earthwatch Institute, Mayfield House, 256 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 7DE, United Kingdom)

收稿日期:2011-02-22 接受日期:2011-03-04 出版日期:2011-03-20 发布日期:2011-06-01
通讯作者: 米湘成
作者简介:*E-mail: mixiangcheng@ibcas.ac.cn

Variation in phylogenetic structure of forest communities along a human disturbance gradient in Gutianshan forest, China

Kai Song¹^,², Xiangcheng Mi¹^,^*(), Qi Jia¹^,³, Haibao Ren¹, Dan Bebber⁴, Keping Ma¹

1 State Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100093, China
2 Graduate University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3 College of Chemistry and Life Science, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, Zhejiang 321004, China
4 Earthwatch Institute, Mayfield House, 256 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 7DE, United Kingdom

Received:2011-02-22 Accepted:2011-03-04 Online:2011-03-20 Published:2011-06-01
Contact: Xiangcheng Mi
Supported by:
Earthwatch Institute Programm “Quantify and Monitor Carbon Pools and Fluxes to Assess the Impact of Climate Change on Subtropical Forests Under Different Anthropogenic Disturbances”.

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

群落谱系结构包含群落发育的历史信息, 能从新的角度反映群落形成的生态过程。作者在浙江古田山自然保护区亚热带常绿阔叶林中选择了人为干扰强度不同的4种群落类型, 以20 m×20 m为研究尺度探讨了不同干扰程度对群落谱系结构的影响。结果表明, 人工林(类型I)谱系结构发散; 但间伐林(类型II)、自然恢复林(类型III)以及自然老龄林(类型IV)谱系结构聚集, 且以类型II和IV聚集度最高。进一步分析不同径级谱系结构发现, 在中小径级(DBH≤5 cm和5 cm<DBH≤10 cm), 类型II、III、IV群落谱系结构聚集, 而类型I群落谱系结构发散; 但DBH>10 cm时, 除了类型IV, 其他3种群落都是谱系结构发散, 这反映了在恢复早期种子扩散对这些林型群落构建影响较大; 而皆伐后的演替和间伐增加了群落生境异质性, 生境过滤作用增强, 使类型II、III群落中小径级谱系结构表现为聚集; 类型IV群落不同径级谱系结构均表现为聚集, 可能与其稳定的生境过滤作用有关。

关键词: 群落结构, 谱系发散, 谱系聚集, 径级结构, 种子传播, 生境过滤

Abstract

Community phylogenetic structure contains information about evolutionary relationships among coexisting species in a community. Studies on community phylogenetic structure provide new insights into ecological processes and the mechanisms underlying community restoration. We compared the phylogenetic structure of forest communities along a human disturbance gradient using data from 12 1-ha plots in secondary forests within the Gutianshan National Nature Reserve, Zhejiang Province, China. We found that, at the 20 m×20 m scale, the plantation forest community (I) was phylogenetically overdispersed. Forest communities II (naturally-restored forest 50 years after clear cutting and 20 years after heavy selective cutting), III (naturally-restored forest 50 years after clear cutting), and IV (old-growth forest) were phylogenetically clustered. Forest types II and IV were the most clustered. We also conducted the same analyses for four forest types grouped into different DBH classes, and found that forests II, III, IV with DBH less than 5 cm and 5-10 cm were phylogenetically clustered, but forest I was overdispersed. In contrast, all the forests with DBH more than 10 cm were phylogenetically overdispersed except the forest IV. Our results suggest that seed dispersal is the main process resulting in phylogenetic overdispersion at early stage of succession, and habitat filtering is main process leading to phylogenetic clustering when habitat heterogeneity increases during succession. Possibly as a result of habitat filtering, forest IV was always phylogenetically clustered regardless of which size class was examined.

Key words: community composition, phylogenetically overdispersed, phylogenetically clustered, diameter classes, seed dispersal, habitat filter

宋凯, 米湘成, 贾琪, 任海保, DanBebber, 马克平 (2011) 不同程度人为干扰对古田山森林群落谱系结构的影响. 生物多样性, 19, 190-196. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1003.2011.07030.

Kai Song, Xiangcheng Mi, Qi Jia, Haibao Ren, Dan Bebber, Keping Ma (2011) Variation in phylogenetic structure of forest communities along a human disturbance gradient in Gutianshan forest, China. Biodiversity Science, 19, 190-196. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1003.2011.07030.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1003.2011.07030

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/CN/Y2011/V19/I2/190

图/表 8

表1 12个1 ha样地群落类型及不同径级的物种数

Table 1 Community types and species richness of 12 1-ha plots

样地 Plot	群落类型 Community type	物种数 Species richness
样地 Plot	群落类型 Community type	总数 Total	DBH≤5 cm	5 cm <DBH≤ 10 cm	DBH> 10 cm
1	I	81	77	31	22
2	IV	114	96	56	73
3	II	100	100	66	25
4	IV	89	83	50	39
5	III	105	96	53	43
6	III	123	113	68	46
7	I	90	86	32	18
8	II	95	89	58	25
9	II	85	76	53	19
10	IV	118	96	68	72
11	I	98	90	40	16
12	III	87	80	45	34

表2 不同类型群落间相似性系数(S?rensen指数)

Table 2 The S?rensen index between different community types

群落类型 Community type	I	II	III
II	0.2146
III	0.2239	0.1910
IV	0.2920	0.2161	0.2177

表3 不同程度干扰群落净谱系亲缘关系指数NRI的LSD单因素方差分析表

Table 3 LSD’s one-way ANOVA for Net Relatedness Index of communities with different disturbance types

变异来源 Source	df	SS	s²	F	Pr>F
干扰类型 Disturbance type	3	64.5689	21.5230	19.09	<0.0001
误差 Error	296	333.7407	1.1275
总变异 Corrected total	299	398.3096

表4 不同干扰类型及径级结构的群落净谱系亲缘关系指数NRI方差分析表

Table 4 Two-way ANOVA for Net Relatedness Index of communities with different disturbance types and DBH classes

变异来源 Source	df	SS	S²	F	Pr>F
干扰类型 Disturbance type (DT)	3	210.0901	70.03	42.76	<.0001
径级结构 DBH	2	489.0633	244.5317	149.31	<.0001
干扰类型× 径级结构 DT× DBH	6	69.703	11.6172	7.09	<.0001
误差 Error	859	1406.8081	1.6377
总变异 Corrected total	870	2175.6645

图1 不同干扰类型群落内样方的净谱系亲缘关系NRI平均值。 I、II、III、IV, 同表1。

Fig. 1 The mean value of Net Relatedness Index of communities of different human disturbance types. I, II, III, IV, see Table 1. The letters on bars are the results of multiple comparison for different community types.

表5 不同地形因子对群落谱系结构净谱系亲缘关系指数NRI的影响

Table 5 Effects of different topographical factors on Net Relatedness Index of communities

地形因子 Topographical factor	海拔 Elevation	坡向 Aspect	坡度 Slope	凹凸度 Convexity
P	0.3916	0.1153	0.3711	0.043^*
R²	0.0025	0.0083	0.0027	0.0137

图2 不同径级范围内, 不同干扰类型群落净谱系亲缘关系NRI平均值。图中字母为同一径级内不同类型群落间的多重比较结果。I、II、III、IV, 同表1。

Fig. 2 The mean value Net Relatedness Index of communities of different DBH classes. The letters on bars are the results of multiple comparison for different community types for the same DBH class. I, II, III, IV, see Table 1.

图3 I型人工林去除杉木后, 不同干扰类型群落内样方的净谱系亲缘关系NRI平均值。图中直方图上方字母为方差分析多重比较结果。I、II、III、IV, 同表1。

Fig. 3 The mean value of Net Relatedness Index of communities with different human disturbance after excluding Cunninghamia lanceolata from plantation forest. The letters on bars are the results of multiple comparison for different community types. I, II, III, IV, see Table 1.

参考文献 30

[1]	Belsky AJ (1986) Regeneration of artificial disturbance in grasslands of the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania: II. Five years of successional change. Journal of Ecology, 74, 937-952.
[2]	Brown KA, Gurevitch J (2004) Long-term impacts of logging on forest diversity in Madagascar. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 101, 6045-6049.
[3]	Buckley DS, Crow TR, Nauertz EA (2003) Influence of skid trails and haul roads on understory plant richness and composition in managed forest landscapes in Upper Michigan, USA. Forest Ecology and Management, 175, 509-520.
[4]	Cannon CH, Peart DR, Leighton M (1998) Tree species diversity in commercially logged Bornean rainforest. Science, 281, 1366-1368. URL PMID
[5]	Cavender-Bares J, Ackerly DD, Baum DA, Bazzaz FA (2004) Phylogenetic overdispersion in Floridian oak communities. The American Naturalist, 163, 823-843. URL PMID
[6]	Cavender-Bares J, Adrienne K, Brianna M (2006) Phylogenetic structure of Floridian plant communities depends on taxonomic and spatial scale. Ecology, 87, S109-S122. URL PMID
[7]	Chazdon RL (2003) Tropical forest recovery: legacies of human impact and natural disturbances. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 6, 51-71.
[8]	Collins SL, Barber SC (1985) Effects of disturbance on diversity on mixed grass prairie. Vegetatio, 64, 87-94.
[9]	Gong GQ (宫贵权), Cheng JM (程积民), Mi XC (米湘成), Chen SW (陈声文), Fang T (方腾) (2007) Habitat association of wood species in the Gutianshan subtropical broad-leaved evergreen forest. Science of Soil and Water Conservation (中国水土保持科学), 5(3), 79-83. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	Helmus MR, Keller W, Paterson MJ (2009) Communities contain closely related species during ecosystem disturbance. Ecology Letters, 13, 162-174. URL PMID
[11]	Huang JX (黄建雄), Zheng FY (郑凤英), Mi XC (米湘成) (2010) Influence of environmental factors on phylogenetic structure at multiple spatial scales in an evergreen broad- leaved forest of China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology (植物生态学报), 34, 309-315. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	Hubbell SP (2001) The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
[13]	Kembel SW, Hubbell SP (2006) The phylogenetic structure of a neotropical forest tree community. Ecology, 87, S86-S99. URL PMID
[14]	Koleff P, Gaston KJ, Lennon JJ (2003) Measuring beta diversity for presence-absence data. Journal of Animal Ecology, 72, 367-382.
[15]	Letcher SG (2009) Phylogenetic structure of angiosperm communities during tropical forest succession. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277, 97-104. URL PMID
[16]	Liu ZM (刘志民), Zhao XY (赵晓英), Liu XM (刘新民) (2002) Relationship between disturbance and vegetation. Acta Prataculturae Sinica (草业学报), 11(4), 1-9. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	Losos JB (2008) Phylogenetic niche conservatism, phylogenetic signal and the relationship between phylogenetic relatedness and ecological similarity among species. Ecology Letters, 11, 995-1007. DOI URL PMID
[18]	Lou LH (楼炉焕), Jin SH (金水虎) (2000) Spermatophyta flora of Gutianshan Nature Reserve in Zhejiang. Journal of Beijing Forestry University (北京林业大学学报), 22(5), 33-39. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	Pickett S TA, White PS (1985) The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. Academic Press, London.
[20]	R Development Core Team (2009) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org. (accessed 2010-09)
[21]	Swenson NG, Enquist BJ, Pither J, Thompson J, Zimmerman JK (2006) The problem and promise of scale dependence in community phylogenetics. Ecology, 87, 2418-2424. URL PMID
[22]	Swenson NG, Enquist BJ, Thompson J, Zimmerman JK (2007) The influence of spatial and size scale on phylogenetic relatedness in tropical forest communities. Ecology, 88, 1770-1780. URL PMID
[23]	Verdu M, Rey PJ, Alcantara JM, Siles G, Valiente-Banuet A (2009) Phylogenetic signatures of facilitation and competition in successional communities. Journal of Ecology, 97, 1171-1180.
[24]	Webb CO, Ackerly DD, Kembel S (2008a) Phylocom: software for the analysis of phylogenetic community structure and character evolution. Version 4.0. http://phylodiversity.net/ phylocom. (accessed 2010-09)
[25]	Webb CO, Ackerly DD, McPeek MA, Donoghue MJ (2002) Phylogenies and community ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 33, 475-505.
[26]	Webb CO, Cannon CH, Davies SJ (2008b) Ecological organization, biogeography, and the phylogenetic structure of tropical forest tree communities. In: Tropical Forest Community Ecology (eds Carson WP, Schnizer SA). Wiley Blackwell, Oxford.
[27]	Webb CO, Donoghue MJ (2005) Phylomatic: tree assembly for applied phylogenetics. Molecular Ecology Notes, 5, 181-183.
[28]	Wiens JJ, Graham CH (2005) Niche conservatism: integrating evolution, ecology and conservation biology. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 36, 519-539.
[29]	Wikstrom N, Savolainen V, Chase MW (2001) Evolution of the angiosperms: calibrating the family tree. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268, 2211-2220. DOI URL PMID
[30]	Ye LQ (叶林奇) (2000) The relationship between disturbance and biodiversity. Journal of Guizhou University (Natural Science)(贵州大学学报自然科学版), 17(2), 129-134. (in Chinese with English abstract)

不同程度人为干扰对古田山森林群落谱系结构的影响

Variation in phylogenetic structure of forest communities along a human disturbance gradient in Gutianshan forest, China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 30

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	杨润明, 中村彰宏. 巢居蚂蚁更倾向于在人造光源附近定居繁殖[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(8): 22067-.
[2]	杨清, 张鹏, 安瑞志, 乔楠茜, 达珍, 巴桑. 拉萨河中下游纤毛虫群落时空分布模式及其驱动机制[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(6): 22012-.
[3]	鲁梦珍, 曾馥平, 宋同清, 彭晚霞, 张浩, 苏樑, 刘坤平, 谭卫宁, 杜虎. 喀斯特常绿落叶阔叶林死亡个体空间分布格局及生境关联[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(4): 21340-.
[4]	陈燕南, 梁铖, 陈军. 亚热带不同树种组成森林中土壤甲螨群落结构特征：以江西新岗山为例[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(12): 22334-.
[5]	米湘成, 王绪高, 沈国春, 刘徐兵, 宋晓阳, 乔秀娟, 冯刚, 杨洁, 毛子昆, 徐学红, 马克平. 中国森林生物多样性监测网络: 二十年群落构建机制探索的回顾与展望[J]. 生物多样性, 2022, 30(10): 22504-.
[6]	易浪, 董亚坤, 苗白鸽, 彭艳琼. 云南高黎贡山地区蝴蝶群落多样性[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(7): 950-959.
[7]	王楠, 黄菁华, 霍娜, 杨盼盼, 张欣玥, 赵世伟. 宁南山区不同植被恢复方式下土壤线虫群落特征:形态学鉴定与高通量测序法比较[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(11): 1513-1529.
[8]	吴二焕, 李东海, 杨小波, 左永令, 李龙, 张培春, 陈琳, 田路嘉, 李晨笛. 海南苏铁种群结构与森林群落郁闭度的关系[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(11): 1461-1469.
[9]	董雷, 王静, 刘永刚, 赵志平, 米湘成, 郭柯. 太行山北段地区荆条灌丛和三裂绣线菊灌丛群落谱系结构[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(1): 21-31.
[10]	余宏昌, 毕宝帅, 唐文乔, 张亚, 郭弘艺. 上海苏州河治理中鱼类多样性及群落结构变化[J]. 生物多样性, 2021, 29(1): 32-42.
[11]	尚素琴, 吴兴波, 王召龙, 彭鹤年, 周惠丽, 张红勇, 白映禄. 兴隆山国家级自然保护区不同生境的蝴蝶群落结构与种-多度分布[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(8): 983-992.
[12]	向颖, 刘素群, 黄兴龙, 刘志霄, 张佑祥, 马方舟. 湖南高望界国家级自然保护区及其周边蝶类多样性与影响因素[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(8): 940-949.
[13]	赵志霞, 赵常明, 邓舒雨, 申国珍, 谢宗强, 熊高明, 李俊清. 重度砍伐后极小种群野生植物崖柏群落结构动态[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(3): 333-339.
[14]	胡芮, 王儒晓, 杜诗雨, 李萌, 邢雨辉, 潘达, 徐海根, 孙红英. 扬州宝应湖底栖大型无脊椎动物的生物多样性及其变化[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(12): 1558-1569.
[15]	宋础良. 结构稳定性: 概念、方法和应用[J]. 生物多样性, 2020, 28(11): 1345-1361.