Acta Prataculturae Sinica ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (4): 13-23.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2020194
Previous Articles Next Articles
Zhong-ju MENG(), Yan-jie CHEN, Si-qin BAO()
Received:
2020-04-08
Revised:
2020-07-20
Online:
2021-04-20
Published:
2021-03-16
Contact:
Si-qin BAO
Zhong-ju MENG, Yan-jie CHEN, Si-qin BAO. Characteristics of community patches under three grazing modes in Sunite Desert-steppe[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(4): 13-23.
放牧方式 Grazing modes | 区域概况 Survey area profile | 地理位置 Geographical location | 植物斑块 Plant patches |
---|---|---|---|
休牧区 Resting pasture area | 与轮牧区相邻,休牧时间为一年,围栏保护避免了牲畜的采食破坏,植被呈现自然恢复状态。Adjacent to the rotation grazing area, the grazing rest period is one year, the fence protection avoids the destruction of livestock feeding, and the vegetation is in a natural recovery state. | 112°42′10″ E-112°42′15″ E 42°57′44″ N-42°57′48″ N | 存在锦鸡儿斑块与芨芨草斑块。There are Caraganarosea plaques and Achnatherum splendens plaques. |
自由放牧区1 Free grazing area 1 | 位于休牧区与轮牧区外围,无围栏保护。Located in the outskirts of rest grazing area and rotation grazing area, no fence protection. | 112°42′3″ E-112°42′8″ E 42°57′46″ N-42°57′50″ N | 存在锦鸡儿斑块、芨芨草斑块以及银灰旋花斑块。There are C. rosea plaques, A. splendens plaques and Convolvulus ammannii plaques. |
自由放牧区2 Free grazing area 2 | 位于休牧区与轮牧区外围,无围栏保护。Located in the outskirts of rest grazing area and rotation grazing area, no fence protection. | 112°42′22″ E-112°42′27″ E 42°57′35″ N-42°57′39″ N | |
轮牧区 Round pastoral area | 与休牧区相邻,采用划区轮牧的方式,分为夏秋场和冬春场,夏秋场面积为270 hm2,夏秋场放牧时间大约为180 d,载畜率为0.96只·hm-2。It is adjacent to the rest grazing area, and is divided into summer autumn field and winter spring field. The area of summer and autumn field is 270 ha, the grazing time of summer autumn farm is about 180 days, and the stocking rate is 0.96 animals·ha-1. | 112°42′51″ E-112°42′56″ E 42°57′36″ N-42°57′40″ N | 存在锦鸡儿斑块以及银灰旋花斑块。There are C. rosea plaques and C. ammannii plaques. |
Table 1 Test area and sample plot summary
放牧方式 Grazing modes | 区域概况 Survey area profile | 地理位置 Geographical location | 植物斑块 Plant patches |
---|---|---|---|
休牧区 Resting pasture area | 与轮牧区相邻,休牧时间为一年,围栏保护避免了牲畜的采食破坏,植被呈现自然恢复状态。Adjacent to the rotation grazing area, the grazing rest period is one year, the fence protection avoids the destruction of livestock feeding, and the vegetation is in a natural recovery state. | 112°42′10″ E-112°42′15″ E 42°57′44″ N-42°57′48″ N | 存在锦鸡儿斑块与芨芨草斑块。There are Caraganarosea plaques and Achnatherum splendens plaques. |
自由放牧区1 Free grazing area 1 | 位于休牧区与轮牧区外围,无围栏保护。Located in the outskirts of rest grazing area and rotation grazing area, no fence protection. | 112°42′3″ E-112°42′8″ E 42°57′46″ N-42°57′50″ N | 存在锦鸡儿斑块、芨芨草斑块以及银灰旋花斑块。There are C. rosea plaques, A. splendens plaques and Convolvulus ammannii plaques. |
自由放牧区2 Free grazing area 2 | 位于休牧区与轮牧区外围,无围栏保护。Located in the outskirts of rest grazing area and rotation grazing area, no fence protection. | 112°42′22″ E-112°42′27″ E 42°57′35″ N-42°57′39″ N | |
轮牧区 Round pastoral area | 与休牧区相邻,采用划区轮牧的方式,分为夏秋场和冬春场,夏秋场面积为270 hm2,夏秋场放牧时间大约为180 d,载畜率为0.96只·hm-2。It is adjacent to the rest grazing area, and is divided into summer autumn field and winter spring field. The area of summer and autumn field is 270 ha, the grazing time of summer autumn farm is about 180 days, and the stocking rate is 0.96 animals·ha-1. | 112°42′51″ E-112°42′56″ E 42°57′36″ N-42°57′40″ N | 存在锦鸡儿斑块以及银灰旋花斑块。There are C. rosea plaques and C. ammannii plaques. |
指数Index | 公式Formula | 公式描述Formula describing |
---|---|---|
斑块个数 Number of patches (NP) | 表示所有斑块的总个数。该指数值越大,对应的破碎程度就越高。Indicates the total number of all patches. The larger the index value, the higher the corresponding degree of fragmentation. | |
景观面积 Total landscape area (TA) | TA为景观的总面积。该指数表示景观的范围大小。TA is the total area of the landscape. The index indicates the extent of the landscape. | |
最大斑块指数 Largest patch index (LPI) | aij为斑块面积,A为景观总面积。该指数取值范围为(0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示某一斑块类型在景观整体中的最大斑块面积越小,其值趋近于100时,表示景观整体中存在面积较大的斑块。aij is the patch area, and A is the total area of the landscape. The value range of this index is (0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it means that the largest patch area of a certain patch type in the whole landscape is smaller. When its value approaches 100, it means there is an larger area plaques in the whole landscape. | |
蔓延度指数 Contagion index (CONTAG) | Pi为类型斑块所占的面积百分比,gik为类型i该指数表示景观里所有斑块类型的延展趋势。取值范围为(0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示景观范围内存在若干小斑块,景观破碎化严重,其值趋近于100时,表示整体景观中存在具有良好连接性的优势斑块,整体环境较为稳定。Pi is the percentage of area occupied by type patches, gik is type i. The index represents the extension trend of all patch types in the landscape. The value range is (0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it indicates there are several small patches in the landscape range, and the fragmentation of the landscape is serious. When the value approaches 100, it indicates that there are dominant patches with good connectivity in the overall landscape and the overall environment is relatively stable. | |
分离度指数 Splitting index (SPLIT) | aij为斑块ij的面积,A为景观面积。该指数表示景观整体被拆分成多个斑块类型,其中同类型斑块在景观中的分散程度或破碎程度。取值范围为(0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示景观范围内分散程度较小,其值趋近于100时,表示景观范围内斑块类型较为分散。aij is the area of patch ij, and A is the landscape area. This index indicates that the entire landscape is divided into multiple patch types, and the degree of dispersion or fragmentation of patches of the same type in the landscape. The value range is (0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it means that the degree of dispersion in the landscape is small. When its value approaches 100, it means that the patch types in the landscape are more scattered. |
Table 2 Landscape level index
指数Index | 公式Formula | 公式描述Formula describing |
---|---|---|
斑块个数 Number of patches (NP) | 表示所有斑块的总个数。该指数值越大,对应的破碎程度就越高。Indicates the total number of all patches. The larger the index value, the higher the corresponding degree of fragmentation. | |
景观面积 Total landscape area (TA) | TA为景观的总面积。该指数表示景观的范围大小。TA is the total area of the landscape. The index indicates the extent of the landscape. | |
最大斑块指数 Largest patch index (LPI) | aij为斑块面积,A为景观总面积。该指数取值范围为(0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示某一斑块类型在景观整体中的最大斑块面积越小,其值趋近于100时,表示景观整体中存在面积较大的斑块。aij is the patch area, and A is the total area of the landscape. The value range of this index is (0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it means that the largest patch area of a certain patch type in the whole landscape is smaller. When its value approaches 100, it means there is an larger area plaques in the whole landscape. | |
蔓延度指数 Contagion index (CONTAG) | Pi为类型斑块所占的面积百分比,gik为类型i该指数表示景观里所有斑块类型的延展趋势。取值范围为(0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示景观范围内存在若干小斑块,景观破碎化严重,其值趋近于100时,表示整体景观中存在具有良好连接性的优势斑块,整体环境较为稳定。Pi is the percentage of area occupied by type patches, gik is type i. The index represents the extension trend of all patch types in the landscape. The value range is (0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it indicates there are several small patches in the landscape range, and the fragmentation of the landscape is serious. When the value approaches 100, it indicates that there are dominant patches with good connectivity in the overall landscape and the overall environment is relatively stable. | |
分离度指数 Splitting index (SPLIT) | aij为斑块ij的面积,A为景观面积。该指数表示景观整体被拆分成多个斑块类型,其中同类型斑块在景观中的分散程度或破碎程度。取值范围为(0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示景观范围内分散程度较小,其值趋近于100时,表示景观范围内斑块类型较为分散。aij is the area of patch ij, and A is the landscape area. This index indicates that the entire landscape is divided into multiple patch types, and the degree of dispersion or fragmentation of patches of the same type in the landscape. The value range is (0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it means that the degree of dispersion in the landscape is small. When its value approaches 100, it means that the patch types in the landscape are more scattered. |
指数Index | 公式Formula | 公式描述Formula describing |
---|---|---|
斑块个数 Number of patches (NP) | 表示某一斑块类型的总个数。该指数值越大,对应的破碎程度就越高。Indicates the total number of a certain patch type. The larger the index value, the higher the corresponding degree of fragmentation. | |
斑块类型面积 Class area (CA) | a为某一斑块类型中所有斑块的面积。该指数与斑块个数呈正相关。a is the area of all patches in a certain patch type. This index is positively correlated with the number of plaques. | |
斑块所占景观面积的比例 Percentage of landscape (PLAND) | aij为斑块的面积,A为所有景观的总面积。该指数表示整个景观面积中某一斑块类型面积所占的比例。取值范围为[0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示景观中此类型斑块分布较少,其值于趋近于100时,表示景观中此类型斑块分布较多。 aij is the area of the patch, and A is the total area of all landscapes. This index represents the proportion of a certain patch type in the entire landscape area. The value range is [0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it means that there are fewer patches of this type in the landscape. When its value approaches 100, it means that there are more patches of this type in the landscape. | |
周长面积分形维数 Perimeter area fractal dimension (PAFRAC) | aij为斑块ij的面积,Pij为斑块ij的周长,ni为斑块数目。该指数用来描述斑块形状的复杂程度。取值范围理论上为[ | |
斑块密度 Patch density (PD) | ni为第i类斑块的总面积,A为所有斑块的总面积。该指数表示单位面积上的斑块数,其值大小代表景观中某一类型斑块的分化程度,数值随斑块数量的增多而上升。ni is the total area of the i type of patches, and A is the total area of all patches. The index represents the number of patches per unit area, and its value represents the degree of differentiation of a certain type of patch in the landscape, and the value increases with the increase in the number of patches. | |
景观分割指数 Landscape division index (DIVISION) | aij代表斑块ij的面积,A为所有斑块的总面积。该指数表示随机选取两个像元不属于同一个斑块的概率。取值范围为(0,1],其值越大,表示斑块分布越分散。aij represents the area of patch ij, and A is the total area of all patches. This index represents the probability that two randomly selected pixels do not belong to the same patch. The value range is (0,1], the larger the value, the more scattered the patch distribution. | |
斑块聚合度指数 Aggregation index (AI) | gij代表斑块类型的相似邻接斑块数量。该指数主要用来衡量同种类型斑块内部的连接程度。当斑块中所有像元不存在公共边界时,说明斑块内部连接度低,所以导致该类型斑块的聚合程度低。gij represents the number of similar adjacent patches of the patch type.The index is mainly used to measure the degree of connection within the same type of plaque. When all pixels in the patch do not have a common boundary, it means that the internal connection degree of the patch is low, so the aggregation degree of this type of patch is low. |
Table 3 Plaque level index
指数Index | 公式Formula | 公式描述Formula describing |
---|---|---|
斑块个数 Number of patches (NP) | 表示某一斑块类型的总个数。该指数值越大,对应的破碎程度就越高。Indicates the total number of a certain patch type. The larger the index value, the higher the corresponding degree of fragmentation. | |
斑块类型面积 Class area (CA) | a为某一斑块类型中所有斑块的面积。该指数与斑块个数呈正相关。a is the area of all patches in a certain patch type. This index is positively correlated with the number of plaques. | |
斑块所占景观面积的比例 Percentage of landscape (PLAND) | aij为斑块的面积,A为所有景观的总面积。该指数表示整个景观面积中某一斑块类型面积所占的比例。取值范围为[0,100],其值趋近于0时,表示景观中此类型斑块分布较少,其值于趋近于100时,表示景观中此类型斑块分布较多。 aij is the area of the patch, and A is the total area of all landscapes. This index represents the proportion of a certain patch type in the entire landscape area. The value range is [0,100]. When its value approaches 0, it means that there are fewer patches of this type in the landscape. When its value approaches 100, it means that there are more patches of this type in the landscape. | |
周长面积分形维数 Perimeter area fractal dimension (PAFRAC) | aij为斑块ij的面积,Pij为斑块ij的周长,ni为斑块数目。该指数用来描述斑块形状的复杂程度。取值范围理论上为[ | |
斑块密度 Patch density (PD) | ni为第i类斑块的总面积,A为所有斑块的总面积。该指数表示单位面积上的斑块数,其值大小代表景观中某一类型斑块的分化程度,数值随斑块数量的增多而上升。ni is the total area of the i type of patches, and A is the total area of all patches. The index represents the number of patches per unit area, and its value represents the degree of differentiation of a certain type of patch in the landscape, and the value increases with the increase in the number of patches. | |
景观分割指数 Landscape division index (DIVISION) | aij代表斑块ij的面积,A为所有斑块的总面积。该指数表示随机选取两个像元不属于同一个斑块的概率。取值范围为(0,1],其值越大,表示斑块分布越分散。aij represents the area of patch ij, and A is the total area of all patches. This index represents the probability that two randomly selected pixels do not belong to the same patch. The value range is (0,1], the larger the value, the more scattered the patch distribution. | |
斑块聚合度指数 Aggregation index (AI) | gij代表斑块类型的相似邻接斑块数量。该指数主要用来衡量同种类型斑块内部的连接程度。当斑块中所有像元不存在公共边界时,说明斑块内部连接度低,所以导致该类型斑块的聚合程度低。gij represents the number of similar adjacent patches of the patch type.The index is mainly used to measure the degree of connection within the same type of plaque. When all pixels in the patch do not have a common boundary, it means that the internal connection degree of the patch is low, so the aggregation degree of this type of patch is low. |
样地 Sample area | 景观面积 TA(hm2) | 斑块数量 NP(n≥1) | 最大斑块指数 LPI(0,100] | 蔓延度指数 CONTAG (0,100] | 分离度指数 SPLIT (0,100] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
休牧区Resting pasture area | 0.03 | 862 | 25.42 | 77.92 | 12.71 |
自由放牧区1 Free grazing area 1 | 0.01 | 415 | 10.77 | 59.19 | 39.50 |
自由放牧区2 Free grazing area 2 | 0.04 | 893 | 17.22 | 72.05 | 19.56 |
轮牧区Rotational grazing area | 0.01 | 795 | 8.18 | 50.93 | 46.99 |
Table 4 Landscape characteristic index of all kinds of plants at landscape level
样地 Sample area | 景观面积 TA(hm2) | 斑块数量 NP(n≥1) | 最大斑块指数 LPI(0,100] | 蔓延度指数 CONTAG (0,100] | 分离度指数 SPLIT (0,100] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
休牧区Resting pasture area | 0.03 | 862 | 25.42 | 77.92 | 12.71 |
自由放牧区1 Free grazing area 1 | 0.01 | 415 | 10.77 | 59.19 | 39.50 |
自由放牧区2 Free grazing area 2 | 0.04 | 893 | 17.22 | 72.05 | 19.56 |
轮牧区Rotational grazing area | 0.01 | 795 | 8.18 | 50.93 | 46.99 |
样地 Sample area | 斑块类型 Plaque types | 斑块数量NP (n≥1) | 类型面积 CA (hm2) | 斑块所占景观 面积比PLAND(%) [0,100] | 周长面积 维数PAFRAC | 斑块密度 PD (No.·100 hm-2) | 景观分割指数DIVISION (0,1] | 斑块聚合度AI (0,100] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
休牧区 Resting pasture area | 锦鸡儿C. rosea | 386 | 0.003 | 8.85 | 1.43 | 0.12 | 1.00 | 96.61 |
芨芨草A. splendens | 476 | 0.029 | 91.15 | 1.36 | 0.15 | 0.92 | 98.75 | |
自由放牧区1 Free grazing area 1 | 锦鸡儿C. rosea | 258 | 0.001 | 25.11 | 1.56 | 0.46 | 1.00 | 96.30 |
芨芨草A. splendens | 157 | 0.004 | 74.89 | 1.31 | 0.28 | 0.98 | 98.14 | |
自由放牧区2 Free grazing area 2 | 芨芨草A. splendens | 871 | 0.037 | 86.98 | 1.38 | 0.20 | 0.95 | 99.20 |
银灰旋花C. ammannii | 22 | 0.005 | 13.02 | 1.29 | 0.01 | 0.99 | 99.54 | |
轮牧区 Rotational grazing area | 锦鸡儿C. rosea | 785 | 0.005 | 59.92 | 1.62 | 0.89 | 1.00 | 96.47 |
银灰旋花C. ammannii | 10 | 0.003 | 40.08 | 1.55 | 0.01 | 0.97 | 99.31 |
Table 5 The landscape characteristic index of various plant micropatches at the level of patch type
样地 Sample area | 斑块类型 Plaque types | 斑块数量NP (n≥1) | 类型面积 CA (hm2) | 斑块所占景观 面积比PLAND(%) [0,100] | 周长面积 维数PAFRAC | 斑块密度 PD (No.·100 hm-2) | 景观分割指数DIVISION (0,1] | 斑块聚合度AI (0,100] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
休牧区 Resting pasture area | 锦鸡儿C. rosea | 386 | 0.003 | 8.85 | 1.43 | 0.12 | 1.00 | 96.61 |
芨芨草A. splendens | 476 | 0.029 | 91.15 | 1.36 | 0.15 | 0.92 | 98.75 | |
自由放牧区1 Free grazing area 1 | 锦鸡儿C. rosea | 258 | 0.001 | 25.11 | 1.56 | 0.46 | 1.00 | 96.30 |
芨芨草A. splendens | 157 | 0.004 | 74.89 | 1.31 | 0.28 | 0.98 | 98.14 | |
自由放牧区2 Free grazing area 2 | 芨芨草A. splendens | 871 | 0.037 | 86.98 | 1.38 | 0.20 | 0.95 | 99.20 |
银灰旋花C. ammannii | 22 | 0.005 | 13.02 | 1.29 | 0.01 | 0.99 | 99.54 | |
轮牧区 Rotational grazing area | 锦鸡儿C. rosea | 785 | 0.005 | 59.92 | 1.62 | 0.89 | 1.00 | 96.47 |
银灰旋花C. ammannii | 10 | 0.003 | 40.08 | 1.55 | 0.01 | 0.97 | 99.31 |
斑块类型 Patch type | 斑块面积 Patch area (hm2) | 斑块周长 Patch perimeter (m) | 分形维数 Fractal dimension | 模型 Model | R2 | 稳定性指数 Stability index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
锦鸡儿C. rosea | 0.009 | 8142.6 | 1.88 | ln A=1.06ln P-2.66 | 0.93 | 0.38 |
芨芨草A. splendens | 0.071 | 30123.1 | 1.43 | ln A=1.40ln P-5.24 | 0.95 | 0.07 |
银灰旋花C. ammannii | 0.009 | 2215.8 | 1.69 | ln A=1.12ln P-2.23 | 0.99 | 0.19 |
Table 6 Fractal dimension and stability index of micropatches in different types of plants
斑块类型 Patch type | 斑块面积 Patch area (hm2) | 斑块周长 Patch perimeter (m) | 分形维数 Fractal dimension | 模型 Model | R2 | 稳定性指数 Stability index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
锦鸡儿C. rosea | 0.009 | 8142.6 | 1.88 | ln A=1.06ln P-2.66 | 0.93 | 0.38 |
芨芨草A. splendens | 0.071 | 30123.1 | 1.43 | ln A=1.40ln P-5.24 | 0.95 | 0.07 |
银灰旋花C. ammannii | 0.009 | 2215.8 | 1.69 | ln A=1.12ln P-2.23 | 0.99 | 0.19 |
1 | Wu Y N, Luo W T, Huo G W, et al. Micro-scale spatial heterogeneity of vegetation community and soil organic matter under different grazing intensities. Journal of Desert Research, 2012, 32(4): 972-979. |
乌云娜, 雒文涛, 霍光伟, 等. 微生境尺度上放牧退化草原群落特征与土壤有机质的空间分异性. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(4): 972-979. | |
2 | Aguilar R, Ashworth L, Galetto L, et al. Plant reproductive susceptibility to habitat fragmentation: Review and synthesis through a meta-analysis. Ecology Letters, 2006, 9(8): 968-980. |
3 | Sun X B, Liu H Y, Zhang X H, et al. Maintenance capacity of plant community diversity of wetlands in patch scale. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2009, 20(3): 579-585. |
孙贤斌, 刘红玉, 张晓红, 等. 斑块尺度湿地植物群落多样性的维持能力. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(3): 579-585. | |
4 | Tanner J E. Edge effects on fauna in fragmented seagrass meadows. Austral Ecology, 2005, 30(2): 210-218. |
5 | Peters D P C, Gosz J R, Pockman W T, et al. Integrating patch and boundary dynamics to understand and predict biotic transitions at multiple scales. Landscape Ecology, 2006, 21(1): 19-33. |
6 | Li B, Zhang J T. Patch shape indices and scale fractal analysis of steppe landscape in the Loess Plateau. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2010, 18(2): 141-147. |
李斌, 张金屯. 黄土高原草原景观斑块形状的指数和分形分析. 草地学报, 2010, 18(2): 141-147. | |
7 | Wang Z Q, Lin H L. Features and application of a rangeland detection algorithm based on fractal dimensions to detect characteristics of barren patch. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(2): 144-151. |
王钊齐, 林慧龙. 基于分形维数的放牧地秃斑特征提取方法及其应用. 草业学报, 2011, 20(2): 144-151. | |
8 | Yang H, Liu X L. Landscape patch scale effect based on fractal theory in Honghe County of Yunnan Province. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2015, 34(9): 2636-2644. |
杨欢, 刘学录. 基于分形理论的云南红河县景观斑块尺度效应. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(9): 2636-2644. | |
9 | Yan H B, Han Y Z, Yang X Q, et al. Spatial distribution patterns and associations of tree species in typical natural secondary mountain forest communities of Northern China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(9): 2311-2321. |
闫海冰, 韩有志, 杨秀清, 等. 华北山地典型天然次生林群落的树种空间分布格局及其关联性. 生态学报, 2010, 30(9): 2311-2321. | |
10 | Wang X T, Wang W, Liu J H, et al. A new method measuring plant population spatial patterns: Photography orientation. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2006, 30(4): 571-575. |
王鑫厅, 王炜, 刘佳慧, 等. 植物种群空间分布格局测定的新方法: 摄影定位法. 植物生态学报, 2006, 30(4): 571-575. | |
11 | Yang H X, Zhang J T, Wu B, et al. Point pattern analysis of Artemisia ordosica population in the MU US sandy land. Journal of Plant Ecology, 2006, 30(4): 563-570. |
杨洪晓, 张金屯, 吴波, 等. 毛乌素沙地油蒿种群点格局分析. 植物生态学报, 2006, 30(4): 563-570. | |
12 | Ren H, Zhao C Z. Spatial pattern and competition relationship of Stellera chamaejasme and Aneurolepidium dasystachys population in degrade alpine grassland. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(2): 435-442. |
任珩, 赵成章. 高寒退化草地狼毒与赖草种群空间格局及竞争关系. 生态学报, 2013, 33(2): 435-442. | |
13 | Nan X N, Liu M X, Zhu G, et al. Spatial distribution pattern and association of Reaumuria songarica and Caragana roborovskyi in central Loess Plateau. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2019, 38(2): 354-360. |
南笑宁, 刘旻霞, 朱恭, 等. 黄土高原中部红砂与荒漠锦鸡儿种群空间分布格局及关联性. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(2): 354-360. | |
14 | Sun H R, Che Z B, Chen Y S, et al. Ecological adaptability of biological traits and population distribution patterns for the ephemeral plant Leontice incerta in desert habitats. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(7): 198-207. |
孙海荣, 车昭碧, 陈乙实, 等. 荒漠植物囊果草生物学特性及其种群分布格局的生态适应意义. 草业学报, 2019, 28(7): 198-207. | |
15 | Gonzalez M, Ladet S, Deconchat M, et al. Relative contribution of edge and interior zones to patch size effect on species richness: An example for woody plants. Forest Ecology and Management, 2010, 259(3): 266-274. |
16 | Zhang C. Identification of desert shrub species based on UAV remote sensing. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2018. |
张超. 基于无人机遥感的荒漠灌丛植物种识别方法研究. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2018. | |
17 | Fu B J, Chen L D, Ma K M, et al. Principles and applications of landscape ecology. Beijing: Science Press, 2001. |
傅伯杰, 陈利顶, 马克明, 等. 景观生态学原理及应用. 北京: 科学出版社, 2001. | |
18 | Frontier S. Applications of fractal theory to ecology. In: Legendre P, Legendre L. Developments in Numerical Ecology. Berlin: Sptinger, 1987: 335-378. |
19 | Rong K, Chen Y, Li X P, et al. Fractal analysis on land use structure in Xixi Watershed of Jinjiang Basin. Bulletin of Water and Soil Conservation, 2012, 32(4): 126-129. |
荣琨, 陈莹, 李学平, 等. 晋江西溪流域土地利用结构变化的分形研究. 水土保持通报, 2012, 32(4): 126-129. | |
20 | Wen J. Study on community characteristics and population pattern of several shrubs and semi-shrubs in Northern Ningxia. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2018. |
温静. 宁夏北部几种灌木、半灌木群落特征及种群格局研究. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2018. | |
21 | Jiang Y. Study on community characteristics and population pattern of Calligonum mongolicum in different areas of Inner Mongolia. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2017: 9-17. |
姜莹. 内蒙古不同地区沙拐枣群落特征及种群格局研究. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2017: 9-17. | |
22 | Wang K. Study of Achnatherum splendens grass on the function of soil and water conservation. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2001, 8(2): 157-159. |
王库. 芨芨草水土保持功能的初步研究. 水土保持研究, 2001, 8(2): 157-159. | |
23 | Fang Y. The impact of human disturbance on Xilamuren grassland. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Normal University, 2010. |
方毅. 人为干扰对希拉穆仁草地的影响. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古师范大学, 2010. | |
24 | Liu Y. Fertilization effects of three varieties of afforestation species in sandland. Protection Forest Science and Technology, 2014(4): 42-44. |
刘艳. 3个沙地造林树种的施肥试验效果. 防护林科技, 2014(4): 42-44. | |
25 | Wang X T, Hou Y L, Liu F, et al. Point pattern analysis of dominant populations in a degraded community in Leymus chinensis+Stipa grandis steppe in Inner Mongolia, China. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2011, 35(12): 1281-1289. |
王鑫厅, 侯亚丽, 刘芳, 等. 羊草+大针茅草原退化群落优势种群空间点格局分析. 植物生态学报, 2011, 35(12): 1281-1289. | |
26 | Zhao C Z, Gao F Y, Shi F X, et al. Melica przewalskyi population spatial pattern and response to soil moisture in degraded alpine grassland. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(22): 6688-6695. |
赵成章, 高福元, 石福习, 等. 高寒退化草地甘肃臭草种群分布格局及其对土壤水分的响应. 生态学报, 2011, 31(22): | |
6688-6695. | |
27 | Zhang F, Shangguan T L. Population pattern of dominant species in Elaeagnus mollis communities, Shanxi.Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2000, 24(5): 590-594. |
张峰, 上官铁梁. 山西翅果油树群落优势种群分布格局研究. 植物生态学报, 2000, 24(5): 590-594. |
[1] | XU Ai-yun, XU Dong-mei, CAO Bing, LIU Jin-long, YU-Shuang, GUO Yan-ju, MA Xiao-jing. Spatial distribution patterns and interspecific relationships of Agropyron mongolicum populations in different desert steppe communities in Ningxia [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(3): 171-178. |
[2] | LI Xin-le, BAO Fang, WU Bo, CAO Yan-li, LIU Ming-hu, DUAN Rui-bing. Distribution of newly fixed carbon of Nitraria tangutorum in the plant-soil system [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(2): 33-40. |
[3] | FANG Zhao, ZHANG Shao-kang, LIU Hai-wei, JIAO Feng, ZHANG Jun. Distribution of herbaceous community biomass and its relationship with influencing factors in the Loess Hilly Region [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(2): 26-35. |
[4] | LIU Ren-Tao, XI Wei-Hua, ZHU Fan. Community composition and seasonal dynamics of ground-dwelling arthropods in the desertified steppe of Ningxia [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(6): 126-135. |
[5] | WANG Tao, XU Chang-lin, ZHANG Li-jing, ZHOU Zhi-yu. Distribution patterns of nutrients in different positions of 5 oat varieties at different breeding periods [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(4): 70-81. |
[6] | LI Wu-bin, HE Bing-hui, WANG Li, SHEN Jian-hong, HUANG Zhi-qing, ZHANG Xing-hua, WEN Ji-jian, DAI Wan-gui. Spatial distribution pattern of soil nutrient contents in Jiuzhaigou Manaoke Gold Mine Valley, Sichuan, China [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(3): 1-9. |
[7] | CHAI Yong-qing, CAO Zhi-zhong, CAI Zhuo-shan, WAN Li-xia, LI Xue-ling. The spatial distribution patterns of rare plant Gymnocarpos przewalskii communities in Subei [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2010, 19(5): 239-249. |
[8] | LU Wei-hua, ZHU Jin-zhong, WANG Dong-jiang, JIN Gui-li, YU Bo. Distribution pattern and dynamic population changes of Seriphidium transiliense seedlings in fenced enclosures in the northern Tianshan Mountains [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(4): 17-26. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||