Biomass and distribution characteristics of dominant shrubs under varying degrees of rocky desertification in the karst region of southern Yunnan

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2024.2.11

Abstract

Abstract:

Shrubs play a crucial role in vegetation restoration in karst rocky desertification areas, with their biomass directly influencing the restoration of rocky desertification and the carbon budget. To explore the biomass characteristics and distribution patterns of dominant shrub species in response to rocky desertification succession, this study focused on three dominant shrub species in the karst areas of southern Yunnan: Osteomeles schwerinae, Osyris lanceolata and Dodonaea viscosa. We analyzed their crown width, tree height, basal diameter, and the biomass of various organs (roots, stems, leaves, and flowers/fruits). The results showed that: (1) Under different rocky desertification gradients, the average biomass of Osteomeles schwerinae and Dodonaea viscosa exhibited an “inverted V” trend, while Osyris lanceolata showed a different pattern. (2) The order of biomass allocation among the organs of the three dominant shrubs under various rocky desertification gradients was: stems > roots > leaves > flowers/fruits. (3) The biomass estimation for the three shrubs was best described by linear and power functions, with the best predictive variables being basal diameter (D) and the product of basal diameter squared and tree height (D²H). This study provides fundamental data for vegetation restoration and ecosystem carbon budget research in karst rocky desertification areas

Key words: karst, rocky desertification, dominant shrubs, biomass, allometric model, distribution characteristics

CLC Number:

YANG Huaju, LI Canfeng, YANG Kehao, ZHANG Xilu, WANG Chuanyu, WANG Xingrong, HE Xu, PENG Xuefeng, ZHANG Liankai. Biomass and distribution characteristics of dominant shrubs under varying degrees of rocky desertification in the karst region of southern Yunnan[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2024, 31(5): 440-448.

Figures/Tables 9

References 35

[1]	ALI A, YAN E R. Relationships between biodiversity and carbon stocks in forest ecosystems: a systematic literature review[J]. Tropical Ecology, 2017, 58(1): 1-14.
[2]	FANG T, RAO M D, CHEN Q T, et al. Different biomass allocation strategies of geophytes and non-geophytes along an altitude gradient[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2023, 146: 109805.
[3]	BECHTOLD H A, INOUYE R S. Distribution of carbon and nitrogen in sagebrush steppe after six years of nitrogen addition and shrub removal[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 2007, 71(1): 122-132.
[4]	曾伟生. 国内外灌木生物量模型研究综述[J]. 世界林业研究, 2015, 28(1): 31-36.
[5]	FERRAZ A, SAATCHI S, MALLET C, et al. Lidar detection of individual tree size in tropical forests[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2016, 183: 318-333.
[6]	JUCKER T, CASPERSEN J, CHAVE J, et al. Allometric equations for integrating remote sensing imagery into forest monitoring programmes[J]. Global Change Biology, 2017, 23(1): 177-190. DOI PMID
[7]	POORTER H, SACK L. Pitfalls and possibilities in the analysis of biomass allocation patterns in plants[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2012, 3: 259. DOI PMID
[8]	詹瑾, 李玉霖, 韩丹, 等. 半干旱沙区3种优势固沙灌木生物量分配及其生态学意义[J]. 中国沙漠, 2020, 40(5): 149-157. DOI
[9]	金文云. 猴耳环人工林地上部分生物量估测及其分配特征研究[D]. 北京: 中国林业科学研究院, 2018.
[10]	FRESCHET G T, VIOLLE C, BOURGET M Y, et al. Allocation, morphology, physiology, architecture: the multiple facets of plant above- and below-ground responses to resource stress[J]. The New Phytologist, 2018, 219(4): 1338-1352.
[11]	宋同清, 彭晚霞, 杜虎, 等. 中国西南喀斯特石漠化时空演变特征、发生机制与调控对策[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(18): 5328-5341.
[12]	赵丽苹. 基于MODIS数据的喀斯特地区石漠化时空演变特征研究[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学(北京), 2015: 68.
[13]	李艳琼. 湘西南石漠化灌丛生物量及养分循环[D]. 长沙: 中南林业科技大学, 2016.
[14]	朱守谦, 魏鲁明, 陈正仁, 等. 茂兰喀斯特森林生物量构成初步研究[J]. 植物生态学报, 1995, 19(4): 358-367.
[15]	刘之洲, 宁晨, 闫文德, 等. 喀斯特地区3种针叶林林分生物量及碳储量研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2017, 37(10): 105-111.
[16]	汪珍川, 杜虎, 宋同清, 等. 广西主要树种(组)异速生长模型及森林生物量特征[J]. 生态学报, 2015, 35(13): 4462-4472.
[17]	赵磊磊, 雷艳娇, 陈俊松, 等. 云南红河州石漠化演变过程及其综合治理成效[J]. 中国岩溶, 2019, 38(5): 704-712.
[18]	曾伟生, 唐守正. 立木生物量方程的优度评价和精度分析[J]. 林业科学, 2011, 47(11): 106-113.
[19]	曾嘉庆, 祝佳杏, 王微, 等. 重庆喀斯特地区不同干扰生境中山麻杆种群的结构与格局[J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(9): 2313-2320.
[20]	肖林颖, 吴秀芹, 周金星, 等. 岩溶断陷盆地典型县域石漠化治理综合效益评价: 以云南建水县为例[J]. 地球学报, 2021, 42(3): 444-450.
[21]	盛茂银, 刘洋, 熊康宁. 中国南方喀斯特石漠化演替过程中土壤理化性质的响应[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(19): 6303-6313.
[22]	李周, 高凯敏, 刘锦春, 等. 西南喀斯特地区两种草本对干湿交替和N添加的生长响应[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(11): 3372-3380.
[23]	程杰, 刘永辉, 田瑛. 宁夏半干旱区柠条锦鸡儿灌木林生长特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 2016, 36(1): 332-336.
[24]	潘睿炽, 王小菁, 李娘辉, 等. 植物生理学[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2017.
[25]	李莹, 曾晓琳, 游明鸿, 等. 5种川西北沙化地草本植物生态适应策略的差异性[J]. 草业科学, 2016, 33(5): 843-850.
[26]	YANG B J, XUE W Y, YU S C, et al. Effects of stand age on biomass allocation and allometry of quercus acutissima in the central Loess Plateau of China[J]. Forests, 2019, 10-41.
[27]	严月, 朱建军, 张彬, 等. 草原生态系统植物地下生物量分配及对全球变化的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(5): 585-596. DOI
[28]	高玉尧, 刘洋, 许文天, 等. 不同施肥处理对橡胶草生物量积累与分配变化及相关性分析[J]. 分子植物育种, 2018, 16(9): 2979-2986.
[29]	HILBERT D W, CANADELL J. Biomass partitioning and resource allocation of plants from Mediterranean-type ecosystems: possible responses to elevated atmospheric CO₂[M]//MORENO J M, OECHEL W C. Global change and mediterranean-type ecosystems. New York: Springer, 1995: 76-101.
[30]	谢宗强, 王杨, 唐志尧, 等. 中国常见灌木生物量模型手册[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2018.
[31]	罗永开, 方精云, 胡会峰. 山西芦芽山14种常见灌木生物量模型及生物量分配[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(1): 115-125. DOI
[32]	LUSK C H. Leaf area and growth of juvenile temperate evergreens in low light: species of contrasting shade tolerance change rank during ontogeny[J]. Functional Ecology, 2004, 18(6): 820-828.
[33]	MA S H, HE F, TIAN D, et al. Variations and determinants of carbon content in plants: a global synthesis[J]. Biogeosciences Discussions, 2018, 15, 693-702.
[34]	CHEN R F, RAN J Z, HUANG H, et al. Life history strategies drive size‐dependent biomass allocation patterns of dryland ephemerals and shrubs[J]. Ecosphere, 2019, 10(4): e02709.
[35]	蒋忠诚, 罗为群, 童立强, 等. 21世纪西南岩溶石漠化演变特点及影响因素[J]. 中国岩溶, 2016, 35(5): 461-468.

物种 Species	科 Family	属 Genus	石漠化梯度	经度(E)/(°)	纬度(N)/(°)	海拔/m
华西小石积 Osteomeles schwerinae	蔷薇科 Rosaceae	小石积属 Osteomeles	非石漠化	102.822 605	23.747 065	1 506
			潜在石漠化	102.904 385	23.619 535	1 383
			轻度石漠化	102.900 635	23.616 895	1 366
			中度石漠化	102.935 310	23.639 170	1 442
			重度石漠化	102.942 120	23.714 085	1 496
沙针 Osyris lanceolata	檀香科 Santalaceae	沙针属 Osyris	非石漠化	102.822 545	23.747 010	1 508
			潜在石漠化	102.900 660	23.616 395	1 385
			轻度石漠化	102.900 460	23.616 725	1 376
			中度石漠化	102.936 790	23.695 840	1 486
			重度石漠化	102.942 125	23.714 125	1 489
车桑子 Dodonaea viscosa	无患子科 Sapindaceae	车桑子属 Dodonaea	非石漠化	102.822 020	23.745 930	1 513
			潜在石漠化	102.899 915	23.611 430	1 397
			轻度石漠化	102.899 995	23.616 745	1 382
			中度石漠化	102.941 560	23.693 235	1 446
			重度石漠化	102.942 465	23.714 835	1 466

物种 Species	科 Family	属 Genus	石漠化梯度	经度(E)/(°)	纬度(N)/(°)	海拔/m
华西小石积 Osteomeles schwerinae	蔷薇科 Rosaceae	小石积属 Osteomeles	非石漠化	102.822 605	23.747 065	1 506
			潜在石漠化	102.904 385	23.619 535	1 383
			轻度石漠化	102.900 635	23.616 895	1 366
			中度石漠化	102.935 310	23.639 170	1 442
			重度石漠化	102.942 120	23.714 085	1 496
沙针 Osyris lanceolata	檀香科 Santalaceae	沙针属 Osyris	非石漠化	102.822 545	23.747 010	1 508
			潜在石漠化	102.900 660	23.616 395	1 385
			轻度石漠化	102.900 460	23.616 725	1 376
			中度石漠化	102.936 790	23.695 840	1 486
			重度石漠化	102.942 125	23.714 125	1 489
车桑子 Dodonaea viscosa	无患子科 Sapindaceae	车桑子属 Dodonaea	非石漠化	102.822 020	23.745 930	1 513
			潜在石漠化	102.899 915	23.611 430	1 397
			轻度石漠化	102.899 995	23.616 745	1 382
			中度石漠化	102.941 560	23.693 235	1 446
			重度石漠化	102.942 465	23.714 835	1 466

物种	最佳方程	最佳变量	参数a	参数b	R²	p	样本数n
华西小石积 Osteomeles schwerinae	Y_Leaf=ab^H	H	33.959	0.752	0.530	<0.001	25
	Y_Stem=a(D²H)^b	D²H	310.853	0.812	0.764	<0.001	25
	Y_Aboveground=a(D²H)^b	D²H	426.577	0.736	0.736	<0.001	25
	Y_Root=ab^A	A	186.256	0.148	0.177	0.021	25
	Y_Total=a(D²H)^b	D²H	677.669	0.604	0.632	<0.001	25
沙针 Osyris lanceolata	Y_Leaf=aD^b	D	158.578	0.639	0.337	0.001	25
	Y_Stem=aD^b	D	557.734	1.022	0.475	<0.001	25
	Y_Aboveground=aD^b	D	731.468	0.948	0.482	<0.001	25
	Y_Root=ab^D	D	285.531	0.214	0.144	0.035	25
	Y_Total=aD^b	D	1 090.11	0.797	0.412	<0.001	25
车桑子 Dodonaea viscosa	Y_Leaf=a+blnD	D	126.16	243.544	0.527	<0.001	25
	Y_Stem=a+bA	A	-117.092	519.028	0.771	<0.001	25
	Y_Aboveground=a+bA	A	11.03	567.017	0.766	<0.001	25
	Y_Root=aD^b	D	184.018	1.464	0.712	<0.001	25
	Y_Total=a+bC	C	-1 751.826	2 080.701	0.781	<0.001	25

物种	最佳方程	最佳变量	参数a	参数b	R²	p	样本数n
华西小石积 Osteomeles schwerinae	Y_Leaf=ab^H	H	33.959	0.752	0.530	<0.001	25
	Y_Stem=a(D²H)^b	D²H	310.853	0.812	0.764	<0.001	25
	Y_Aboveground=a(D²H)^b	D²H	426.577	0.736	0.736	<0.001	25
	Y_Root=ab^A	A	186.256	0.148	0.177	0.021	25
	Y_Total=a(D²H)^b	D²H	677.669	0.604	0.632	<0.001	25
沙针 Osyris lanceolata	Y_Leaf=aD^b	D	158.578	0.639	0.337	0.001	25
	Y_Stem=aD^b	D	557.734	1.022	0.475	<0.001	25
	Y_Aboveground=aD^b	D	731.468	0.948	0.482	<0.001	25
	Y_Root=ab^D	D	285.531	0.214	0.144	0.035	25
	Y_Total=aD^b	D	1 090.11	0.797	0.412	<0.001	25
车桑子 Dodonaea viscosa	Y_Leaf=a+blnD	D	126.16	243.544	0.527	<0.001	25
	Y_Stem=a+bA	A	-117.092	519.028	0.771	<0.001	25
	Y_Aboveground=a+bA	A	11.03	567.017	0.766	<0.001	25
	Y_Root=aD^b	D	184.018	1.464	0.712	<0.001	25
	Y_Total=a+bC	C	-1 751.826	2 080.701	0.781	<0.001	25