放牧家畜组合对青藏高原高寒草地植冠种子库与萌发特征的影响

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2025.03.008

生态环境学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (3): 411-420.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2025.03.008

放牧家畜组合对青藏高原高寒草地植冠种子库与萌发特征的影响

周沁苑¹^,²^,³(), 董全民¹^,²^,³, 杨晓霞¹^,²^,³, 刘玉祯¹^,²^,³, 王芳草¹^,²^,³, 许蔚¹^,²^,³, 俞旸¹^,²^,³, 张春平¹^,²^,³, 刘文亭¹^,²^,³^,^*()

1.青海大学畜牧兽医科学院，青海西宁 810016
2.青海省高寒草地适应性管理重点实验室，青海西宁 810016
3.三江源区高寒草地生态教育部重点实验室，青海西宁 810016

收稿日期:2024-09-14 出版日期:2025-03-18 发布日期:2025-03-24
通讯作者: *刘文亭。E-mail꞉ qhdxlwt@163.com
作者简介:周沁苑（1999年生），女，博士研究生，研究方向为草地生态与环境保护研究。E-mail: zhouqinyuan2021@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(32160340);青海省科协中青年科技人才托举工程(2022QHSKXRCTJ15)

Effects of Grazing Livestock Combinations on Canopy Seed Bank and Germination Characteristics of Alpine Grassland in Qinhai

ZHOU Qinyuan¹^,²^,³(), DONG Quanmin¹^,²^,³, YANG Xiaoxia¹^,²^,³, LIU Yuzhen¹^,²^,³, WANG Fangcao¹^,²^,³, XU Wei¹^,²^,³, YU Yang¹^,²^,³, ZHANG Chunping¹^,²^,³, LIU Wenting¹^,²^,³^,^*()

1. College of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Science, Qinghai University, Xining 810016, P. R. China
2. Key Laboratory of Adaptive Management of Alpine Grassland, Xining 810016, P. R. China
3. Key Laboratory of Alpine Grassland Ecology of Ministry of Education, Sanjiangyuan District, Xining 810016, P. R. China

Received:2024-09-14 Online:2025-03-18 Published:2025-03-24

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

植冠种子库是植物适应外界环境的一种机制，在抵抗外界干扰和植被更新恢复等方面具有重要意义。基于青海省海北州西海镇高寒草地，研究不同放牧家畜组合（牦牛藏羊1꞉2、1꞉4、1꞉6、牦牛/藏羊单牧）对高寒草地植物群落植冠种子库的影响。结果表明，1）研究试验区具有植冠种子库的物种13种，分属6个科、10个属，其中7种宿存时间超过5个月。2）放牧会降低群落植冠种子库的密度，且主要降低禾本科植物种子与杂类草植物种子密度，藏羊单牧与混合放牧对植冠种子库密度的影响大于牦牛单牧，同时放牧处理会降低群落植冠种子库丰富度指数和多样性指数。3）植冠种子库经5个月宿存后，共有物种矮生嵩草（Carex alatauensis）的植冠种子库种子质量提高、萌发率提高。4）矮生嵩草植冠种子库数量与质量权衡策略受不同放牧家畜组合影响，表现为牦牛与藏羊混牧条件下更倾向于增加种子质量，而单一藏羊放牧则偏重种子数量提升。综上所述，放牧会显著降低植冠种子库密度，种子经宿存后整体质量得到提升。建议在返青期前严格控制放牧，以促进草地的植被恢复和种群稳定。该研究为高寒草地的生态管理提供了理论依据。

关键词: 高寒草地, 植冠种子库, 中度放牧, 放牧家畜组合, 种子萌发, 权衡分析

Abstract:

The canopy seed bank serves as a critical adaptive mechanism for plants, enabling them to cope with environmental challenges, resist disturbances, and facilitate vegetation regeneration and ecosystem restoration. Understanding the effects of grazing on canopy seed banks is essential for managing alpine grassland ecosystems, where grazing practices and livestock combinations can significantly impact plant community structure and seed dynamics. In this study, we investigated the effects of different grazing livestock combinations on the canopy seed bank within an alpine grassland ecosystem in Xihai Town, Haibei Prefecture, Qinghai Province. Specifically, we examined the impacts of grazing regimes that included varying ratios of yak to Tibetan sheep, specifically 1꞉2, 1꞉4, and 1꞉6, as well as single-species grazing by yaks or Tibetan sheep alone. Our research aimed to clarify how these grazing combinations influence canopy seed bank density, species composition, seed dormancy, and seed quality. Results indicated that 1) 13 plant species within the study area maintained canopy seed banks, spanning six botanical families and ten genera. Of these species, seven demonstrated the capacity for seed persistence within the canopy seed bank for over five months. 2) Our findings highlight the significant influence of grazing practices on the density and diversity of the canopy seed bank within alpine grassland plant communities. Grazing consistently reduced canopy seed bank density, with notable decreases in the densities of both Poaceae (grass family) seeds and seeds from miscellaneous forb species. Among the grazing treatments, Tibetan sheep-only grazing and mixed yak-sheep grazing regimes exerted a more substantial impact on canopy seed bank density compared to yak-only grazing. Furthermore, grazing treatments led to a reduction in the species richness and diversity indices of the canopy seed bank, underscoring the susceptibility of seed bank diversity to grazing-induced pressures. 3) In addition to these density and diversity effects, our study observed that seeds stored within the canopy seed bank undergo qualitative improvements following prolonged dormancy. Specifically, after a five-month dormancy period, seeds of Carex alatauensis (a dominant sedge species in the study area) exhibited significant increases in both seed mass and germination rates. This suggests that while grazing may reduce the overall quantity of seeds in the canopy seed bank, dormancy can enhance the physiological quality of the remaining seeds, potentially benefiting species that rely on canopy seed banks for regeneration. 4) Moreover, the trade-off between seed quantity and quality in the canopy seed bank was found to be influenced by the specific combinations of grazing livestock. Under mixed grazing conditions involving both yaks and Tibetan sheep, Carex alatauensis displayed a tendency towards increased seed quality, as indicated by higher seed mass and improved germination rates. In contrast, Tibetan sheep-only grazing promoted an increase in seed quantity rather than quality. This observed trade-off suggests that the presence of different livestock species may drive distinct evolutionary or adaptive strategies in seed bank dynamics, which could have implications for species composition and community resilience in grazed ecosystems. Overall, our findings indicate that grazing exerts a significant, density-reducing effect on the canopy seed bank, while also prompting adaptive changes in seed quality among certain plant species. These results contribute to a broader understanding of how grazing influences plant reproductive strategies and canopy seed bank dynamics in alpine grasslands, with potential applications for ecological management and conservation. Based on our findings, we recommend implementing strict grazing controls before the green-up period in alpine grasslands, as this may promote vegetation recovery, enhance canopy seed bank quality, and improve the stability of plant populations. This research provides valuable theoretical support for the sustainable management of alpine grassland ecosystems, particularly in regions where grazing is a predominant land use practice.

Key words: alpine grassland, canopy seed bank, moderate grazing, grazing livestock combination, seed germination, trade-off analysis

中图分类号:

S812.29
X173

周沁苑, 董全民, 杨晓霞, 刘玉祯, 王芳草, 许蔚, 俞旸, 张春平, 刘文亭. 放牧家畜组合对青藏高原高寒草地植冠种子库与萌发特征的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2025, 34(3): 411-420.

ZHOU Qinyuan, DONG Quanmin, YANG Xiaoxia, LIU Yuzhen, WANG Fangcao, XU Wei, YU Yang, ZHANG Chunping, LIU Wenting. Effects of Grazing Livestock Combinations on Canopy Seed Bank and Germination Characteristics of Alpine Grassland in Qinhai[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2025, 34(3): 411-420.

图/表 11

参考文献 31

[1]	Bell R H V, 1971. A grazing ecosystem in the Serengeti[J]. Scientific American, 225(1): 86-93.
[2]	CALVO L, HERNÁNDEZ V, VALBUENA L, et al., 2016. Provenance and seed mass determine seed tolerance to high temperatures associated to forest fires in Pinus pinaster[J]. Annals of Forest Science, 73(2): 381-391.
[3]	COFFIN D P, LAUENROTH W K, 1989. Spatial and temporal variation in the seed bank of a semiarid grassland[J]. American Journal of Botany, 76(1): 53-58.
[4]	GOUBITZ S, NATHAN R, ROITEMBERG R, et al., 2004. Canopy seed bank structure in relation to꞉ fire, tree size and density[J]. Plant Ecology, 173(2): 191-201.
[5]	GÜNSTER A, 1994. Seed bank dynamics—longevity, viability and predation of seeds of serotinous plants in the central Namib Desert[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 28(3): 195-205.
[6]	GUTTERMAN Y, GINOTT S, 1994. Long-term protected ‘seed bank’ in dry inflorescences of Asteriscus pygmaeus; achene dispersal mechanism and germination[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 26(2): 149-163.
[7]	KAREN R, VAN M W R, 1999. Dispersal biology of desert plants[M]. Berlin꞉ Springer-Verlag.
[8]	LAMONT B B, 1991. Canopy seed storage and release꞉ What’s in a name?[J]. Oikos, 60(2): 266-268.
[9]	LAMONT B B, ENRIGHT N, 2000. Adaptive advantages of aerial seed banks[J]. Plant Species Biology, 15(2): 157-166.
[10]	LU J J, LIU B, TAN D Y, et al., 2020. Aerial seed bank in a cold desert annual-ephemeral species꞉ Role of anatomical structure of stem and delayed fruit dehiscence in timing of seed dispersal[J]. Plant Species Biology, 35(4): 260-269.
[11]	MACDONALD N, WATKINSON A, 1981. Models of an annual plant population with a seedbank[J]. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 93(3): 643-653.
[12]	NADKARNI N M, HABER W A, 2009. Canopy seed banks as time capsules of biodiversity in pasture-remnant tree crowns[J]. Conservation Biology, 23(5): 1117-1126. DOI PMID
[13]	NARITA K, WADA N, 1998. Ecological significance of the aerial seed pool of a desert lignified annual, Blepharis sindica (Acanthaceae)[J]. Plant Ecology, 135(2): 177-184.
[14]	SHROFF R, VERGARA F, MUCK A, et al., 2008. Nonuniform distribution of glucosinolates in Arabidopsis thaliana leaves has important consequences for plant defense[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(16): 6196-6201.
[15]	TIAN X X, MAO P C, ZHENG M L, et al., 2021. Seed germination and biochemical responses of two Elytrigia elongata accessions exposed to abiotic stresses[J]. Grassland Science, 67(4): 369-379.
[16]	VERKAIK I, ESPELTA J M, 2006. Post-fire regeneration thinning, cone production, serotiny and regeneration age in Pinus halepensis[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 231(1-3): 155-163.
[17]	WEITBRECHT K, MÜLLER K, LEUBNER-METZGER G, 2011. First of the mark: Early seed germination[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 62(10): 3289-3309.
[18]	YANG X X, DONG Q M, CHU H, et al., 2019. Different responses of soil element contents and their stoichiometry (C꞉N꞉P) to yak grazing and Tibetan sheep grazing in an alpine grassland on the eastern Qinghai - Tibetan Plateau[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 285: 106628.
[19]	ZHOU Q Y, DONG Q M, WANG F C, et al., 2023. Cascading effects of seed-stem individual spatial patterns along a grazing gradient[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 14: 1137726.
[20]	董全民, 赵新全, 刘玉祯, 等, 2022. 放牧方式影响高寒草地矮生嵩草种子大小与数量的关系[J]. 植物生态学报, 46(9): 1018-1026. DOI
	DONG Q M, ZHAO X Q, LIU Y Z, et al., 2022. Grazing methods affect the relationship between seed size and number of Kobresia humilis in alpine grassland[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 46(9): 1018-1026.
[21]	董文静, 2021. 荒漠一年生植物异喙菊植冠种子库的结构成因、扩散及休眠与萌发特性[D]. 乌鲁木齐꞉ 新疆农业大学.
	DONG W J, 2021. Structural origin, diffusion, dormancy and germination characteristics of crown seed bank of desert annual plant I. heterocerasus[D]. Urumqi꞉ Xinjiang Agricultural University.
[22]	刘冰, 2020. 荒漠一年生短命植物鸟头荠植冠种子库꞉ 结构成因、扩散动态与萌发行为[D]. 乌鲁木齐꞉ 新疆农业大学.
	LIU B, 2020. Study on the canopy seed bank of one-year-old ephemeral plant Cardamine hirsuta in desert꞉ structural origin, diffusion dynamics and germination behavior[D]. Urumqi꞉ Xinjiang Agricultural University.
[23]	刘芳, 肖彩虹, 2008. 野生甘草资源植冠种子库特性的初步研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 22(3): 175-177.
	LIU F, XIAO C H, 2008. Preliminary study on the characteristics of wild Glycyrrhiza resources crown seed bank[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 22(3): 175-177.
[24]	马君玲, 刘志民, 2005. 植冠种子库及其生态意义研究[J]. 生态学杂志, 24(11): 79-83.
	MA J L, LIU Z M, 2005. Study on crown seed bank and its ecological significance[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 24(11): 79-83.
[25]	马君玲, 刘志民, 2008. 沙丘区植物植冠储藏种子的活力和萌发特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 19(2): 252-256.
	MA J L, LIU Z M, 2008. Seed vigor and germination characteristics of plant canopy storage in dune area[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 19(2): 252-256.
[26]	王东丽, 焦菊英, 陈宇, 等, 2015. 黄土丘陵沟壑区主要物种植冠种子库动态及其生态策略[J]. 生态学报, 35(5): 1513-1520.
	WANG D L, JIAO J Y, CHEN Y et al., 2015. Dynamics and ecological strategies of seed bank of main crop planting canopy in loess hilly and gully region[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(5): 1513-1520.
[27]	闫巧玲, 刘志民, 李荣平, 等, 2005. 科尔沁沙地75种植物结种量种子形态和植物生活型关系研究[J]. 草业学报, 14(4): 21-28.
	YAN Q L, LIU Z M, LI R P et al., 2005. Study on the relationship between seed number, seed morphology and plant life form of 75 species in Horqin Sandy Land[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 14(4): 21-28.
[28]	闫巧玲, 刘志民, 李雪华, 等, 2007. 埋藏对65种半干旱草地植物种子萌发特性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 18(4): 777-782.
	YAN Q L, LIU Z M, LI X H, et al., 2007. Effects of burial on seed germination characteristics of 65 species of semi-arid grassland plants[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 18(4): 777-782.
[29]	杨丰福, 2022. 青藏高原放牧家畜食性生态位特征研究[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学.
	YANG F F, 2022. Study on the foraging niche characteristics of grazing livestock on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau[D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University.
[30]	张小彦, 焦菊英, 王宁, 等, 2010. 陕北黄土丘陵区6种植物冠层种子库的初步研究[J]. 武汉植物学研究, 28(6): 767-771.
	ZHANG X Y, JIAO J Y, WANG N, et al., 2010. Preliminary study on canopy seed bank of six plant species in loess hilly region of northern Shaanxi[J]. Wuhan Botanical Research, 28(6): 767-771.
[31]	周华坤, 姚步青, 于龙, 2016. 三江源区高寒草地退化演替与生态恢复[M]. 北京꞉ 科学出版社.
	ZHOU H K, YAO B Q, YU L, 2016. Degraded succession and ecological restoration of alpine grassland in the source region of Tam Giang[M]. Beijing꞉ Science Press.

处理	牦牛头数	藏羊只数	小区面积/hm²	小区数
YG	1	0	0.26	3
SG	0	2	0.17	3
MG1꞉2	1	2	0.43	3
MG1꞉4	1	4	0.60	3
MG1꞉6	1	6	0.77	3
CK	0	0	0.05	3

处理	牦牛头数	藏羊只数	小区面积/hm²	小区数
YG	1	0	0.26	3
SG	0	2	0.17	3
MG1꞉2	1	2	0.43	3
MG1꞉4	1	4	0.60	3
MG1꞉6	1	6	0.77	3
CK	0	0	0.05	3

时间	种	种子密度/m⁻²
时间	种	CK	YG	MG1꞉2	MG1꞉4	MG1꞉6	SG
11月	天山针茅 Stipa tianschanica	12.27±4.94^a	－	－	0.53±0.53^b	0.27±0.27^b	－
	紫花针茅 Stipa purpurea	1.91±1.01^a	2.13±1.65^ab	－	－	1.07±1.07^b	－
	洽草 Koeleria macrantha	－	－	－	－	0.80±0.80	－
	早熟禾 Poa annua	123.20±41.19^a	19.73±10.74^b	－	3.47±2.20^b	14.40±10.82^b	10.40±4.57^b
	鸡冠茶 Sibbaldianthe bifurca	－	－	4.80±4.80	－	－	－
	多茎委陵菜 Potentilla multicaulis	35.47±18.02^ab	61.87±26.24^a	1.60±1.16^b	10.67±10.67^b	0.53±0.36^b	－
	毛莓草 Sibbaldianthe adpressa	1.60±1.60^a	18.70±1.02^a	4.80±4.26^a	2.13±1.40^a	18.70±1.60^a	－
	矮生嵩草 Carex alatauensis	146.93±48.86^a	107.73±34.30^a	4.53±2.17^b	66.40±25.50^ab	88.80±25.37^ab	19.20±5.92^b
	干生薹草 Carex aridula	73.07±25.70^a	3.47±1.9^b	0.27±0.27^b	1.07±0.6^b	1.07±0.73^b	7.73±5.36^b
	猪毛蒿 Artemisia scoparia	128.80±80.31^a	7.20±6.39^b	8.27±5.95^b	－	－	－
	狗娃花 Aster hispidus	316.00±87.91	－	－	－	－	－
	白花枝子花 Dracocephalum heterophyllum	1.60±1.60	－	－	－	－	－
	鳞叶龙胆 Gentiana squarrosa	－	10.13±10.13	－	－	－	－
4月	早熟禾 Poa annua	20.80±4.82^a	6.93±3.97^b	0.53±0.53^b	2.13±1.02^b	1.60±1.34^b	2.40±1.16^b
	多茎委陵菜 Potentilla multicaulis	30.40±11.22^a	0.27±0.27^b	－	5.07±4.53^b	4.00±3.24^b	－
	矮生嵩草 Carex alatauensis	72.00±21.42^ab	74.67±18.92^a	4.00±1.75^c	37.87±15.38^abc	34.93±16.19^abc	12.00±5.76^ab
	干生薹草 Carex aridula	30.93±14.92^a	0.53±0.53^b	3.20±3.20^b	0.53±0.53^b	0.27±0.27^b	0.27±0.27^b
	猪毛蒿 Artemisia scoparia	0.53±0.53^a	0.27±0.27^a	0.53±0.53^a	－	－	0.27±0.27^a
	狗娃花 Aster hispidus	8.80±8.80	－	－	－	－	－
	洽草 Koeleria macrantha	10.93±32.86	－	－	－	－	－

时间	种	种子密度/m⁻²
时间	种	CK	YG	MG1꞉2	MG1꞉4	MG1꞉6	SG
11月	天山针茅 Stipa tianschanica	12.27±4.94^a	－	－	0.53±0.53^b	0.27±0.27^b	－
	紫花针茅 Stipa purpurea	1.91±1.01^a	2.13±1.65^ab	－	－	1.07±1.07^b	－
	洽草 Koeleria macrantha	－	－	－	－	0.80±0.80	－
	早熟禾 Poa annua	123.20±41.19^a	19.73±10.74^b	－	3.47±2.20^b	14.40±10.82^b	10.40±4.57^b
	鸡冠茶 Sibbaldianthe bifurca	－	－	4.80±4.80	－	－	－
	多茎委陵菜 Potentilla multicaulis	35.47±18.02^ab	61.87±26.24^a	1.60±1.16^b	10.67±10.67^b	0.53±0.36^b	－
	毛莓草 Sibbaldianthe adpressa	1.60±1.60^a	18.70±1.02^a	4.80±4.26^a	2.13±1.40^a	18.70±1.60^a	－
	矮生嵩草 Carex alatauensis	146.93±48.86^a	107.73±34.30^a	4.53±2.17^b	66.40±25.50^ab	88.80±25.37^ab	19.20±5.92^b
	干生薹草 Carex aridula	73.07±25.70^a	3.47±1.9^b	0.27±0.27^b	1.07±0.6^b	1.07±0.73^b	7.73±5.36^b
	猪毛蒿 Artemisia scoparia	128.80±80.31^a	7.20±6.39^b	8.27±5.95^b	－	－	－
	狗娃花 Aster hispidus	316.00±87.91	－	－	－	－	－
	白花枝子花 Dracocephalum heterophyllum	1.60±1.60	－	－	－	－	－
	鳞叶龙胆 Gentiana squarrosa	－	10.13±10.13	－	－	－	－
4月	早熟禾 Poa annua	20.80±4.82^a	6.93±3.97^b	0.53±0.53^b	2.13±1.02^b	1.60±1.34^b	2.40±1.16^b
	多茎委陵菜 Potentilla multicaulis	30.40±11.22^a	0.27±0.27^b	－	5.07±4.53^b	4.00±3.24^b	－
	矮生嵩草 Carex alatauensis	72.00±21.42^ab	74.67±18.92^a	4.00±1.75^c	37.87±15.38^abc	34.93±16.19^abc	12.00±5.76^ab
	干生薹草 Carex aridula	30.93±14.92^a	0.53±0.53^b	3.20±3.20^b	0.53±0.53^b	0.27±0.27^b	0.27±0.27^b
	猪毛蒿 Artemisia scoparia	0.53±0.53^a	0.27±0.27^a	0.53±0.53^a	－	－	0.27±0.27^a
	狗娃花 Aster hispidus	8.80±8.80	－	－	－	－	－
	洽草 Koeleria macrantha	10.93±32.86	－	－	－	－	－

科	属	种	生活型
禾本科 Gramineae	针茅属 Stipa	紫花针茅 Stipa purpurea	PH
	针茅属 Stipa	天山针茅 Stipa tianschanica	PH
	洽草属 Koeleria	洽草 Koeleria macrantha	PH
	早熟禾属 Poa	早熟禾 Poa annua	AH
蔷薇科 Rosaceae	委陵菜属 Potentilla	多茎委陵菜 Potentilla multicaulis	PH
	毛莓草属 Sibbaldianthe	毛莓草 Sibbaldianthe adpressa	PH
	毛莓草属 Sibbaldianthe	鸡冠茶 Sibbaldianthe bifurca	PH
菊科 Compositae	蒿属 Artemisia	猪毛蒿 Artemisia scoparia	PH/ABH
	紫菀属 Aster	狗娃花 Aster hispidus	ABH
莎草科 Cyperaceae	薹草属 Carex	矮生嵩草 Carex alatauensis	PH
	薹草属 Carex	干生薹草 Carex aridula	PH
唇形科 Labiatae	青兰属 Dracocephalum	白花枝子花 Dracocephalum heterophyllum	PH
龙胆科 Gentianaceae	龙胆属 Gentiana	鳞叶龙胆 Gentiana squarrosa	AH

放牧家畜组合对青藏高原高寒草地植冠种子库与萌发特征的影响

Effects of Grazing Livestock Combinations on Canopy Seed Bank and Germination Characteristics of Alpine Grassland in Qinhai

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 11

参考文献 31

相关文章 7

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	许蔚, 董全民, 王芳草, 周沁苑, 孙彩彩, 吕卫东, 杨晓霞, 刘玉祯, 刘文亭. 放牧家畜组合对环青海湖高寒草地优势种空间格局的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1397-1405.
[2]	朱玲, 魏天兴, 于欢, 王仙, 范德卉, 赵雨琪. 刺槐根系和根际土对7种乔灌草植物的化感潜力[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(9): 1406-1415.
[3]	陈懂懂, 霍莉莉, 赵亮, 陈昕, 舒敏, 贺福全, 张煜坤, 张莉, 李奇. 青海高寒草地水热因子对土壤微生物生物量碳、氮空间变异的贡献——基于增强回归树模型[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(7): 1207-1217.
[4]	周沁苑, 董全民, 王芳草, 刘玉祯, 冯斌, 杨晓霞, 俞旸, 张春平, 曹铨, 刘文亭. 放牧方式对高寒草地瑞香狼毒根际土壤团聚体及有机碳特征的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 660-667.
[5]	杨冲, 王春燕, 王文颖, 毛旭峰, 周华坤, 陈哲, 索南吉, 靳磊, 马华清. 青藏高原黄河源区高寒草地土壤营养特征变化及质量评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(5): 896-908.
[6]	盛基峰, 李垚, 于美佳, 韩艳英, 叶彦辉. 氮磷添加对高寒草地土壤养分和相关酶活性的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(12): 2302-2309.
[7]	宗宁, 石培礼, 朱军涛. 高寒草地沙化过程植物群落构成及生态位特征变化[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(8): 1561-1570.