Study on Water Holding Characteristics of Four Typical Forest Litter in Songshan, Beijing

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2021.06.004

Ecology and Environment ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (6): 1139-1147.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2021.06.004

• Research Articles • Previous Articles Next Articles

Study on Water Holding Characteristics of Four Typical Forest Litter in Songshan, Beijing

ZHAO Na¹^,²(), WANG Junbo², LI Shaoning¹^,², LU Shaowei¹^,²^,^*(), XU Xiaotian¹^,²

1. Beijing Academy of Forestry and Fruit Science/Yanshan Forest Ecosystem Positional Observation and Research Station, Beijing 100093, China
2. College of Forestry, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang 110866, China

Received:2021-01-13 Online:2021-06-18 Published:2021-09-10
Contact: LU Shaowei
Supported by:
KJCX(20200602);KJCX(KJCX20190301)

北京松山4种典型林分枯落物持水特征研究

赵娜¹^,²(), 王俊博², 李少宁¹^,², 鲁绍伟¹^,²^,^*(), 徐晓天¹^,²

1.北京市林业果树科学研究院/北京燕山森林生态系统定位观测研究站,北京 100093
2.沈阳农业大学林学院,辽宁沈阳 110866

通讯作者: 鲁绍伟
作者简介:赵娜（1985年生）,女,助理研究员,主要从事森林生态系统水碳过程研究。E-mail: zhaona1019@126.com
基金资助:
北京市农林科学院科技创新能力建设项目(KJCX20200801);国家自然科学基金项目(31800363);北京市自然科学基金项目(5202028)

Abstract

Abstract:

Four typical forest stands including three pure forests i.e. Quercus mongolica, Pinus tabulaeformis, and Populus davidiana and mixed forest of Populus tomentosa and Pinus tabulaeformis in Songshan National Nature Reserve of Beijing were selected to evaluated their hydrological capacities in litter layers through typical field investigation and indoor immersion timing treatments. The results showed that (1) the litter accumulation volumes in four typical forest stands ranged from 8.05 t∙hm^-2 to 23.78 t∙hm^-2. The litter accumulation volume was sorted as Quercus mongolica pure forest (23.78 t∙hm^-2)>Populus davidiana pure forest (21.26 t∙hm^-2)>Pinus tabulaeformis pure forest (15.85 t∙hm^-2)>coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest (8.05 t∙hm^-2). (2) The maximum water holding capacity of litter layer in Populus davidiana pure forest (7.19 t∙hm^-2) was the largest, and those in Quercus mongolica pure forest (4.37 t∙hm^-2) was the smallest than that in other forest stands. Comparing the average water holding capacity of the litter layer in four typical forest stands, it was found that the coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest was the largest (230.90%), whereas the smallest one was observed in Quercus mongolica pure forest (106.85). (3) There was a logarithmic correlation between the water holding capacity of litter layer and the immersion time (R²>0.75, P<0.01), while water holding rate of litter layer and immersion time could be fitted by power function (R²>0.89, P<0.01). The effective storage capacity (13.67 t∙hm^-2) and its rate (114.3%) of litter layer in Populus davidiana pure forest were higher than that in other stands, while those capacity (4.46 t∙hm^-2) and its rate (58.11%) of litter layer in Pinus tabulaeformis pure forest were remarkable lower than other forest stands. According to the above-mentioned hydrological indicators, the synthetic water conservation capacity of litter layer in Populus davidiana pure forest is better than that in other three types of forest litter. This study can provide a theoretical basis for specific regional vegetation restoration and soil erosion control.

Key words: Beijing Songshan, reserve, different stands, litter layer, hydrologic effect

摘要：

为研究北京松山国家自然保护区不同林分枯落物持水效能差异,采用典型样地调查和室内浸泡法,对松山国家级自然保护区内4种典型林分类型,即蒙古栎（Quercus mongolica）纯林、油松（Pinus tabuliformis）纯林、山杨（Populus davidiana）纯林和毛白杨 (Populus tomentosa)-油松针阔混交林的枯落物水文效应进行分析。结果表明,（1）4种典型林分类型枯落物层蓄积量为8.05—23.78 t∙hm^-2,大小排序为蒙古栎纯林 (23.78 t∙hm^-2)>山杨纯林 (21.26 t∙hm^-2)>油松纯林 (15.85 t∙hm^-2)>针阔混交林 (8.05 t∙hm^-2)。（2）山杨纯林枯落物最大持水量最大（7.19 t∙hm^-2）,蒙古栎纯林最小（4.37 t∙hm^-2）;比较4种典型林分类型枯落物平均持水率发现,针阔混交林最大（230.9%）,蒙古栎纯林最小（106.85%）。（3）4种林分枯落物层持水量与其浸水时间呈对数相关（R²>0.75,P<0.01）;其持水速率与浸泡时间符合幂函数关系（R²>0.89,P<0.01）。山杨纯林有效拦蓄量（13.67 t∙hm^-2）与有效拦蓄率（114.3%）均较高,而油松纯林有效拦蓄量（4.46 t∙hm^-2）及其有效拦蓄率（58.11%）均显著低于其他林分类型。根据水文指标评价上述4种典型林分枯落物持水能力,松山自然保护区内山杨纯林枯落物持水能力最佳,其水源涵养综合能力优于其他3种类型林分枯落物。研究结果可为区域植被恢复和水土流失防治提供理论基础。

关键词: 北京松山, 自然保护区, 不同林分, 枯落物层, 水文效应

CLC Number:

ZHAO Na, WANG Junbo, LI Shaoning, LU Shaowei, XU Xiaotian. Study on Water Holding Characteristics of Four Typical Forest Litter in Songshan, Beijing[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2021, 30(6): 1139-1147.

赵娜, 王俊博, 李少宁, 鲁绍伟, 徐晓天. 北京松山4种典型林分枯落物持水特征研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(6): 1139-1147.

Figures/Tables 10

References 30

[1]	ADOLFO C C, LOURDES C H, SANDRA R O, 2017. Mass, nutrient pool, and mineralization of litter and fine roots in a tropical mountain cloud forest[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 575: 879-886.
[2]	BONELL M, 1993. Progress in the understanding of runoff generation dynamics in forests[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 150(2-4): 217-275. DOI URL
[3]	CAI D, YANG X H, WANG S Z, et al., 2017. Effects of dissolved organic matter derived from forest leaf litter on biodegradation of phenanthrene in aqueous phase[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 324(Part B): 516-525.
[4]	ECAROL A, WILLIAMJ P, STEVENJ D G, et al., 2008. Simple three-pool model accurately describes patterns of long-term litter decomposition in diverse climates[J]. Global Change Biology, 14(11): 2636-2660. DOI URL
[5]	KULMALA L, PUMPANEN J, HARI P, et al., 2011. Photosynthesis of ground vegetation in different aged pine forests: Effect of environmental factors predicted with a process-based model[J]. Journal of Vegetation Science, 22(1): 96-110. DOI URL
[6]	陈继东, 周长亮, 李惠丽, 2017. 接坝地区9种典型林分类型枯落物层和土壤层水文效应[J]. 水土保持研究, 24(6): 216-221, 226.
	CHEN J D, ZHOU C L, LI H L, 2017. Hydrological effects of litter layer and soil layer of nine typical forest types in Jieba area[J]. Soil and Water Conservation Research, 24(6): 216-221, 226.
[7]	陈琦, 刘苑秋, 刘士余, 等, 2019. 杉木取代阔叶林后林下水源涵养功能差异评价[J]. 水土保持学报, 33(2): 244-250.
	CHEN Q, LIU Y Q, LIU S Y, et al., 2019. Evaluation of differences in understory water conservation function after Chinese fir replaces broad-leaved forest[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 33(2): 244-250.
[8]	董治宝, 李振山, 1998. 风成沙粒度特征对其风蚀可蚀性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 4(4): 1-5.
	DONG Z B, LI Z S, 1998. Influence of aeolian sand grain size characteristics on its wind erosion erodibility[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 4(4): 1-5.
[9]	胡淑萍, 余新晓, 岳永杰, 2008. 北京百花山森林枯落物层和土壤层水文效应研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 22(1): 146-150.
	HU S P, YU X X, YUE Y J, 2008. Research on the Hydrological Effects of Forest Litter Layer and Soil Layer of Baihua Mountain in Beijing[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 22(1): 146-150.
[10]	季冬, 关文彬, 谢春华, 2007. 贡嘎山暗针叶林生态系统枯落物截留特征研究[J]. 林业调查规划, 32(1): 111-116.
	JI D, GUAN W B, XIE C H, 2007. Study on the characteristics of litter interception in the dark coniferous forest ecosystem of Gongga Mountain[J]. Forestry Inventory and Planning, 32(1): 111-116.
[11]	金雅琴, 李冬林, 孙丽娟, 等, 2018. 南京近郊人工林地表枯落物的累积量及持水性[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 16(5): 95-104.
	JIN Y Q, LI D L, SUN L J, et al., 2018. Accumulation and water holding capacity of surface litter in artificial forests in the suburbs of Nanjing[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 16(5): 95-104.
[12]	李黎立, 蒋万杰, 吴记贵, 等, 2008. 北京松山自然保护区生物多样性现状与保护对策[J]. 林业调查规划, 33(5): 51-54.
	LI L L, JIANG W J, WU J G, et al., 2008. Biodiversity status and protection countermeasures of Beijing Songshan Nature Reserve[J]. Forest Inventory and Planning, 33(5): 51-54.
[13]	李阳, 万福绪, 2019. 黄浦江中游5种典型林分枯落物和土壤水源涵养能力研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 33(2): 264-271.
	LI Y, WAN F X, 2019. Research on litter and soil water conservation capacity of five typical forests in the middle reaches of huangpu river[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 33(2): 264-271.
[14]	梁文俊, 魏曦, 赵伟文, 等, 2021. 关帝山不同林分结构华北落叶松林枯落物水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 35(2): 324-329, 337.
	LIANG W J, WEI X, ZHAO W W, et al., 2021. Hydrological effects of litter in Larix principis-rupprechtii forests with different stand structures in Guandi Mountain[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 35(2): 324-329, 337.
[15]	梁晓娇, 王树力, 2017. 阿什河源头不同类型红松人工林枯落物及其土壤水文特性[J]. 水土保持学报, 31(1): 140-145.
	LIANG X J, WANG S L, 2017. Different types of Pinus koraiensis plantation litter and soil hydrological characteristics at the source of Ash River[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 31(1): 140-145.
[16]	林立文, 邓羽松, 李佩琦, 等, 2020. 桂北地区不同密度杉木林枯落物与土壤水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 34(5): 200-207, 215.
	LIN L W, DENG Y S, LI P Q, et al., 2020. The litter and soil hydrological effects of Chinese fir plantations with different densities in northern Guangxi[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 34(5): 200-207, 215.
[17]	刘斌, 鲁绍伟, 李少宁, 等, 2015. 北京西山6种天然纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 29(4): 73-78, 137.
	LIU B, LU S W, LI S N, et al., 2015. The litter and soil hydrological effects of six natural pure forests in Xishan, Beijing[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 29(4): 73-78, 137.
[18]	卢振启, 黄秋娴, 杨新兵, 2014. 河北雾灵山不同海拔油松人工林枯落物及土壤水文效应研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 28(1): 112-116.
	LU Z Q, HUANG Q X, YANG X B, 2014. Research on litter and soil hydrological effects of Pinus tabulaeformis plantations at different altitudes in Wuling Mountain, Hebei[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 28(1): 112-116.
[19]	鲁绍伟, 陈波, 潘青华, 等, 2013. 北京山地不同海拔人工油松林枯落物及其土壤水文效应[J]. 水土保持研究, 20(6): 54-58, 70.
	LU S W, CHEN B, PAN Q H, et al., 2013. The litter and its soil hydrological effects of artificial Pinus tabulaeformis at different altitudes in Beijing mountainous areas[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 20(6): 54-58, 70.
[20]	鲁绍伟, 李少宁, 陈波, 等, 2015. 北京西山6种天然纯林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 29(4): 73-78, 137.
	LU S W, LI S N, CHEN B, et al., 2015. The litter and soil hydrological effects of six natural pure forests in Xishan, Beijing[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 29(4): 73-78, 137.
[21]	吕刚, 曹小平, 卢慧, 等, 2010. 辽西海棠山森林枯落物持水与土壤贮水能力研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 24(3): 203-208.
	LV G, CAO X P, LU H, et al., 2010. Research on water holding capacity and soil water holding capacity of forest litter in Haitang Mountain in western Liaoning[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 24(3): 203-208.
[22]	庞梦丽, 朱辰光, 翟博超, 等, 2017. 河北省太行山区3种人工水土保持林枯落物及土壤水文效应[J]. 水土保持通报, 37(1): 51-56.
	PANG M L, ZHU C H, ZHAI B C, et al., 2017. The litter and soil hydrological effects of three artificial soil and water conservation forests in the Taihang Mountains of Hebei province[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 37(1): 51-56.
[23]	涂志华, 范志平, 孙学凯, 等, 2019. 大伙房水库流域不同植被类型枯落物层和土壤层水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 33(1): 129-135.
	TU Z H, FAN Z P, SUN X K, et al., 2019. Hydrological effects of litter layer and soil layer of different vegetation types in the Dahuofang Reservoir Basin[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 33(1): 129-135.
[24]	王玲, 赵广亮, 周红娟, 等, 2019. 八达岭林场不同密度油松人工林枯落物水文效应[J]. 生态环境学报, 28(9): 1767-1775.
	WANG L, ZHAO G L, ZHOU H J, et al., 2019. Hydrological characteristics of litter in a Pinus tabulaeformis plantation with different densities in Badaling Forest Farm[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 28(9): 1767-1775.
[25]	王美莲, 王飞, 姚晓娟, 等, 2015. 不同林龄兴安落叶松枯落物及土壤水文效应研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 24(6): 925-931.
	WANG M L, WANG F, YAO X J, et al., 2015. Hydrological Effects of Forest Litters and Soil in Xing'an Larch Forest at Different Stand Ages[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 24(6): 925-931.
[26]	宣立辉, 佟彦国, 张军, 等, 2019. 冀北山区油松人工林林分密度对枯落物层和土壤层水文特征的影响[J]. 林业与生态科学, 34(1): 15-23.
	XUAN L H, TONG Y G, ZHANG J, et al., 2019. Influence of stand density of Pinus tabulaeformis plantation on hydrological characteristics of litter layer and soil layer in mountainous area of northern Hebei[J]. Forestry and Ecological Sciences, 34(1): 15-23.
[27]	殷沙, 赵芳, 欧阳勋志, 2015. 马尾松木荷不同比例针阔混交林枯落物和土壤持水性能比较分析[J]. 江西农业大学学报, 37(3): 454-460.
	YIN S, ZHAO F, OUYANG X Z, 2015. Comparative analysis of litter and soil water holding capacity of different proportions of coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forests of Pinus massoniana and Schima superba[J]. Journal of Jiangxi Agricultural University, 37(3): 454-460.
[28]	张更权, 2018. 大同县退耕还白桦林枯枝落物和土壤持水效应[J]. 安徽农业大学, 46(31): 107-110.
	ZHANG G Q, 2018. The litter and soil water retention effect of returning farmland to Betula platyphylla forest in Datong County[J]. Anhui Agricultural University, 46(31): 107-110.
[29]	赵阳, 余新晓, 吴海龙, 等, 2011. 华北土石山区典型森林枯落物层和土壤层水文效应[J]. 水土保持学报, 25(6): 148-152.
	ZHAO Y, YU X X, WU H L, et al., 2011. Hydrological effects of typical forest litter layer and soil layer in the rocky mountainous area of North China[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 25(6): 148-152.
[30]	赵雨森, 韩春华, 张宏光, 等, 2012. 阿什河上游小流域主要林分类型土壤水文功能研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 26(2): 203-208.
	ZHAO Y S, HAN C H, ZHANG H G, et al., 2012. Study on soil hydrological function of main forest types in the small watershed of the upper Ashi River[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 26(2): 203-208.

样地编号 Sample number	林分类型 Stand type	海拔 Altitude/m	坡向 Aspect	坡度 Slope/(°)	坡位 Slope position	叶面积指数 Leaf area index
1	蒙古栎纯林 Quercus mongolica pure forest	717	东北 Northeast	40	坡中Middle	3.38
2	油松纯林 Pinus tabuliformis pure forest	790	西南 Southwest	50	坡中Middle	2.81
3	针阔混交林,优势树种主要为毛白杨和油松Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest, dominant species are Populus tomentosa and Pinus tabuliformis	810	西南 Southwest	60	坡下Lower	3.51
4	山杨纯林 Populus davidiana pure forest	880	西北 Northwest	59	坡上Upper	2.94

样地编号 Sample number	林分类型 Stand type	海拔 Altitude/m	坡向 Aspect	坡度 Slope/(°)	坡位 Slope position	叶面积指数 Leaf area index
1	蒙古栎纯林 Quercus mongolica pure forest	717	东北 Northeast	40	坡中Middle	3.38
2	油松纯林 Pinus tabuliformis pure forest	790	西南 Southwest	50	坡中Middle	2.81
3	针阔混交林,优势树种主要为毛白杨和油松Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest, dominant species are Populus tomentosa and Pinus tabuliformis	810	西南 Southwest	60	坡下Lower	3.51
4	山杨纯林 Populus davidiana pure forest	880	西北 Northwest	59	坡上Upper	2.94

林分类型 Stand type	未分解层 Non-decomposed layer of litter			半分解层 Semi-decomposed layer of litter			枯落物总蓄积量 Total Accumulation volume of litter/(t∙hm^-2)	枯落物总厚度 Total thickness of litter/cm
林分类型 Stand type	厚度 Thickness/ cm	蓄积量 Accumulation volume/ (t∙hm^-2)	占总蓄积量百分比 Percentage of total accumulation volume/%	厚度 Thickness/ cm	蓄积量Accumulation volume/ (t∙hm^-2)	占总蓄积量百分比 Percentage of total accumulation volume/%	枯落物总蓄积量 Total Accumulation volume of litter/(t∙hm^-2)	枯落物总厚度 Total thickness of litter/cm
蒙古栎 Quercus mongolica	6.00±0.82	9.64±2.64a	40.53	2.75±0.20	14.14±1.92a	59.47	23.78±0.72a	8.75±0.61
油松 Pinus tabuliformis	2.65±1.10	7.97±0.82a	50.25	2.30±0.73	7.88±0.82b	49.75	15.85±1.63b	4.95±1.84
针阔混交林Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest	2.20±0.41	2.70±0.02b	33.56	2.35±0.29	5.35±1.29ba	66.44	8.05±1.31c	4.55±0.12
山杨 Populus davidiana	5.00±1.63	7.52±0.71a	35.37	3.50±0.41	13.74±2.10a	64.63	21.26±2.80a	8.50±1.22

林分类型 Stand type	未分解层 Non-decomposed layer of litter			半分解层 Semi-decomposed layer of litter			枯落物总蓄积量 Total Accumulation volume of litter/(t∙hm^-2)	枯落物总厚度 Total thickness of litter/cm
林分类型 Stand type	厚度 Thickness/ cm	蓄积量 Accumulation volume/ (t∙hm^-2)	占总蓄积量百分比 Percentage of total accumulation volume/%	厚度 Thickness/ cm	蓄积量Accumulation volume/ (t∙hm^-2)	占总蓄积量百分比 Percentage of total accumulation volume/%	枯落物总蓄积量 Total Accumulation volume of litter/(t∙hm^-2)	枯落物总厚度 Total thickness of litter/cm
蒙古栎 Quercus mongolica	6.00±0.82	9.64±2.64a	40.53	2.75±0.20	14.14±1.92a	59.47	23.78±0.72a	8.75±0.61
油松 Pinus tabuliformis	2.65±1.10	7.97±0.82a	50.25	2.30±0.73	7.88±0.82b	49.75	15.85±1.63b	4.95±1.84
针阔混交林Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest	2.20±0.41	2.70±0.02b	33.56	2.35±0.29	5.35±1.29ba	66.44	8.05±1.31c	4.55±0.12
山杨 Populus davidiana	5.00±1.63	7.52±0.71a	35.37	3.50±0.41	13.74±2.10a	64.63	21.26±2.80a	8.50±1.22

分解层次 Litter layer	林分类型 Stand type	拟合方程 Fitting equation	R²
未分解层 Non-decomposed layer	蒙古栎 Quercus mongolica	Q=193.01lnx+899.42	0.9633
	油松 Pinus tabuliformis	Q=252.57lnt+428.2	0.9642
	针阔混交林Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest	Q=588.01lnt+1798.8	0.9823
	山杨 Populus davidiana	Q=156.13lnt+1252.1	0.9302
半分解层 Semi-decomposed layer	蒙古栎 Quercus mongolica	Q=172.09lnt+568.19	0.9589
	油松 Pinus tabuliformis	Q=255.96lnt+880.3	0.9789
	针阔混交林 Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest	Q=403.39lnt+990.29	0.9274
	山杨 Populus davidiana	Q=189.83lnt+1162	0.7508

Study on Water Holding Characteristics of Four Typical Forest Litter in Songshan, Beijing

北京松山4种典型林分枯落物持水特征研究

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 30

Related Articles 5

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

分解层次 Litter layer	林分类型 Stand type	拟合方程 Fitting equation	R²
未分解层 Non- decomposed layer	蒙古栎 Quercus mongolica	V=1194.9t ^-1.507	0.9198
	油松 Pinus tabuliformis	V=587.55t ^-1.307	0.8956
	针阔混交林Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest	V=2401.5t ^-1.444	0.9211
	山杨 Populus davidiana	V=1644.8t ^-1.583	0.9225
半分解层 Semi- decomposed layer	蒙古栎 Quercus mongolica	V=757.49t ^-^1.459	0.9225
	油松 Pinus tabuliformis	V=1172.6t ^-1.467	0.9247
	针阔混交林Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest	V=1323.7t ^-1.393	0.9081
	山杨 Populus davidiana	V=1540.1t ^-1.56	0.9479

林分类型 Stand type	未分解层 Non-decomposed layer		半分解层 Semi-decomposed layer		总有效拦蓄量 Total effective storage capacity/ (t∙hm^-2)	平均有效拦蓄率 Average effective retention rate/ %
林分类型 Stand type	有效拦蓄量 Modified interception/ (t∙hm^-2)	有效拦蓄率 Effective retention rate/%	有效拦蓄量 Modified interception/ (t∙hm^-2)	有效拦蓄率 Effective retention rate/%	总有效拦蓄量 Total effective storage capacity/ (t∙hm^-2)	平均有效拦蓄率 Average effective retention rate/ %
蒙古栎 Quercus mongolica	4.17±2.27b	67.58	8.40±2.84a	65.46	12.56±0.65b	66.52
油松 Pinus tabuliformis	1.22±0.10b	30.32	3.24±1.65b	85.91	4.46±1.75b	58.11
针阔混交林Coniferous-broadleaved mixed forest	5.40±2.45a	234.31	4.91±1.42ab	120.25	10.31±1.08a	177.28
山杨 Populus davidiana	6.21±1.53a	104.93	7.46±2.24ab	123.67	13.67±3.77a	114.30

[1]	LI Tingting, HOU Mengdan, DENG Xinyan, ZHOU Xuping, WANG Shunli, HUANG Dan, ZENG Zhiruo, PENG Tao. Diversity of Epiphytic Bryophytes for Four Vegetation Types in Guizhou Xishui National Nature Reserve [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(8): 1556-1565.
[2]	WANG Chaoyue, GUO Xianhua, GUO Li, BAI Lifang, XIA Lilin, WANG Chunbo, LI Tingzhen. Land Use Change and Its Impact on Carbon Storage in Northwest China Based on FLUS-Invest: A Case Study of Hu-Bao-Er-Yu Urban Agglomeration [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(8): 1667-1679.
[3]	ZHOU Xuping, TANG Luyan, HE Zhuoji, WANG Shunli, HUANG Dan, LI Dahua, DENG Xinyan, HOU Mengdan, YANG Shulin, PENG Tao. Deviation in the Composition of Bryophytes Geographic Elements in Relation to Environmental and Spatial Factors among 27 National Nature Reserves in China [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(10): 1959-1970.
[4]	LI Cong, LÜ Jinghua, LU Mei, YANG Zhidong, LIU Pan, REN Yulian, DU Fan. Responses of Soil Bacterial Communities to Vertical Vegetarian Zone Changes in the Subtropical Forests, Southeastern Yunnan [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2022, 31(10): 1971-1983.
[5]	DONG Xin, LANG Jiayu, CHUYUAN Mengran, ZHAO Shanshan, ZHANG Jindong, BAI Wenke. The Seasonal Characteristics of Home Range and Habitat Utilization of Sichuan Golden Monkeys (Rhinopithecus roxellana) [J]. Ecology and Environment, 2021, 30(7): 1342-1352.