Water use efficiency and its influencing factors of typical greening tree species in Beijing region
-
摘要:
目的 在北京地区绿化率需求提升和水资源短缺背景下，城市绿化与城市生产、生活用水矛盾日益尖锐。因此，探寻城市绿化树种对干旱生境的响应机制，筛选低耗水、高水分利用的园林绿化树种，成为北京高质量城市森林景观建设的重要需求。 方法 该研究以北京地区落叶树种银杏、栾树、国槐和常绿树种侧柏、油松和白皮松盆栽幼树为研究对象，基于碳稳定同位素技术与树种生理参数观测分析3种干旱胁迫处理下（50% ~ 70%土壤田间持水量（FC）（轻度干旱SLD）；30% ~ 50% FC（中度干旱MD）；低于30% FC（重度干旱ED））树种瞬时水分利用效率（WUEi）和平均水分利用效率（WUEL）差异。 结果 （1） 与对照处理（90% ~ 100% FC，CK）相比，银杏、栾树、国槐和侧柏的光合能力、WUEi在土壤体积含水量（SWC）小于70%条件下显著减小（P < 0.05），而油松、白皮松WUEi在水分胁迫作用下无显著变化。（2） MD与ED下，常绿树种WUEL均显著高于落叶树种（P < 0.05）。在ED处理下3种落叶树种间WUEL存在显著差异，排序为国槐 > 栾树 > 银杏（P < 0.05）。银杏、栾树在SLD、侧柏、油松在MD时分别达到各自WUEL峰值后下降；而在土壤逐渐干旱处理下，国槐、白皮松WUEL逐渐增大，且在ED处理下分别比CK增加了44.19%和30.35%（P < 0.05）。（3） 比较不同树种光合荧光参数分别与WUEi、WUEL之间的相关关系发现，落叶树种银杏、栾树和国槐的气孔导度（gs）影响其光合、蒸腾过程（P < 0.01），对WUEi影响较大；而常绿树种侧柏、油松和白皮松gs对土壤水分变异不敏感（P > 0.05），对WUEi影响较小。在MD和ED水分胁迫条件下常绿树种WUEL均高于落叶树种。 结论 北京典型常绿树种比落叶树种更能优化光合性能，提高自身水分利用效率以适应干旱生境。 Abstract:Objective Due to the water scarcity and the improvement in urban greening, the tension has grown from the struggles for water between industries, urban life, and urban afforestation in Beijing. Thus, it is the top priority to explore the response mechanism of urban greening tree species to arid habitats and to screen the low-water consumption and high-water utilization landscaping tree species for high-quality urban forest landscape. Method Typical greening tree species including Ginkgo biloba, Koelreuteria paniculata, Sophora japonica, Platycladus orientalis, Pinus tabuliformis, and Pinus bungeana in Beijing were selected and subjected to three groups of soil water stresses such as slight drought (SLD, 50%−70% field capacity (FC)), moderate drought (MD, 30%−50% FC) and extreme drought (ED, lower than 30% FC). The interspecific differences in the instantaneous water use efficiency (WUEi) and mean water use efficiency (WUEL) of these tree species under water stresses and their relationship to eco-physiological factors were investigated based on the stable isotope technology and the observations on tree physiological traits. Result The photosynthetic capacities and WUEi in G. biloba, K. paniculata, S. japonica and P. orientalis decreased significantly compared with control (CK, 90%−100% FC) when potted soil volumetric water content (SWC) was less than 70% (P < 0.05), whereas there was no significant difference in WUEi of P. tabuliformis and P. bungeana subjected to continuous drought (P > 0.05). The WUELs of evergreen tree species were significantly higher than those of deciduous tree species under MD and ED (P < 0.05). The WUELs of three deciduous tree species differed in response to extreme drought (P < 0.05), and the sequence of WUELs in three deciduous tree species was S. japonica > K. paniculata > G. biloba. The WUELs of G. biloba and K. paniculata in SLD, and P. orientalis and P. tabuliformis in MD reached their respective peaks and then decreased along with the increases in soil water stress; while those of S. japonica and P. bungeana increased with potted soil drying, and were 44.19% and 30.35% higher than control, respectively at severe drought condition (P < 0.05). Comparing the correlations between photosynthetic parameters, WUEi and WUEL of different tree species, it was found that the stomatal conductance (gs) of G. biloba, K. paniculata and S. japonica significantly affected its photosynthesis and transpiration processes (P < 0.01) and hence exerted a strong influence on WUEi, while those in evergreen tree species such as P. orientalis, P. tabuliformis, and P. bungeana were insensitive to the variation in soil moisture and had little impact on WUEi (P > 0.05). The WUEL of evergreen tree species was higher than that of deciduous ones under moderate and extreme water stress. Conclusion Therefore, considering the limited water resources of Beijing, evergreen tree species have stronger abilities to conserve water content and optimize photosynthetic performance to improve their water use efficiency, to adapt to arid habitats than those of deciduous trees in Beijing. -
Key words:
- Beijing /
- drought stress /
- greening tree species /
- water use efficiency /
- carbon stable isotope
-
图 1 6种绿化树种盆栽不同干旱胁迫下土壤体积含水量
CK、SLD、MD、ED分别为对照处理组（90% ~ 100% FC）、轻度干旱（50% ~ 70% FC）、中度干旱（30% ~ 50% FC）和重度干旱（低于30% FC）处理。FC为盆栽土壤田间持水量。小写字母表示不同水分胁迫处理间差异显著（P < 0.05）。下同。CK, SLD, MD, ED are the control group (90%−100% FC) and three groups of soil water stresses as slight drought (50%−70% FC), moderate drought (30%−50% FC) and extreme drought (lower than 30% FC). FC is potted soil field capacity. Different small letters mean significant differences at P < 0.05 level among the treatments of soil water stresses. The same as below.
Figure 1. Variations in soil volumetric water content of potting soil of six tree species
图 2 土壤水分胁迫对北京地区绿化树种叶水势的影响
Figure 2. Effects of water deficits on leaf potential in typical greening tree species of Beijing
图 3 土壤水分胁迫对北京地区绿化树种光合能力的影响
Pn. 净光合速率。下同。Pn, net photosynthetic rate. The same below.
Figure 3. Effects of water deficits on photosynthetic capacities in typical greening tree species of Beijing
图 4 土壤水分胁迫对北京市绿化树种气孔导度的影响
gs. 气孔导度。下同。gs, stomatal conductance. The same below.
Figure 4. Effects of water deficits on stomatal conductance in typical greening tree species of Beijing
图 5 土壤水分胁迫对北京市绿化树木PSⅡ原初光能转换效率（Fv/Fm）和PSⅡ潜在活性（Fv/Fo）的影响
Fv/Fm. PSⅡ原初光能转换效率；Fv/Fo. PSⅡ潜在活性。下同。Fv/Fm, primary light energy conversion of PSⅡ; Fv/F0, potential activity of PSⅡ. The same below.
Figure 5. Effects of water deficits on Fv/Fm and Fv/Fo in typical greening tree species in Beijing
图 6 不同土壤水分胁迫下北京地区绿化树木瞬时水分利用效率
Figure 6. Instantaneous water use efficiencies in typical greening tree species of Beijing under different soil water stresses
图 7 不同土壤水分胁迫下北京地区绿化树木平均水分利用效率
不同大写字母表示物种间差异显著（P < 0.05）。Different capital letters mean significant difference at P < 0.05 level among tree species.
Figure 7. Mean water use efficiencies in typical greening tree species of Beijing under different soil water stresses
表 1 不同土壤水分胁迫下北京地区绿化树木叶片δ13Cleaf比较
Table 1. Comparison in leaf δ13Cleaf in greening tree species of Beijing under varied soil water stresses
物种 Species CK SD SLD SD MD SD ED SD 银杏
G. biloba−29.352bB 0.217 −27.787aC 0.109 −27.930bB 0.138 −29.584cD 0.253 栾树
K. paniculata−28.828cB 0.570 −27.412aBC 0.464 −27.757abB 0.251 −28.572bcC 0.507 国槐
S. japonica−29.784bB 0.444 −28.940bE 0.187 −27.817aB 0.209 −27.894abB 0.486 侧柏
P. orientalis−26.887abA 0.101 −26.496aA 0.248 −26.462aA 0.049 −27.290bAB 0.121 油松
P. tabuliformis−27.503aA 0.454 −27.994bD 0.368 −26.438aA 0.739 −27.352aAB 0.183 白皮松
P. bungeana−28.353bB 0.746 −27.083aB 0.440 −26.664aAB 0.090 −26.640aA 0.204 注：δ13Cleaf为植物叶片碳-13丰度值；同行不同小写字母表示不同水分胁迫处理间差异显著(P < 0.05)；同列不同大写字母表示物种间差异显著(P < 0.05)。Notes: δ13Cleaf is Cabon-13 isotope abundance in plant leaf. Different lowercase letters in the same row mean significant differences at P < 0.05 level among the treatments of soil water stresses. Different capital letters in the same column mean significant differences at P < 0.05 level among tree species. 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 落叶幼树生理生态指标与水分利用效率相关分析
Table 2. Pearson correlations between eco-physiological parameters and WUEs in different deciduous tree species
项目 Item LWP Pn gs Fv/Fm Fv/Fo δ13Cleaf WUEi WUEL LWP 1 Pn 0.239* gs 0.166 0.538** Fv/Fm 0.172 −0.006 −0.006 Fv/Fo 0.210* 0.024 −0.063 0.913** δ13Cleaf −0.098 0.135 0.383** −0.117 −0.192 WUEi 0.072 0.153 −0.365** 0.250* 0.393* −0.335** WUEL −0.21 −0.009 −0.06 −0.226 −0.176 0.821** 0.205 1 注：LWP. 09:00—11:00叶水势；Pn. 净光合速率；gs. 气孔导度；Fv/Fm. PSⅡ原初光能转换效率；Fv/Fo. PSⅡ潜在活性；δ13Cleaf. 植物叶片碳-13丰度值；WUEi. 瞬时水分利用效率；WUEL. 平均水分利用效率. “*”、“**”分别表示相关性显著(P < 0.05)和极显著(P < 0.01)。下同。
Notes: LWP, leaf potential at 09:00−11:00; Pn, net photosynthetic rate; gs, stomatal conductance; Fv/Fm, primary light energy conversion of PSII; Fv/Fo, potential activity of PSII; δ13Cleaf, Cabon-13 isotope abundance in plant leaf;；WUEi, instantaneous water use efficiency；WUEL, mean water use efficiency. Significant correlations at P <0.05 level marked with an asterisk and those at P <0.01 level marked with two asterisks. The same below.
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 常绿幼树生理生态指标与水分利用效率相关分析
Table 3. Pearson correlations between eco-physiological parameters and WUEs in different evergreen tree species
项目 Item LWP Pn gs Fv/Fm Fv/Fo δ13Cleaf WUEi WUEL LWP 1 Pn −0.79 gs 0.062 0.155 Fv/Fm −0.067 −0.009 0.062 Fv/Fo −0.58 0.012 0.098 0.951** δ13Cleaf 0.185 0.256 0.162 −0.025 0.023 WUEi −0.116 0.425** −0.007 −0.165 −0.174 0.164 WUEL 0.121 0.321* 0.192 −0.089 −0.008 0.528** 0.203 1
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] Gillner S, Vogt J, Tharang A, et al. Role of street trees in mitigating effects of heat and drought at highly sealed urban sites[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2015, 143: 33−42. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.06.005 [2] Nowak D J, Greenfield E J, Hoehn R E, et al. Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2013, 178: 229−236. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019 [3] Baldocchi D A. A comparative study of mass and energy exchange rates over a closed C3 (wheat) and an open C4 (corn) crop (II): CO2 exchange and water use efficiency[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 1994, 67: 291−321. doi: 10.1016/0168-1923(94)90008-6 [4] 林光辉. 稳定同位素生态学[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2013: 141−147.Lin G H. Stable isotope ecology[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2013: 141−147. [5] Cao X, Jia J B, Li H, et al. Photosynthesis, water use efficiency and stable carbon isotope composition are associated with anatomical properties of leaf and xylem in six poplar species[J]. Plant Biology, 2012, 14: 612−620. doi: 10.1111/j.1438-8677.2011.00531.x [6] Farquhar G D, Richards R A. Isotopic composition of plant carbon correlates with water-use efficiency of wheat genotypes[J]. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 1984, 11(6): 539−552. [7] 张永娥, 余新晓, 陈丽华, 等. 北京西山侧柏林冠层不同高度处叶片水分利用效率[J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(7):2143−2148.Zhang Y E, Yu X X, Chen L H, et al. Foliar water use efficiency of Platycladus orientalis of different canopy heights in Beijing western mountains area, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017, 28(7): 2143−2148. [8] Kozlowski T T, Pallardy S G. Acclimation and adaptive responses of woody plants to environmental stresses[J]. Botanical Review, 2002, 68(2): 270−334. doi: 10.1663/0006-8101(2002)068[0270:AAAROW]2.0.CO;2 [9] Picotte J, Rosenthal D, Rhode J, et al. Plastic responses to temporal variation in moisture availability: consequences for water use efficiency and plant performance[J]. Oecologia, 2007, 153(4): 821−832. doi: 10.1007/s00442-007-0794-z [10] Xu X, Yang F, Xiao X W, et al. Sex-specific responses of Populus cathayana to drought and elevated temperatures[J]. Plant Cell and Environment, 2008, 31(6): 850−860. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2008.01799.x [11] 马 飞, 姬明飞, 陈立同, 等. 油松幼苗对干旱胁迫的生理生态响应[J]. 西北植物学报, 2009, 29(3):548−554.Ma F, Ji M F, Chen L T, et al. Responses of Pinus tabulae formis seedlings to different soil water moistures in ecophysiological characteristics[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2009, 29(3): 548−554. [12] Farquhar G D, O’Leary M H, Berry J A. On the relationship between carbon isotope discrimination and the intercellular carbon dioxide concentration in leaves[J]. Functional Plant Biology, 1982, 9(2): 121−137. doi: 10.1071/PP9820121 [13] Li J Y, Blake T J. Effect of repeated cycles of dehydration-rehydration on gas exchange and water use efficiency in jack pine and black spruce[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University (English Edition), 1996, 5(2): 78−87. [14] Yu S W. Plant physiology and molecular biology[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 1992. [15] Lang Y, Wang M, Zhang G C, et al. Experimental and simulated light responses of photosynthesis in leaves of three tree species under different soil water conditions[J]. Photosynthetica, 2013, 51(3): 370−378. doi: 10.1007/s11099-013-0036-z [16] Suresh K, Nagamani C, Ramachandrudu K, et al. Gas-exchange characteristics, leaf water potential and chlorophyll a fluorescence in oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) seedlings under water stress and recovery[J]. Photosynthetica, 2010, 48(3): 430−436. doi: 10.1007/s11099-010-0056-x [17] Razavi F, Pollet B, Steppe K, et al. Chlorophyll fluorescence as a tool for evaluation of drought stress in strawberry[J]. Photosynthetica, 2008, 46(4): 631−633. doi: 10.1007/s11099-008-0108-7 [18] 段娜, 贾玉奎, 郝玉光, 等. 干旱胁迫对欧李叶绿素荧光特性的影响[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2018, 33(6):10−14. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2018.06.02Duan N, Jia Y K, Hao Y G, et al. Effects of drought stress on chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of Cerasus humilis[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2018, 33(6): 10−14. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2018.06.02 [19] Klein T. The variability of stomatal sensitivity to leaf water potential across tree species indicates a continuum between isohydric and anisohydric behaviours[J]. Functional Ecology, 2014, 28(6): 1313−1320. doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.12289 [20] 范嘉智, 王丹, 胡亚林, 等. 最优气孔行为理论和气孔导度模拟[J]. 植物生态学报, 2016, 40(6):631−642. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2015.0480Fan J Z, Wang D, Hu Y L, et al. Optimal stomatal behavior theory for simulating stomatal conductance[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2016, 40(6): 631−642. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2015.0480 [21] 张彦群, 王传宽. 北方和温带森林生态系统的蒸腾耗水[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2008, 14(6):838−845.Zhang Y Q, Wang C K. Transpiration of boreal and temperate forests[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology, 2008, 14(6): 838−845. [22] 郑淑霞, 上官周平. 8 种阔叶树种叶片气体交换特征和叶绿素荧光特性比较[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(4):1080−1087. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.04.014Zheng S X, Shangguan Z P. Comparison of leaf gas exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in eight broad-leaved tree species[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2006, 26(4): 1080−1087. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.04.014 [23] Damesin C, Rambal S, Toffre R. Between-tree variations in leaf delta C-13 of Quercus pubescens and Quercus ilex among Mediterranean habitats with different water availability[J]. Oecologia, 1997, 111: 26−35. doi: 10.1007/s004420050204 [24] 贾剑波. 北京山区典型森林生态系统水分运动过程与机制研究[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2016.Jia J B. Water movement process and mechanism analysis on forest ecosystems in Beijing mountainous area[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2016. [25] 李瀚之, 余新晓, 贾国栋, 等. 北京山区侧柏人工林内CO2浓度及其δ13C值变化特征和影响因子[J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(7):2164−2170.Li H Z, Yu X X, Jia G D, et al. Variations and determinants of CO2 concentration and δ13C in Platycladus orientalis plantation in Beijing mountainous area, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017, 28(7): 2164−2170. [26] Evans J R. Nitrogen and photosynthesis in the flag leaf of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)[J]. Plant Physiology, 1983, 72(2): 297−302. doi: 10.1104/pp.72.2.297 [27] Perez-Martin A, Michelazzo C, Torres-Ruiz J M, et al. Regulation of photosynthesis and stomatal and mesophyll conductance under water stress and recovery in olive trees: correlation with gene expression of carbonic anhydrase and aquaporins[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2014, 65(2): 3143−3156. [28] Lagergren F, Lindroth A. Transpiration response to soil moisture in pine and spruce trees in Sweden[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2002, 112(2): 67−85. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00060-6 [29] 杨建伟, 赵丹, 孙桂芳, 等. 干旱胁迫对小紫珠光合生理的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2018, 38(4):733−740.Yang J W, Zhao D, Sun G F, et al. Photosynthetic characteristics of Callicarpa dichotoma under drought stress[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2018, 38(4): 733−740. [30] 王孟本, 李洪建. 黄土高原人工林水分生态研究[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2001.Wang M B, Li H J. Study on water ecology of plantations in the Loess Plateau[M]. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House, 2001. [31] Somerville C, Youngs H, Taylor C, et al. Feedstocks for lignocellulosic biofuels[J]. Science, 2010, 329: 790−792. doi: 10.1126/science.1189268 [32] Saibo N J M, Lourenço T, Oliveira M M. Transcription factors and regulation of photosynthetic and related metabolism under environmental stresses[J]. Annals of Botany, 2009, 103(4): 609−623. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcn227 [33] Ögren E, Öquist G. Effects of drought on photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence and photoinhibition susceptibility in intact willow leaves[J]. Planta, 1985, 166(3): 380−388. doi: 10.1007/BF00401176 [34] Ashraf M, Harris P J C. Photosynthesis under stressful environments: an overview[J]. Photosynthetica, 2013, 51(2): 163−190. doi: 10.1007/s11099-013-0021-6 [35] 罗丹丹, 王传宽, 金鹰. 植物水分调节对策: 等水与非等水行为[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(9):1020−1032. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0366Luo D D, Wang C K, Jin Y. Plant water-regulation strategies: isohydric versus anisohydric behavior[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2017, 41(9): 1020−1032. doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2016.0366 [36] Hou J, D’Andrea W J, Macdonald D, et al. Evidence for water use efficiency as an important factor in determining the δD values of tree leaf waxes[J]. Organic Geochemistry, 2007, 38(8): 1251−1255. doi: 10.1016/j.orggeochem.2007.03.011 [37] 赵凤君, 沈应柏, 高荣孚, 等. 叶片δ13C与长期水分利用效率的关系[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2006, 28(6):40−45. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-1522.2006.06.007Zhao F J, Shen Y B, Gao R F, et al. Relationship between foliar carbon isotope composition (δ13C) and long-term water use efficiency (WUEL)[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2006, 28(6): 40−45. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-1522.2006.06.007 [38] Franks P J, Doheny-Adams T W, Britton-Harper Z J, et al. Increasing water-use efficiency directly through genetic manipulation of stomatal density[J]. New Phytologist, 2015, 207(1): 188−195. doi: 10.1111/nph.13347 [39] Fitter A H. Functioning of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizas under field condition[J]. New Phytologist, 1985, 99(2): 257−265. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.1985.tb03654.x [40] Huang Y, Shuman B, Wang Y, et al. Climatic and environmental controls on the variation of C3 and C4 plant abundances in central Florida for the past 62, 000 years[J]. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaecology, 2006, 237(2−4): 428−435. doi: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2005.12.014 [41] Waghorn M J, Whitehead D, Watt M S, et al. Growth, biomass, leaf area and water-use efficiency of juvenile Pinus radiata in response to water deficits[J]. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science, 2015, 45(1): 1−11. doi: 10.1186/s40490-015-0034-y [42] Paul J K, John S B. Water relations of plants and soils[M]. San Diego: Academy Press, 1995. [43] 金华, 玉米提·哈力克, 阿丽亚·拜都热拉, 等. 阿克苏8种常见树种水分利用效率特征[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2015, 30(2):44−50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2015.02.08Jin H, Umut H, Aliya B, et al. Characteristics of leaf water use efficiency of eight common tree species in Aksu[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2015, 30(2): 44−50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2015.02.08 [44] 牛素贞, 宋勤飞, 樊卫国, 等. 干旱胁迫对喀斯特地区野生茶树幼苗生理特性及根系生长的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(21):7333−7341.Niu S Z, Song Q F, Fan W G, et al. Effects of drought stress on leaf physiological characteristics and root growth of the clone seedlings of wild tea plants[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(21): 7333−7341. [45] 牛晓丽, 胡田田, 刘亭亭, 等. 适度局部水分胁迫提高玉米根系吸水能力[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(22):80−86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2014.22.010Niu X L, Hu T T, Liu T T, et al. Appropriate partial water stress improving maize root absorbing capacity[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014, 30(22): 80−86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2014.22.010 -
点击查看大图
图(7) / 表(3)
计量
- 文章访问数: 451
- HTML全文浏览量: 127
- PDF下载量: 41
- 被引次数: 0
