Effects of density, shrub-herb coverage and trunk shape on the in-forest patch index of planted Pinus tabuliformis forests
-
摘要:目的林分密度、灌草盖度和树干形态是影响风景林林内景观质量的重要因子，本文从色彩斑块景观指数变化特点角度，对北京油松人工风景林林内景观质量形成机理进行探讨。方法通过林内景观画面的色彩斑块结构特点解析，研究了林分密度、灌草盖度和树干形态变化对林内景观指数的影响。结果林分密度对斑块分裂指数(SPI)有显著影响，SPI随林分密度的增大而减小；灌草盖度对聚集度指数(AI)、景观形状指数(LSI)有显著影响，随灌草盖度增大两个指数均增大；树干形态对辛普森均匀度指数(SIEI)有极显著影响，对LSI有显著影响，LSI在树干弯曲与通直并存时数值较大，SIEI在树干通直时数值较大；林分密度与灌草盖度的交互作用对LSI、SPI、SIEI有显著影响，3个指数随林分密度的增大而减小，随灌草盖度的增大而增大。林分密度与树干形态的交互作用对LSI、SIEI有显著影响，两个指数随林分密度的增大而减小，LSI在树干弯曲与通直并存时数值较大，SIEI在树干通直时数值较大；灌草盖度与树干形态的交互作用对SIEI有显著影响，SIEI随灌草盖度的增大而增大，在树干弯曲与通直并存时数值较大。结论林分密度、灌草盖度、树干形态及其交互作用均对林内景观指数有显著影响。主要原因是结构要素的变化引起视域内斑块数量以及形状的改变从而引起斑块指数的变化。Abstract:ObjectiveStand density, shrub-herb coverage and trunk shape are important factors affecting the in-forest landscape quality. It is expected that the formation mechanism of the landscape quality in artificial forest of Pinus tabuliformis in Beijing could be discussed from the perspective of changing landscape index of the color patch.MethodBy analyzing the structure characteristics of forest landscape patches of color images, the effects of stand density, shrub-herb coverage and trunk shape changes on the in-forest patch index were studied.ResultThe stand density had a significant influence on splitting index (SPI), and SPI decreased with the increase of density; shrub-herb coverage had significant influence on aggregation index (AI) and landscape shape index (LSI), and both indexes increased with the increase of shrub-herb coverage. Trunk shape had a very significant effect on Simpson's evenness index (SIEI) and a significant influence on LSI. LSI was higher when the trunk shape was both bend and straight, SIEI was higher when the trunk shape was straight. The interaction of stand density and shrub-herb coverage had significant effect on LSI, SPI, SIEI, the three indexes all decreased with the increase of stand density, and increased with the increase of shrub-herb coverage. The interaction of stand density and trunk shape had significant influence on LSI, SIEI, two indexes decreased with the increase of stand density, the value of LSI was larger when the trunk was both bend and straight, the value of SIEI was larger when the trunk was straight. The interaction of shrub-grass coverage and trunk shape had a significant influence on SIEI, SIEI increased with the increase of shrub-herb coverage, and the value of SIEI was larger when the trunk was both bend and straight.ConclusionStand density, shrub-herb coverage, trunk shape and their interactions all had significant influence on forest landscape index. The main reason was that the change of structural elements caused the change of the number and the shape of the patches in the visual field, and then caused the change of plaque index.
-
Keywords:
- scenic forest /
- in-forest landscape /
- landscape quality /
- patch index /
- photo color
-
-
![]()
图 1 美景度值与斑块指数的简相关系数比较
LPI.最大斑块指数；LSI.景观形状指数；ACOV.斑块面积变异系数；CON.蔓延度；PLA.相似斑块邻接比例；SPI.斑块分裂指数；SHDI.Shannon多样性指数；SIEI.辛普森均匀度指数；AI.聚集度指数。下同。
Figure 1. Comparison in simple correlation coefficient between scenic beauty value and patch indices
LPI, largest patch index; LSI, landscape shape index; ACOV, coefficient variability of patchs area; CON, contagion index; PIA, proportion of like adjacencies; SPI, splitting index; SHDI, Shannon's diversity index; SIEI, Simpson's evenness index; AI, aggregation index. The same below.
![]()
图 2 林分密度、灌草盖度、树干形态对景观斑块指数的影响
A1、A2、A3分别表示林分密度为700~1 000株/hm2、1 000~1 200株/hm2、>1 200株/hm2；B1、B2、B3分别表示灌草盖度为 < 30%、30%~70%、>70%；C1和C2分别表示树干形态全部通直、弯曲与通直并存。不同小写字母表示差异显著(P < 0.05)。下同。
Figure 2. Influences of stand density, shrub-herb coverage and trunk shape on landscape patch index
A1, A2, A3 mean 700-1 000 plant/ha, 1 000-1 200 plant/ha, >1 200 plant/ha stand density, respectively; B1, B2, B3 mean < 30%, 30%-70%, >70% shrub coverage, respectively; C1, C2 mean the shape of the trunk is straight or both bend and straight, respectively. Different lowercase letters indicate significant difference at P < 0.05 level. The same below.
![]()
图 3 林分密度与灌草盖度对景观斑块指数的交互影响
Figure 3. Interactive influences of stand density and shrub-herb coverage on landscape patch index
![]()
图 4 林分密度、灌草盖度与树干形态对景观斑块指数的交互影响
Figure 4. Interactive influences of stand density, shrub-herb coverage and trunk shape on landscape patch index
![]()
图 5 林分密度、灌草盖度和树干形态对SPI的交互作用
Figure 5. Interactive influences of stand density, shrub-herb coverage and trunk shape on SPI
表 1 人工油松风景林样地概况
Table 1 Main information of sampled plots of planted Pinus tabuliformis forest
密度级
Stand density grade密度范围/(株·hm-2)
Stand density range/(tree·ha-1)样地数量
Sample plot number平均胸径
Average DBH/cm平均冠幅
Average crown width/m平均树高
Average tree height/m灌草盖度
Shrub and herb coverage/%透视距离
Perspective distance/mⅠ 450~800 13 16.1±0.4 5.5 8.6±0.24 70~90 25~30 Ⅱ 800~1 100 17 14.1±0.2 4.7 7.9±0.2 0~70 15~20 Ⅲ 1 100~1 380 10 12.6±0.2 4.1 8.2±0.7 70~90 5~7 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 不同处理间景观斑块指数方差分析
Table 2 Variance analysis of landscape patch index among different treatments
变异来源
Origin of varianceLSI SIEI SPI AI F P F P F P F P A 1.036 0.433 4.200 0.104 12.748 0.018 2.733 0.178 B 3.228 0.045 2.425 0.130 0.191 0.828 8.391 0.005 C 12.475 0.012 29.832 0.001 0.909 0.377 1.312 0.295 A×B 5.879 0.007 3.806 0.031 5.475 0.009 2.675 0.083 A×C 6.110 0.035 9.299 0.014 4.386 0.067 3.847 0.084 B×C 1.611 0.239 6.175 0.014 3.380 0.068 0.357 0.706 A×B×C 2.296 0.118 2.312 0.117 3.449 0.042 2.568 0.092 注：A代表林分密度，B代表灌草盖度，C代表树干形态。Notes: A stands for stand density, B stands for shrub-herb coverage, and C stands for trunk shape.
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 陈鑫峰, 王雁.森林美剖析:主论森林植物的形式美[J].林业科学, 2001, 37(2): 122-130, 147-148. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2001.02.020 Chen X F, Wang Y. An analytic study on forest beauty, mostly on form beauty of forest plants[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2001, 37(2): 122-130, 147-148. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2001.02.020
[2] 陈鑫峰, 王雁.森林游憩业发展回顾[J].世界林业研究, 1999, 12(6): 32-37. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4241.1999.06.007 Chen X F, Wang Y. Review of the development of forest recreation [J]. World Forestry Research, 1999, 12(6): 32-37. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4241.1999.06.007
[3] 章志都.京郊低山风景游憩林质量评价及调控关键技术研究[D].北京: 北京林业大学, 2010. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/article/cdmd-10022-2010129086.htm Zhang Z D. Quality assessing and key adjusting technologies for scenic-recreational forests in the lower mountains of suburbans in Beijing[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2010. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/article/cdmd-10022-2010129086.htm
[4] 袁铁象, 张合平, 谭一波, 等.广西花山喀斯特峰丛洼地风景林林内景观质量[J].中南林业科技大学学报, 2014, 34(1): 72-77. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/znlxyxb201401015 Yuan T X, Zhang H P, Tan Y B, et al. In-forest landscape quality of karst peak-cluster depression forest in Huashan scenic area, Guangxi[J]. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2014, 34(1): 72-77. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/znlxyxb201401015
[5] 毛斌.北京中幼龄人工油松、侧柏风景林抚育技术研究[D].北京: 北京林业大学, 2015. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10022-1015319433.htm Mao B. Studies on tending technique of young and half matured planted scenic forest of Pinus tabuliformis and Platycdadus orientals in Beijing [D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2015. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10022-1015319433.htm
[6] Gong L, Zhang Z D, Xu C Y. Developing a quality assessment index system for scenic forest management: a case study from Xishan Mountain, suburban Beijing [J]. Forest, 2015, 6: 225-243. doi: 10.3390/f6010225
[7] 孙启臻, 吴泽民.上海植物园典型群落景观美景度评价[J].中国城市林业, 2012, 10(2): 1-4. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4925.2012.02.002 Sun Q Z, Wu Z M. Scenic beauty evaluation of typical plant communities in Shanghai Botanical Garden[J]. Journal of Chinese Urban Forestry, 2012, 10(2): 1-4. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4925.2012.02.002
[8] Deng S, Yin N, Guan Q, et al. Dynamic response of the scenic beauty value of different forests to various thinning intensities in central eastern China [J]. Environmental Monitoring & Assessment, 2014, 186(11): 7413-7429. http://cn.bing.com/academic/profile?id=2c93e42cc63c608a3c8b3cd95fd1d021&encoded=0&v=paper_preview&mkt=zh-cn
[9] 王娜, 钟永德, 黎森.基于SBE法的城郊森林公园森林林内景观美学质量评价[J].西北林学院学报, 2017, 32(1): 308-314. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2017.01.49 Wang N, Zhong Y D, Li S. SBE based evaluation of in-forest landscape aesthetic quality of forest park in suburb[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2017, 32(1): 308-314. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2017.01.49
[10] 张大鹏.泰山风景游憩林景观质量与游憩承载力研究[D].泰安: 山东农业大学, 2008. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10434-2008206901.htm Zhang D P. The study on landscape quality and recreational carry-capacity of scenic recreational forest in Mountain Tai[D]. Taian: Shandong Agricultural University, 2008. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10434-2008206901.htm
[11] 梁爽, 张洁, 戚继忠, 等.次生林为主的自然风景林林内景观质量评价[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 39(6): 119-124. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/njlydxxb201506022 Liang S, Zhang J, Qi J Z, et al. The forest landscape quality evaluation of the natural scenic beauty mainly made of secondary forest[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition), 2015, 39(6): 119-124. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/njlydxxb201506022
[12] 李翠翠.京郊典型风景游憩林林内景观质量评价技术研究[D].北京: 北京林业大学, 2010. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10022-2010128716.htm Li C C. Assessment on landscape quality in stands of typical scenic and recreational forests in suburbs in Beijing[D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2010. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10022-2010128716.htm
[13] Schroeder H, Daniel T C. Progress in predicting the perceived scenic beauty of forest landscapes[J]. Forest Science, 1981, 27(1): 71-80. https://academic.oup.com/forestscience/article/27/1/71/4656458
[14] 毛斌, 徐程扬, 彭立群.基于林内色彩斑块的油松人工风景林定量分级的研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2014, 29(4): 169-174. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2014.04.30 Mao B, Xu C Y, Peng L Q. Color patches of in-forest based study on planted Pinus tabulaeformis scenic forest quantitative classification [J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2014, 29(4): 169-174. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2014.04.30
[15] 毛斌, 彭立群, 李乐, 等.侧柏风景林美景度的林内色彩斑块非线性模型研究[J].北京林业大学学报, 2015, 37(7): 68-75. doi: 10.13332/j.1000-1522.20140481 Mao B, Peng L Q, Li L, et al. Non-linear scenic beauty model of scenic Platycladus orientalis plantations based on in-forest color patches[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2015, 37(7): 68-75. doi: 10.13332/j.1000-1522.20140481
[16] Mao B, Gong L, Xu C Y. Evaluating the scenic beauty of individual trees, a case study using a nonlinear model for a Pinus tabulaeformis scenic forest in Beijing[J]. Forests, 2015, 6: 1933-1948. doi: 10.3390/f6061933
[17] 杨程.北京山区油松侧柏人工风景林林分密度确定[D].北京: 北京林业大学, 2009. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10022-2009161771.htm Yang C. Stand density of planted scenic forest Pinus tabulaeformis and Platycladus orientalis in Beijing mountain area [D]. Beijing: Beijing Forestry University, 2009. http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10022-2009161771.htm
[18] 毛斌, 徐程扬, 李翠翠, 等.不同修枝强度对侧柏、油松人工林林内景观美景度的影响[J].西北林学院学报, 2013, 28(3): 123-125, 205. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2013.03.23 Mao B, Xu C Y, Li C C, et al. Effects of pruning intensity on in-forest landscape of Platycladus orientalis and Pinus tabulaeformis plantations[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2013, 28(3): 123-125, 205. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2013.03.23
[19] 陈鑫峰, 贾黎明.京西山区森林林内景观评价研究[J].林业科学, 2003, 39(4): 59-66. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/lykx200304010 Chen X F, Jia L M. Research on evaluation of in-forest landscapes in west Beijing mountain area[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2003, 39(4): 59-66. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/lykx200304010
[20] Goodwin B J. Is landscape connectivity a dependent or independent variable?[J]. Landscape Ecology, 2003, 18(7): 687-699. doi: 10.1023/B:LAND.0000004184.03500.a8
[21] Daniel T C, Boster R S. Measuring landscape esthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method[R]. Colorado: USDA Forest Service Research Paper, 1976: 66.
[22] 邬建国.景观生态学:格局、过程尺度与等级[M].北京:高等教育出版社, 2001. Wu J G. Landscape ecology: pattern, process scale and grade[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2001.
[23] 章志都, 徐程扬, 龚岚, 等.基于SBE法的北京市郊野公园绿地结构质量评价技术[J].林业科学, 2011, 47(8): 53-60. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/lykx201108009 Zhang Z D, Xu C Y, Gong L, et al. Assessment on structural quality of landscapes in green space of Beijing suburban parks by SBE method[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2011, 47(8): 53-60. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/lykx201108009
[24] Kardan O, Demiralp E, Hout M C, et al. Is the preference of natural versus man-made scenes driven by bottom-up processing of the visual features of nature?[J].Frontier in Psychology, 2015, 6: 471. https://doaj.org/article/97134e945b9d4b8aac3948fdbd889785
[25] 章志都, 徐程扬, 董建文, 等.郁闭度对风景游憩林林下植被及林内景观的影响[J].中国城市林业, 2008, 6(2): 10-13. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4925.2008.02.003 Zhang Z D, Xu C Y, Dong J W, et al. Impacts of canopy closure on undergrowth and landscape in scenic recreational forest: a case study of Platycladus orientalis-Robinia pseudoacacia forest in Beijing[J]. Journal of Chinese Urban Forestry, 2008, 6(2): 10-13. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4925.2008.02.003
[26] 刘畅, 刘亚, 徐程扬, 等.游憩型城镇景观林林内景观斑块类型特征研究[J].西北林学院学报, 2016, 31(4): 305-311. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2016.04.51 Liu C, Liu Y, Xu C Y, et al. Characteristics of in-forest landscape patch types of recreational landscape forest in urban and suburban area[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2016, 31(4): 305-311. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2016.04.51
[27] Lamb R J, Purcell A T. Perception of naturalness in landscape and its relationship to vegetation structure[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1990, 19(4): 333-352. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(90)90041-Y
[28] Sang Å O, Knez I, Gunnarsson B, et al. The effects of naturalness, gender, and age on how urban green space is perceived and used[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2016, 18: 268-276. http://cn.bing.com/academic/profile?id=47a79e620d726a7f7102f76b990b1857&encoded=0&v=paper_preview&mkt=zh-cn
[29] Atasoy M, Barlow R J, Kush J S. Evaluating the relationship between vegetative composition and forest aesthetics of prescribed fire management in longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) forests[J]. Journal of International Academic Research for Multidisciplinary, 2017, 5(6): 38-52.
[30] 杨鑫霞, 亢新刚, 杜志, 等.基于SBE法的长白山森林景观美学评价[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2012, 40(6): 86-90, 98. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-XBNY201206014.htm Yang X X, Kang X G, Du Z, et al. SBE method-based forest landscape aesthetic quality ecaluation of Changbai Mountain[J]. Journal of Northwest A & F University(Natural Science Edition), 2012, 40(6): 86-90, 98. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-XBNY201206014.htm
[31] 史琛媛, 路亚星, 刘佳, 等.抚育间伐对冀北山地华北落叶松生态景观林林内美景度的影响[J].河北农业大学学报, 2016, 39(3): 66-72. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/hbnydxxb201603012 Shi C Y, Lu Y X, Liu J, et al. Effects of thinning on in-stand scenic beauty of Larix principis-rupprechtii Mayr. ecological landscape forest in the mountainous area of morthern Hebei Province [J]. Journal of Agricultural University of Hebei, 2016, 39(3): 66-72. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/hbnydxxb201603012
[32] 孙澜, 苏智先, 张素兰, 等.马尾松-川灰木人工混交林种内、种间竞争强度[J].生态学杂志, 2008, 27(8): 1274-1278. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxzz200808004 Sun L, Su Z X, Zhang S L, et al. Intra-and inter-specific competition intensities in Pinus massoniana-Symplocos szechumensis mixed plantation [J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2008, 27(8): 1274-1278. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxzz200808004
[33] Mohler C L, Marks P L, Sprugel D G. Stand structure and allometry of trees during self-thinning of pure stands[J]. Journal of Ecology, 1978, 66(2): 599. doi: 10.2307/2259153
[34] Frank S, Fürst C, Koschke L, et al. Assessment of landscape aesthetics: validation of a landscape metrics-based assessment by visual estimation of the scenic beauty [J]. Ecological Indicators, 2013, 32: 222-231 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.03.026
[35] 王子, 荣媛, 李明阳, 等.森林景观色彩评价研究[J].世界林业研究, 2017, 30(3): 41-45. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/sjlyyj201703008 Wang Z, Rong Y, Li M Y, et al. A review of forest landscape color evaluation[J]. World Forest Research, 2017, 30(3): 41-45. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/sjlyyj201703008
[36] 吴健生, 袁甜, 王彤.基于三维景观指数的城市景观美学特征定量表达:以深圳市为例[J].生态学报, 2017, 37(13): 4519-4528. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxb201713024 Wu J S, Yuan T, Wang T. Preliminary theory of urban landscape esthetics based on three-dimensional landscape indicators [J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(13): 4519-4528. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxb201713024
[37] 周年兴, 黄震方, 蒋铭萍, 等.庐山森林景观美学质量与景观格局指数的关系[J].地理研究, 2012, 31(7): 1224-1232. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/dlyj201207006 Zhou N X, Huang Z F, Jiang M P, et al. The relationships between forest landscape visual quality and landscape spatial pattern index of Mount Lushan[J]. Geographical Research, 2012, 31(7): 1224-1232. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/dlyj201207006
-
期刊类型引用(11)
1. 赵熙来，周正，葛锐，罗伟豪，马旭彤，蒋慧，苏华维. 残次香梨与乳酸菌组合对四翅滨藜青贮的影响. 中国饲料. 2024(17): 155-161 . 
百度学术
2. 张衡锋，杨绮，韦庆翠，张焕朝. 盐胁迫对10个品种紫薇的影响及其耐盐性综合评价. 东北林业大学学报. 2023(09): 34-40 . 百度学术
3. 李雨欣，罗秀丽，张婷婷，康宇乾，王鹏，江行玉，周扬. 盐胁迫下海马齿生理指标变化及相关基因表达分析. 农业生物技术学报. 2022(07): 1279-1289 . 百度学术
4. 刘鹤莹，张嫚，翟中葳，杨鹏，支苏丽，沈仕洲，张克强. 大薸对奶厅废水主要污染物的去除效果研究. 农业环境科学学报. 2022(11): 2525-2538 . 百度学术
5. 王涛，蒙仲举，张佳鹏，雷虹娟，张格. NaCl胁迫对紫穗槐幼苗生长及生理特性的影响. 西北林学院学报. 2021(01): 25-30 . 百度学术
6. 刘学良，姚俊修，刘翠兰，李善文，任飞，李庆华，吴海涛，翟红莲，吴德军，邢世岩，高红萍. 7个接骨木无性系苗木对盐胁迫的生理响应与评价. 中南林业科技大学学报. 2021(01): 37-44+79 . 百度学术
7. 鲁俊倩，武舒，钟姗辰，张伟溪，苏晓华，张冰玉. ‘84K’杨组氨酸激酶基因PaHK3a的表达及功能分析. 北京林业大学学报. 2021(02): 46-53 . 本站查看
8. 丁丁，王红宝，郑伶杰，左永梅，韩民利，吴新海，郭艳超. 不同品种茶菊对NaCl胁迫的生理响应及耐盐性评价. 植物生理学报. 2021(03): 692-702 . 百度学术
9. 赵佳伟，李清亚，路斌，李艳，朱玉菲，栗浩，路丙社. 不同品种北美豆梨对NaCl胁迫的生理响应及耐盐性评价. 植物生理学报. 2019(01): 23-31 . 百度学术
10. 邹晓君，列志旸，薛立. NaCl胁迫对4种园林植物养分含量和贮量的影响. 华南农业大学学报. 2018(06): 77-84 . 百度学术
11. 杨传宝，孙超，李善文，姚俊修，刘敬国，矫兴杰. 白杨派无性系苗期耐盐性综合评价及筛选. 北京林业大学学报. 2017(10): 24-32 . 本站查看
其他类型引用(5)
计量
- 文章访问数: 1745
- HTML全文浏览量: 477
- PDF下载量: 29
- 被引次数: 16
