喀斯特区天峨槭(Acer wangchii)树干液流特征及其与环境因子的相关分析

Abstract

PDF HTML阅读 XML下载 导出引用 引用提醒 喀斯特区天峨槭(Acer wangchii)树干液流特征及其与环境因子的相关分析 DOI: 10.5846/stxb201609251934 作者: 作者单位: 作者简介: 通讯作者: 中图分类号: 基金项目: 黔科合人字（2011）12号；黔科合人才团队[2014]4004号；黔林科合J字[2015]14号；黔科合SY字[2014]3039号；黔科合院士站[2014]4006；黔林科合J字[2014]09号 Characteristics of sap flow and correlation analysis with environmental factors of Acer wangchii in the karst area Author: Affiliation: Fund Project: 摘要 | 图/表 | 访问统计 | 参考文献 | 相似文献 | 引证文献 | 资源附件 | 文章评论 摘要:采用TDP（Thermal Dissipation Probe）热扩散探针法，于2012年2月-2014年3月，对喀斯特地区天峨槭（Acer wangchii）树干液流速率进行了长期连续的监测，并同步监测了林分空气温度（Ta）、相对湿度（RH）、太阳辐射（Solar）、风速（WS）、降雨量（Rainfall）、土壤含水量（SWC）等环境因子，探讨了不同时间尺度下天峨槭树干液流特征及其与环境因子的关系。结果表明：1）不同天气条件下的树干液流为晴天 > 阴天 > 雨天，且均呈明显的"昼高夜低"变化规律；2）天峨槭树干的日平均液流量为5.08 kg/d，不同季节表现为夏季（（8.38±5.32）kg/d） > 秋季（（5.16±3.99）kg/d） > 春季（（4.86±3.77）kg/d） > 冬季（（1.94 ±1.40）kg/d）；3）月平均液流量为153.64 kg，年平均液流量达1838.40 kg；4）小时尺度下，影响晴天、阴天、雨天全天树干液流的主要环境因子都是Solar，但各环境因子对树干液流的影响程度又因昼夜、季节及降雨量的不同而存在差异；5）从年度范围来看：小时尺度下，Solar、Ta、RH、SWC10cm和WS可以共同解释树干液流的63.50%；日尺度下，Solar、Ta、SWC10cm和Rainfall可共同解释其68.50%；月尺度下，单个因子Ta就能解释其74.80%；且随着时间尺度的缩小，各环境因子入选回归方程的个数有增加的趋势，而对树干液流的解释程度（R2）则有降低的趋势。对比其他地区研究结果，其环境因子对树干液流的影响差异都很大；但总的来说，无论在何种时间尺度上，Solar（或光合有效辐射（PAR））和Ta基本上都是影响树干液流的主要环境因子，且各环境因子对雨天树干液流的解释程度都不高，本研究亦如此；因此，以环境因子对雨天树干液流进行预测的时候可能会存在误差，应特别注意土壤含水量对其的影响。 Abstract:The Thermal Dissipation Probe (TDP) method was used to conduct long-term continuous observations from February 2012 to March 2014 on the sap flow velocity of Acer wangchii in karst regions. In addition, environmental factors including air temperature (Ta), relative humidity (RH), solar radiation (Solar), wind speed (WS), rainfall, soil water content (SWC), and the characteristics of A. wangchii sap flow were investigated, and correlations between environmental factors and different temporal scales were determined. The findings revealed the following:1) sap flow velocity in relation to different weather conditions, in descending order, was sunny, cloudy, and rainy days, and the sap flow was generally high in the daytime and low at night; 2) the average amount of sap flow was 5.08 kg/d, with the sap flow quantity varying in different seasons, in descending order of (8.38 ±5.32) kg/d in summer, (5.16 ±3.99) kg/d in autumn, (4.86 ±3.77) kg/d in spring, and (1.94 ±1.40) kg/d in winter; 3) the monthly sap flow was 153.64 kg and the annual sap flow was 1838.40 kg, on average; 4) on the hourly scale, solar radiation over 1 day was the main environmental factor influencing sap flow regardless of the weather conditions, while the influence of the other environmental factors on sap flow varied in the daytime, at night, and in different seasons and rainfalls; and 5) over 1 year:on the hourly scale, 63.50% of the sap flow could be interpreted jointly by the environmental factors including solar radiation, Ta, RH, SWC10cm and WS. On the daily scale, 68.50% of the sap flow could be interpreted jointly by the environmental factors including solar radiation, Ta, SWC10cm and rainfall. On the monthly scale, the sap flow quantity could be interpreted with the single environmental factor, Ta, which contributed 74.80% to the total. With the time scale reducing, the more environmental factors were involved in the regression equation, the lesser interpretation of sap flow quantity (R2) would be. In comparison to similar findings from other regions, the impact of environment factors on sap flow diverged greatly. However, on temporal scales, solar radiation or PAR and Ta were the two major factors that affected sap flow, and no environmental factor contributed in the interpretation of sap flow on rainy days, which is consistent with the present study. Therefore, estimates of the impact of environmental factors on sap flow on rainy days deviate, and particular attention should be paid to the role of soil water content. 参考文献 相似文献 引证文献