Bark Fire Resistance of 6 Tree Species Based on Entropy Weight Method

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lczyyj.2024.01.006

Abstract

Abstract:

The frequent occurrence of forest fires in Xichang City posed great threat to local people's property and forest ecology.In order to effectively enhance the forest fire prevention capability,the fire resistance of bark of 6 tree species in mountain forest around Xichang City were measured and analyzed.Using entropy weight method and cluster analysis,the fire resistance performance of 6 tree species were sorted and classified,which is based on their comprehensive physicochemical properties and combustion performances differences.The results indicated that there were significant differences in the physicochemical properties and combustion performances of bark among the tree species.The thickness of the bark and the content of crude ash were relatively high,while the moisture content and crude fat content were relatively low in Sapindus mukorossi bark.The moisture content and ignition point of Phyllanthus emblica bark were significantly higher than those of other tree species,and the content of crude fibre and caloric value were significantly lower than those of other tree species.The bark thickness,the content of crude fat and lignin of Ligustrum lucidum bark were relatively low,and its ignition point was significantly lower than other that of tree species.The bark thickness,the content of crude fat,ignition point,and caloric value of Sapium sebiferum were all relatively high.The content of crude ash in Illicium simonsii bark was relatively low,and the content of crude fibre was significantly higher than that of other tree species.The bark of Pinus armandii had the lowest moisture content and significantly higher caloric value than that of other tree species.Bark fire resistance of the 6 tree species followed the order of S.mukorossi>P.emblica>L.lucidum>S.sebiferum>I.simonsii>P.armandii.The fire resistance of bark from 6 tree species could be divided into 3 class.S.mukorossi had better fire resistance and could be used as the local fire-resistant tree.The fire resistance of P.emblica,L.lucidum and S.sebiferum was average,which could be used in the construction of mixed forest in biological fire barriers.I.simonsii and P.armandii had poor fire resistance,which should be paid attention to fire prevention in large areas of pure forest.

Key words: fire resistant performance, bark, entropy weight method, cluster analysis, Sapindus mukorossi

CLC Number:

S762.3

LI Shuhui, WU Yan, SUN Zhidong, WANG Cai, LIAO Lili, CHEN Ji'en, XIAO Xuejun, SHEN Junhua. Bark Fire Resistance of 6 Tree Species Based on Entropy Weight Method[J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2024, (1): 41-47.

Figures/Tables 4

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Fig.1

References 34

[1]	吴月圆, 舒立福, 王明玉, 等. 近年世界森林火灾综述[J]. 温带林业研究, 2022, 5(4):49-54.
[2]	白夜, 王博, 武英达, 等. 凉山州森林火灾形成的火环境研究[J]. 林业资源管理, 2020(5):116-112.
[3]	魏书精, 罗碧珍, 李小川, 等. 凉山州“3·30”林火扑救人员伤亡原因分析与启示[J]. 森林防火, 2020(2):10-13.
[4]	白夜, 齐方忠, 王博, 等. 森林火灾“爆燃”成因及应对策略[J]. 消防界(电子版), 2019(9):56-59.
[5]	胡宇宸, 何晓旭, 段绍光, 等. 豫西伏牛山区栎类林地表可燃物研究[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2013, 47(6):710-714.
[6]	田晓瑞, 代玄, 王明玉, 等. 多气候情景下中国森林火灾风险评估[J]. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(3):769-776.
[7]	Ferreira A, Alegre S P, Coelho C O, et al. Strategies to prevent forest fires and techniques to reverse degradation processes in burned areas[J]. Catena, 2015, 128:224-237. doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2014.09.002
[8]	王明霞, 单延龙, 尹赛男, 等. 11种树种的树皮抗火性[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(1):65-71. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202001.020
[9]	温开德, 欧阳园兰. 11种常绿阔叶树的树皮抗火性研究[J]. 南方林业科学, 2018, 46(1):50-53.
[10]	李世友, 金贵军, 周全, 等. 3种针叶树种树皮抗火性研究[J]. 浙江林业科技, 2006, 26(4):6-9.
[11]	彭博. 基于GIS技术对西昌市森林火险等级划分的研究[J]. 四川林业科技, 2021, 42(5):53-57.
[12]	陈兵, 赵凤君, 范太云, 等. 西昌市森林防火综合阻隔网空间布局[J]. 林业科学, 2023, 59(9):130-141.
[13]	甘薇薇, 杨淑群, 马振峰, 等. 北太平洋海温异常对四川省春季林火的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016, 32(6):132-138. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb15090020
[14]	张景华, 欧阳渊, 刘洪, 等. 基于主控要素的生态地质脆弱性评价——以四川省西昌市为例[J]. 自然资源遥感, 2021, 33(4):181-191.
[15]	中国轻工业联合会. 造纸原料水分的测定:GB/T 2677.2—2011[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2011.
[16]	国家林业局森林防火办公室. 森林可燃物的测定:LY/T 2013—2012[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2012.
[17]	李艳芹, 胡海清. 森林可燃物抽提物研究综述[J]. 世界林业研究, 2008, 21(6):54-56.
[18]	国家林业局. 林业生物质原料分析方法灰分的测定:GB/T 36057—2018[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
[19]	中华人民共和国卫生部. 植物内食品中粗纤维的测定:GB/T 5009.10—2003[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2003.
[20]	范鹏程, 田静, 黄静美, 等. 花生壳中纤维素和木质素含量的测定方法[J]. 重庆科技学院学报(自然科学版), 2008, 10(5):64-66.
[21]	梁敬妮, 李阳, 由金文, 等. 基于“辨状论质”结合熵权法的厚朴药材质量等级研究[J]. 中国现代中药, 2023, 25(10):2171-2178.
[22]	顾汪明, 卢泽洋, 黄春良, 等. 云南省建水县防火树种筛选研究[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2020, 42(2):49-60.
[23]	安海山, 孟亚楠, 杨克强, 等. 核桃杂交后代群体及优选单株种仁中粗蛋白质和粗脂肪含量的遗传特性[J]. 植物资源与环境学报, 2011, 20(4):24-28.
[24]	裴建元, 叶清, 赵平, 等. 常绿针叶树种抗火性研究[J]. 农业灾害研究, 2014, 4(7):43-46.
[25]	邹璐, 陶远胜, 甘继权, 等. 井冈山自然保护区16种树叶的抗火性排序[J]. 江西农业大学学报, 2012, 34(5):976-982.
[26]	李海佳, 郑淑霞, 单笑笑, 等. 西宁周边山地主要造林树种防火性能评价[J]. 林业科学研究, 2021, 34(5):111-118.
[27]	蔺超. 呼和浩特市15种乔木树种抗火性分析[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2021.
[28]	高仲亮, 魏建珩, 龙腾腾, 等. 气候变化背景下云南松林火灾害的响应规律研究[J]. 西部林业科学, 2021, 50(1):12-18.
[29]	李世友, 昌尼娜, 管晓媛, 等. 昆明地区15种常见木本植物活枝的燃烧性[J]. 生态学杂志, 2012, 31(2):276-281.
[30]	曾素平, 刘发林, 赵梅芳, 等. 我国亚热带典型树种抗火性状随林龄和器官的变异[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(4):1063-1072. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202004.008
[31]	王雷, 徐家琛, 朱鹏飞, 等. 呼和浩特市主要园林树种理化性质及燃烧性研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 44(3):74-80. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201905024
[32]	Pinard M A, Huffman J. Fire resistance and bark properties of trees in a seasonally dry forest in eastern Bolivia[J]. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 1997, 13(5):727-740. doi: 10.1017/S0266467400010890
[33]	单延龙, 陶洪伟, 赵丽, 等. 长白山红松阔叶林主要树种树皮抗火性的分析与排序[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2011, 39(12):49-51.
[34]	李修鹏, 杨晓东, 余树全, 等. 基于功能性状的常绿阔叶植物防火性能评价[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(20):6604-6613.

树种	生活型	树高/m	胸径/cm
野八角Illicium simonsii	常绿乔木	4.5	10.4
余甘子Phyllanthus emblica	落叶乔木	6.5	14.7
女贞Ligustrum lucidum	常绿乔木	6.5	8.8
无患子Sapindus mukorossi	落叶乔木	12.0	31.3
乌桕Sapium sebiferum	落叶乔木	6.0	15.1
华山松Pinus armandii	常绿乔木	15.5	23.0

树种	含水率/ %	树皮厚度/ mm	粗灰分含量/ %	粗脂肪含量/ %	粗纤维含量/ %	木质素含量/ %	燃点/ ℃	热值/ (J/g)
野八角	57.9±1.2b	6.4±0.2ab	1.8±0.0b	2.4±0.4ab	39.4±2.4a	19.8±2.4a	265.8±0.3c	6 630±8e
余甘子	68.2±0.6a	2.7±0.2b	7.9±0.2ab	3.4±0.5a	7.1±1.2f	23.3±2.5a	275.6±0.3a	3 477±109f
女贞	52.3±1.2c	2.7±0.1b	2.9±0.0ab	1.7±0.5b	21.7±2.3d	7.5±1.0b	244.9±0.2e	6 995±38d
无患子	35.4±1.0e	12.0±2.3a	9.1±0.4a	2.2±0.4ab	34.9±3.2b	10.8±1.9b	260.9±0.2d	9 859±235c
乌桕	37.6±0.6d	9.3±1.6ab	4.1±0.0ab	3.3±0.6a	30.3±2.6c	11.3±1.0b	270.3±0.3b	10 473±93b
华山松	34.1±0.5e	8.9±1.4ab	2.2±0.1ab	2.8±0.3ab	14.0±1.1e	22.0±1.8a	265.8±0.5c	11 782±39a

变量	含水率	热值	粗灰分含量	粗脂肪含量	粗纤维含量	木质素含量	燃点	树皮厚度
含水率	1.000
热值	-0.976^**	1.000
粗灰分含量	0.073	-0.252	1.000
粗脂肪含量	0.109	-0.067	0.192	1.000
粗纤维含量	-0.291	0.281	-0.129	-0.257	1.000
木质素含量	0.375	-0.265	-0.056	0.564^*	-0.413	1.000
燃点	0.159	-0.117	0.279	0.787^**	-0.200	0.691^**	1.000
树皮厚度	-0.810^**	0.773^**	0.182	0.045	0.513^*	-0.142	0.170	1.000