Establishment and Application of Site Index Table for Pinus spp.in Shandong Province

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2018.02.009

Abstract

Abstract:

Data from 233 sample plots of Pinus thunbergii and Pinus densiflora plantation were collected at different site conditions in Shandong Province.Firstly,the feasibility was verified in establishment of a common site index table for Pinus thunbergii and Pinus densiflora.The guide curve equation was Richards equation for Pinus thunbergii and Pinus densiflora,and the coefficient of determination (R ²) was 0.958 0. Then,site index table was established by means of relative dominant height,in which the baseline age was 30a,the interval of site index class was 1m,and the site index ranged from 5m to 12m.The site index table was demonstrated to be of high accuracy through significance test and prediction accuracy test,and it was applicable for site quality evaluation for Pinus thunbergii and Pinus densiflora planation in Shandong Province.The site index varied from 7m to 9m for 59.4% of the total 233 sample plots,and these sample plots were grouped into medium site quality.

Key words: Shandong Province, Pinus thunbergii, Pinus densiflora, site index table, site quality evaluation

CLC Number:

S758

YANG Chuanqiang, LI Shimei, KONG Yuguang, GONG Yanping, YANG Zhijun, LU Hongchun, SUN Tianxu. Establishment and Application of Site Index Table for Pinus spp.in Shandong Province[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2018, (2): 43-47.

Figures/Tables 8

Tab.1

Tab.2

Fig.1

Tab.3

Tab.4

Equation and parameters of guide curve

模型	表达式	判定系数R²	参数
模型	表达式	判定系数R²	a	b	c
理查德(Richards)式	$H = a 1 - e - cA b$	0.9580	11.444	1.085	0.040
逻辑斯蒂(Logistic)式	$H = a 1 + b e - cA$	0.7161	8.885	6.584	0.153
豪斯费尔德(Hossfeld)式	$H = a 1 + b A - c$	0.6836	9.062	89.419	1.921
考尔夫(Korf)式	$H = a e - bA - c$	-0.9554	24.541	5.538	0.459
坎派兹(Gompertz)式	$H = a e - b e - cA$	-0.9523	75.596	3.713	0.1879

Tab.4

Tab.5

Tab.6

Tab.7

References 14

[1]	郭艳荣, 吴保国, 刘洋, 等. 立地质量评价研究进展[J]. 世界林业研究, 2012,25(5):47-52.
[2]	李宗俊, 刘萍, 朱英娟, 等. 纸浆材桉树人工林地位指数表的编制[J].林业资源管理, 2016(1):59-64.
[3]	郑聪慧, 贾黎明, 段劼, 等. 华北地区栓皮栎天然次生林地位指数表的编制[J]. 林业科学, 2013,49(2):79-85. doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20130212
[4]	马炜, 孙玉军. 长白落叶松人工林立地指数表和胸径地位级表的编制[J].东北林业大学学报, 2013(12):21-25.
[5]	高祥, 焦有权, 冯仲科, 等. 基于Mitscherlich模型的华北落叶松人工林地位级表研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2016,30(3):86-91.
[6]	王璐, 王海燕, 何丽鸿, 等. 天然云冷杉针阔混交林立地质量评价[J].东北林业大学学报, 2016(3):1-7.
[7]	秦乐. 济南市南部山区立地类型划分与工程造林关键技术研究[D]. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2009.
[8]	谭启航. 鲁中南干旱瘠薄山地立地类型划分[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2014.
[9]	许景伟, 李传荣, 王卫东, 等. 沿海沙质岸黑松防护林立地质量评价及其类型划分[J].河北林业科技, 2003(4):7-10.
[10]	许景伟. 沂山刺槐人工林立地质量数量化评价[J].山东林业科技, 1996(2):41-44.
[11]	张伟, 杨传强, 赵青. 山东省侧柏人工林立地指数表的编制[J].山东林业科技, 2014(3):6-10.
[12]	曹汉玉, 苟守华, 吴德军. 日本落叶松立地质量数量化评定表的编制及应用[J].山东林业科技, 1991(S1):29-32.
[13]	孟宪宇. 测树学[M].3版. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2006.
[14]	吴再明. 论χ ²检验在地位指数曲线检验中的应用[J].云南林业调查规划, 1988(2):1-6.

龄阶	树高标准差	平均树高 /m	剔除下限	剔除上限	优势木株数/m
5	0.88	2.03	-0.62	4.68	20
10	0.96	3.83	0.95	6.71	20
15	1.70	5.20	0.09	10.31	20
20	1.47	5.99	1.58	10.40	19
25	0.98	6.75	3.81	9.69	19
30	1.28	7.67	3.82	11.52	20
35	1.93	8.04	2.24	13.84	18
40	2.36	8.64	1.55	15.73	20
45	2.16	9.43	2.95	15.91	24
50	1.79	10.73	5.37	16.09	19
55	2.80	11.53	3.13	19.93	14
60	0.91	10.50	7.78	13.22	20
合计					233

组别	龄阶/a								株数/株
组别	5	10	15	20	25	30	35	40	株数/株
1	0.8	1.7	2.6	3.4	4.0	4.6	5.1	5.6	10
2	1.1	2.0	3.4	4.3	5.2	5.8	6.5	7.2	11
3	1.1	2.7	3.9	4.9	5.9	6.8	7.6	8.3	12
4	1.7	3.4	5.0	6.2	7.1	8.0	8.6	9.4	9
5	1.8	4.1	5.8	7.4	8.2	9.0	9.8	10.3	5
6	2.2	4.1	6.3	7.9	8.9	9.8	11.0	12.0	4
7	2.5	5.2	7.0	8.6	10.1	11.1	12.1	13.6	3
龄阶均值	1.8	3.4	4.8	6.0	7.0	7.8	8.4	9.0	54

差异源	离均差平方	自由度	均方	F值	P值	F临界值
树种	17.970	1	17.970	3.865	0.050828	3.893640
龄阶	1305.651	9	145.072	31.206	2.11E-32	1.932205
交互	3.010	9	0.334	0.072	0.999901	1.932205
内部	836.798	180	4.649
总计	2163.429	199

统计量	龄阶/a
统计量	5	10	15	20	25	30	35	40	45	50	55	60
树高标准差S_H	0.8	1.4	1.6	1.8	1.9	2.1	2.3	2.5	2.6	3.0	2.2	2.7
平均树高H	1.3	2.9	4.4	5.4	6.4	7.2	7.8	8.5	9.1	9.6	9.0	9.1
树高变动系数C_H	59.9	46.8	37.6	33.9	30.2	29.6	29.3	29.7	28.3	31.2	25.0	29.4

龄阶/a	指数5	指数6	指数7	指数8	指数9	指数10	指数11	指数12
5	1.2	1.4	1.6	1.8	2.1	2.3	2.5	2.8
10	2.2	2.6	3.1	3.5	4.0	4.4	4.8	5.3
15	3.1	3.7	4.3	5.0	5.6	6.2	6.8	7.4
20	3.9	4.6	5.4	6.2	6.9	7.7	8.5	9.2
25	4.5	5.4	6.3	7.2	8.1	9.0	9.9	10.8
30	5.0	6.0	7.0	8.0	9.0	10.0	11.0	12.0
35	5.5	6.5	7.6	8.7	9.8	10.9	12.0	13.1
40	5.8	6.9	8.1	9.2	10.4	11.5	12.7	13.8
45	6.1	7.3	8.5	9.7	10.9	12.1	13.3	14.5
50	6.3	7.6	8.8	10.1	11.3	12.6	13.9	15.1
55	6.5	7.8	9.1	10.4	11.7	13.0	14.3	15.6
60	6.7	8.0	9.3	10.6	12.0	13.3	14.6	16.0