Dynamics of Change in Age Group Structure of Arbor Forests in Zhejiang Province Based on Continuous Inventory Data

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lczyyj.2024.02.004

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the data from successive national forest resources inventories and annual monitoring of provincial forest resources in Zhejiang Province during 1979-2019,we analyzed the changes in the age group structure of arbor forests in Zhejiang Province over the past 40 years and predicted the development in the next 10 years by adopting methods such as statistical comparisons,analysis of the balance rate,and projections of area transfer.The results show that:1)During the 40 years,the changes in the age group structure of arbor forests in Zhejiang Province can be obviously divided into two phases.From 1979 to the end of the 20th century,there was a period of rapid growth in the area of arbor forests,and the age group equilibrium rate increased from 0.464 to 0.546,and the optimization of the age group structure was not the main successional feature;after entering the 21st century,the area of arbor forests was stagnant,and the age group equilibrium rate increased from 0.546 to 0.758,the optimization of age group structure has become the main successional feature;2)The age group structure of arbor forests in Zhejiang Province is now close to an ideal state,with the potential for forest resources to be fully cultivated,and it is predicted that it will reach an ideal state by 2029;3)At present,the arbor forests in Zhejiang Province have the problem of the overall age complementary effect of the stand,which means a relatively young age of one species and the relatively old age of another.It should be noted that the overall better age structure of the stand may mask the uneven age structure of individual species.Based on the current status of the age structure of arbor forests in Zhejiang Province and the target orientation of sustainable management,measures to optimize the age structure are proposed,with a view to promoting the improvement of the quality of forest resources and the capacity of carbon sequestration and sink enhancement.

Key words: continuous inventory, age group structure, equilibrium rate, dynamics of change, Zhejiang Province

CLC Number:

S757.2

TANG Yanglong, LI Mengting, TAO Jixing. Dynamics of Change in Age Group Structure of Arbor Forests in Zhejiang Province Based on Continuous Inventory Data[J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2024, (2): 26-33.

Figures/Tables 8

Tab.1

Tab.2

Fig.1

Tab.3

Fig.2

Tab.4

Fig.3

Tab.5

References 18

[1]	王红春. 龄组划分的公式化表达及其应用[J]. 林业资源管理, 2011(3):72-75.
[2]	于政中. 森林经理学[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社,1991.
[3]	石春娜, 王群. 我国森林资源质量变化及现状分析[J]. 林业科学, 2009, 45(11):90-97.
[4]	崔海鸥, 刘珉. 我国第九次森林资源清查中的资源动态研究[J]. 西部林业科学, 2020, 49(5):90-95.
[5]	张海为. 碳中和背景下我国森林龄组结构现状及优化对策与建议[J]. 中国林业经济, 2022(4):91-95.
[6]	冯德乾, 王珊, 赵义民, 等. 中国森林资源变化趋势及龄组结构优化研究[J]. 西南林业大学学报:自然科学, 2023, 41(4):122-131.
[7]	钟乐, 武晓玉, 沈发兴, 等. 江西省森林资源动态变化及驱动力分析[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2017, 45(14):215-219.
[8]	朱玉章, 刘向东, 董泽生, 等. 辽宁森林龄组结构变化分析[J]. 林业勘察设计, 2005(1):15-16.
[9]	袁传武, 吴保国, 唐万鹏, 等. 湖北省森林资源动态变化分析与评价[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2007, 22(4):78-82.
[10]	李国庆, 吴雪玲, 唐辉, 等. 安吉县2007—2018年森林资源动态和成因分析[J]. 浙江林业科技, 2020, 40(3):56-60.
[11]	赵国辉. 大兴沟林业局乔木林地各龄组树种结构分析[J]. 吉林林业科技, 2020, 49(1):7-11.
[12]	陶吉兴, 张国江, 季碧勇, 等. 浙江森林资源调查监测鉴知[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2022.
[13]	陶吉兴, 季碧勇, 徐达, 等. 浙江森林资源一体化监测理论与实践[M]. 北京: 中国林业出版社, 2016.
[14]	刘安兴, 张正寿, 丁良冬. 浙江林业自然资源·森林卷[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2002.
[15]	陆兆苏, 张昂和. 试论法正林[J]. 林业资源管理, 1980(1):1-7.
[16]	王红春, 寇文正. 应用性法正龄级结构的探讨[J]. 中国林业产业, 2004(4):51-54.
[17]	程建银. 评价森林资源结构的指标—平衡率[J]. 林业资源管理, 1987(4):45-48.
[18]	季碧勇, 徐军, 张国江, 等. 浙江林业生态资源·森林卷[M]. 杭州: 浙江科学技术出版社, 2020.

树种(组)	幼龄林	中龄林	近熟林	成熟林	过熟林
杉木、水杉、池杉	1~10	11~20	21~25	26~35	≥36
松、柏、枊杉	1~20	21~30	31~40	41~60	≥61
硬阔	1~20	21~30	31~40	41~60	≥61
软阔、速生硬阔	1~10	11~15	16~20	21~30	≥31

监测年	总计		幼龄林		中龄林		近熟林		成过熟林
监测年	面积/ 万hm²	占比/ %	面积/ 万hm²	占比/ %	面积/ 万hm²	占比/ %	面积/ 万hm²	占比/ %	面积/ 万hm²	占比/ %
1979	231.95	100	147.54	63.61	61.68	26.59	5.08	2.19	17.65	7.61
1986	284.44	100	156.25	54.93	91.18	32.06	19.35	6.80	17.66	6.21
1989	296.00	100	145.28	49.08	112.83	38.12	20.51	6.93	17.38	5.87
1994	344.78	100	158.68	46.02	140.82	40.84	27.70	8.04	17.58	5.10
1999	361.53	100	154.32	42.68	149.52	41.36	42.12	11.65	15.57	4.31
2004	393.61	100	164.48	41.79	164.46	41.78	46.95	11.93	17.72	4.50
2009	410.07	100	170.95	41.69	143.83	35.07	65.38	15.94	29.91	7.30
2014	426.88	100	170.76	40.00	132.83	31.12	70.39	16.49	52.90	12.39
2019	432.15	100	174.08	40.28	120.42	27.86	61.78	14.30	75.87	17.56

监测年	总计		幼龄林		中龄林		近熟林		成过熟林
监测年	蓄积量/ 万m³	占比/ %	蓄积量/ 万m³	占比/ %	蓄积量/ 万m³	占比/ %	蓄积量/ 万m³	占比/ %	蓄积量/ 万m³	占比/ %
1979	7 918.33	100	2 475.27	31.26	3 271.85	41.32	377.28	4.76	1 793.93	22.66
1986	8 811.68	100	2 181.08	24.75	3 630.07	41.20	1 266.62	14.37	1 733.91	19.68
1989	9 461.39	100	2 087.80	22.07	4 466.76	47.21	1 355.57	14.33	1 551.26	16.39
1994	11 122.00	100	2 879.35	25.89	5 048.50	45.39	1 813.60	16.31	1 380.55	12.41
1999	11 535.85	100	1 958.83	16.98	5 676.90	49.21	2 546.85	22.08	1 353.27	11.73
2004	17 223.14	100	4 210.70	24.45	8 077.05	46.89	3 413.01	19.82	1 522.38	8.84
2009	21 679.75	100	5 645.39	26.04	8 063.54	37.19	5 287.69	24.39	2 683.13	12.38
2014	28 114.67	100	7 223.74	25.69	9 220.90	32.80	6 216.36	22.11	5 453.67	19.40
2019	36 087.01	100	10 167.60	28.18	10 632.59	29.46	6 264.33	17.36	9 022.49	25.00

监测年	松类	杉类	阔叶树类	针叶混	针阔混	总体
1979	0.289	0.529	0.594			0.464
1986	0.416	0.587	0.710			0.507
1989	0.422	0.554	0.753			0.504
1994	0.449	0.545	0.654			0.508
1999	0.529	0.593	0.464			0.546
2004	0.558	0.571	0.319	0.598	0.454	0.541
2009	0.632	0.793	0.211	0.678	0.530	0.643
2014	0.624	0.786	0.370	0.762	0.569	0.714
2019	0.695	0.566	0.416	0.750	0.751	0.758

年份	类别	总计/万hm²	幼龄林/万hm²	中龄林/万hm²	近熟林/万hm²	成过熟林/万hm²	平衡率
2019年	基数	432.15	174.08	120.42	61.78	75.87	0.758
	造林	9.0
2024年	转进		22.18	27.65	19.76
	转出	-22.18	-27.65	-19.76
	采伐				-6.78
2024年	估计	434.37	160.90	114.95	69.67	88.85	0.820
2029年	造林	7.50
	转进		19.59	27.50	25.82
	转出	-19.59	-27.50	-25.82
	采伐				-6.78
2029年	估计	435.09	148.81	107.04	71.35	107.89	0.877