Comprehensive Quality Evaluation of the Pure and Mixed Cunninghamia lanceolata Stands of the Ecological Public-Welfare Forests in Northern Guangdong

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2022.05.009

Abstract

Abstract:

The study was based on data of each wood scale,soil physical and chemical properties,litter characteristics and biodiversity of the standard sample plots from pure Cunninghamia/lanceolata and six typical C.lanceolata with broad-leaved mixed stands(C.lanceolata×Schima superba,C.lanceolata×Castanopsis hystrix,C.lanceolata×Michelia chapensis,C.lanceolata×Michelia macclurei,C.lanceolata×Cinnamomum camphora,C.lanceolata×Liquidambar formosana)of the ecological public-welfare forests in northern Guangdong,China.Analytical Hierarchy Process(AHP)method was applied to obtain relative weights of each criterion including stand quality,ecological function and soil fertility maintenance and theirs sub-criterions,with the object to build a comprehensive quality evaluation system for C.lanceolata ecological forests in northern Guangdong.According to the evaluation results,the C.lanceolata×C.hystrix,C.lanceolata×M.chapensis and C.lanceolata×M.macclurei stands appeared to have higher stand quality scores than others,and the stands of C.lanceolata×M.macclurei,C.lanceolata×L.formosana and C.lanceolata×M.chapensis presented rather good ecological function.While the C.lanceolata×C.hystrix,C.lanceolata×S.superba and C.lanceolata×M.macclurei stands had higher soil fertility maintenance ability than others.Overall,three types of stands including C.lanceolata×M.macclurei,C.lanceolata×C.hystrix and C.lanceolata×M.chapensis were comprehensively good regarding all aspects.

Key words: northern Guangdong, ecological public-welfare forests, pure and mixed Cunninghamia lanceolata stand, Analytical Hierarchy Process, comprehensive quality evaluation system

CLC Number:

YAN Shu, DENG Houyin, HU Dehuo, WANG Runhui, WEI Ruping, ZHENG Huiquan, ZOU Yihua, CHEN Xiawei. Comprehensive Quality Evaluation of the Pure and Mixed Cunninghamia lanceolata Stands of the Ecological Public-Welfare Forests in Northern Guangdong[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2022, (5): 69-75.

Figures/Tables 7

Fig.1

Fig.2

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

References 23

[1]	GB/T 18337.1—2001,生态公益林建设导则[S].
[2]	林文欢. 广东省生态公益林建设现状及对策[J]. 粤东林业科技, 2011(1):45-47.
[3]	杨春桃. 生态公益林管理模式改革的实践与建议[J]. 中国林业产业, 2016(1):121.
[4]	谭增斌. 生态公益林保护存在的问题及对策[J]. 现代农业科技, 2022(8):141-142.
[5]	黄卫平. 生态公益林质量评价探析[J]. 林业科技情报, 2020, 52(2):41-43.
[6]	毛淑娟, 胡月明. 基于GIS与灰关联综合评价模型的生态公益林林分质量评价[J]. 广东林业科技, 2007, 23(1):37-41.
[7]	肖水根. 福建将乐生态公益林质量评价[J]. 福建林业科技, 2015, 42(3):220-222.
[8]	王震明. 浙江省浦江县公益林生态效益评价研究[J]. 华东森林经理, 2018, 32(4):15-20.
[9]	胡淑仪. 对粤北生态屏障保护的思考[J]. 中南林业调查规划, 2019, 38(2):23-25.
[10]	邓厚银, 胡德活, 晏姝, 等. 粤北地区杉木林与阔叶纯林土壤肥力特征[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2021, 49(1):18-23.
[11]	李华军, 廖德志, 刘敏杰, 等. 生态公益林林分结构对林下植被多样性的影响[J]. 湖南林业科技, 2020, 47(4):63-67.
[12]	黄润霞, 贾小容, 刘婷, 等. 亚热带生态公益林冠层结构与林下辐射动态[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2020, 35(1):28-36.
[13]	曹小玉, 李际平, 封尧, 等. 杉木生态公益林林分空间结构分析及评价[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(7):37-48.
[14]	危炳忠. 酸雨区不同林龄杉木人工林土壤物理性质及水源涵养功能差异[J]. 亚热带农业研究, 2017, 13(2):106-109.
[15]	周国逸, 尹光彩, 唐旭利, 等. 中国森林生态系统碳储量——生物量方程[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2018.
[16]	邓厚银, 晏姝, 王润辉, 等. 粤北不同林龄杉木人工林下土壤层及枯落物层持水能力研究[J]. 广东农业科学, 2019, 46(2):51-58.
[17]	巢林, 洪滔, 李键, 等. 中亚热带不同林龄杉木人工林径级结构与林下物种多样性分析[J]. 植物资源与环境学报, 2015, 24(2):88-96.
[18]	Valls-Donderis P, Vallés-Planells M, Galiana F. AHP for indicators of sustainable forestry under Mediterranean conditions[J]. Forest Systems, 2017, 26(2):1-5.
[19]	Saaty T L. The analytic hierarchy process[M]. New York: Mc Graw Hill Inc, 1980.
[20]	尹峰, 张贵, 朱玉雯. 生态公益林质量评价指标体系及综合指数研究[J]. 浙江林业科技, 2008, 28(3):29-33.
[21]	冯宗炜, 陈楚莹, 张家武, 等. 一种高生产力和生态协调的亚热带针阔混交林——杉木火力楠混交林的研究[J]. 植物生态学与地植物学学报, 1988, 12(3):165-180.
[22]	黄钰辉, 张卫强, 甘先华, 等. 南亚热带杉木林改造不同树种配置模式的土壤质量评价[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2017, 15(3):123-130.
[23]	肖石红, 高常军, 蔡坚, 等. 南亚热带杉木和红椎林及其混交林的土壤肥力[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2018, 38(2):142-148.

准则层(B) 指标	准则层权重 (W_Bi)	措施层(C) 指标	措施层权重 (W_ci)	总权重
林分质量 (B1)	0.50	平均胸径(C1)	0.40	0.20
		平均树高(C2)	0.40	0.20
		郁闭度(C3)	0.20	0.10
生态功能 (B2)	0.25	林分生产力(C4)	0.17	0.04
		林分碳储量(C5)	0.08	0.02
		水源涵养量(C6)	0.42	0.11
		物种多样性(C7)	0.33	0.08
地力维持 (B3)	0.25	土壤容重(C8)	0.09	0.02
		土壤孔隙度(C9)	0.25	0.06
		土壤有机质(C10)	0.33	0.08
		土壤N含量(C11)	0.33	0.08

林分类型		平均胸径/cm	平均树高/m	郁闭度	林分质量评分
杉木林	Cunninghamia.lanceolata	13.28±0.22b	10.58±0.19b	0.85±0.03a	0.0388
杉木×木荷	C.lanceolata×S.superba	11.99±0.21c	11.15±0.19a	0.90±0.02a	0.0693
杉木×红锥	C.lanceolata×C.hystrix	11.99±0.23c	11.83±0.19a	0.90±0.05a	0.4806
杉木×乐昌含笑	C.lanceolata×M.chapensis	14.22±0.34a	10.88±0.18ab	0.80±0.03a	0.4148
杉木×火力楠	C.lanceolata×M.macclurei	14.50±0.22a	10.87±0.13ab	0.75±0.05a	0.3774
杉木×香樟	C.lanceolata×C.camphora	11.74±0.16c	9.63±0.07b	0.70±0.05a	-1.4441
杉木×枫香	C.lanceolata×L.formosana	13.90±0.29ab	10.69±0.12ab	0.75±0.05a	0.0633

林分类型		林分生产力/ (t/hm²)	林分碳储量/ (t/hm²)	水源涵养量/ (t/hm²)	物种多样性 (Simpson)	生态功能评分
杉木林	Cunninghamia lanceolata	45.35±3.04c	22.68±1.52c	416.17±35.08bc	3.33±0.88c	-0.1388
杉木×木荷	C.lanceolata×S.superba	60.43±13.85b	28.57±6.92b	454.11±28.16b	2.67±0.33c	-0.0511
杉木×红锥	C.lanceolata×C.hystrix	55.72±11.46b	26.10±5.73b	425.10±73.08b	3.67±0.33bc	-0.0546
杉木×乐昌含笑	C.lanceolata×M.chapensis	58.60±5.88b	28.23±2.94b	447.91±6.71b	3.67±1.20bc	0.0000
杉木×火力楠	C.lanceolata×M.macclurei	71.01±2.62a	35.24±1.31a	552.19±23.51a	4.00±0.58b	0.2609
杉木×香樟	C.lanceolata×C.camphora	34.03±1.18c	16.38±0.59c	338.22±14.07c	6.00±0.00a	-0.1438
杉木×枫香	C.lanceolata×L.formosana	57.32±4.47b	22.38±2.23b	490.40±22.66ab	5.33±0.88ab	0.1275

林分类型		土壤容重/ (g/cm³)	土壤总孔隙度 /%	土壤有机质/ (g/kg)	土壤N含量/ (g/kg)	地力维持评分
杉木林	Cunninghamia lanceolata	1.30±0.07b	39.96±3.51c	24.75±3.73ab	1.02±0.14ab	0.0298
杉木×木荷	C.lanceolata×S.superba	1.29±0.08b	43.54±2.82abc	26.78±2.62ab	1.15±0.14a	0.1223
杉木×红锥	C.lanceolata×C.hystrix	1.29±0.13b	40.81±7.31bc	28.74±1.43a	1.26±0.08a	0.1521
杉木×乐昌含笑	C.lanceolata×M.chapensis	1.37±0.03ab	41.25±0.67bc	19.66±4.24bc	1.17±0.22a	0.0408
杉木×火力楠	C.lanceolata×M.macclurei	1.19±0.04b	53.08±2.35a	21.45±1.68ab	1.07±0.07ab	0.1099
杉木×香樟	C.lanceolata×C.camphora	1.55±0.03a	32.24±1.41c	9.30±0.51d	0.51±0.07c	-0.3250
杉木×枫香	C.lanceolata×L.formosana	1.18±0.02b	48.08±2.27ab	13.01±2.18cd	0.74±0.08bc	-0.1299

林分类型		林分质量评分	生态功能评分	地力维持评分	综合评分
杉木林	Cunninghamia lanceolata	0.0388	-0.1343	0.0298	-0.0702
杉木×木荷	C.lanceolata×S.superba	0.0693	-0.0523	0.1223	0.1404
杉木×红锥	C.lanceolata×C.hystrix	0.4806	-0.0514	0.1521	0.5781
杉木×乐昌含笑	C.lanceolata×M.chapensis	0.4148	-0.0002	0.0408	0.4556
杉木×火力楠	C.lanceolata×M.macclurei	0.3774	0.2448	0.1099	0.7482
杉木×香樟	C.lanceolata×C.camphora	-1.4441	-0.1275	-0.3250	-1.9129
杉木×枫香	C.lanceolata×L.formosana	0.0633	0.1209	-0.1299	0.0609