[目的]对太原市常绿针叶树的生态适应性进行研究,为太原市园林绿化树种的选择提供参考。[方法]应用层次分析法(AHP)对太原市12种常绿针叶树的生态适应性进行评价,依托5个评价指标,利用1-9标度法建立判断矩阵计算权重值,根据综合得分进行适应性评价与聚类分析,将树种划分为：Ⅰ级(极适应)、Ⅱ级(适应)、Ⅲ级(较不适应)、Ⅳ级(不适应)、Ⅴ级(极不适应)。[结果]5个指标(冠势、干形、生长势、枝叶态势、虫害表现)入选太原市常绿针叶树生态适应性评价指标体系,权重值分别为0.395、0.068、0.333、0.113、0.091,适应性评价与聚类分析划分12种常绿针叶树为四个等级。[结论]太原市常绿针叶树Ⅰ级树种为圆柏、侧柏、白皮松,Ⅱ级树种为白杄、青杄、杜松,Ⅲ级树种为樟子松、华山松、油松,Ⅳ级树种为雪松、辽东冷杉、南方红豆杉。
Abstract
In the research, we studied the ecological adaptability of evergreen conifers in Taiyuan City, and provided references for the selection of greening species. Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was used to evaluate ecological adaptability of 12 evergreen conifers in Taiyuan, and based on the five evaluation indexes, the judgment matrix and weight value were established by 1-9 scale method. According the comprehensive scores, we conducted adaptability evaluation and cluster analysis, and the tree species were divided into five levels: level Ⅰ (extremely adaptive), level Ⅱ (adaptive), level Ⅲ (not very adaptive), level Ⅳ (not adaptive), level Ⅴ (extremely maladaptive). Five indicators (crown potential, trunk shape, growth potential, branches and leaves situational, pest performance) were chosen in the ecological adaptability evaluation index system of Taiyuan evergreen conifers, and the weight value of every indicator was 0.395, 0.068, 0.333, 0.113 and 0.091, respectively. The adaptability evaluation and cluster analysis showed that the 12 evergreen conifers were divided into four grades as: levelⅠ-Sabina chinensis, Platycladus orientalis, Pinus bungeana; level Ⅱ-Picea meyeri, Picea wilsonii, Juniperus rigida; level Ⅲ-Pinus sylvestris, Pinus armandii, Pinus tabuliformis; level Ⅳ- Cedrus deodara, Abies holophylla, Taxus chinensis.
关键词
常绿针叶树;生态适应性;层次分析法;树种选择
{{custom_keyword}} /
Key words
evergreen conifers; ecological adaptability; AHP; selection of tree species
{{custom_keyword}} /
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 张莉俊,刘振林,戴思兰,等.北方冬季园林植物景观的调查与分析[J].中国园林,2006,12(4):87-90.
[2] 王雪,高凤,矫明阳,等.常绿植物在北京公园冬季植物景观营造中的思考[J].广东农业科学, 2012, 10(5) :50-53.
[3] 刘禹延.呼和浩特市几种云杉属树种引种适应性研究[D].呼和浩特：内蒙古农业大学,2016.
[4] 闫晓云,张秋良,韩鹏,等.呼和浩特市绿化树种综合评价即树种选择[J].干旱区资源与环境,2011, 25(3):135-140.
[5] 单建萍,胡海辉,王圣霖,等.哈尔滨城市公园植物景观评价[J].山东农业大学学报,2015,46(5):790-796.
[6] 张建国,徐新文,雷加强,等.塔克拉玛干沙漠腹地引种植物适应性评价指标体系的构建与应用[J].自然资源学报, 2009,24(5):849-858.
[7] 熬姸.文冠果类型综合评价指标体系的构建[J].华南农业大学学报,2016,37(4):46-50.
[8] Saaty T L.The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocat[M].New York: McGraw- Hill International Book Co, 1980.
[9] 刘瑞雪,彭媛媛.基于层次分析法的城市滨海绿地植物景观评价[J].西北林学院学报,2017,32(4):288-293.
[10] 张锁成,谷建才,王秀芳,等.基于AHP方法的高速公路中央分隔带绿化植物综合评价[J].西北林学院学报,2012,27(4):100-102.
[11] 雷金睿,辛欣,宋希强,等.基于AHP的海口市公园绿地植物群落景观评价与结构分析[J].西北林学院学报,2016,31(3):262-268.
[12] 李录林,吕寻,胡勐鸿,等.甘肃小陇山林区5种引进树种生态适应性评价[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2017,37(8):29-33.
[13] 孙明,李萍,张启翔.基于层次分析法的地被菊品系综合评价研究[J].西北林学院学报,2011,26(3):177-181.
[14] 陈仲芳,张霖,尚富德.利用层次分析法综合评价湖北省部分桂花品种[J].园艺学报,2004,31(6):825-828.
[15] 刘浦孝.山东沙质海岸防护林主要树种适应性评价[J].济南：山东农业大学,2010.
[16] 韩玉洁,孙海箐,朱春玲,等.上海沿海防护林树种适应性评价[J].南京林业大学学报,2010,34(4):165-168.
[17] 杨东,万福绪,顾汤华,等.上海海岸防护林造林树种的选择[J].南京林业大学学报,2012,36(2):95-100.
[18] 韦新良,马俊,刘恩斌.生态景观林树种选择适宜性评价技术研究[J].西北林学院学报,2008,23(6):207-212.
[19] Cay T,Uyan M.Evaluation of reallocation criteria in land consolidation studies using the Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP) [J].Land Use Policy,2013,30(1):541-548.
[20] Godratollah B.Using analytical hierarchy process(AHP) for prioritizing and ranking of ecological indicators for monitoring sustainability of ecotourism in Northern Forest,Iran[J].Ecologia Balkanica,2011,3(1):59-67.
[21] 杨凤萍,胡兆永,张硕新,等.不同海拔油松和华山松乔木层生物量与蓄积量的动态变化[J].西北农林科技大学学报, 2014,42(3):68-76.
[22] 李明,高宝嘉,张静洁.承德光秃山不同海拔油松居群遗传多样性与生境因子关联研究[J].植物遗传资源学报,2012, 13(3): 350-356.
[23] 李月芬.吉林西部草原生态环境评价及其专家系统研究[D].长春：吉林大学,2004.
[24] 梁冰.北京地区彩叶树种的生态适应性究[D].北京：北京林业大学,2014.
{{custom_fnGroup.title_cn}}
脚注
{{custom_fn.content}}
PDF(1103 KB)
