宋振1,
张国良1,
王忠辉1,
付卫东1,,,
尹树红2,
翟洪凯2,
席坤鹏2
1.中国农业科学院农业环境与可持续发展研究所 北京 100081
2.白城市农业环境保护与农村能源管理站 白城 137000
基金项目: 国家重点研发计划项目2016YFC1201203
详细信息
作者简介:张瑞海, 主要研究方向为入侵植物防控。E-mail:ruihai.321@163.com
通讯作者:付卫东, 主要研究方向为外来入侵植物入侵机制与防控。E-mail:fuweidong@caas.cn
中图分类号:Q948计量
文章访问数:769
HTML全文浏览量:6
PDF下载量:562
被引次数:0
出版历程
收稿日期:2018-07-26
录用日期:2018-10-19
刊出日期:2019-03-01
Characteristics of soil seed bank for Solanum rostratum Dunal. and its response to control with replaceable plants
ZHANG Ruihai1,,SONG Zhen1,
ZHANG Guoliang1,
WANG Zhonghui1,
FU Weidong1,,,
YIN Shuhong2,
ZHAI Hongkai2,
XI Kunpeng2
1. Institute of Agricultural Environment and Sustainable Development, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
2. Agricultural Environmental Protection and Rural Energy Management Station of Baicheng, Baicheng 137000, China
Funds: the National Key R & D Project of China2016YFC1201203
More Information
Corresponding author:FU Weidong, E-mail: fuweidong@caas.cn
摘要
HTML全文
图
参考文献
相关文章
施引文献
资源附件
访问统计
摘要
摘要:土壤种子库在退化生态系统植被的恢复和演替中起重要作用，为明确外来入侵植物刺萼龙葵（Solanum rostratum Dunal.）土壤种子库特征，评价植物替代控制刺萼龙葵的效果，调查了河滩及农田边缘两个典型生境中的刺萼龙葵土壤种子库特征，分析了刺萼龙葵种子在土壤中的垂直分布与季节变化动态，并利用多种多年生禾本科与豆科牧草对刺萼龙葵进行替代控制研究，以期为刺萼龙葵生态调控提供理论依据。结果表明：1）两个生境中共鉴定出23种植物，禾本科和菊科为优势科；河滩及农田边缘刺萼龙葵种子总储量分别达347粒·m-2和2 600粒·m-2，占整个种子库的2.46%及35.16%。2）河滩生境中刺萼龙葵种子多集中于表层（0~2 cm）土壤，占种子总量的64.3%，且随土层深度的增加而减少；而农田边缘生境0~2 cm、2~5 cm和5~10 cm 3层种子数量差异不大（P>0.05），分别占种子总量的32.7%、38.2%及29.1%。3）两个生境中刺萼龙葵种子主要集中于4月份采集的土样中，分别为273粒·m-2（河滩）和1 970粒·m-2（农田边缘），显著高于6月份与8月份采集的土样种子数（P < 0.05）；4）从替代控制第2年起，刺萼龙葵的密度、生物量及土壤种子储量即被控制在较低水平，均显著低于同期对照（P < 0.05），沙打旺+苇状羊茅+冰草+羊草组合对刺萼龙葵控制效果最佳，同时还可获得牧草鲜重20 396.1 kg·hm-2，干重7 710.6 kg·hm-2（2017年），经济效益可观。5）刺萼龙葵种子库与刺萼龙葵密度（P < 0.01）、生物量（P < 0.05）呈正相关，牧草产量与刺萼龙葵种子库储量、密度、生物量均呈负相关，但相关性不显著（P>0.05）；降雨显著影响刺萼龙葵种子库储量（P < 0.05），可用幂函数模型y=2.619x0.001（R2=0.822，F=18.486，P=0.013）描述二者之间的关系。
关键词:生物入侵/
刺萼龙葵/
入侵植物/
土壤种子库/
时空特性/
替代控制
Abstract:Soil seed bank is important in the restoration and succession of vegetation in degraded ecosystems. In order to determine the characteristics of soil seed bank of the alien invasive plant Solanum rostratum Dunal. and to evaluate the effects of replacement control of S. rostratum, soil seed bank of S. rostratum in two typical habitats (riverside and farmland margin) were studied and its' vertical distribution and seasonal dynamics analyzed. In addition, a study on replacement control of S. rostratum was conducted using varieties of perennial forages of Gramineae and Leguminosea. 1) Based on the results, 23 plants species were identified, and Gramineae and Compositae were the most dominant families. The total reserve of S. rostratum seed banks in the riverside and farmland margin were respectively 347 seeds·m-2 and 2 600 seeds·m-2, which accounted for 2.46% and 35.16% of the whole seed bank. S. rostratum was the dominant family in farmland but another invasive plant (Cenchrus spinifex Cav.) was the main species in riverside; reaching 5 187 seeds·m-2 and accounting for 36.70% of the seed reserve. 2) S. rostratum seeds were mainly stored in the 0-2 cm soil layer in riverside region, accounting for 64.3% and decreasing with increasing soil depth. There was no significant difference in the three soil layers of farmland margin in terms of S. rostratum seed reserve (P>0.05), which accounted for 32.7% (0-2 cm), 38.2% (2-5 cm) and 29.1% (5-10 cm) of the total seed bank. However, it was need to pay attention to potential hazards of seeds in the middle and lower layers (2-10 cm). 3) For the three times of samplings, S. rostratum seeds mainly were collected in April reached 273 seeds·m-2 and 1 970 seeds·m-2 in riverside and farmland margin, significantly fewer in June and August. 4) In the second year of the controlled replacement, the coverage of forage gradually increased, the resources and niches were seized by the forage, and the growth of S. rostratum significantly inhibited. The density, biomass and soil seed reserve of S. rostratum were controlled at a low level, significant lower than CK (P < 0.05). Astragalus adsurgens Pall., Festuca arundinacea Schreb., Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertn., combined with Leymus chinensis (Trin.) Tzvel. had the best control effect on S. rostratum. At the same time, it showed obvious economic benefits, which produced forage grass of 20 396.1 kg·hm-2 (fresh weight) and 7 710.6 kg·hm-2 (dry weight). 5) Soil seed reserves of S. rostratum was positively correlation with density (P < 0.01) and biomass (P < 0.05) of S. rostratum, while forage yield was negatively correlation with soil seed reserve, density and biomass of S. rostratum. However, this was not significant (P>0.05). Nevertheless, rainfall significantly affected soil seed reserve of S. rostratum (P < 0.05), which was described by the power function model y=2.619x0.001 (R2=0.822, F=18.486, P=0.013). Therefore, plant replacement combined with physical and chemical methods can be used to establish integrated system to control S. rostratum growth in habitats such as grassland, farmland margin and wasteland.
Key words:Biological invasion/
Solanum rostratum Dunal./
Invasive plant/
Soil seed bank/
Temporal and spatial dynamics/
Replacement control
HTML全文
图1不同生境中刺萼龙葵土壤种子库的垂直分布
*表示同一生境不同土层在0.05水平差异显著。
Figure1.Vertical distribution of soil seed bank of Solanum rostratum Dunal. in two habitats
* indicates significant differences among different soil layers within the same habitat at 0.05 level.
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片
图2不同生境中刺萼龙葵种子库季节动态变化
不同小写字母表示同一生境不同月份间在0.05水平差异显著。
Figure2.Seasonal dynamics of soil seed bank of Solanum rostratum Dunal. in two habitats
Different lowercase letters in the same habitat indicate significant differences among different months at 0.05 level.
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片
图3不同植物替代控制处理对不同土层刺萼龙葵种子库动态变化的影响
Figure3.Dynamics of the seed bank of Solanum rostratum Dunal. in different soil layers under different plant replacement treatments
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片
图4替代控制试验过程中各处理替代牧草产量变化
Figure4.Changes of forage yields during plant replacement experiment under different treatments
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片表1替代植物试验处理及播种方法
Table1.Treatments and sowing methods of the plant replacement experiment
| 处理 Treatment | 替代植物 Replaceable plants | 播种量 Sowing amount |
| T1 | 披碱草+无芒雀麦+沙打旺 Elymus dahuricus Turcz. (Ed) + Bromus inermis Leyss. (Bi) + Astragalus adsurgens Pall. (Aa) | 披碱草1 000 g·hm-2、无芒雀麦1 000 g·hm-2、沙打旺500 g·hm-2 Ed 1 000 g·hm-2, Bi 1 000 g·hm-2, Aa 500 g·hm-2 |
| T2 | 披碱草+苇状羊茅+羊草 Ed + Festuca arundinacea Schreb. (Fa) + Leymus chinensis (Trin.) Tzvel. (Lc) | 披碱草1 000 g·hm-2、苇状羊茅750 g·hm-2、羊草2 000 g Ed 1 000 g·hm-2, Fa 750 g·hm-2, Lc 2 000 g·hm-2 |
| T3 | 披碱草+无芒雀麦+冰草+羊草 Ed+Bi+Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertn. (Ac) + Lc | 披碱草1 000 g·hm-2、无芒雀麦1 000 g·hm-2、冰草750 g·hm-2、羊草2 000 g·hm-2 Ed 1 000 g·hm-2, Bi 1 000 g·hm-2, Ac 750 g·hm-2, Lc 2 000 g·hm-2 |
| T4 | 紫花苜蓿+披碱草 Medicago sativa L. (Ms) + Ed | 紫花苜蓿750 g·hm-2、披碱草1 000 g·hm-2 Ms 750 g·hm-2, Ed 1 000 g·hm-2 |
| T5 | 紫花苜蓿+无芒雀麦+羊草 Ms + Bi + Lc | 紫花苜蓿750 g·hm-2、无芒雀麦1 000 g·hm-2、羊草2 000 g·hm-2 Ms 750 g·hm-2, Bi 1 000 g·hm-2, Lc 2 000 g·hm-2 |
| T6 | 沙打旺+苇状羊茅+冰草+羊草 Aa + Fa + Ac + Lc | 沙打旺500 g·hm-2、苇状羊茅750 g·hm-2、冰草750 g·hm-2、羊草2 000 g·hm-2 Aa 500 g·hm-2, Fa 750 g·hm-2, Ac 750 g·hm-2, Lc 2 000 g·hm-2 |
| T7 | 沙打旺+无芒雀麦 Aa + Bi | 沙打旺500 g·hm-2、无芒雀麦1 000 g·hm-2 Aa 500 g·hm-2, Bi 1 000g·hm-2 |
| T8 | 紫羊茅+无芒雀麦+紫花苜蓿 Festuca rubra L. (Fr) + Bi + Ms | 紫羊茅800 g·hm-2、无芒雀麦1 000 g·hm-2、紫花苜蓿750 g·hm-2 Fr 800 g·hm-2, Bi 1 000g, Ms 750 g |
| T9 | 紫羊茅+紫花苜蓿+苇状羊茅+羊草 Fr + Ms + Fa + Lc | 紫羊茅800 g、紫花苜蓿750 g、苇状羊茅750 g、羊草2 000 g Fr 800 g, Ms 750 g, Fa 750 g·hm-2, Lc 2 000 g·hm-2 |
| T10 | 紫羊茅+冰草+羊草 Fr + Ac + Lc | 紫羊茅800 g·hm-2、冰草750 g·hm-2、羊草2 000 g·hm-2 Fr 800 g·hm-2, Ac 750 g·hm-2, Lc 2 000 g·hm-2 |
| CK | 无替代植物 No replaceable plant |
下载: 导出CSV表2朝阳河滩土壤种子库各物种组成及其所占储量比例
Table2.Plant species composition of soil seed bank in riverside in Chaoyang
| 物种 Species | 科 Family | 属 Genus | 储量 Reserves (seeds·m-2) | 比例 Proportion (%) |
| 刺萼龙葵Solanum rostratum Dunal. | 茄科 Solanaceae | 茄属Solanum | 347±102 | 2.46 |
| 少花蒺藜草Cenchrus sinifex Cav. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 蒺藜草属Cenchrus | 5 187±1 986 | 36.70 |
| 马唐Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 马唐属Digitaria | 2 367±872 | 16.75 |
| 牛筋草Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 穇属Eleusine | 2 030±689 | 14.36 |
| 狗尾草Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 狗尾草属Setaria | 1 933±567 | 13.68 |
| 稗Echinochloa crusgalli (L.) Beauv. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 稗属Echinochloa | 1 450±469 | 10.26 |
| 猪毛菜Salsola collina Pall. | 藜科 Chenopodiaceae | 猪毛菜属Salsola | 290±103 | 2.05 |
| 苦荬菜Ixeris polycephala Cass. | 菊科 Asteraceae | 苦荬菜属Ixeris | 14±8 | 0.10 |
| 田旋花Convolvulus arvensis L. | 旋花科 Convolvulaceae | 旋花属Convolvulus | 4±3 | 0.04 |
| 圆叶牵牛Pharbitis purpurea (L.) Voisgt | 旋花科 Convolvulaceae | 牵牛属Pharbitis | 3±2 | 0.02 |
| 马齿苋Portulaca oleracea L. | 马齿苋科 Portulacaceae | 马齿苋属Portulaca | 50±15 | 0.35 |
| 大画眉草Eragrostis cilianensis (All.) Link. ex Vignclo - Lutati | 禾本科 Poaceae | 画眉草属Eragrostis | 7±6 | 0.05 |
| 车前Plantago asiatica L. | 车前科 Plantaginaceae | 车前属Plantago | 90±22 | 0.64 |
| 苍耳Xanthium sibiricum Patrin ex Widder | 菊科 Asteraceae | 苍耳属Xanthium | 3±4 | 0.02 |
| 苣荬菜Sonchus arvensis L. | 菊科 Asteraceae | 苣荬菜属Sonchus | 17±12 | 0.12 |
| 反枝苋Amaranthus retroflexus L. | 苋科 Amaranthaceae | 苋属Amaranthus | 120±55 | 0.85 |
| 小藜Chenopodium serotinum L. | 藜科 Chenopodiaceae | 藜属Chenopodium | 177±43 | 1.25 |
| 凹头苋Amaranthus lividus L. | 苋科 Amaranthaceae | 苋属Amaranthus | 43±16 | 0.30 |
下载: 导出CSV表3万全农田边缘土壤种子库各物种组成及其所占储量比例
Table3.Plant species composition soil seed bank in farmland margin in Wanquan
| 物种 Species | 科 Family | 属 Genus | 储量 Reserves (seeds·m-2) | 比例 Proportion (%) |
| 刺萼龙葵Solanum rostratum Dunal. | 茄科 Solanaceae | 茄属Solanum | 2 600±965 | 35.16 |
| 马齿苋Portulaca oleracea L. | 马齿苋科 Portulacaceae | 马齿苋属Portulaca | 1 440±420 | 19.47 |
| 狗尾草Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 狗尾草属Setaria | 1 076±336 | 14.55 |
| 牛筋草Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 穇属Eleusine | 763±265 | 10.32 |
| 小藜Chenopodium serotinum L. | 藜科 Asteraceae | 藜属Chenopodium | 707±366 | 9.56 |
| 马唐Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop. | 禾本科 Poaceae | 马唐属Digitaria | 214±68 | 2.89 |
| 苦荬菜Ixeris polycephala Cass. | 菊科 Asteraceae | 苦荬菜属Ixeris | 157±32 | 2.12 |
| 蒺藜Tribulus terrestris L. | 蒺藜科 Zygophyllaceae | 蒺藜属Tribulus | 123±28 | 1.66 |
| 地锦Euphorbia humifusa Willd. ex Schlecht. | 大戟科 Euphorbiaceae | 大戟属Euphorbia | 84±16 | 1.14 |
| 凹头苋Amaranthus lividus L. | 苋科 Amaranthaceae | 苋属Amaranthus | 68±36 | 0.92 |
| 田旋花Convolvulus arvensis L. | 旋花科 Convolvulaceae | 旋花属Convolvulus | 4±3 | 0.05 |
| 圆叶牵牛Pharbitis purpurea (L.) Voisgt | 旋花科 Convolvulaceae | 牵牛属Pharbitis | 40±18 | 0.54 |
| 平车前Plantago depressa Willd. | 车前科 Plantaginaceae | 车前属Plantago | 13±6 | 0.18 |
| 大画眉草Eragrostis cilianensis (All.) Link. ex Vignclo - Lutati | 禾本科 Poaceae | 画眉草属Eragrostis | 18±8 | 0.24 |
| 车前Plantago asiatica L. | 车前科 Plantaginaceae | 车前属Plantago | 5±3 | 0.07 |
| 铁苋菜Acalypha australis L. | 大戟科 Euphorbiaceae | 铁苋菜属Acalypha | 6±5 | 0.08 |
| 苣荬菜Sonchus arvensis L. | 菊科 Asteraceae | 苣荬菜属Sonchus | 35±17 | 0.47 |
| 反枝苋Amaranthus retroflexus L. | 苋科 Amaranthaceae | 苋属Amaranthus | 40±10 | 0.54 |
| 地肤Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad. | 藜科 Asteraceae | 地肤属Kochia | 2±2 | 0.03 |
下载: 导出CSV表42012—2017年连续不同植物替代控制处理对对刺萼龙葵密度的影响
Table4.Densities of Solanum rostratum Dunal. under different continuous plant replacement treatments from 2012 to 2017
| plant·m-2 | ||||||
| 处理 Treatment | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
| T1 | 36.2±18.5a | 6.0±4.3a | 6.6±1.5a | 5.0±0.3a | 1.8±1.1a | 8.8±2.6a |
| T2 | 55.4±6.5a | 9.0±5.0a | 1.6±1.5a | 3.4±1.2a | 3.0±0.88a | 4.0±1.5a |
| T3 | 24.0±4.2a | 15.0±7.5a | 4.2±0.5a | 6.2±3.5a | 50.0±1.6a | 6.8±2.6a |
| T4 | 32.0±14.0a | 19.0±13.8a | 6.0±3.1a | 5.8±3.3a | 4.6±2.1a | 9.6±5.6a |
| T5 | 18.0±20.2a | 17.0±6.5a | 4.4±2.5a | 9.8±4.2a | 18.8±5.9a | 11.2±6.3a |
| T6 | 25.0±13.1a | 12.0±9.1.2a | 5.0±3.2a | 13.0±5.5a | 15.4±6.5a | 16.8±2.5a |
| T7 | 28.0±11.2a | 7.0±1.3a | 3.4±2.5a | 22.0±8.5a | 6.8±1.2a | 6.6±3.3 a |
| T8 | 35.6±6.5a | 6.0±1.6a | 2.2±1.5a | 30.0±10.5a | 10.0±3.3a | 5.0±1.2a |
| T9 | 45.0±10.0a | 8.0±1.0a | 2.0±1.6a | 38.0±11.3a | 12.0±5.14a | 4.0±3.3a |
| T10 | 35.0±5.3a | 4.0±2.6a | 7.0±2.5a | 28.0±6.3a | 11.0±5.1a | 5.8±1.2a |
| CK | 199.5±60.5b | 118.0±65b | 92.8±23.6b | 95.0±22.2b | 168.0±75.3b | 96.0±35.5b |
| 同列不同小写字母表示不同植物替代处理间0.05水平差异显著。Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences among different plant replacement treatments at 0.05 level. | ||||||
下载: 导出CSV表52012—2017年连续不同植物替代控制处理对对刺萼龙葵生物量的影响
Table5.Biomass of Solanum rostratum Dunal. under different continuous plant replacement treatments from 2012 to 2017
| g·plant-1 | ||||||
| 处理 Treatment | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
| T1 | 36.9±3.5a | 31±5.3a | 21.9±3.4a | 55±17.7a | 25.8±11.5a | 23.6±5.3a |
| T2 | 38.0±6.8a | 31.9±4.7a | 24.7±4.7a | 46.2±7.2a | 30.1±3.6a | 25.3±8.5a |
| T3 | 44.6±4.2a | 37.5±5.5a | 21.4±5.5a | 38.1±10.1a | 48.1±4.2a | 28.5±8.2a |
| T4 | 37.2±15.3a | 31.3±8.7a | 17.7±8.7a | 44.4±11.8a | 29.5±6.7a | 16.2±3.3a |
| T5 | 39.3±4.8a | 16.6±4.7a | 20.6±3.4a | 70.9±18.7a | 29.9±3.6a | 26.0±4.1a |
| T6 | 35.7±5.6a | 30.0±5.5a | 32.9±6.4a | 43.5±11.1a | 32.0±4.2a | 10.4±6.5a |
| T7 | 32.0±8.9a | 26.9±8.7a | 13.2±5.2a | 52.4±9.9a | 36.1±6.7a | 13.9±6.3a |
| T8 | 35.0±8.6a | 29.4±8.4a | 17.6±4.6a | 56.1±18.3a | 31.3±6.5a | 20.3±2.5a |
| T9 | 43.2±3.5a | 11.6±3.4a | 8.8±8.5a | 63.3±7.2a | 26.3±2.6a | 32.5±3.5a |
| T10 | 34.7±6.7a | 29.1±6.6a | 24.6±8.3a | 51.2±13.8a | 29.2±5.0a | 19.9±4.1a |
| CK | 160.2±45.6b | 185.5±55.6b | 195.5±98.6b | 260.7±120.0b | 202.8±110.7b | 198.7±99.9b |
| 同列不同小写字母表示不同植物替代处理间0.05水平差异显著。Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences among different plant replacement treatments at 0.05 level. | ||||||
下载: 导出CSV表6刺萼龙葵相关指标与牧草产量相关性分析
Table6.Correlation between related indexes of Solanum rostratum Dunal. and forage yield
| 种子库储量 Seed bank reserve | 密度 Density | 生物量 Biomass | 牧草产量 Forage yield | |
| 种子库储量 Seed bank reserve | 1.000 | 0.620** | 0.471* | -0.213 |
| 密度 Density | 0.620** | 1.000 | 0.461* | -0.084 |
| 生物量 Biomass | 0.471* | 0.461* | 1.000 | -0.269 |
| 牧草产量 Forage yield | -0.213 | -0.084 | -0.269 | 1.000 |
| *和**分别表示在0.05和0.01水平显著相关。* and ** indicate significant correlation at 0.05 and 0.01 level, respectively. | ||||
下载: 导出CSV表7不同年份土壤种子库与年降雨量的回归分析——以 T6处理为例
Table7.Regression analysis of soil seed bank and annual rainfall based on T6 treatment of plant replacement in different years
| 拟合方式 Fit method | 回归模型 Regression model | R2 | F | 显著性 Significant |
| 线性 Linear | y=18.434x-3 466.520 | 0.511 | 4.174 | 0.111 |
| 对数 Logarithmic | y=5 310.018lnx-27 845.366 | 0.462 | 3.429 | 0.138 |
| 幂 Power | y=2.619x0.001 | 0.822 | 18.486 | 0.013 |
| 指数 Exponential | y=107.374e0.008x | 0.790 | 15.004 | 0.018 |
下载: 导出CSV参考文献
| [1] | KEELEY J E. Seed production, seed populations in soil, and seedling production after fire for two congeneric pairs of sprouting and nonsprouting Chaparal shrubs[J]. Ecology, 1977, 58(4):820-829 doi: 10.2307/1936217 |
| [2] | ROBERTS H A. Seed banks in the soil[J]. Advance in Applied Biology, 1981, 6:1-55 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/OAPaper/oai_doaj-articles_61a729fd8a12db11c1335d8b3af6784a |
| [3] | 张志权.土壤种子库[J].生态学杂志, 1996, 15(6):36-42 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/nmgdxxb200106012 ZHANG Z Q. Soil seed bank[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 1996, 15(6):36-42 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/nmgdxxb200106012 |
| [4] | 徐高峰, 申时才, 张付斗, 等.外来入侵植物小子虉草研究进展与展望[J].中国生态农业学报, 2015, 23(9):1083-1092 http://www.ecoagri.ac.cn/zgstny/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=2015902&flag=1 XU G F, SHEN S C, ZHANG F D, et al. Research progress and prospect about exotic invasive species Phalaris minor Retz[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2015, 23(9):1083-1092 http://www.ecoagri.ac.cn/zgstny/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=2015902&flag=1 |
| [5] | MARQUES A R, COSTA C F, ATMAN A P F, et al. Germination characteristics and seedbank of the alien species Leucaena leucocephala (Fabaceae) in Brazilian forest:Ecological implications[J]. Weed Research, 2014, 54(6):576-583 doi: 10.1111/wre.12107 |
| [6] | 白文娟, 章家恩, 全国明.土壤种子库研究的热点问题及发展趋向[J].土壤, 2012, 44(4):562-569 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9829.2012.04.006 BAI W J, ZHANG J E, QUAN G M. Hot topics and developing trends in soil seed bank[J]. Soils, 2012, 44(4):562-569 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9829.2012.04.006 |
| [7] | STREHLOW T, DEKEYSER S, KOBIELA B. Managing seedbank composition to enhance wetland restoration[J]. Ecological Restoration, 2017, 35(1):12-16 doi: 10.3368/er.35.1.12 |
| [8] | SINGH R P, BAGNALL R H. Solanum rostratum Dunal., a new test plant for the potato spindle tuber virus[J]. American Potato Journal, 1968, 45(9):335-336 doi: 10.1007/BF02849770 |
| [9] | 关广清, 高东昌.又有五种杂草传入我国[J].植物检疫, 1982, 6:2 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=QK000005086976 GUAN G Q, GAO D C. Five other weeds spread to China[J]. Plant Quarantine, 1982, 6:2 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=QK000005086976 |
| [10] | 王维升, 郑红旗, 朱殿敏, 等.有害杂草刺萼龙葵的调查[J].植物检疫, 2005, 19(4):247-248 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-2755.2005.04.023 WANG W S, ZHENG H Q, ZHU D M, et al. Investigation of harmful weed Solanum rostratum Dunal.[J]. Plant Quarantine, 2005, 19(4):247-248 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-2755.2005.04.023 |
| [11] | 车晋滇, 刘全儒, 胡彬.外来入侵杂草刺萼龙葵[J].杂草学报, 2006, (3):58-60 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-935X.2006.03.022 CHE J D, LIU Q R, HU B. Alien invasive weed-Solanum rostratum Dunal.[J]. Weed Science, 2006, (3):58-60 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-935X.2006.03.022 |
| [12] | 贺俊英, 哈斯巴根, 孟根其其格, 等.内蒙古新外来入侵植物——黄花刺茄(Solanum rostratum Dunal.)[J].内蒙古师范大学学报:自然科学汉文版, 2011, 40(3):288-290 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/nmgsdxb201103019 HE J Y, KHASBAGAN, MONGENQIQIG, et al. Solanum rostratum Dunal.:A newly invaded alien plant of Inner Mongolia[J]. Journal of Inner Mongolia Normal University:National Science Edition, 2011, 40(3):288-290 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/nmgsdxb201103019 |
| [13] | 向俊, 李翠妮, 刘全儒, 等.北京外来入侵植物刺萼龙葵的生态状况[J].生态学杂志, 2011, 30(3):453-458 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxzz201103006 XIANG J, LI C N, LIU Q R, et al. Ecological state of invasive alien plant Solanum rostratum in Beijing[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2011, 30(3):453-458 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxzz201103006 |
| [14] | BAH M, GUTIéRREZ D M, ESCOBEDO C, et al. Methylprotodioscin from the Mexican medical plant Solanum rostratum (Solanaceae)[J]. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology, 2004, 32(2):197-202 doi: 10.1016/S0305-1978(03)00172-8 |
| [15] | 张少逸, 魏守辉, 张朝贤, 等.刺萼龙葵种子休眠和萌发特性研究进展[J].杂草学报, 2011, 29(2):5-9 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-935X.2011.02.002 ZHANG S Y, WEI S H, ZHANG C X, et al. Research advances on seed dormancy and germination of buffalobur (Solanum rostratum)[J]. Weed Science, 2011, 29(2):5-9 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-935X.2011.02.002 |
| [16] | 苏秋霞, 李青丰.黄花刺茄种子休眠及发芽特性[J].草业科学, 2014, 31(7):1298-1301 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/caoyekx201407014 SU Q X, LI Q F. Seed dormancy and germination of Solanum rostratum[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2014, 31(7):1298-1301 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/caoyekx201407014 |
| [17] | 钟艮平, 沈文君, 万方浩, 等.用GARP生态位模型预测刺萼龙葵在中国的潜在分布区[J].生态学杂志, 2009, 28(1):162-166 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxzz200901026 ZHONG G P, SHEN W J, WAN F H, et al. Potential distribution areas of Solanum rostratum in China:A prediction with GARP niche model[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2009, 28(1):162-166 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxzz200901026 |
| [18] | WEI S H, ZHANG C X, LI X J, et al. Factors affecting buffalobur (Solanum rostratum) seed germination and seedling emergence[J]. Weed Science, 2009, 57(5):521-525 doi: 10.1614/WE-09-054.1 |
| [19] | 邵华.外来入侵植物刺萼龙葵的化感作用研究[J].种子, 2015, 34(8):101-104 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zhongz201508026 SHAO H. Study on the allelopathic effect of Solanum rostratum Dunal[J]. Seed, 2015, 34(8):101-104 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zhongz201508026 |
| [20] | 赵晓红, 张国良, 张瑞海, 等.刺萼龙葵入侵对不同生境土壤特征的影响[J].生态环境学报, 2017, 26(6):924-930 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/tryhj201706003 ZHAO X H, ZHANG G L, ZHANG R H, et al. Effects of Solanum rostratum invasion on soil characteristics in different habitats[J]. Ecology and Environment Sciences, 2017, 26(6):924-930 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/tryhj201706003 |
| [21] | HUANG H J, LING T J, WANG H M, et al. One new flavonoid from Solanum rostratum[J]. Natural Product Research, 2017, 31(5):1831-1835 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=10.1080/14786419.2017.1290621 |
| [22] | CHANG L, SHAO Q, XI X J, et al. Separation of four flavonol glycosides from Solanum rostratum Dunal using aqueous two-phase flotation followed by preparative high-performance liquid chromatography[J]. Journal of Separation Science, 2017, 40(3):804-812 doi: 10.1002/jssc.201600922 |
| [23] | ZHAO J L, LOU A R. Genetic diversity and population structure of the invasive plant Solanum rostratum in China[J]. Russian Journal of Ecology, 2017, 48(2):134-142 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=970da94a08d09df1a00d98412271df37 |
| [24] | 张少逸, 张朝贤, 杨连喜, 等.茎叶除草剂对刺萼龙葵的防治效果评价[J].植物保护, 2012, 38(5):170-173 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0529-1542.2012.05.037 ZHANG S Y, ZHANG C X, YANG L X, et al. Efficacy evaluation of foliar-applied herbicides on Solanum rostratum[J]. Plant Protection, 2012, 38(5):170-173 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0529-1542.2012.05.037 |
| [25] | 农业部环境保护科研监测所.恶性杂草刺萼龙葵入侵天然植被快速恢复方法: 中国, CN201210355171[P]. 2013-01-09 Agro-Environmental Protection Institute, Ministry of Agriculture. Method for quickly recovering natural vegetation invaded by malignant weed Solanum rostratum: CN, CN201210355171[P]. 2013-01-09 |
| [26] | GULDEN R H, SHIRTLIFFE S J. Weed seed banks:Biology and management[J]. Weeds, Herbicides and Management, 2009, 2:46-52 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/xynygdzkxxxb200604037 |
| [27] | 张广帅, 邓浩俊, 杜锟, 等.汶川地震生态治理区土壤种子库及其与地上植被的关系[J].中国生态农业学报, 2015, 23(1):69-79 http://www.ecoagri.ac.cn/zgstny/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=2015109&flag=1 ZHANG G S, DENG H J, DU K, et al. Soil seed bank and its correlations with aboveground vegetation in ecological restoration zones of Wenchuan Earthquake Region[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2015, 23(1):69-79 http://www.ecoagri.ac.cn/zgstny/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=2015109&flag=1 |
| [28] | MOSTERT E, GAERTNER M, HOLMES P M, et al. Impacts of invasive alien trees on threatened lowland vegetation types in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa[J]. South African Journal of Botany, 2017, 108:209-222 doi: 10.1016/j.sajb.2016.10.014 |
| [29] | RUSTERHOLZ H P, KüNG J, BAUR B. Experimental evidence for a delayed response of the above-ground vegetation and the seed bank to the invasion of an annual exotic plant in deciduous forests[J]. Basic and Applied Ecology, 2017, 20:19-30 doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2017.02.004 |
| [30] | 张衍雷, 张瑞海, 付卫东, 等.不同农作措施对少花蒺藜草(Cenchrus pauciflorus Benth)种子库及其繁殖能力的影响[J].农业资源与环境学报, 2015, 32(3):312-320 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/nyhjyfz201503015 ZHANG Y L, ZHANG R H, FU W D, et al. Effects of Different cultivation practices on the amount of seeds in the soils and seed production of Cenchrus pauciflorus Benth[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2015, 32(3):312-320 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/nyhjyfz201503015 |
| [31] | 张瑞海, 付卫东, 宋振, 等.河北地区黄顶菊土壤种子库特征及其对替代控制的响应[J].生态环境学报, 2016, 25(5):775-782 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/tryhj201605007 ZHANG R H, FU W D, SONG Z, et al. Characteristics of Soil seed bank of Flaveria bidentis and its response to control with replacement plants in Hebei, China[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2016, 25(5):775-782 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/tryhj201605007 |
| [32] | 张志明, 沈蕊, 张建利, 等.元江流域干热河谷灌草丛土壤种子库与地上植物群落的物种组成比较[J].生物多样性, 2016, 24(4):431-439 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/swdyx201604008 ZHANG Z M, SHEN R, ZHANG J L, et al. Comparisons of species composition between soil seed banks and aboveground plant communities in the dry-hot valley of the Yuanjiang River[J]. Biodiversity Science, 2016, 24(4):431-439 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/swdyx201604008 |
| [33] | RUWANZA S. Soil seed bank depletion as a mechanism of Lantana camara L. invasion[J]. South African Journal of Plant and Soil, 2016, 33(4):303-308 doi: 10.1080/02571862.2016.1155765 |
| [34] | 章超斌, 马波, 强胜.江苏省主要农田杂草种子库物种组成和多样性及其与环境因子的相关性分析[J].植物资源与环境学报, 2012, 21(1):1-13 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7895.2012.01.001 ZHANG C B, MA B, QIANG S. Analyses of species composition and diversity of weed seed bank of main crop fields in Jiangsu Province and its correlation with environmental factors[J]. Journal of Plant Resources and Environment, 2012, 21(1):1-13 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7895.2012.01.001 |
| [35] | 林玉, 谭敦炎.一种潜在的外来入侵植物:黄花刺茄[J].植物分类学报, 2007, 45(5):675-685 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zwflxb200705007 LIN Y, TAN D Y. The potential and exotic invasive plant:Solanum rostratum[J]. Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica, 2007, 45(5):675-685 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zwflxb200705007 |
| [36] | REID A M, MORIN L, DOWNEY P O, et al. Does invasive plant management aid the restoration of natural ecosystems?[J]. Biological Conservation, 2009, 142(10):2342-2349 doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.05.011 |
| [37] | GIORIA M, OSBORNE B. Similarities in the impact of three large invasive plant species on soil seed bank communities[J]. Biological Invasions, 2010, 12(6):1671-1683 doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9580-7 |
| [38] | 庞立东, 孙余卓.刺萼龙葵的入侵机理与控制策略研究进展[J].中国植保导刊, 2016, 36(8):20-25 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6820.2016.08.004 PANG L D, SUN Y Z. Research progress on invasive mechanism of Solauum rostratum Dunal. and its control strategy[J]. China Plant Protection, 2016, 36(8):20-25 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6820.2016.08.004 |
| [39] | SHELEY R L, KRUEGER-MANGOLD J. Principles for restoring invasive plant-infested rangeland[J]. Weed Science, 2003, 51(2):260-265 doi: 10.1614/0043-1745(2003)051[0260:PFRIPI]2.0.CO;2 |
| [40] | WAN F H, LIU W X, GUO J Y, et al. Invasive mechanism and control strategy of Ageratina adenophora (Sprengel)[J]. Science China Life Sciences, 2010, 53(11):1291-1298 doi: 10.1007/s11427-010-4080-7 |
| [41] | 孙启忠, 桂荣, 那日苏, 等.赤峰地区不同生长年限沙打旺生产力的研究[J].中国草地学报, 1999, (5):30-35 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=QK199900809218 SUN Q Z, GUI R, NA R S, et al. Study on productivity of Astragalus adsurgens Pall. with different growth periods[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 1999, (5):30-35 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=QK199900809218 |
| [42] | 陈志怡, 李金月.不同生长年限对紫花苜蓿产量及土壤养分的影响[J].山东农业大学学报:自然科学版, 2015, 46(2):214-220 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/sdnydxxb201502010 CHEN Z Y, LI J Y. Effects of growth years on the yield of Medicago sativa L. and soil nutrient[J]. Journal of Shandong Agricultural University:Natural Science Edition, 2015, 46(2):214-220 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/sdnydxxb201502010 |
| [43] | ZHANG B, GUI D W, GAO X P, et al. Controlling soil factor in plant growth and salt tolerance of leguminous plant Alhagi sparsifolia Shap. in saline deserts, Northwest China[J]. Contemporary Problems of Ecology, 2018, 11(1):111-121 doi: 10.1134/S199542551801002X |
| [44] | 慈恩, 高明.环境因子对豆科共生固氮影响的研究进展[J].西北植物学报, 2005, 25(6):1269-1274 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-4025.2005.06.039 CI E, GAO M. Research advances in the effects of environmental factors on the symbiotic nitrogen fixation of legumes[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2005, 25(6):1269-1274 doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-4025.2005.06.039 |
| [45] | 赵俊峰, 肖礼, 安韶山, 等.永利煤矿复垦区植物叶片和枯落物生态化学计量学特征[J].生态学报, 2017, 37(9):3036-3045 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxb201709018 ZHAO J F, XIAO L, AN S S, et al. Ecological stoichiometry characteristics of leaves and litter in plant communities in the Yongli colliery reclamation area[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(9):3036-3045 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/stxb201709018 |
