PLANT DIVERSITY IN QIANYANZHOU AFTER 20 YEARS OF SMALL WATERSHED TREATMENT

2005, 29 (5) 766 774 Ξ Acta Phytoecologica Sinica 20 1 2,1 1 (1, 100101) (2, 110016) 20 :1) : 3 ( Liquidambar formosana), 12 0. 17, ( Imperata cylin2 drica var. major) ( Loropetalum chinense)2 ( Bromus remotiflorus) 0. 53 0. 51 2) : 3 ( Pinus massoniana), (2. 61) ; : + ( Pinus elliottii) + ( Litsea cubeba) ( Castanea mollissima) + 3) : ;, ; 4) : 2, + +, 0. 76 +, 5), 12 3,, PLANT DIVERSITY IN QIANYANZHOU AFTER 20 YEARS OF SMALL WATERSHED TREATMENT LIU Qi-Jing 1 HU Li-Le 2,1 and LI Xuan- Ran 1 (1 Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resource Researches, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China) (2 Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China) Abstract The species diversity of a small watershed was investigated following 20 years treatments. Our re2 sults showed that the species dominance index of the upper forest canopy layer was higher than other layers and was higher in the artificial forests than that in secondary forests and Liquidambar formosana stands. As a whole, the dominance index for the shrub layer of the 12 communities investigated was small, averaging 0. 17. For the herb layer, the dominance index was high in the Ass. Imperata cylindrica var. major community (0. 53) and the Ass. Loropetalum chinense- Bromus remotiflorus community (0. 51). The species diversity in2 dex was high in the canopy layer of the L. formosana forest and natural Pinus massoniana forest but was low in other communities and, in particular, was lowest in the artificial forests. For the canopy layer, the species diversity index was the highest in the L. formosana forest (2. 61). A similar trend was found in the sub2 canopy layers with the highest value found in the P. massoniana + P. elliottii forest. Also, the species di2 versity index was higher in the artificial forests than that in the secondary forests except for the P. massoniana + Litsea cubeba and Castanea mollissima + L. formosana forests. The richness index was the highest in the shrub layer for all communities and was similarly high in both the canopy and herb layers as the shrub layer in the L. formosana forests. The richness index was higher in secondary forests than that in artificial forests. The evenness index or uniformity index in the herb layer was higher than that in the shrub layer except for the Ass. Ldoropetalum chinense- Bromus remotiflorus and Ass. I. cylindrica var. major stands. For the canopy layer, evenness was as high as 0. 76 in the Ass. C. mollissima + L. formosana and Ass. P. massoniana + L. cubeba stands whereas other artificial forests had lower values than that in secondary forests and L. formosana stands. In the shrub layer, evenness was the highest in the artificial forests except for the Castanea + Ξ : 2004208231 : 2005203220 : (2002CB4125) E-mail : liuqj @igsnrr. ac. cn

5 : 20 767 Liquidambar forest. The diversity indices showed large differences between the shrub layer and other communi2 ties, and the L. formosana forest showed properties that can be considered atransitionaltype between artificial and secondary forests. Key words Plant diversity, Small watershed treatment, Forest community types, Plantation,,, (,1998 ; ( Paul et al.,2004 ;,1998) Geoffrey,2004 ;,2003) (,1993),, : 4 (, 1993 ;, Paulo et al.,2001),, (,1998) 1 (Magurran,1988), (, 1. 1 1993), (,1997 ; 100 m 20,1994 ;,2002) ( 50 m, ), 17. 9, 0 (,2002) 6 523, 10 6 015 ; 1 489 mm ; 1 406 h, 43 %, (Whittaker et al.,2001 ;,2004), 4 349 MJ m - 2 a - 1 ; 323 d,,, (,1989), 1. 2 2003 7 9 1, 20 m 20 m, (,2001),, 10 m 10 m 5 m, 5 m 10 20 m 20 m,14 10 m 10 m (,1997) 1983, 5 m 5 m 26, 5 450 m 2 20 m 20 m 4 10 m 10 m 20, 10 m 10 m : 5 m 5 m 4 1 m 1 m 3 m 1980 1990 115 03 44 E,26 44 N, 72 m

768 29 GPS : 26, 12, :,,, 1. 3 1. 3. 1 ( Importance value, IV) ( 4 2,,2003) : IV = ( + + 10 3, 7 ) / 3 100 ; IV = ( + ) / 2 100 ; IV = ( + ) / 2 100 1. 3. 2 ( : ( Eurya muricata) ( Quercus fab2,2002a), (,2002b) ri) ( Vaccinium bracteatum) ( Rhus chi2 nensis) ( Adinandra bockiana) (,2002 ;,1995 ; 5 m 4 Rm = ( S - 1) / ln N,, S, N :11. 3 9. 8 8. 2 5. 5 Simpson : 3 = p 2 i, P i = N i / N, N i i, 12 Shannon-Wiener : H = - p i, 3 log p i Heip : Eh = [ exp ( - p i log p i ) - 1 ]/ ( S - 1),12 12 3 ( Community dis2, ( Woodwardia japonica) similarity, CD) : CD = 1-2 c/ ( a + b) c ( Dryopteris atrata) ( Dicrannepteris di2, a b chotoma), 19. 0 10. 6 10. 1 (,2004) ( Millettia reticulata) 2. 2 2 2. 1, ( Kvalseth,1991 ;,2004) ( Pinus massoniana) 1 : ( F L) 3, (B E) (A),, (B E) (A) ( Cunninghamia lanceolata) (J ) ( I) Simpson ( Pinus elliottii) ; + 0. 77 0. 75 ; + + ( Schima superba) (F) + ( K) ( H) + ( Litsea cubeba) ; ( Castanea mollissima) + ( Liquidambar for2 12 ( 1) 12 150,, 100, 49 47 4 3,,1994) Margalef : ( Serissa serissoides), 3, 0. 2 12, 0. 07 mosana) 0. 26 0. 17, ( Imperata ( ), cylindrica var. major) ( D) - :, ( Bromus remotiflorus ) (B )

5 : 20 769 1 Table 1 Quadrat information Community code Quadrat number Area (m m) Community name Aspect ( ) Slope ( ) Altitude (m) A 726A 20 20 Liquidambar formosana forest NE53 20 98 A 812A 20 20 Liquidambar formosana forest NW8 45 85 B 730A1 10 10 - Loropetalum chinense-bromus remotiflorus shurb NW75 35 85 B 730A2 10 10 - Loropetalum chinense-bromus remotiflorus shurb NW75 35 85 C 808A 10 10 - Loropetalum chinense- Pteridium aquilinum var. latiusculum shurb NE85 25 124 C 810A 10 10 - Loropetalum chinense- Pteridium aquilinum var. latiusculum shurb NE72 20 103 D 812B1 5 5 Imperata cylindrica var. major herb NE80 2 132 D 812B2 5 5 Imperata cylindrica var. major herb NE80 2 132 E 730B 10 10 Pinus massoniana forest NE55 15 130 E 806A 10 10 Pinus massoniana forest NE72 20 112 F 807B 10 10 + Pinus massoniana + Pinus elliottii forest WS35 15 134 F 810B 10 10 + Pinus massoniana + Pinus elliottii forest NE30 3 117 F 811A 10 10 + Pinus massoniana + Pinus elliottii forest NE45 5 116 F 811B 10 10 + Pinus massoniana + Pinus elliottii forest NE22 5 119 G 807A 10 10 + Pinus massoniana + Litsea cubeba forest SW82 30 110 H 731A 20 20 Pinus massoniana forest NW10 35 102 H 801A 20 20 Pinus massoniana forest SE35 25 107 I 803A 20 20 Cunninghamia lanceolata forest NE20 10 95 I 804A 10 10 Cunninghamia lanceolata forest SE35 20 94 J 802A 20 20 Pinus elliottii forset SW23 20 102 J 802B 20 20 Pinus elliottii forset WS10 5 94 K 808B 10 10 + Castamea mollissima + Liquidambar formosana forset NW35 8 92 K 808C 10 10 + Castamea mollissima + Liquidambar formosana forset NW60 8 90 L 727A 20 20 + Pinus elliottii + Schima superba forest WS40 30 85 L 801B 20 20 + Pinus elliottii + Schima superba forest NW12 5 76 L 806B 20 20 + Pinus elliottii + Schima superba forest NW12 20 79 2 Table 2 Importance value of trees Species IV Sample number Pinus massoniana 25. 1 24 Pinus elliottii 24. 0 29 Cunninghamia lanceolata 11. 6 8 Liquidambar formosana 7. 5 15 Schima superba 5. 6 11 Quercus fabri 3. 8 11 Loropetalum chinense 3. 5 13 Eurya muricata 2. 6 14 Magnolia heptapeta 2. 4 4 Vaccinium bracteatum 2. 0 11 Rhus chinensis 1. 8 9 Cinnamomum camphora 1. 4 7 Adinandra bockiana 1. 2 14 Viburnum setigerum 0. 6 4 Rhus verniciflua 0. 6 5 Melia azedarach 0. 5 4 Dalbergia hupehana 0. 4 4 0. 53 0. 51 + ( K) + ( G) 2 :12 > > 2. 39 1. 87 1. 51 3, (A) ( E), (A) (2. 61) ( E) 1. 6 + (L) ( H) ( I) (J) 0. 57 0. 57 : + (F), + ( G) + ( K), - 0. 91 ( p = 0. 01) ( 3), 0. 85 ( p = 0. 01) 12

770 29 3 Table 3 Importance value of shrubs Species IV Sample number Loropetalum chinense 10. 8 64 Serissa serissoides 9. 8 35 Quercus fabri 8. 3 78 Rubus corchorifolius 4. 2 59 Vaccinium bracteatum 4. 2 63 Vitex negundo var. cannabifolia 3. 5 30 Smilax glabra 3. 4 57 Rhus chinensis 3. 2 55 Smilax ferox 2. 9 47 Lespedeza davidii 2. 8 33 Symplocos paniculata 2. 8 48 Ilex aculeolata 2. 3 41 Eurya muricata 2. 2 37 Adinandra bockiana 2. 1 36 Rosa cymosa 1. 9 33 Millettia reticulata 1. 7 29 Gardenia jasminoides 1. 6 29 Schima superba 1. 6 17 Lagerstroemia indica 1. 4 23 Dalbergia hupehana 1. 4 23 Rhamnus crenata 1. 2 21 Syzygium grijsii 1. 0 18 Lonicera japonica 1. 0 14 Glochidion puberum 0. 9 16 Ardisia crenata 0. 8 12 Pinus massoniana 0. 8 14 Morinda umbellata 0. 8 14 Sapium sebiferum 0. 7 13 Viburnum setigerum 0. 7 12 Rhus verniciflua 0. 7 12 Rhododendron simsii 0. 6 10 Cinnamomum camphora 0. 6 10 Berchemia floribunda 0. 5 10 Aleurites fordii 0. 5 10 4 Table 4 Importance value of herbs Species IV Sample number Woodwardia japonica 10. 5 71 Dryopteris atrata 9. 5 64 Dicrannepteris dichotoma 9. 2 50 Carex gibba 6. 9 34 Lygodium japonicum 6. 6 44 Adiantum flabellulatum 6. 4 45 Oplismenus undulatifolius 6. 0 30 Imperata cylindrica var. major 4. 5 13 Melastoma doclecandrum 4. 4 18 Bromus remotiflorus 4. 2 19 Pteris multifida 3. 5 23 Carex bodimieri 3. 3 21 Lophatherum gracile 3. 3 16 Stenoloma chusanum 2. 7 18 Pteridium aquilinum var. latiusculum 2. 4 17 Cyclosorus acuminatus 2. 1 13 Spodiopogon cotulifera 1. 9 12 Helicteres angustifolia 1. 8 12 Arachniodes simplicior 1. 4 10 Scleria levis 1. 3 7 Ampelopsis heterophylla 1. 1 8 Vitis sinocinerea 0. 9 7 2 Fig. 2 Shannon-Wiener diversity index 1 Notes see Fig. 1 1 Fig. 1 Simpson dominance index Ar, Sh, He Ar, Sh and He rep2 resent the arbor, shrub and herb, respectively A L 1 Community code A - L see Table 1 : > >,, 3 ( 4) : 1 2

5 : 20 771 3 Fig. 3 Margalef abundance index 1 Notes see Fig. 1 + ( G) + (L) 0. 62, 0. 6 ; (J ) + ( F) ( H) ( I) 0. 4 4 : (D) 0. 82 ;, 2 (C) 0. 6, 2 (B) ( E), : 3, 2 ( C) (D) 0. 6 0. 4 0. 6 4 Fig. 4 Heip uniformity index 1 Notes see Fig. 1 (0. 35) ;, 0. 51 0. 49,0. 22 0. 54,0. 13 0. 94 2 (B) (D),, + ( K), 0. 94 + ( G) (0. 76) ( E C) (A) + ( K), 5 ( E C) (A) A L 2. 3 Community dissimilarity, : 3 ; Fig. 5 diversity index 1 Community code A - L see Table 1 CD :, > (,2001 ;,1995) 5 >, 80 + : (F L) + +

772 29,, 20,,, Simpson + +,, 3 +, + : + ;, 3,, ( + + ) : +, 0. 94,, + (0. 76) 3 5 :,,, ; ( + + ) ;, 60 1,, + ( K), 20 20,,, ;, 2,,,,, 69 %, 1999 95 %, ; 93. 3 %, :20, + + (,2003 ;,2004), 12, (2. 39) Shannon2Wiener 1. 5 3. 5 4. 5 (,,1994),, 3,, ;, Biodiversity Committee of Chinese Academy of Sciences (

5 : 20 773 ) (1994). Principles and Methodologies of Biodiversity Studies ( ). with English abstract) China Science and Technology Press, Beijing, 141-165. (in Chinese) Chai Y ( ), Li YY ( ), Fang B ( ), He LP( ), He R ( ) (2004). Study on the species diversity of natural forests in Caiyanghe Nature Reserve. Journal of Fujian College of Forestry ( ), 24,75-79. (in Chi2 nese with English abstract) Chen LZ ( ) (1993). Chinese Biodiversity : Current Situa2 tions and Conservation Strategies ( : Scientific Investigation Team of Chinese Academy of Sciences for ). Science Press, Beijing, 112-156. (in Chi2 nese) Deng XL ( ) (2003). Analyses on species diversity of Cas2 tanopsis eyrei community in Jinggangshan Nature Reserve. Jour2 nal of Jinggangshan Normal College (Natural Sciences Edition) ( ) ), 24, 10-13. (in Chinese with English abstract) Geoffrey H ( 2004). Economics of biodiversity : an introduction. Resource and Energy Economics, 26, 105-114. He JS ( ), Chen WL ( ) (1997). A review of gra2 dient changes in species diversity of land plant communities. Acta Ecologica Sinica ( ), 17, 91-99. (in Chinese with English abstract) Jia ZB ( ), Jin ZP ( ), Liu SR ( ) (2001). Primary study on comprehensive improvement of small watershed and biodiversity restoration. Journal of Inner Mongolia Agricul2 tural University ( ), 22, 56-60. (in Chinese with English abstract) Kong DZ ( ) (1998). Study on the restoration of degraded vegetation in Qianyanzhou hilly red soil region. In : Cheng T ( ) ed. Study on the Restoration of Red Hilly Ecosystem and Sus2 tainable Development of Agriculture (Vol. 2) ( Xie J Y ( ), Chen LZ ( ) (1994). Species diversity ( ) ). China Meteorological Press, Beijing, 44-51. (in Chinese) Kvalseth TO (1991). Note on biological diversity, evenness, and homogeneity measures. Oikos, 62, 123-127. Lin KM ( ), Huang BL ( ) (2001). Studies on 2 diversity index of undergrowth plant in Chinese fir plantation. Biodiversity Science ( ), 9, 157-161. (in Chinese with English abstract) Liu ZL ( ), Zheng CY ( ), Fang J Y ( ) (2004). Changes in plant species diversity along an elevation gradient on Mt. Xiaowutai, Hebei, China. Biodiversity Science ( ), 12, 137-145. (in Chinese with English ab2 stract) Ma KP ( ) (1993). On the concept of biodiversity. Chinese Biodiversity ( ), 1, 20-22. (in Chinese with Eng2 lish abstract) Ma KP ( ), Liu CR ( ), Liu YM ( ) (1995). Measurements of community diversity.. -Diversity. Chinese Biodiversity ( ), 3, 38-43. (in Chinese Magurran AE ( 1988). Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1-179. Paulo ALDN, Jeroen CJMVDB (2001). Economic valuation of bio2 diversity : sense or nonsense? Ecological Economics, 39, 203-222. Paul RA, Bruce EK, Frank WD (2004). An introduction to biodi2 versity concepts for environmental economists. Resource and En2 ergy Economics, 26, 115-136. Southern Mountainous Areas, Management office of natural re2 sources in Ji an Prefecture of Jiangxi Province ( ) (1989). Management and Develop2 ment of Red Hilly Area Experimental Study in Qianyanzhou ( ). Science Press, Beijing, 1-23. (in Chinese) Song YL ( ), Yang QR ( ), Huang YQ ( ) (1998). Study and Conversation of Species Diversity ( ). Zhejiang Science & Technology Press, Hangzhou, 1-261. (in Chinese) Tang ZY ( ), Fang J Y ( ) (2004). A review on the elevational patterns of plant species diversity. Biodiversity Science ( ), 12, 20-28. (in Chinese with English ab2 stract) Wang YF ( ), Yu SX ( ), Liu WQ ( ) (2002). A new species diversity index and its fractal analysis. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica ( ), 26, 391-395. (in Chinese with English abstract) Whittaker RJ, Willis KJ, Field R (2001). Scale and species rich2 ness : towards a general hierarchical theory of species diversity. Journal of Biogeography, 28, 453-470. characteristics of deciduous forests in the warm temperate zone of North China. Acta Ecologica Sinica ( ), 14, 337-344. (in Chinese with English abstract) Yang BZ ( ) (1998). Variations and distributions of vegeta2 tion types before and after management in Qianyanzhou red hilly region. In : Cheng T( ) ed. Study on the Restoration of Red Hilly Ecosystem and Sustainable Development of Agriculture (Vol. 2) ( ( ) ). China Meteoroloical Press, Beijing, 34-43. (in Chi2 nese) Zhang JT ( ), Chen TG ( ) (2002). A Study on the biodiversity of plant communities in Guandi Mountains. Shanxi : United diversity and - diversity. Journal of Shanxi University (Natural Science Edition) 25, 173-175. (in Chinese with English abstract) ( ( ) ), Zhang JT ( ) (1995). Methods of Quantitative Vegetation E2 cology ( ). China Science and Technology Press, Beijing, 1-318. (in Chinese)

774 29 Zhang J Y ( ), Zhao HL ( ), Zhang TH ( ), Zhao XY ( ) (2004). Dynamics of species diversity of communities in restoration processes in Horqin sandy land. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica ( ), 28, 86-92. (in Chi2 nese with English abstract) Zhang LJ ( ), Yue M ( ), Zhao GF ( ), Zhang YD ( ), Gu FX ( ), Pan XL ( ) (2002). Plant community species diversity on oasis- desert ecotone in Fukang of Xinjiang and comparison of its measurement. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica ( ), 22, 350-358. (in Chinese with English abstract) Zhang QG ( ), Zhang DY ( ) (2003). Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning : recent advances and trends. Biodi2 versity Science ( ), 11, 351-363. (in Chinese with English abstract) Zhang RF ( ) (1997). Biological diversity protection in wa2 tershed. Jiangxi Hydraulic Science & Technology ( ), 23, 185-188. (in Chinese with English abstract) Zhang YM ( ), Zhou GY ( ), Wen DZ ( ), Zhang DQ ( ), Zhang QM ( ) (2003). Dynamics of the Castnopsis chinensi-schima superba- Cryptocarya concinna community of monsoon evergreen broadleaved forest in Dinghushan Natura Reserve in lower subtropical China. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica ( ), 27, 256-262. (in Chinese with English abstract) : :