引用本文: 郭淑梅，郑天立，黄文博，宋珊珊，唐玲. 青藏高原共玉公路沿线取弃土场修复效果可持续性评估. 草业科学, 2020, 37(11): 2243-2250 doi: shu

Citation: GUO S M, ZHENG T L, HUANG W B, SONG S S, TANG L. Sustainability assessment of restoration of abandoned soil excavation sites along the Gongyu Highway on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Pratacultural Science, 2020, 37(11): 2243-2250 doi: shu

青藏高原共玉公路沿线取弃土场修复效果可持续性评估

郭淑梅 ^1, ,
郑天立 ^{2,
,} ,
黄文博 ^2,3, ,
宋珊珊 ^3, ,
唐玲 ^4,

1.
qinghaishengjiaotonggongchengzixunyouxiangongsi，qinghai xining 810008
2.
重庆欢乐生肖 jiaotongyunshubutianjinshuiyungongchengkexueyanjiusuo，tianjin 300000
3.
lanzhoudaxuecaodinongyekejixueyuan，gansu lanzhou 730000
4.
qinghaishengjiaotongyunshutingkejichu，qinghai xining 810008

作者简介: 郭淑梅(1970-)，女，青海西宁人，高级工程师，本科。E-mail: ;

通讯作者: 郑天立,

基金项目:重庆欢乐生肖国家自然科学基金(31901172)；青海省交通运输厅科技项目(2019-07)

摘要: 青藏高原地区因公路建设遗留的大量取弃土场虽被及时修复，但草地生态系统修复效果是否具有可持续性还存在较大的不确定性。本研究以共和至玉树高速公路(以下简称共玉公路)沿线的取弃土场修复草地为研究对象，比较了低海拔(3个样点)和高海拔(3个样点)样地取弃土场草地与相对应的天然草地之间的植被群落高度、盖度、物种丰富度、香农–威纳指数、辛普森多样性指数以及草地植物群落结构的差异。结果显示: 取弃土场与天然草地之间的植被群落盖度、物种丰富度、香农–威纳指数、辛普森多样性指数以及群落结构均存在显著差异(P < 0.05)。低海拔取弃土场草地的植被群落高度显著低于天然草地的高度( P < 0.05)，而高海拔样地取弃土场的植被群落高度与天然草地的高度无显著差异( P > 0.05)。综上，取弃土场在种草修复4年后草地盖度有所增加，但其整体修复效果与天然草地仍存在较大差距，取弃土场草地修复效果并不具有可持续性。

关键词:

English

Sustainability assessment of restoration of abandoned soil excavation sites along the Gongyu Highway on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau

1.
qinghai transportation engineering consulting co. ltd, xining 810008, qinghai, china
2.
重庆欢乐生肖 tianjin research institute for water transport engineering, m.o.t., tianjin 300000, china
3.
college of pastoral agriculture science and technology, lanzhou university, lanzhou 730000, gansu, china
4.
science and technology department of qinghai provincial transportation department, xining 810008, qinghai, china

Corresponding author: Tianli ZHENG,

Received Date: 2019-08-22
Available Online: 2019-11-15

Abstract: A large number of soil excavation and deposition sites which were produced during highway construction on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau have been restored over time, however, there is still considerable uncertainty regarding whether the restored grassland ecosystem is sustainable. This study examined restored grassland at abandoned soil excavation sites along the Gonghe-Yushu Expressway (hereinafter referred to as Gongyu Road) and compared differences in vegetation community height, coverage, species richness, Shannon-Wiener index, Simpson diversity index, and grassland plant community structures between the abandoned soil excavation site grassland and corresponding natural grasslands. The results showed that vegetation community coverage, species richness, Shannon-Wiener index, Simpson diversity index, and community structure differed significantly between excavation sites and natural grassland (P < 0.05). The vegetation community height of excavation site grassland was significantly lower than that of natural grasslands ( P < 0.05), while height of the vegetation community in excavation site grassland of the high-altitude sample plot was not significantly different from that of natural grassland ( P > 0.05). In summary, grassland coverage has increased after four years of grass reseeding in abandoned excavation site grassland, however, the overall restoration effect did not restore used sites to natural grassland. Taken together, the grassland-restoration effect on abandoned excavation site grassland is not sufficient in this region.

Key words:

1. [1]
  龙瑞军. 青藏高原草地生态系统之服务功能[J]. 科技导报科技导报, 2007, 25(9): 28-30.
  LONG R J. Functions of ecosystem in the Tibetan Grassland[J]. Science and Technology ReviewScience and Technology Review, 2007, 25(9): 28-30.
2. [2]
  刘怡萱, 曹鹏熙, 马红梅, 刘星. 青藏高原土壤微生物多样性及其影响因素研究进展[J]. 环境生态学环境生态学, 2019, 1(6): 1-7.
  LIU Y X, CAO P X, MA H M, LIU X. Research progress on soil microbial diversity and its influencing factors in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau[J]. Environmental EcologyEnvironmental Ecology, 2019, 1(6): 1-7.
3. [3]
  谢高地, 鲁春霞, 冷允法, 郑度, 李双成. 青藏高原生态资产的价值评估[J]. 自然资源学报自然资源学报, 2003, 18(2): 189-196. doi:
  XIE G D, LU C X, LENG Y F, ZHENG D, LI S C. Ecological assets valuation of the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Journal of Natural ResourcesJournal of Natural Resources, 2003, 18(2): 189-196. doi:
4. [4]
  JIANG W, LU Y H, LIU Y X, GAO W W. Ecosystem service value of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau significantly increased during 25 years[J]. Ecosystem ServicesEcosystem Services, 2020, 44(): 101146-. doi:
5. [5]
  郭兵, 孔维华, 姜琳, 范业稳. 青藏高原高寒生态区生态系统脆弱性时空变化及驱动机制分析[J]. 生态科学生态科学, 2018, 37(3): 96-106.
  GUO B, KONG W H, JIANG L, FAN Y W. Analysis of spatial and temporal changes and its driving mechanism of ecological vulnerability of alpine ecosystem in Qinghai Tibet Plateau[J]. Ecological ScienceEcological Science, 2018, 37(3): 96-106.
6. [6]
  ZHANG Y L, HU Z J, QI W, WU X, BAI W Q, LI L H, DING M J, LIU L S, WANG Z F, ZHANG D. Assessment of effectiveness of nature reserves on the Tibetan Plateau based on net primary production and the large sample comparison method[J]. Journal of Geographical SciencesJournal of Geographical Sciences, 2016, 26(): 27-44. doi:
7. [7]
  孙鸿烈, 郑度. 青藏高原形成演化与发展. 广州: 广东科技出版社, 1998: 1-72.
  SUN H L, ZHENG D. Formation, Evolution and Development of Tibetan Plateau. Guangzhou: Guangdong Science Technology Press, 1998: 1-72.
8. [8]
  赵科, 汪正芸, 李育庆, 郑天立, 胡健波. 两种修复方式对青藏高原取弃土场修复后草地盖度的影响[J]. 草业科学草业科学, 2019, 36(10): 2499-2506. doi:
  ZHAO K, WANG Z Y, LI Y Q, ZHENG T L, HU J B. Effect of two restorations on the grassland coverage after remediation of take-abandon soil field on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau[J]. Pratacultural SciencePratacultural Science, 2019, 36(10): 2499-2506. doi:
9. [9]
  马昊翔, 陈长成, 宋英强, 晔沙, 胡月明. 青海省近10年草地植被覆盖动态变化及其驱动因素分析[J]. 水土保持研究水土保持研究, 2018, 25(6): 141-149.
  MA H X, CHEN C C, SONG Y Q, YE S, HU Y M. Analysis of vegetation cover change and its driving factors over the past ten years in Qinghai Province[J]. Research of Soil and Water ConservationResearch of Soil and Water Conservation重庆欢乐生肖, 2018, 25(6): 141-149.
10. [10]
  ZHANG H Y, FAN J W, WANG J B, CAO W, WARWICK H. Spatial and temporal variability of grassland yield and its response to climate change and anthropogenic activities on the Tibetan Plateau from 1988 to 2013[J]. Ecological IndicatorsEcological Indicators, 2018, 95(): 141-151. doi:
11. [11]
  蒋成海, 彭立, 李宏泉, 李世慧, 方理刚, 黄伟伟. 高速公路建设弃土场存在的问题及处治措施探讨[J]. 公路工程公路工程, 2011, 36(3): 47-50. doi:
  JIANG C H, PENG L, LI H Q, LI S H, FANG L G, HUANG W W. Test study on spoil ground in mountainous area high way engineering[J]. Highway EngineeringHighway Engineering, 2011, 36(3): 47-50. doi:
12. [12]
  储小院, 张洪江, 王玉杰, 江玉林, 陈宗伟, 陈学平. 高速公路建设中不同类型弃土场的土壤流失特征[J]. 中国水土保持科学中国水土保持科学, 2007, 5(2): 102-106. doi:
  CHU X Y, ZHANG H J, WANG Y J, JIANG Y L, CHEN Z W, CHEN X P. Soil loss characteristics in different types of dump during expressway construction[J]. Science of Soil and Water ConservationScience of Soil and Water Conservation, 2007, 5(2): 102-106. doi:
13. [13]
  党悦霖. 青藏高原地区公路建设对环境的影响及保护对策[J]. 中国公路中国公路, 2017, 21(): 109-111. doi:
  DANG Y L. The influence of highway construction on environment in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and its protection countermeasures[J]. China HighwayChina Highway, 2017, 21(): 109-111. doi:
14. [14]
  陈宗伟, 江玉林, 张洪江, 程云, 杨占武. 青藏高原高速公路建设中弃土场土壤流失特性: 以青海平阿高速公路为例[J]. 水土保持研究水土保持研究, 2006, 13(6): 4-6. doi:
  CHEN Z W, JIANG Y L, ZHANG H J, CHENG Y, YANG Z W. The properties of the soil loss in the spoil area during the construction of expressway in Tibetan Plateau: Example as the Ping’a Express in Qinghai Province[J]. Research of Soil and Water ConservationResearch of Soil and Water Conservation, 2006, 13(6): 4-6. doi:
15. [15]
  金艳霞. 青海省三种不同类型草地取土场的恢复力和稳定性研究. 北京: 中国科学院研究生院硕士学位论文, 2014.
  JIN Y X. Study on the restorability and stability of three different types of grassland soils in Qinghai Province. Master Thesis. Beijing: Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2014.
16. [16]
  尚洪磊. 青海湖北岸道路工程形成的次生裸地植被自然恢复研究. 西宁: 中国科学院西北高原生物研究所硕士学位论文, 2010.
  SHANG H L. Study on natural restoration of secondary bare land vegetation formed by road engineering on the north shore of Qinghai Lake. Master Thesis. Xining: Northwest Institute of Plateau Biology, CAS, 2010.
17. [17]
  田美荣, 刘志强, 高吉喜, 向昌林. 基于种子库激活的沙化草地生态修复技术应用[J]. 生态与农村环境学报生态与农村环境学报, 2017, 33(1): 32-37. doi:
  TIAN M R, LIU Z Q, GAO J X, XIANG C L. Application of the seed-bank-reactivation-based ecological remediation technologies to sandy grassland[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2017, 33(1): 32-37. doi:
18. [18]
  张永超, 牛得草, 韩潼, 陈鸿洋, 傅华. 补播对高寒草甸生产力和植物多样性的影响[J]. 草业学报草业学报, 2012, 21(2): 308-312.
  ZHANG Y C, NIU D C, HAN T, CHEN H Y, FU H. Effect of reseeding on productivity and plant diversity on alpine meadows[J]. Acta Prataculturae SinicaActa Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(2): 308-312.
19. [19]
  戴明新, 李东昌. 西藏自治区公路建设水土流失特点及防治措施[J]. 建筑工程技术与设计建筑工程技术与设计, 2015, 3(): 899-900. doi:
  DAI M X, LI D C. Characteristics and prevention measures of soil erosion in highway construction in Tibet Autonomous Region[J]. Construction Engineering Technology and Design, 2015, 3(): 899-900. doi:
20. [20]
  祁文斌. 浅谈共玉公路草皮植被护坡防护[J]. 青海交通科技青海交通科技, 2013, 3(): 10-11. doi:
  QI W B. A brief discussion on slope protection of sod vegetation on Gongyu Highway[J]. Qinghai Transportation Science and Technology, 2013, 3(): 10-11. doi:
21. [21]
  SMITH B, WILSON J B. A consumer's guide to evenness indices[J]. OikosOikos重庆欢乐生肖, 1996, (): 70-82.
22. [22]
  李以康, 杜岩功, 张正芝, 林丽, 郭小伟, 张法伟, 李茜, 周华坤, 曹广民. 种子补播恢复退化草地研究进展[J]. 草地学报草地学报, 2017, 25(6): 1171-1177. doi:
  LI Y K, DU Y G, ZHANG Z Z, LIN L, GUO X W, ZHANG F W, LI Q, ZHOU H K, CAO G M. Research progresses on seed reseeding to recover the degraded grassland[J]. Acta Agrestia SinicaActa Agrestia Sinica, 2017, 25(6): 1171-1177. doi:
23. [23]
  周杨, 韩丽源. 铁路取弃土场生态恢复调查分析[J]. 铁路节能环保与安全卫生铁路节能环保与安全卫生, 2019, 9(1): 8-11.
  ZHOU Y, HAN L Y. Investigation and analysis on ecological restoration of railway soil borrow area and spoil group[J]. Railway Energy Saving & Environmental Protection & Occupational Safety and Health, 2019, 9(1): 8-11.
24. [24]
  周华坤, 赵新全, 赵亮, 韩发, 古松. 高山草甸垂穗披碱草人工草地群落特征及稳定性研究[J]. 中国草地学报中国草地学报, 2007, 29(2): 13-25. doi:
  ZHOU H K, ZHAO X Q, ZHAO L, HAN F, GU S. Study on the community characteristics and stability of the artificial grassland of hyaline in alpine meadow[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland ScienceChinese Journal of Grassland Science, 2007, 29(2): 13-25. doi:
25. [25]
  郑华平, 陈子萱, 牛俊义, 高玉红. 补播禾草对玛曲高寒沙化草地植物多样性和生产力的影响[J]. 草业学报草业学报, 2009, 18(3): 28-33. doi:
  ZHENG H P, CHEN Z X, NIU J Y, GAO Y H. Effects of interseeding on plant diversity and productivity in Maqu alpine desertified meadow[J]. Acta Prataculturae SinicaActa Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(3): 28-33. doi:
26. [26]
  LOREAU M, DE MAZANCOURT C, DUFFY E. Biodiversity and ecosystem stability: A synthesis of underlying mechanisms[J]. Ecology LettersEcology Letters, 2013, 16(1): 106-115.
27. [27]
  HAUTIER Y, TILMAN D, ISBELL F, SEABLOOM E W, BPRER E, REICH P B. Anthropogenic environmental changes affect ecosystem stability via biodiversity[J]. ScienceScience, 2015, 348(): 336-340. doi:
28. [28]
  仝淑萍, 苗彦军, 边步云, 贾书刚, 关法春, 郭红宝, 杨光宗. 不同恢复措施对藏北草地群落生产力和多样性影响的研究[J]. 草地学报草地学报, 2018, 26(5): 1078-1083. doi:
  TONG S P, MIAO Y J, BIAN B Y, JIA S G, GUAN F C, GUO H B, YANG G Z. Effects of different restoration measures on productivity and diversity of grassland communities in Northern Tibet[J]. Acta Agrestia SinicaActa Agrestia Sinica, 2018, 26(5): 1078-1083. doi:
29. [29]
  MARTIN L M, MOLONEY K A, WILSEY B J. An assessment of grassland restoration success using species diversity components[J]. Journal of Applied EcologyJournal of Applied Ecology, 2010, 42(2): 327-336.
30. [30]
  BAER S G, ADAMS T, SCOTT D A, BLAIR J M, COLLINS S. Soil heterogeneity increases plant diversity after twenty years of manipulation during grassland restoration[J]. Ecological ApplicationsEcological Applications, 2019, 30(1): 1-15.
31. [31]
  贺金生, 刘志鹏, 姚拓, 孙书存, 吕植, 胡小文, 曹广民, 吴新卫, 李黎, 卜海燕, 朱剑霄. 青藏高原退化草地恢复的主要制约因子及修复技术[J]. 科技导报科技导报, 2020, 38(17): 66-80.
  HE J S, LIU Z P, YAO T, SUN S C, LYU Z, HU X W, CAO G M, WU X W, LI L, BU H Y, ZHU J X. Analysis of the main constraints and restoration techniques of degraded grassland on the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Science and Technology ReviewScience and Technology Review重庆欢乐生肖, 2020, 38(17): 66-80.
32. [32]
  贺金生, 卜海燕, 胡小文, 冯彦皓, 李守丽, 朱剑霄, 刘国华, 王彦荣, 南志标. 退化高寒草地的近自然恢复: 理论基础与技术途径[J]. 科学通报科学通报, 2020, 65(): 3898-3908.
  HE J S, BU H Y, HU X W, FENG Y H, LI S L, ZHU J X, LIU G H, WANG Y R, NAN Z B. Close-to-nature restoration of degraded alpine grasslands: Theoretical basis and technical approach[J]. Chinese Science BulletinChinese Science Bulletin, 2020, 65(): 3898-3908.
1. [1]
  谭春桃 , 李欢 , 曲家鹏 . 野生和室内饲养高原鼠兔肠道菌群多样性的比较. 草业科学, 2019, 36(2): 531-539. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
2. [2]
  田富 , 程云湘 , 周国利 , 马青青 , 申波 , 曲久 , 常生华 . 高原鼠兔洞穴密度与高寒草甸植物群落结构以及土壤因子的关系. 草业科学, 2019, 36(4): 1094-1104. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
3. [3]
  张春林 , 韩向敏 , 郎侠 , 王彩莲 . 青藏高原东北缘不同草地类型牧草营养品质动态. 草业科学, 2019, 36(3): 763-771. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
4. [4]
  柴林荣 , 孙义 , 王宏 , 常生华 , 侯扶江 , 程云湘 . 牦牛放牧强度对甘南高寒草甸群落特征与牧草品质的影响. 草业科学, 2018, 12(1): 18-26. doi:
5. [5]
  孙建 , 张振超 , 董世魁 . 青藏高原高寒草地生态系统的适应性管理. 草业科学, 2019, 36(4): 933-938. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
6. [6]
  马培杰 , 李亚娇 , 潘多锋 , 陈本建 , 李心诚 , 王德利 . 牦牛干扰下草原毛虫对小嵩草高寒草甸植物群落特征的影响. 草业科学, 2017, 11(4): 698-705. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
7. [7]
  李建平 , 谢应忠 . 封育对黄土高原天然草地深层土壤碳、氮储量的影响. 草业科学, 2016, 10(10): 1981-1988. doi:
8. [8]
  高宏元 , 高新华 , 冯琦胜 , 李文龙 , 鲁征 , 梁天刚 . 基于深度学习的天然草地植物物种识别方法. 草业科学, 2020, 37(9): 1931-1939. doi:
9. [9]
  田曼 , 严成 , 周静 . 覆土厚度对受损河滩草地群落特征的影响. 草业科学, 2019, 36(9): 2193-2200. doi:
10. [10]
  田青 , 李宗杰 , 王建宏 , 宋玲玲 , 韩蓉 , 陈博 . 摩天岭北坡东南部不同海拔梯度草本植物群落特征. 草业科学, 2016, 10(4): 755-763. doi:
11. [11]
  黄文洁 , 曾桐瑶 , 黄晓东 . 青藏高原高寒草地植被物候时空变化特征. 草业科学, 2019, 36(4): 1032-1043. doi:
12. [12]
  王昱 , 毕润成 , 茹文明 . 山西浊漳河北源湿地草本植物群落优势种生态位与种间关系. 草业科学, 2018, 12(2): 276-285. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
13. [13]
  徐文兵 , 施颖 , 邢亚芸 , 张茜 , 郑志虎 , 罗巧玉 . 青海高寒草原鼠丘植物群落结构及稳定性特征. 草业科学, 2020, 37(4): 603-611. doi:
14. [14]
  张佳宁 , 胡小柯 , 朱国庆 , 李亚 . 民勤绿洲霸王群落的植物多样性. 草业科学, 2013, 7(11): 1819-1823.
15. [15]
  詹天宇 , 侯阁 , 刘苗 , 孙建 , 付顺 . 青藏高原不同退化梯度高寒草地植被与土壤属性分异特征. 草业科学, 2019, 36(4): 1010-1021. doi:
16. [16]
  郭建秀 , 王召锋 , Saman BOWATTE , 侯扶江 . 高寒草甸8种植物种子内生细菌和真菌群落的多样性. 草业科学, 2020, 37(5): 901-915. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
17. [17]
  宋珊珊 , 张建胜 , 郑天立 , 张帆 , 朱剑霄 . 围栏封育对青海海北高寒草甸植被碳储量的影响. 草业科学, 2020, 37(12): 1-8. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
18. [18]
  周岐燃 , 帅林林 , 胡健 , 田莉华 , 陈有军 , 汪辉 , 周青平 . 青藏高原草原文明中的农业伦理内涵对草地生态保护的借鉴. 草业科学, 2019, 36(11): 2997-3006. doi: 重庆欢乐生肖
19. [19]
  刘晓丽 , 张孝春 , 刘艺衫 , 张蔚然 , 孙涛 . 皖北石灰岩山地不同植被恢复模式对植物群落物种组成及多样性的影响. 草业科学, 2020, 37(5): 845-852. doi:
20. [20]
  郭小伟 , 杜岩功 , 林丽 , 李以康 , 张法伟 , 李茜 , 刘淑丽 , 欧阳经政 , 曹广民 . 青藏高原北缘3种高寒草地的CH4、CO2和N2O通量特征的初步研究. 草业科学, 2016, 10(1): 27-37. doi:

重庆欢乐生肖

图 1 取弃土场修复草地与天然草地群落高度和盖度的差异

Figure 1. Differences in community height and coverage between abandoned excavation sites and natural grassland

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 取弃土场修复草地与天然草地植物多样性的差异

Figure 2. Differences in plant diversity between excavation sites and natural grassland

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 取弃土场与天然草地群落结构的差异

Figure 3. 重庆欢乐生肖 Differences in community structure between excavation sites and natural grassland

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 重庆欢乐生肖调查样地基本信息

Table 1. 重庆欢乐生肖 Basic information on study sites

样地 Site		纬度 Latitude	经度 Longitude	海拔 Elevation/m	年均温 Annual temperature/℃	年均降水量 Annual precipitation/mm	草地类型 Grassland type
低海拔样地 Low-altitude site	1	36°18′ N	100°33′ E	2 986	2.69	366.6	塔拉滩草地 Talatan grassland
	2	36°12′ N	100°32′ E	2 910	3.80	362.7
	3	36°05′ N	100°23′ E	2 987	3.47	359.8
高海拔样地 High-altitude site	1	35°05′ N	98°46′ E	4 428	−2.34	350.4	高寒草原 Alpine steppe
	2	34°57′ N	98°34′ E	4 279	−2.49	358.6
	3	34°51′ N	98°08′ E	4 243	−2.51	353.0

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 取弃土场草地修复相关指标的t检验

Table 2. 重庆欢乐生肖 T-test of grassland restoration indexes at abandoned excavation sites

指标 Parameter	低海拔样地 Low-altitude site		高海拔样地 High-altitude site
指标 Parameter	t	Pr > \| t\|	t	Pr > \| t \|
高度 Height	6.34	< 0.001	−1.76	0.10
总盖度 Total coverage	8.40	< 0.001	4.52	< 0.001
禾草盖度 Grass coverage	5.92	< 0.001	−2.64	0.02
莎草盖度 Sedge coverage	1.63	0.13	1.88	0.08
豆科盖度 Legume coverage	1.00	0.33	4.15	< 0.01
杂类草盖度 Forb coverage	6.04	< 0.001	3.67	< 0.01
物种丰富度 Species richness	3.39	< 0.01	5.46	< 0.001
香农-威纳指数 Shannon-Wiener index	2.47	0.03	5.86	< 0.001
辛普森多样性指数 Simpson's diversity index	2.51	0.03	5.72	< 0.001

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 重庆欢乐生肖取弃土场与天然草地植物功能群盖度的差异

Table 3. Differences in plant functional group coverage between abandoned excavation sites and natural grassland

%
指标 Parameter	低海拔样地 Low-altitude site		高海拔样地 High-altitude site
指标 Parameter	天然草地 Natural grassland	取弃土场 Take-abandon soil field	天然草地 Natural grassland	取弃土场 Take-abandon soil field
禾草 Grasses	32.39 ± 4.24a	4.57 ± 1.29b	4.54 ± 0.85b	11.93 ± 2.42a
莎草 Sedges	0.47 ± 0.29a	0.00 ± 0.00a	9.27 ± 4.90a	0.05 ± 0.05a
豆科 Legumes	0.10 ± 0.10a	0.00 ± 0.00a	3.73 ± 0.90a	0.20 ± 0.20b
杂类草 Forbs	26.08 ± 4.00a	2.29 ± 0.93b	25.95 ± 6.87a	0.64 ± 0.25b
不同小写字母表示不同海拔样地中取弃土场与天然草地之间差异显著(P < 0.05)； n = 15。　Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences between excavation sites and natural grassland at different elevations; n = 15.