不同改造措施对杉木林分生长和碳储量的影响
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

S753.5,S791.27

基金项目:

国家重点研发计划专题“低质低效人工林群落结构优化技术集成与固碳增产效应评价(2023YFF1304402-08)”;湖北省林业科技支撑重点项目“杉木人工林质量提升与固碳增汇关键技术研发”([2022]LYKJ03)


Effects of different retrofitting measures on growth and carbon stocks in Cunninghamia lanceolata forest
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
    摘要:

    [目的] 探讨不同改造措施对杉木(Cunninghamia lanceolata)林分生长和碳储量的影响,为该地区杉木林制定合理的改造措施提供理论依据。[方法] 以湖北省太子山石龙林场管理局杉木人工林为研究对象,在近自然改造理论指导下,采取间伐补植(T1,间伐强度50%并补植木荷(Schima superba))和间伐(T2,间伐强度50%)措施,以未改造样地为对照(CK),测定了不同改造措施下杉木胸径、树高、单株材积、蓄积量,分析胸径结构分布,并比较乔木层、灌木层、草本层、植被层碳储量的差异。[结果] T1措施的胸径和单株材积3 a增长量均显著高于CK(p<0.05),不同改造措施间树高增长量无显著差异(p>0.05)。T1和T2处理的中大径阶(≥20 cm)林木比例显著提升,CK仍以小径阶林木为主。T1处理中,胸径3 a增长量在2~4 cm范围内的林木株数占比达28.3%,较CK显著提高23.7%,改造措施(尤其T1)使林分径阶结构向大径级方向偏移。各措施植被层碳储量均表现为:乔木层>灌木层>草本层,T1措施的植被层及乔木层碳储量3 a增长量与CK无显著差异(p>0.05),尽管T1措施当前植被层总碳储量仍低于CK(主要受间伐初期林木减少影响),但其后期较高的碳储量增长速度表明其长期固碳潜力更大;灌木层和草本层碳储量在各措施间无显著差异(p>0.05),然而,T1提高了灌木层碳储量的年均增量,T2则提高了草本层碳储量的年均增量。[结论] 间伐补植在促进杉木人工林生长、结构优化及关键碳库(乔木层)恢复与增长方面,效果显著优于间伐。在湖北太子山同类型杉木人工林的近自然化改造及提升森林碳汇功能实践中,推广应用间伐补植木荷技术是更为合理的选择。

    Abstract:

    [Objective] The effects of different retrofitting measures on the growth and carbon stock of Cunninghamia lanceolata plantations were evaluated, in order to provide a theoretical basis for developing optimal forest retrofitting strategies for the region. [Methods] The research was conducted within C. lanceolata plantations at Taizishan Shilong Forestry Retrofitting Bureau, Hubei Province. Guided by near-natural forest retrofitting principles, three treatments were applied: thinning with replanting (T1, 50% thinning intensity with interplanting of Schima superba), thinning only (T2, 50% thinning intensity), and an unimproved control (CK). Diameter at breast height (DBH), tree height, individual tree volume, stand volume, and DBH class distribution were measured. Carbon stocks within the tree layer, shrub layer, herb layer, and total vegetation layer were also quantified and compared among treatments. [Results] After three years, DBH growth and individual tree volume increment were significantly higher in T1 compared to CK (p<0.05). Tree height growth showed no significant differences among treatments (p>0.05). The T1 and T2 treatments significantly increased the proportion of trees in medium and large DBH classes (≥20 cm), while CK still dominated with small-diameter trees. Specifically, in T1, the proportion of trees with DBH increments of 2—4 cm over three years was 28.3%, representing a 23.7% increase over CK. Overall, the thinning measures, particularly T1, shifted the stand DBH distribution towards larger diameter classes. Carbon stock allocation within the vegetation layer followed the order: tree layer > shrub layer > herb layer across all treatments. The three-year growth in total vegetation layer carbon stock and tree layer carbon stock within T1 did not differ significantly from CK (p>0.05). Although the total vegetation carbon stock in T1 remained lower than CK (primarily due to tree removal during thinning), its higher subsequent growth rate indicated greater long-term carbon sequestration potential. Carbon stock growth within the shrub and herb layers showed no significant differences among treatments (p>0.05). However, T1 significantly increased the mean annual increment (MAI) of carbon stock in the shrub layer, while T2 significantly increased the MAI in the herb layer. [Conclusion] Thinning combined with replanting C. lanceolata demonstrated significant advantages over thinning alone in promoting the growth of dominant C. lanceolata trees, optimizing stand structure, and enhancing the carbon stock growth rate within the key carbon pool (tree layer). Consequently, T1 represents a more suitable approach for promoting near-natural retrofitting in similar Chinese fir plantations and enhancing forest carbon sink functionality in the Taizi Mountain region of Hubei Province.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

潘召龙,袁慧,杜超群,艾训儒,许业洲,曹越,潘磊.不同改造措施对杉木林分生长和碳储量的影响[J].水土保持通报,2025,45(6):280-289

复制
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2025-07-22
  • 最后修改日期:2025-08-21
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2025-12-31
  • 出版日期: