Volume 39 Issue 4
Jul.  2022
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents

BAI Hui, JIANG Haiyan, CONG Lin, SHI Dongming, LIN Renjie, DI Jialin. Diversity of macrofungi in different broad-leaved forests in Gaogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2022, 39(4): 765-774. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20210661
Citation: BAI Hui, JIANG Haiyan, CONG Lin, SHI Dongming, LIN Renjie, DI Jialin. Diversity of macrofungi in different broad-leaved forests in Gaogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2022, 39(4): 765-774. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20210661

Diversity of macrofungi in different broad-leaved forests in Gaogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve

doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20210661
  • Received Date: 2021-09-26
  • Accepted Date: 2022-04-06
  • Rev Recd Date: 2022-03-02
  • Available Online: 2022-07-20
  • Publish Date: 2022-08-20
  •   Objective  This study, taking Gogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve as the research area, is aimed to investigate the distribution of macrofungi and its relationship with the local vegetation in five broad-leaved forests so as to provide plausible reference for the conservation of macrofungi in the future.   Method  First, macrofungi were collected from Betula platyphylla (Type Ⅰ), Quercus mongolica (Type Ⅱ), B. platyphylla-Tilia mongolica (Type Ⅲ), B. platyphylla-T. mongolica and B. platyphylla-Q. mongolica-Populus davidiana-B. dahurica (Type Ⅳ), and P. davidiana-Q. mongolica-B. dahurica (Type Ⅴ) in the nature reserve with the employment of random sampling and sample plot method. Then the collected specimens were identified from the perspectives of morphology and molecular chemistry before an analysis was conducted of the species distribution, diversity, community similarity and macrofungi-plant relationships.   Result  (1) There were 213 species of macrofungi in the reserve, which can be categorized into 2 phyla, 4 classes, 19 orders, 54 families, 119 genera. (2) There were a total of 8 dominant genera including Russula, Agaricus and Lepista. (3) Of the five vegetation types, Type Ⅳ wuranked the first in richness, diversity and evenness. (4) The diversity index and evenness index of tree layer, shrub layer and herb layer and the diversity index of tree layer and herb layer had significant influence on the indices of macrofungi. (5) The total vegetation coverage, herbage coverage, canopy closure and altitude were significantly correlated with the dominant genera of macrofungi. (6) The similarity between Type Ⅱ and Type Ⅳ was the highest (0.27) whereas the one between Type Ⅲ and Type Ⅳ and the one between Type Ⅰ and Type Ⅱ were the lowest (both being 0.14). (7) In terms of species clustering, with the distance coefficient being 25, they could be divided into two groups, while with the distance coefficient being 14, they could be divided into three clusters.   Conclusion  The diversity and similarity of plants affected the distribution of macrofungi to varying degrees, and the more similar the plant type was, the more similar the composition of macrofungi was. [Ch, 2 fig. 7 tab. 28 ref.]
  • [1] NAN Guowei, WANG Jinghui, QIN Shuying, HAN Lei, HE Xinyu.  Diversity characteristics of herbaceous species under Robinia pseudoacacia forest in different years . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2024, 41(5): 978-985. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20240128
    [2] ZHANG Chuanying, LI Tingting, GONG Xiaofei, PAN Jiangyan, GONG Zhengyu, PAN Jun, JIAO Jiejie, WU Chuping.  Habitat community characteristics and species diversity of Chimonanthus nitens in Wuxi River Basin, Suichang . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2023, 40(4): 848-858. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20220570
    [3] JIN Mengli, HU Jun, QI Shi, LU Jinsheng, LI Yue, JIANG Jiuhua.  Reconstruction measures of species diversity of low-function Platycladus orientalis forest in Beijing . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2020, 37(1): 27-35. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2020.01.004
    [4] LI Jun, LU Yunfeng, YANG Anna, BAI Zhiliang, WANG Yang, LOU Luhuan, TONG Zaikang.  Species diversity of natural Phoebe sheareri communities with different disturbance intensities . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2019, 36(2): 279-288. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2019.02.009
    [5] WU Shibin, KU Weipeng, ZHOU Xiaorong, JI Meifen, WU Jiasen.  Structural characteristics and species diversity for survival of the rare plant Ostrya multinervis . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2019, 36(1): 31-37. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2019.01.005
    [6] XIA Wen, LU Jianguo, JING Lei.  Community structure and species diversity of a low impact development demonstration area in Zhenjiang City . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2019, 36(4): 793-800. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2019.04.020
    [7] GU Jianqiang, CHEN Donghui, XU Kuiyuan, CHEN Youwu, WU Jiawei, ZHOU Jin, XU Zhihong.  Insect species diversity, functional diversity, and their mutual relationship in a pecan stand . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2015, 32(1): 116-122. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2015.01.017
    [8] DENG Hongjian, LI Weizhong, CAO Zhu, WANG Qing, WANG Guangru.  Species diversity based on sample size in a Pinus tabulaeformis mixed forest . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2015, 32(1): 67-75. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2015.01.010
    [9] WANG Limin, MIAO Xindong, YAN Caixia, MA Kai, MA Dandan, LI Genyou.  Structure characteristics and species diversity of Zanthoxylum micranthum in Zhejiang Province . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2013, 30(2): 215-219. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2013.02.009
    [10] WEI Qi, LOU Lu-huan, LENG Jian-hong, BAO Qi-min, ZHONG Chao-liang, SHENG Nian-hua.  Community structure and species diversity of Camellia trichoclada . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2011, 28(4): 634-639. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.04.018
    [11] YAN Dong-feng, ZHU Ying, YANG Xi-tian.  Species diversity and stability of a natural Quercus forest in Baotianman,Henan Province . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2011, 28(4): 628-633. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.04.017
    [12] XU Hua-chao, HAO Xiao-dong, HUANG Jun-hao, YE Tan-xian, YE Li-xin.  Insects diversity of Fengyangshan Mountain in Zhejiang Province . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2011, 28(1): 1-6. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.01.001
    [13] AI Xun-ru, YI Yong-mei, YAO Lan, WANG Bo-quan, XIONG Biao.  Effects of human disturbance on species diversity of Pinus massoniana-Cunninghamia lanceolata mixed forest in Suobuya Stone Forest . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2010, 27(2): 178-184. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2010.02.003
    [14] SHEN Nian-hua, WAN Zhi-zhou, TANG Geng-guo, WANG Chun, CHENG Hong-mei.  Community structure and species diversity of a Quercus variabilis forest on Mount Zijinshan . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2009, 26(5): 696-700.
    [15] LI Gui-xiang, SHI Hai-jing, MENG Guang-tao, FANG Xiang-jing, CHAI Yong, HE Li-ping, ZHANG Zheng-hai, YANG Yong-xiang.  Community structural properties and species diversity in primary Pinus yunnanensis forest . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2007, 24(4): 396-400.
    [16] AI Jian-guo, MEI Sheng-long, LIU Sheng-long, DING Bing-yang.  Species diversity of Fokienia hodginsii community in Nature Reserve of Mount Fengyang in Zhejiang Province . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2006, 23(1): 41-45.
    [17] LI Qiao, CHEN You-qing, CHEN Zhen, GUO Xiao, LIAO Qiong, ZHAO Jian, LI Kun.  Orthopteran diversity in Yuanmou dry-hot valley of Yunnan . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2006, 23(3): 316-322.
    [18] FAN Hai-lan, HONG Wei, HONG Tao, WU Chen-zhen, SONG Ping, ZHU Hui, ZHANG Qiong, LIN Yong-ming.  Effects of controlled burning on species diversity of undergrowth in Choerospondias axillaris plantations . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2005, 22(5): 495-500.
    [19] CHEN Shi-pin.  Changes in species diversity of plants in Cyclobalanopsis chungii forest during the course of restoration . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2004, 21(3): 258-262.
    [20] SU Li-ying.  Investigation of macro fungi resources from Mount Mogan . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 1999, 16(2): 157-163.
  • [1]
    MA Keping. On the concept of biodiversity [J]. Biodiversity Sci, 1993, 1(1): 20 − 22.
    [2]
    FU Bojie, CHEN Liding. Landscape diversity types and their ecological significance [J]. Acta Geogr Sin, 1996, 51(5): 454 − 462.
    [3]
    YU Zhanhu. Macrofungal diversity and its role in forest ecosystems [J]. For By-Prod Spec China, 2007, 88(3): 81 − 85.
    [4]
    ZHANG Lixia, ZHANG Feng, SHANGGUAN Tieliang. Study on the diversity of plant community in Luya Mountain [J]. Biodiversity Sci, 2000, 8(4): 361 − 369.
    [5]
    JUN Shan, WANG Dongbo, ZHOU Jianhua, et al. Community structures of phytoplankton and its relationship with environmental factors in the Lhasa River [J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2019, 39(3): 787 − 798.
    [6]
    Tolgor, LI Yu. Species diversity of macrofungi studies in Daqinggou Nature Reserve [J]. J Jilin Agric Univ, 1999, 21(3): 36 − 45.
    [7]
    BA Tu, Oyongowa, Tolgor. Statistics of mycobiota of macrofungi in Gaogustahenwula Nature Reserve of Inner Mongolia [J]. J Jilin Agric Univ, 2005, 27(1): 29 − 34, 42.
    [8]
    FANG Jingyun, GUO Ke, WANG Guohong, et al. Vegetation classification system and classification of vegetation types used for the compilation of vegetation of China [J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2000, 44(2): 96 − 110.
    [9]
    ZHANG Xiuhua, QI Haiying, WANG Renqing, et al. Plant diversity in nature reserves of Shandong Province [J]. J Shandong Univ Nat Sci, 2019, 54(7): 1 − 10.
    [10]
    ZHANG Qingyang. Studies on Macrofungi Diversity in Xianrendong National Nature Reserve in Liaoning Province[D]. Changchun: Jilin Agricultural University, 2014.
    [11]
    NA Q, BAU T. Mycena section Sacchariferae: three new species with basal discs from China [J]. Mycol Prog, 2019, 18(3): 483 − 493.
    [12]
    YAO Yijian. Red list assessment of macrofungi in China [J]. Biodiversity Sci, 2020, 28(1): 1 − 3.
    [13]
    WIJAYAWARDENE N N, HYDE K D, LUMBSCH HT, et al. Outline of Ascomycota: 2017 [J]. Fungal Diversity, 2018, 88(1): 167 − 263.
    [14]
    MAHARACHCHIKUMBURA S S N, HYDE K D, JONES E B G, et al. Families of Sordariomycetes [J]. Fungal Diversity, 2016, 79(1): 1 − 317.
    [15]
    MA Keping, LIU Yuming. Measurement methods of community diversity (Ⅰ) α diversity measurement methods (Ⅱ) [J]. Biodiversity Sci, 1994, 2(4): 231 − 239.
    [16]
    SHANNON C E. A mathematical theory of communication [J]. Comput Commun Rev, 2001, 5(1): 3 − 55.
    [17]
    MA Keping. Measurement methods of community diversity (Ⅰ) α diversity measurement methods (Ⅰ) [J]. Biodiversity Sci, 1994, 2(3): 162 − 168.
    [18]
    WHITTAKER R H. Evolution of measurement of species diversity [J]. Axon, 1972, 21(2/3): 213 − 251.
    [19]
    Tolgor, LI Yu. Study on fungal flora diversity in Daqinggou Nature Reserve [J]. Biodiversity Sci, 2000, 8(1): 73 − 80.
    [20]
    WANG Xueshan. Studies on Macrofungal Diversity in Hanwula National Nature Reserve, Inner Mongolia[D]. Changchun: Jilin Agricultural University, 2020, 39(4): 695 − 706.
    [21]
    YANG Ying, ZHAO Lan, CHEN Yanliu, et al. Diversity and flora of macrofungi in the Fuheyuan Nature Reserve in Jiangxi Province [J]. J Northwest For Univ, 2022, 37(2): 164 − 169.
    [22]
    WANG Shurong, WANG Deli, WANG Qi, et al. Relationship of macrofungal diversity and vegetation and environments in al-pine forests of Southeastern Tibet [J]. Mycosystema, 2016, 35(3): 279 − 289.
    [23]
    MA Shaobin, FENG Yunli, MA Ming. Study on the macrofungi diversity in 9 communities of Quzonggong area in Baima Snow Mountain [J]. Edible Fungi China, 2019, 38(9): 7 − 12.
    [24]
    WANG Zhengyi, DAI Qilin, BAI Cheng, et al. Types and diversity of natural regeneration community after clear cutting of Phyllostachys edulis forests in Mount Tianmu, China [J]. J Zhejiang A&F Univ, 2020, 37(4): 710 − 719.
    [25]
    MAO Yuming, WU Chuping, HUANG Yujie, et al. Structure and function of forest for water conservation in Kaihua [J]. J Zhejiang For Sci Technol, 2015, 35(5): 1 − 5.
    [26]
    DU Hongju. Macrofungi Diversity and Their Association with Forest Characters in Xiao Xing’an Mountains, NE China[D]. Harbin: Northeast Forestry University, 2018.
    [27]
    BAU Tolgor, CHEN Jinzhao, WANG Yao, et al. Macrofungal diversity in broad-leaved Korean pine forest in the Changbaishan National Nature Reserve [J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2010, 30(17): 4549 − 4558.
    [28]
    CHEN Jidong, LI Dongsheng, JIA Zhe, et al. Study on the structure characteristics and comparability in different plant communities in the north region of Yanshan Mountain [J]. Hebei J For Orchard Res, 2013, 28(1): 49 − 54.
  • 加载中
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Figures(2)  / Tables(7)

Article views(519) PDF downloads(39) Cited by()

Related
Proportional views

Diversity of macrofungi in different broad-leaved forests in Gaogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve

doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20210661

Abstract:   Objective  This study, taking Gogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve as the research area, is aimed to investigate the distribution of macrofungi and its relationship with the local vegetation in five broad-leaved forests so as to provide plausible reference for the conservation of macrofungi in the future.   Method  First, macrofungi were collected from Betula platyphylla (Type Ⅰ), Quercus mongolica (Type Ⅱ), B. platyphylla-Tilia mongolica (Type Ⅲ), B. platyphylla-T. mongolica and B. platyphylla-Q. mongolica-Populus davidiana-B. dahurica (Type Ⅳ), and P. davidiana-Q. mongolica-B. dahurica (Type Ⅴ) in the nature reserve with the employment of random sampling and sample plot method. Then the collected specimens were identified from the perspectives of morphology and molecular chemistry before an analysis was conducted of the species distribution, diversity, community similarity and macrofungi-plant relationships.   Result  (1) There were 213 species of macrofungi in the reserve, which can be categorized into 2 phyla, 4 classes, 19 orders, 54 families, 119 genera. (2) There were a total of 8 dominant genera including Russula, Agaricus and Lepista. (3) Of the five vegetation types, Type Ⅳ wuranked the first in richness, diversity and evenness. (4) The diversity index and evenness index of tree layer, shrub layer and herb layer and the diversity index of tree layer and herb layer had significant influence on the indices of macrofungi. (5) The total vegetation coverage, herbage coverage, canopy closure and altitude were significantly correlated with the dominant genera of macrofungi. (6) The similarity between Type Ⅱ and Type Ⅳ was the highest (0.27) whereas the one between Type Ⅲ and Type Ⅳ and the one between Type Ⅰ and Type Ⅱ were the lowest (both being 0.14). (7) In terms of species clustering, with the distance coefficient being 25, they could be divided into two groups, while with the distance coefficient being 14, they could be divided into three clusters.   Conclusion  The diversity and similarity of plants affected the distribution of macrofungi to varying degrees, and the more similar the plant type was, the more similar the composition of macrofungi was. [Ch, 2 fig. 7 tab. 28 ref.]

BAI Hui, JIANG Haiyan, CONG Lin, SHI Dongming, LIN Renjie, DI Jialin. Diversity of macrofungi in different broad-leaved forests in Gaogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2022, 39(4): 765-774. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20210661
Citation: BAI Hui, JIANG Haiyan, CONG Lin, SHI Dongming, LIN Renjie, DI Jialin. Diversity of macrofungi in different broad-leaved forests in Gaogestai Hanwula Nature Reserve[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2022, 39(4): 765-774. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20210661
  • 生物多样性被用来描述自然界多样性的程度,是一个内容十分广泛的概念[1]。生物多样性具有丰富的层次和内容[2],其中物种多样性是人类可持续发展所依赖的最重要的可再生自然资源宝库,是生物多样性最重要的结构和功能单位,是不可或缺的部分[3]。物种多样性是指动物、植物和微生物种类的丰富度。物种多样性不仅可以反映植被类型或生境中物种的丰富度、变化程度或均匀度,也可反映不同自然条件(生态系统的结构类型、稳定程度、生境差异等)与植被类型的关系[4],比较系统而清晰地显示生物群落的结构,同时也可以反映生物群落和生态环境之间的关系[5],是衡量一定区域内生物资源丰富程度的客观指标[6]。研究不同植被类型下大型真菌物种分布情况,揭示大型真菌分布规律,不仅对探明研究区大型真菌种类资源,反映其发生变化的规律,比较不同植被类型下大型真菌物种多样性有着重要作用,同时可为大型真菌资源利用提供基础资料。

    高格斯台罕乌拉自然保护区的生态环境丰富,极适宜大型野生真菌的生长和繁衍,是野生菌菇类的天然基因库,但保护区尚未开展全面的大型真菌调查,仅在2005年巴图等[7]对保护区调查并发现大型真菌44科99属160种。本研究对保护区进行了详细调查,了解大型真菌资源、物种多样性以及子实体发生的生态特征,完善该地阔叶林内物种资源,以期为高格斯台罕乌拉自然保护区积累必要的生物多样性基础资料。

    • 高格斯台罕乌拉自然保护区位于内蒙古赤峰市,阿鲁科尔沁旗北部,该地区年均气温为3.8 ℃,年均降水量为437.3 mm,四季分明,生态环境良好,物种资源多样,保留了较为原始的景观和丰裕的生物资源。植被类型复杂,主要的植被类型有落叶阔叶林、常绿阔叶灌丛、落叶阔叶灌丛、半灌木丛、草原、草甸和沼泽等。根据植被分类系统和各级分类单位的划分标准[8],该保护区植被划分为5个类型,其中,阔叶林可划分为1个植被型6个植被亚型7个群系组10个群系。根据保护区内大型真菌的分布及生长情况,于2019和2020年的8—9月选取5种具代表性的类型:类型Ⅰ林内主要为白桦Betula platyphylla;类型Ⅱ林内主要为蒙古栎Quercus mongolica;类型Ⅲ林内主要为白桦和蒙椴Tilia mongolica;类型Ⅳ林内主要为白桦、蒙古栎、山杨Populus davidiana、黑桦B. dahurica等;类型Ⅴ林内主要为山杨、蒙古栎、黑桦。设5个样地,每个样地按照水平和垂直方向划设3~5个20 m×20 m的样方,并测定大型真菌组成和记录采集标本的数量,在每个样方的四角及中间设置5个5 m×5 m的灌木样方和5个1 m×1 m的草本样方,记录植物种类及数量[9]。5种阔叶林样地立地条件见表1

      植被类型海拔/m湿度/%植被总盖度/%乔木胸径/mm乔木树高/m草本盖度/%灌木盖度/%郁闭度/%
      749.70±3.22 a63.03±0.97 b63.00±6.08 a46.33±14.84 a6.87±0.55 a44.00±2.08 d75.67±2.91 a49.67±3.38 b
      940.07±4.02 a75.20±0.55 a73.67±6.36 a35.00±3.01 a10.50±3.76 a75.33±3.18 b54.33±3.84 ab70.67±4.10 a
      1196.34±0.52 a47.70±1.62 c78.33±0.88 a51.87±1.94 a8.60±0.31 a81.00±0.58 b74.00±2.08 a74.33±2.60 a
      1152.05±9.23 a50.33±0.67 c82.00±1.53 a36.20±1.63 a8.83±0.42 a62.67±4.18 c3.33±3.33 c81.00±1.15 a
      1182.87±0.80 a47.10±1.06 c78.00±3.61 a40.30±0.64 a7.93±0.72 a90.00±2.65 a42.00±11.93 b81.00±0.58 a
        说明:数值为均值±标准误,同列不同小写字母表示Duncan氏方差检验差异显著(P<0.05),n=3

      Table 1.  Site conditions of 5 broad-leaved forests

    • 在样方内采集并记录种群类型及其发生的大型真菌种类。在采集过程中对大型真菌进行编号,用索尼黑卡相机对其子实体进行全方位拍照,包括生境、菌盖、菌褶、菌柄、菌环及菌托等,并记录其特征;随身携带位置记录仪,记录采集标本点的经纬度和海拔。将标本用牛皮纸袋封装好,带回烘干,保存在内蒙古农业大学林学院森林病理标本室。

    • 形态学鉴定:采用传统形态学对标本鉴定,做徒手切片,将材料置于质量分数为5%的氢氧化钾或蒸馏水中在光学显微镜或者电子显微镜下观察(孢子、担子、菌丝等)子实体的微观特征[10];用质量分数为1%刚果红染色剂,光学显微镜下检验孢子菌丝、菌髓是否为淀粉质和类糊精反应。孢子大小取50个的平均值。根据样本的宏观和微观特征,结合标本照片,根据《蕈菌分类学》《中国大型真菌原色图鉴》 《赛罕乌拉自然保护区菌物资源图鉴》《中国梵净山大型真菌》《中国大型菌物资源图鉴》等有关书籍进行鉴定。

      分子学鉴定:DNA提取采用CTAB法,使用真菌通用引物ITS1 (5′-TC CGTAGGTGAACCTGCGG-3′)/ITS4 (5′-TCCTCCGC TTATTGATATGC-3′)对标本进行PCR扩增,扩增产物送北京华大基因研究中心进行测序,将自测序列输入分子数据库GenBank进行BLAST比对和同源序列的检索[11]

      将鉴定后的大型真菌物种名在Index Fungorum真菌命名数据库(http://www.indexfungorum.org/Names/Names.asp)中搜索比对,确保物种拉丁学名准确,中文名及分布地参考生物物种名录[12],并结合相关文献[13-14]和《现代菌物分类系统》对鉴定出的物种进行分类统计。

    • 大型真菌及植物多样性采用Simpson多样性指数(D)[15]和Shannon-Wiener多样性指数(H′)[16]相结合;采用Menhinick的丰富度指数(R)和Pielou的均匀度指数(E)[17]。采用Sorenson相似性系数(Cj)[18]计算两两植被类型间大型真菌物种的相似系数。

    • 大型真菌数量统计依靠地上子实体个数,多度采用数量统计的方法;乔木的胸径采用胸径尺测量;乔木树高采用CGQ-1型林业测高器进行测量;空气湿度采用Kestrel 2500风速气象仪测定;海拔使用GPS定位获得;灌木冠幅使用普通卷尺测量;林冠郁闭度、草本盖度采用目测估算。大型真菌的物种组成根据研究区域所采集的标本数据在Excel中进行科、属的统计及多样性分析;按照图力古尔等[19]对优势属的定义,将物种数≥5的属定为优势属;采用SPSS 25对样地立地条件及植物多样性进行Duncan氏方差检验分析,对不同植被类型间相似系数进行系统聚类分析;采用Canoco 5对不同植被类型优势科与立地条件进行冗余分析;对植物多样性与大型真菌多样性进行相关分析;采用OriginPro 2020制作不同植被类型中大型真菌物种相似性韦恩图。

    • 表2可见:保护区阔叶林内大型真菌资源丰富,经鉴定隶属于2门4纲19目54科119属213种。其中,32科只有单一属级分类单元,为暗银耳科、齿菌科、刺孢齿耳菌科等,共占总科数的59.3%。依据《菌物词典》第10版,将刺银耳属Pseudohydnum、附毛菌属Trichaptum、斑褶菇属Panaeolus归为科地位未定属。

      科名属数种数科名属数种数科名属数种数
      暗银耳科 Phaeotremellaceae 1 1 肉座菌科 Hypocreaceae 1 1 拟层孔菌科 Fomitopsidaceae 2 4
      齿菌科 Hydnaceae 1 1 小塔氏菌科 Tapinellaceae 1 1 小皮伞科 Marasmiaceae 2 4
      刺孢齿耳菌科 Steccherinaceae 1 1 原毛平革菌科 Phanerochaetaceae 1 1 钉菇科 Gomphaceae 2 4
      伏革菌科 Corticiaceae 1 1 黏褶菌科 Gloeophyllaceae 1 1 光柄菇科 Pluteaceae 2 5
      腹菌科 Hymenogastraceae 1 1 桩菇科 Paxillaceae 1 1 类脐菇科 Omphalotaceae 2 5
      干腐菌科 Serpulaceae 1 1 鹅膏科 Amanitaceae 1 2 韧革菌科 Stereaceae 2 5
      革菌科 Thelephoraceae 1 1 锁瑚菌科 Clavulinaceae 1 2 刺革菌科 Hymenochaetaceae 3 3
      隔孢伏革菌科 Peniophoraceae 1 1 银耳科 Tremellaceae 1 2 粉褶菌科 Entolomataceae 3 3
      挂钟菌科 Cyphellaceae 1 1 地星科 Geastraceae 1 3 泡头菌科 Physalacriaceae 3 3
      鸡油菌科 Cantharellaceae 1 1 小菇科 Mycenaceae 1 3 干朽菌科 Meruliaceae 5 6
      块菌科 Tuberaceae 1 1 蜡伞科 Hygrophoraceae 1 5 球盖菇科 Strophariaceae 6 7
      裂褶菌科 Schizophyllaceae 1 1 轴腹菌科 Hydnangiaceae 1 5 丝盖伞科 Inocybaceae 4 9
      灵芝科 Ganodermataceae 1 1 红菇科 Russulaceae 1 14 小脆柄菇科 Psathyrellaceae 5 11
      铆钉菇科 Gomphidiaceae 1 1 侧耳科 Pleurotaceae 2 2 蘑菇科 Agaricaceae 3 15
      木瑚菌科 Lentariaceae 1 1 火丝菌科 Pyronemataceae 2 2 口蘑科 Tricholomataceae 8 22
      盘菌科 Pezizaceae 1 1 离褶伞科 Lyophyllaceae 2 2 多孔菌科 Polyporaceae 20 28
      柔膜菌科 Helotiaceae 1 1 牛肝菌科 Boletaceae 2 2 未定科 3 5
      乳牛肝菌科 Suillaceae 1 1 粪伞科 Bolbitiaceae 2 3 共计 119 213
      丝膜菌科 Cortinariaceae 1 1 木耳科 Auriculariaceae 2 3

      Table 2.  Total number of families ,genera and species of macrofungi in Gaogesitai Hanwula Nature Reserve

    • 表3可知:物种相对丰富的属有8个,分别为红菇属Russula 14种,蘑菇属Agaricus、马勃属Lycoperdon、香蘑属Lepista及杯伞属Clitocybe各6种,蜡蘑属Laccaria、蜡伞属Hygrophorus及栓菌属Trametes各5种,共计53种,占总物种数的24.9%,而属数仅占总属数的6.7%。

      属名种数占比/%属名种数占比/%
      栓菌属 5 2.3 马勃属 6 2.8
      蜡伞属 5 2.3 蘑菇属 6 2.8
      蜡蘑属 5 2.3 红菇属 14 6.6
      杯伞属 6 2.8 共计  53 24.9
      香蘑属 6 2.8

      Table 3.  Statistics of dominant genera(≥5 species)of macrofungi in Gaogesitai Hanwula Nature Reserve

    • 表4可见:不同植被类型中,大型真菌丰富度、多样性指数不同。大型真菌丰富度从高到低依次为Ⅳ、Ⅴ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅰ,其中类型Ⅳ中大型真菌丰富度最高(7.681 8),类型Ⅰ丰富度指数最小(2.750 0);多样性指数DH′的从高到低依次为Ⅳ、Ⅴ、Ⅱ、Ⅰ、Ⅲ,可见在2种多样性测度方法下,多样性指数变化趋势是一致的;从均匀度指数E看,各植被类型中真菌分布相对比较均匀,从高到低依次为Ⅳ、Ⅴ、Ⅱ、Ⅰ、Ⅲ,其中类型Ⅳ均匀度指数最高(0.983 9)。

      植被
      类型
      物种数标本
      总数
      丰富度
      指数
      多样性指数均匀度
      指数E
      DH′
      22642.750 00.939 52.930 70.948 1
      35793.937 80.960 73.384 10.951 8
      24463.538 60.930 12.935 80.923 8
      1292827.681 80.991 04.781 80.983 9
      871976.198 50.984 64.315 70.966 4

      Table 4.  Macrofungi diversity in different vegetation type in Gaogesitai Hanwula Nature Reserve

    • 表5可见:各层次多样性指数DH′从大到小均依次为草木层、灌本层、乔木层;均匀度指数E从大到小依次为乔木层、灌木层、草本层。乔木层多样性指数D在类型Ⅳ中最高,由于该类型以山杨为优势种乔木层物种种类复杂多样,相比较于其他类型,各种的个体分配较均匀,导致该类型多样性指数D最高,多样性指数H′在类型Ⅴ中最高(0.516 3),均匀度指数类型Ⅱ最低,为0.124 4;从灌木层来看,多样性指数DH′分别在类型Ⅰ和类型Ⅳ最高,分别为0.740 4和0.699 1,类型Ⅱ均匀度指数E最低,为0.111 4;草本层多样性指数H'类型Ⅰ最高,为0.864 5,多样性指数D类型Ⅳ最高,为0.723 3,均匀度指数E在类型Ⅲ最高,为0.007 6。

      植被类型层次多样性指数均匀度指数E
      DH'
      乔木层0.238 4±0.013 2 cE0.338 3±0.037 7 cC0.242 4±0.002 7 aA
      灌木层0.740 4±0.009 7 bA0.558 6±0.007 7 bB0.190 2±0.008 7 aB
      草本层0.864 5±0.007 8 aA0.690 5±0.002 8 aB0.066 9±0.025 2 bA
      乔木层0.192 9±0.000 8 cE0.239 8±0.005 8 cE0.124 4±0.005 0 aC
      灌木层0.682 7±0.003 6 bB0.498 7±0.022 3 bC0.111 4±0.005 8 aD
      草本层0.784 8±0.003 4 aC0.623 9±0.010 9 aB0.050 6±0.009 2 bA
      乔木层0.288 0±0.005 0 cD0.366 7±0.128 9 bC0.134 1±0.003 4 aC
      灌木层0.356 9±0.014 7 bD0.395 7±0.005 3 bD0.115 7±0.002 2 bD
      草本层0.732 3±0.001 5 aE0.604 1±0.009 1 aA0.077 6±0.004 3 cA
      乔木层0.641 6±0.003 2 cB0.489 3±0.007 9 cC0.179 5±0.004 1 aB
      灌木层0.706 4±0.002 4 bC0.699 1±0.003 4 bA0.140 1±0.004 7 bC
      草本层0.762 1±0.006 2 aD0.723 3±0.006 4 aA0.036 1±0.002 3 cA
      乔木层0.461 6±0.007 0 cA0.516 3±0.007 5 bC0.233 7±0.004 2 aA
      灌木层0.588 6±0.006 0 bC0.530 3±0.012 7 bC0.169 4±0.000 3 bB
      草本层0.826 0±0.000 7 aB0.683 6±0.004 7 aA0.052 2±0.006 7 cA
        说明:不同小写字母表示同一林型不同层间差异显著( P<0.05),不同大写字母表示同层不同林型间差异显著( P<0.05)

      Table 5.  Plant diversity in different vegetation types in Gaogesitai Hanwula Nature Reserve

    • 图1显示:草本盖度为主要影响第2轴的因子,并且单独解释量最大,解释了变量的13.5% (P=0.002<0.05),银耳属、附毛菌属、香蘑属等与草本盖度有较强的正相关,随着植被总盖度和郁闭度的增加,红菇属、杯伞属、蜡伞属等种数增加。小菇属Mycena、红菇属、层孔菌属Fomes等对海拔、湿度、植被总盖度等8个立地条件因子选择性较低。乔木树高、胸径、湿度及灌木冠幅对优势属无显著影响。

      Figure 1.  RDA analysis of dominant genera and site conditions of macrofungi in different vegetation types

    • 表6可见:在类型Ⅰ中,草本层多样性各项指数与大型真菌各项指数均呈正相关,其中,大型真菌多样性指数H′与草本层多样性指数D和均匀度指数E为极显著正相关(P<0.01),乔木层多样性指数D与大型真菌指数H′呈现极显著负相关(P<0.01);类型Ⅱ中,除灌木层多样性指数H′外,大型真菌多样性指数D与其他层次各项指数均呈正相关,多样性指数H′与灌木层均匀度指数E呈极显著负相关(P<0.01),大型真菌均匀度指数E与乔木层多样性指数H′呈极显著负相关(P<0.01);类型Ⅲ大型真菌多样性指数D与灌木层多样性指数H′呈极显著正相关(P<0.01),与3种层次均匀度指数E及草本层多样性指数H′呈负相关,草本层的3种指数与大型真菌多样性指数H′和均匀度指数E呈正相关;类型Ⅳ中大型真菌均匀度指数E与乔木层和草本层多样性指数D呈极显著正相关(P<0.01),大型真菌多样性指数H′与草本层多样性指数H′呈显著正相关(P<0.05);类型Ⅴ中大型真菌多样性指数H′随灌木层多样性指数H′的增高而降低,且呈现显著水平。从整体看,草本层各项多样性指数是影响大型真菌多样性的主要因素。

      植被类型大型真菌
      多样性
      植物多样性
      乔木层灌木层草本层
      DH'EDH'EDH'E
      D−0.865−0.640−0.5430.010−0.242−0.2420.7560.9580.493
      H'−1.000**−0.941−0.894−0.4970.2820.2820.983**0.9710.866**
      E−0.779−0.516−0.4100.162−0.387−0.3870.6480.9030.356
      D0.4600.9160.7170.996−0.8120.3060.6160.5080.978
      H'0.696−0.671−0.888−0.396−0.296−1.000**0.5520.656−0.109
      E−0.032−0.999*−0.948−0.9360.481−0.687−0.216−0.087−0.791
      D0.6990.978−0.2760.9071.000**−0.5970.323−0.942−0.920
      H'−0.225−0.727−0.264−0.557−0.8540.0930.2160.9790.583
      E0.045−0.516−0.514−0.313−0.682−0.1780.4710.8890.343
      D−0.7870.6050.771−0.5330.8560.584−0.7750.997−0.157
      H'−0.8630.7070.850−0.6430.9180.469−0.8540.999*−0.290
      E0.919**−0.789−0.9090.733−0.960−0.3570.911**−0.9840.405
      D−0.939−0.574−0.3020.368−0.760−0.9820.0540.0250.327
      H'−0.937−0.968−0.8490.884−1.000**−0.870−0.608−0.631−0.365
      E0.8840.4580.171−0.2390.6650.947−0.189−0.160−0.452
        说明:**为极显著相关( P<0.01),*为显著相关( P<0.05)

      Table 6.  Relationship between macrofungal diversity and plant diversity

    • 不同植被类型大型真菌分布情况不同,类型Ⅰ中分布有宽褶革裥菌Lenzites platyphyllus、丁香金黄孔菌Xanthoporus syringae、锈口蘑Tricholoma pessundatum、布莱萨蘑菇Agaricus bresadolanus、桦拟层孔菌Fomitopsis betulina、槐栓菌Trametes robiniophila、硬毛栓菌Trametes hirsuta、血根草红菇Russula sanguinaria、沼泽红菇Russula paludosa、橄榄色绒盖伞Simocybe sumptuosa、药用拟层孔菌Fomitopsis officinalis、网纹马勃Lycoperdon perlatum、干小皮伞Marasmius siccus等22种大型真菌。其中,干小皮伞为该类型内的优势种,占总类型大型真菌内物种总数的10.9%。

      类型Ⅱ中有亚致密韧伞Lentinus substrictus、鲑贝耙菌Irpex consors、天蓝红菇Russula azurea、铜绿红菇Russula aeruginea、芳香杯伞Clitocybe fragrans、条纹口蘑Tricholoma virgatum、腐木硬柄菇Ossicaulis lignatilis、血红色钉菇Chroogomphus rutilus、细木耳Auricularia heimuer、褐疣柄牛肝菌Leccinum scabrum、布罗德韦田头菇Agrocybe broadwayi、袋形地星Geastrum saccatum、干小皮伞等35种。其中,袋形地星和干小皮伞为类型Ⅱ的优势种,占类型内物种总数的7.6%

      类型Ⅲ中分布单色下皮黑孔菌Cerrena unicolor、冬生韧伞Lentinus brumalis、偏肿栓菌Trametes gibbosa、软帕氏孔菌Parmastomyces mollissimus、烟管菌Bjerkandera adusta、树脂薄皮孔菌Ischnoderma resinosum、松生拟层孔菌Fomitopsis pinicola、大趋木菌Xylobolus princeps、皱皮囊皮菇Cystoagaricus strobilomyces、半卵形斑褶菇Panaeolus semiovatus、二胶化孔菌Gelatoporia dichroa、裂褶菌Schizophyllum commune、白刺马勃Lycoperdon wrightii、淡色冬菇Flammulina rossica、双色蜡蘑Laccaria bicolor、二形附毛菌Trichaptum biforme、淡黄枝瑚菌Ramaria lutea、毛嘴地星Geastrum fimbriatum、网纹马勃等24种。其中,毛嘴地星为优势种,占类型内物种总数的17.4%,网纹马勃次之(10.9%)。

      类型Ⅳ中分布的大型真菌为红褐隔孢伏革菌Peniophora rufa、新粗毛革耳Panus neostrigosus、科普兰齿舌革菌Radulomyces copelandii、光亮红菇Russula nitida、薄盖蜡孔菌Cerioporus leptocephalus、粉红蜡伞Hygrophorus pudorinus、钩刺马勃Lycoperdon penicillatum、软皮马勃Lycoperdon dermoxanthum、红毛盾盘菌Scutellinia scutellata、拟白林地蘑菇Agaricus silvicolae-similis、烟色韧革菌Stereum gausapatum、霍氏绒盖伞Simocybe haustellaris、红射脉菌Phlebia rufa、宽丝刺顶菌Hydnocristella latihypha、软靴耳Crepidotus mollis、地疣杯菌Tarzetta catinus、纳雷姆玉成孔菌Yuchengia narymica、阿帕锥盖伞Conocybe apala、茶暗银耳Phaeotremella foliacea、木蹄层孔菌Fomes fomentarius、直柄铦囊蘑Melanoleuca strictipes、大型小皮伞Marasmius maximus等129种。其中,木蹄层孔菌、直柄铦囊蘑、大型小皮伞为类型Ⅳ的优势种(1.8%)。

      类型Ⅴ中共分布悬垂箭皮菌Oxydontia copeladii、蓝灰干酪菌Tyromyces caesius、毒蝇鹅膏Amanita muscaria、灰鹅膏Amanita vaginata、密簇斜盖伞Clitopilus caespitosus、李状粉褶蕈Entoloma prunuloides、伏果干腐菌Serpula lacrymans、帽盖光柄菇Pluteus petasatus、拟苞小包脚菇Volvariella pseudovolvacea、血红菇Russula sanguinea、异白桩菇Leucopaxillus paradoxus、梭孢环柄菇Lepiota magnispora、多汁盘菌Peziza succosa、热带小奥德蘑Oudemansiella canarii、淡黄鳞伞Pholiota flavida、朱红凹壳菌Nectria cinnarbarina、墨汁拟鬼伞Coprinopsis atramentaria、珠芽小脆柄菇Psathyrella piluliformis、竹生钟伞Campanella junghuhnii、耳状小塔氏菌Tapinella panuoides、毛嘴地星、褐皮马勃Lycoperdon fuscum等87种。其中,毛嘴地星、褐皮马勃是类型Ⅴ的优势种,为3.5%。

    • 保护区阔叶林内共有大型真菌213种,分布在5种不同植被类型的种相似系数见表7。由表7可见:发现在类型Ⅱ与类型Ⅳ之间相似性最高,为0.27;在类型Ⅲ与类型Ⅳ之间和类型Ⅰ与类型Ⅱ之间的相似性最低,均为0.14。说明植被类型相似性高,大型真菌物种相似性也高。由图2A聚类图看:在距离系数最大处(25处),聚类图可分为两大类,分别为A类,包含类型Ⅰ和类型Ⅲ;B类,包含类型Ⅱ、类型Ⅳ和类型Ⅴ。A、B两类平均相关系数为0.225。在距离系数为14处,可分为3个小聚群:类型Ⅰ和类型Ⅲ,相似系数为0.22;类型Ⅴ、类型Ⅱ,相似系数为0.20和类型Ⅴ。按照地理位置、调查程度及相似系数等多重作用下,5种不同植被类型下大型真菌分类相对合理。图2B可以看出:5种植被类型中无共有种,类型Ⅰ~Ⅴ中特有种分别为6、5、7、83和52种。类型Ⅳ的特有种所占比例较大。

      Figure 2.  Clustering of similarity coefficent of macrofungal species with different vegetation types and Venn diagram of species similarity

      植被类型
      1.000.140.220.170.18
      0.141.000.200.270.20
      0.220.201.000.140.16
      0.170.270.141.000.22
      0.180.200.160.221.00

      Table 7.  Similarity coefficients of various macrofungi in GaogesitaiHanwula National Nature Reserve

    • 高格斯台罕乌拉自然保护区植被属于山地森林、草原,且森林植被的组成及群落类型是多样的,山体上部的阴坡立地条件最湿润,一般发育形成白桦、黑桦林及山杨林,或桦杨混生林,复杂多样的植被情况为大型真菌生长发育提供了有利环境。经鉴定,保护区5种不同阔叶林内大型真菌有2门4纲19目54科119属213种,其中,优势属8个,包含53个物种。阔叶林内大型真菌物种资源较为丰富,可能与该区良好的生态环境和多样的植被类型有关,这与王雪珊[20]对罕山自然保护区大型真菌调查的结果一致。不同植被类型下大型真菌多样性指数的结果表明:白桦-蒙古栎-山杨-黑桦林内大型真菌物种丰富度明显高于其他植被类型,可能与林内植被种类、郁闭度、地表腐殖质、温湿度等因素有关,这与相关研究[21-22]的结果一致;但在白桦林内由于部分物种聚群密度偏高、种间个体数目相差大等,造成林内物种总个体数基数偏大,从而导致大型真菌物种丰富度指数偏低;乔木植物种类相似、林内结构相似的植被类型,大型真菌物种丰富度指数也较接近。因此生态系统一致的植被类型,大型真菌多样性差异小,反之,差异大。此观点与马绍宾等[23]得出不同的生态系统、生态环境中大型真菌多样性差异很大的观点较为一致。从不同植被类型间植物各层之间的差异性可以看出各类型之间的植物多样性有较大差别[24]。在同一林型内,植物各层多样性指数变化从大到小均为草本层、灌木层、乔木层,由于林内乔木分布较均匀、林间透光性强等因素,导致草本和灌木生长较好。阔叶混交林植物多样性指数较高,是由于林内植被复杂多样,植物物种生长发育好[25]。在2种阔叶树纯林内,虽灌木种类较其他3种植被类型复杂,但由于乔木树种单一,海拔较高,灌草层物种分布和生长发育受到影响,与乔木之间资源利用的竞争更加剧烈,林内通风性强,光照充足,导致一些阴生物种缺乏,从而影响林内灌草层的物种种类。

      林内立地条件影响大型真菌优势属的分布,其中,草本盖度对大型真菌优势属分布情况解释率最大,是影响大型真菌优势属分布的主要因子。草本植物丰富、盖度大的类型,可为大型真菌生长发育提供优良环境,从而大型真菌优势属种类分布较多;从整体看,乔木层分布均匀,草本层和大型真菌分布也较均匀,且草本多样性指数是影响大型真菌多样性的主要因素,这点与杜红居等[26]观点一致。不同植被类型中大型真菌多样性组成存在一定差异性,且与植物多样性有关,这与图力古尔等[27]对长白山阔叶红松Pinus koraiensis林大型真菌多样性分析结果一致。保护区不同植被类型间有不同程度的联系,植被类型相互间界限明显,虽然在水平结构上差异显著,但内部结构相对单一,物种丰富度指数偏低,致使不同植被类型之间的相似系数降低[28],表明不同植被类型的林内植物结构影响大型真菌相似性,不同植被类型间的林内植物结构相似性高的样地,大型真菌物种相似性也高。按照地理位置、调查程度及相似性系数等多重作用下,5种不同植被类型下大型真菌分类相对合理。

      本研究通过对高格斯台罕乌拉自然保护区大型真菌调查,在一定程度上反映了该区阔叶林内大型真菌物种多样性。大型真菌丰富程度与植被、立地条件有关,且草本层是影响大型真菌物种的主要因子。

Reference (28)

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return