4.7 Article

Interactions of soil water content heterogeneity and species diversity patterns in semi-arid steppes on the Loess Plateau of China

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 519, 期 -, 页码 1362-1367

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.09.012

关键词

Species diversity; Plant productivity; Belowground biomass; Soil water; Semi-arid region

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC41390463, 41371282, 41371242]
  2. Action Plan for West Development Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences [KZCX2-XB3-13]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province [2014KJXX-15]
  4. '100-Talent Program' of Chinese Academy of Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soil water is a major driving force for plant community succession in semi-arid area. Many studies have focused on the relationships of species diversity-productivity, but few studies have paid attentions to the effects of soil water content heterogeneity on the plant species diversity in the semi-arid loess regions. To determine relationship of soil water content heterogeneity and plant community structure properties a semi-arid steppe on the Loess Plateau, we conducted a gradient analysis of soil water content variation and above- and below-ground properties of plant communities. Results showed that community coverage, above- and below-ground biomass were significantly and positively related to the surface soil water contents (0-5 cm). Plant diversity (Shannon index and Richness index) were closely correlated to soil water content at the soil depth of 0-10 cm. But plant height, litter biomass and root/shoot ratio were not related to soil water content. These results showed that there is an positive interaction effects for plant diversity and soil water content in the semi-arid grassland communities. Our observations indicate that change of plant species diversity is also an important community responses to soil water content heterogeneity in the semi-arid grassland ecosystem. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据