本文選題：典型草原　切入點(diǎn)：嚙齒動(dòng)物　出處：《內(nèi)蒙古農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：研究不同放牧方式對(duì)嚙齒動(dòng)物及植物群落的影響,可以進(jìn)一步明確嚙齒動(dòng)物密度對(duì)牧草產(chǎn)量損失的關(guān)系,這對(duì)于計(jì)算草地危害閾值和經(jīng)濟(jì)閾值至關(guān)重要,也可以對(duì)草地畜牧業(yè)管理決策提供指導(dǎo)。本研究于2012年-2016年,在錫林郭勒典型草原(東烏珠穆沁旗),應(yīng)用標(biāo)志重捕法和樣方法對(duì)嚙齒動(dòng)物密度以及9月份植物群落特征進(jìn)行了調(diào)查,用嚙齒動(dòng)物密度及其日食量來(lái)估算嚙齒動(dòng)物對(duì)牧草的損害程度,確定牧草損失量。為了揭示不同放牧方式下嚙齒動(dòng)物及植物群落的動(dòng)態(tài)特征,以及它們之間的互相關(guān)系,分析了嚙齒動(dòng)物群落的物種數(shù)特征與各物種的種群動(dòng)態(tài);同時(shí)分析了典型草原植物群落在不同放牧方式下的年度特征。研究結(jié)果表明:(1)不同放牧方式下嚙齒動(dòng)物群落的結(jié)構(gòu)組成較為一致,過(guò)牧區(qū)的物種數(shù)略高于禁牧區(qū)、輪牧區(qū);在2012年-2016年期間發(fā)生了群落演替的現(xiàn)象。并且不同放牧方式下嚙齒動(dòng)物捕獲數(shù)量的年度變化差異不顯著,但過(guò)牧區(qū)的嚙齒動(dòng)物數(shù)量變化率明顯高于輪牧區(qū)、禁牧區(qū)。(2)不同放牧方式下植物群落組成基本相似,只有冷蒿(Artemisia frigida)的密度在2013年-2015年出現(xiàn)了明顯降低。而不同放牧方式下植物高度差異不顯著(P0.05),密度、生物量以及牧草損失比均有顯著性差異(P0.05),3種放牧區(qū)中過(guò)牧區(qū)的植物高度、密度、生物量以及牧草損失比例均較低,而禁牧區(qū)均較高。(3)嚙齒動(dòng)物密度與牧草損失量的最佳擬合曲線是三參數(shù)S型曲線,為:Loss=k/(1+ea-rdensity);當(dāng)嚙齒動(dòng)物密度906標(biāo)準(zhǔn)鼠單位/hm~2時(shí),牧草產(chǎn)量發(fā)生最大損失(牧草產(chǎn)量損失比=23.30%);該類型草地嚙齒動(dòng)物對(duì)牧草損害的危害閾值為每公頃174標(biāo)準(zhǔn)鼠單位。(4)2012年-2016年5年的鼠害平均經(jīng)濟(jì)閾值為172標(biāo)準(zhǔn)鼠單位/hm~2。(5)綜合考慮危害閾值與防治閾值可以得出,既不會(huì)造成明顯的經(jīng)濟(jì)損失,也不會(huì)造成牧草發(fā)生明顯損失的閾值范圍為172-174標(biāo)準(zhǔn)鼠單位/hm~2。
[Abstract]:By studying the effects of different grazing methods on rodents and plant communities, the relationship between rodent density and forage yield loss can be further clarified, which is of great importance to the calculation of grassland damage threshold and economic threshold.It can also provide guidance for grassland animal husbandry management decision.In this study, the density of rodents and the characteristics of plant communities in September were investigated in the typical grassland of Xilingol (East Urumqin Banner) from 2012 to 2016.The density of rodents and their daily food intake were used to estimate the damage degree of rodents to forage and to determine the loss of forage.In order to reveal the dynamic characteristics of rodent and plant communities under different grazing patterns and their relationships, the species number characteristics of rodent communities and the population dynamics of various species were analyzed.At the same time, the annual characteristics of typical grassland plant communities under different grazing patterns were analyzed.The results showed that the composition of rodent community under different grazing methods was consistent, and the species number in overgrazing area was slightly higher than that in forbidden grazing area and rotational grazing area, and the community succession occurred from 2012 to 2016.The annual variation of rodent catch number was not significant under different grazing patterns, but the rodent population change rate in overgrazing area was significantly higher than that in rotational grazing area, and the composition of plant community was similar under different grazing modes.The density of Artemisia frigida decreased significantly from 2013 to 2015.However, there was no significant difference in plant height under different grazing patterns (P 0.05), but there were significant differences in plant height, density, biomass and the loss ratio of forage grass in three grazing areas. The plant height, density, biomass and loss ratio of forage grass in three grazing areas were lower than those in other grazing areas.The best fitting curve between rodent density and forage loss is three-parameter S-shaped curve, which is 1 ea-rdensity.When rodent density is 906 standard rat unit / unit / hm ~ 2,The maximum loss of forage yield (forage yield loss ratio is 23.30m; the threshold of damage to forage by rodents of this type is 174 standard rodent units per hectare. 4) the average economic threshold of rodent damage is 172 standard rodent units for the 5 years from 2012 to 2016.The hazard threshold and the prevention threshold can be obtained by considering the hazard threshold and the prevention threshold.The threshold range of significant loss in forage is 172-174 standard rat unit / hmmf2.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：內(nèi)蒙古農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：S812.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊婧;褚鵬飛;王明玖;白永飛;;基于牧場(chǎng)生產(chǎn)力的內(nèi)蒙古典型草原載畜率研究[J];干旱區(qū)資源與環(huán)境;2017年01期

2 候偉峰;烏恩;敖特根;王成杰;金凈;;放牧強(qiáng)度對(duì)克氏針茅典型草原地上生物量的影響[J];中國(guó)草地學(xué)報(bào);2016年06期

3 蘇軍虎;南志標(biāo);紀(jì)維紅;;家畜放牧對(duì)草地嚙齒動(dòng)物影響的研究進(jìn)展[J];草業(yè)學(xué)報(bào);2016年11期

4 單玉梅;溫超;陳海軍;常虹;木蘭;張璞進(jìn);曄薷罕;孫海蓮;;放牧強(qiáng)度對(duì)荒漠草原植物種群高度的季節(jié)性影響[J];畜牧與飼料科學(xué);2016年05期

5 王德利;李心誠(chéng);潘多峰;德科加;;青藏高原草地鼠害的生態(tài)釋義及控制[J];西南民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(自然科學(xué)版);2016年03期

6 侯祥磊;李國(guó)梁;宛新榮;張知彬;;放牧對(duì)布氏田鼠主要食物選擇的影響[J];獸類學(xué)報(bào);2016年02期

7 殷國(guó)梅;呂世杰;丁海君;薛艷林;王海明;趙和平;劉永志;;放牧強(qiáng)度與主要植物種群及群落高度的對(duì)應(yīng)分析[J];河南農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué);2015年10期

8 劉偉;嚴(yán)紅宇;王溪;王長(zhǎng)庭;;高原鼠兔對(duì)退化草地植物群落結(jié)構(gòu)及恢復(fù)演替的影響[J];獸類學(xué)報(bào);2014年01期

9 馮國(guó)雙;譚德講;劉韞寧;賀慶;;四參數(shù)log-logistic模型在生物活性測(cè)定研究中的應(yīng)用[J];藥物分析雜志;2013年11期

10 何詠琪;黃曉東;侯秀敏;馮琦勝;王瑋;郭正剛;梁天剛;;基于3S技術(shù)的草原鼠害監(jiān)測(cè)方法研究[J];草業(yè)學(xué)報(bào);2013年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張福順;不同干擾下荒漠嚙齒動(dòng)物群落格局動(dòng)態(tài)及其敏感性研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：1713864