| تعداد نشریات | 282 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 80 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 3,219 |
| تعداد مقالات | 35,690 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 53,571,518 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 92,851,370 |
بررسی ارتباط وضعیت مرتع با تنوع گونهای موجود در هر وضعیت | ||
| تحقیقات مرتع و بیابان ایران | ||
| مقاله 9، دوره 26، شماره 3، مهر 1398، صفحه 613-628 اصل مقاله (1.2 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/ijrdr.2019.120003 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| حسن اسلامی1؛ جواد معتمدی (ترکان)* 2؛ حبیب نظرنژاد3؛ اسماعیل شیدای کرکج4 | ||
| 1کارشناس ارشد مرتعداری، اداره کل منابع طبیعی و آبخیزداری اردبیل، اردبیل، ایران | ||
| 2l دانشیار پژوهشی، بخش تحقیقات مرتع، مؤسسه تحقیقات جنگلها و مراتع کشور، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، تهران | ||
| 3دانشیار، گروه مرتع و آبخیزداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه ارومیه، ایران | ||
| 4استادیار گروه مرتع و آبخیزداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| تنوع گونهای، از مشخصههای نشاندهنده تغییرات در مراتع است. در این راستا، ارتباط وضعیت مرتع بهعنوان برآیند اقدامات مدیریتی، با تنوع گونهای، بررسی شد. با آزمون همبستگی اسپیرمن و تجزیه واریانس یکطرفه، تغییرات مقادیر شاخص تنوع شانون- وینر تیپهای گیاهی، با وضعیت آنها آزمون شد. سپس با ترسیم منحنیهای رتبه- فراونی و تطبیق مدلهای توزیع فراونی، تیپهای گیاهی با تنوع بالاتر، مشخص و ارتباط آنها با وضعیت مرتع، تفسیر گردید. نتایج نشان داد، شاخص تنوع شانون- وینر با وضعیت مرتع، همبستگی معنیداری ندارد. طبقه وضعیت مرتع نیز بر مقدار تنوع، تاثیر معنیداری ندارد و هر سه طبقه وضعیت (خوب، متوسط، ضعیف) تیپهای گیاهی، از لحاظ شاخص مذکور، در یک گروه آماری قرار گرفتند. بهطورکلی، روند مشخصی بین وضعیت مرتع و مقدار تنوع، مشاهده نشد. نتایج تداعیکننده آن است که بالا بودن مقادیر شاخصهای عددی تنوع، دلیل بر بهبود وضعیت مرتع نیست؛ بلکه باید ترکیب گونهای و فراوانی آنها نیز مورد بررسی قرار گیرد. ترسیم منحنیهای رتبه- فراونی و تطابق مدلهای توزیع فراونی، نشان داد که در تیپهای گیاهی دارای وضعیت خوب و متوسط، گونههای با فراوانی اندک، کمتر مشاهده میشود و منحنی آن دارای شیب ملایمتری نسبت به تیپهای دارای وضعیت ضعیف است، بنابراین تنوع آنها بالاتر میباشد. در اکثر تیپهای گیاهی، مدل سری هندسی تطابق داشت که نشاندهنده تیپهای گیاهی با تنوع گونهای پائین و وضعیت ضعیف مرتع است. بهطورکلی با توجه به میزان همخوانی نتایج مدلهای توزیع فروانی با وضعیت تیپهای گیاهی، نتایج حاصل بر ضرورت توجه به شاخصهای پارامتری تنوع گونهای در ارزیابی سلامت مرتع، تاکید دارد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| شاخصهای عددی تنوع گونهای؛ شاخصهای پارامتری تنوع گونهای؛ گرایش مرتع؛ وضعیت مرتع | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Investigating the relationship between range condition of plant types and species diversity | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Hasan Eslami1؛ Javad Motamedi (Torkan)2؛ Habib Nazarnejad3؛ Esmael Sheidaye Karkaj4 | ||
| 1M.Sc. in Range Management, Ardabil Bureau of Natural Resources and Watershed Management, Ardabil, Iran | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Rangeland Research Division, Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran | ||
| 3Associate Professor, Department of Range and Watershed, Faculty of Natural Resources, Urmia University, Iran | ||
| 4Assistant Professor, Department of Range and Watershed Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Species diversity is one of the characteristics indicating changes in rangelands. In this regard, the relationship between range condition as a result of managerial measures and species diversity was investigated. Spearman correlation test and one-way analysis of variance were used for testing the variations of Shannon-Wiener diversity index values of plant types with their conditions. Then, by plotting rank-frequency curves and applying the frequency distribution models, the vegetation types with higher diversity were identified and their relationship with range condition was interpreted. The results showed that Shannon-Wiener diversity index had no significant correlation with range condition. Range condition had no significant effect on the amount of diversity and all three categories of condition (good, average, poor) were classified according to the mentioned index. In general, no significant trend was observed between range condition and amount of diversity. The results suggest that the high values of numerical indices of diversity are not the reason for the improvement of range condition, but their species composition and abundance should also be investigated. Drawing rank-frequency curves and matching the frequency distribution models showed that plant types with good and moderate condition, species with less abundance, were less frequently observed and its curve had a mild slope than those with poor condition, so their diversity was higher. In most plant types, the geometric series model was consistent, indicating low plant diversity and poor range condition. In general, concerning the degree of conformity of the results of the frequency distribution models with the condition of the plant types, the results emphasize the need to pay attention to the parametric indices of species diversity in rangeland health assessment. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Numerical indices of diversity, parametric indices of diversity, range trend, range condition | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
- Arzani, H. and M., Abedi, 2015. Rangeland assessment: vegetation measurement. University of Tehran Press, 304p. - Arzani, H., 1997. Guidelines for assessing the rangelands of different climate zones of Iran. Forestry and Rangeland Research Institute, 75p. - Bell, G., Lechowicz, M. J. and Waterway, M. J., 2000. Environmental heterogeneity and species diversity of forest sedges. Journal of Ecology, 88: 67-87. - Borhani, M., Arzani, H. and Jabeolansar, Z., 2017. Assessment of range management methods and proposed grazing systems in Semirom, Esfahan province. Journal of Range and Desert Research, 24(2): 249-258. - Chapin, E. S., Zavaleta, E. S., Eviner, V. T., Naylor, R. L., Vitousek, P. M., Reynolds, H. L., Hooper, C. U., Lavrel, S., Sala, O. E., Hobbie, S. E., Mack, M. C. and Diaz, S., 1999. Functional and societal consequences of changing biotic diversity. Journal of Nature, 405: 234-242. - Ejtehadi, H., Sepehri, A. and Akafi, H. R., 2009. Biodiversity measurement methods. Ferdowsi University Press, Mashhad, 228p. - Fancy, S. G., Gross, J. E. and Carter, S. L., 2009. Monitoring the condition of natural resources in US national parks. Journal of Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 151:161-174. - Flather, C. H. and Sieg, C. H., 2000. Applicability of montreal process criterion conservation of biological diversity to rangeland sustainability. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 7:81-96. - Ghaermi, A., 2015. Assessment and mapping species diversity of rangeland habitats in Avrin mountains (Khoy). M.Sc. thesis in Range Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, Urmia University. - Hayek, L. A. C., Buzas, M. A. and Osterman, L. E., 2007. Community structure of foraminiferal communities within temporal biozones from the western Arctic Ocean. Journal of Foraminifera Research, 37: 33-40. - Holechek, J. L., Pieper, R. D. and Herbel, C. H., 2005. Range management (principles and practices) (5nded.), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff, 587p. - Kamrani, k., Arzani, H., Javadi, A. and Azizinejad, R., 2018. Investigating the effects of range management methods (Balanced, Natural and Artificial) on range management (Case study of Gazanak Amol Rangelands, Haraz River Basin). Journal of Range and Desert Research, 25(4): 748-760. - Krebs, C. J. and Kenny, A. J., 2001. Ecological methodology version 6.0. University of British Columbia. - MacArtur, R. H., 1965. Patterns of species diversity. Journal of Biological Reviews 40: 510-533. - Magurran, A. E., 2004. Ecological diversity and its measurement. By Princeton University Press, New Jersey. 179p. - Mesdaghi, M., 2005. Vegetation description and analysis. Mashhad University Press, 287p. - Mojarad, N., 2015. Evaluation of species diversity in Kanisive and Nejdareh reserve of Urmia. M.Sc. thesis in Range Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, Urmia University. - Moridi, T., Karami, P., Shokri, M. and Jouri, M. H., 2007. The relationships between and production in the zagros grasslands and shrublands. Journal of Rangeland, 1(1): 1-10 - Motamedi, J. and Sheidai Karkaj, A., 2015. A suitable model for distribution of frequency diversity in three different crop intensities in the Dizaj Betchi rangelands of West Azerbaijan. Journal of Range and Watershed, 67: 115-103. - Moetamedi, J., Arzan, H., Jafari, M., Farahpour, M. and Zarechahouki, M. A., 2019. A model for estimating long-term grazing capacity. Journal of Range and Desert Research, 26(1): 241-259. - Motamedi, J. and Souri, M., 2016. Efficiency of numerical and parametrical indices to determine biodiversity in mountain rangelands. Journal of Acta Ecologica Sinica, 36: 108-112. - Motamedi, J. and Souri, M., 2016. Evaluating and preparing species diversity and richness plan in rangeland habitats of Khanghah-e-Sorkh rangelands. Final Report of Research Project, Vice Chancellor for Research, Urmia University. - Motamedi, J., Abdolslizadeh, Z. and Sheidai Karkaj, E., 2016. Field and laboratory methods for grassland and animal production research. University of Urmia Press, 529p. - Motamedi, J., Alijanpour, A. and Banej Shafiyi, A., 2017. Recognition and utilization of range and forest by-products in West Azerbayjan Province. Final Report of Research Project, Vice Chancellor for Research, Urmia University. - Pellant, M., Shaver, P., Pyke, D. A. and Herrick, J. E. 2005. Interpreting indicators of rangeland health. Version 4. Technical Reference 1734-6, USDI, BLM, National Science and Technology Center, Denver, Colorado. 21-Mar-02. 122p. - Peterson, E. and McCune, B., 2001. Diversity and succession of epiphytic macro lichen communities in low-elevation managed conifer forests in Western Oregon. Journal of Vegetation Science, 12: 511-524. - Porbabaei, H., 2008. Statistical ecology. Giulan University Publication, 428p. - Shannon,C. E. and Wiener, W., 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, 350p. - Simpson, E. H., 1949. Measurment of diversity. Journal of Nature, 163: 688. - Symstad, A .J. and Jonas, J. L., 2011. Incorporating biodiversity into rangeland health: plant species richness and diversity in great plains grasslands. Journal of Rangeland Ecology Management, 64: 555-572. - Tongway, D. J. and Hindley, N., 2003. Indicators of ecosystem rehabilitation success: stage two, verification of EFA indicators. Final Report to the Australian Center for Mining Environmental Research, Produced by the Center for Mine land rehabilitation, University of Queensland, Brisbane and CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Canberra, Australia. 66p. - Wilson, A. D., 1986. The monitoring of change in range condition: A multivatic site potential approach. 517-521 in Rangelands: A Resource under Siege٫ Proceeding of the Second International Rangelands Congress, Australia Academy of Science. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 756 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 584 |
||