بررسی شاخصهای پایش ساختار برای گونه‌های چوبی جنگل‌های شمال ایران

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه تهران

2 هیات علمی

3 دانشگاه تهران- دانشکده منابع طبیعی- استاد گروه

4 دانشجوی دکتری محیط زیست، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

سابقه و هدف: ساختار جنگل به مطالعه توزیع ویژگی‌ های درختان در اکوسیستم‌ های جنگلی می‌پردازد. به طور کلی، واژه ساختار به ترکیب جوامع درختی از نظر ویژگی‌های خاص تأکید می‌کند. پایش ساختار جنگل در درک بسیاری از مسائل در اکولوژی و مدیریت جنگل ضروری است. امروزه به منظور ارزیابی موقعیت و تنوع زیستی درختان شاخص‌ های بسیاری توسعه یافته‌اند که باعث ساده تر شدن تحلیل ساختاری جنگل شده است.بکارگیری این شاخص‌ها در قطعات نمونه‌ی ثابت باعث تسهیل در مطالعات دینامیک جمعیت در طی زمان می‌شود و امکان پایش تنوع موقعیت مکانی، ابعاد، تنوع اندازقطر و ارتفاع درختان را ممکن می‌سازد. هم چنین به علت کمی بودن این شاخص‌ها و امکان مقایسه یک توده در دو زمان مختلف، این شاخص‌ ها به عنوان ابزار مفیدی در نیل رسیدن به مدیریت پایدار جنگل می‌باشد. مواد و روش ها: شاخص‌ های آمیختگی، زاویه‌ای یکنواخت، تمایز قطر و ارتفاع از جمله مهمترین شاخص‌ها در تحلیل ساختار مکانی جنگل در مطالعات استاتیک می‌باشند. که این شاخص‌ها به علت سادگی در محاسبات و دقت بالانسبت به سایر روش ها ارجح‌تر می‌باشد. در این پژوهش، مورد آماربرداری قرار گرفت. سپس به منظور بررسی پایش ساختار گونه‌های چوبی جنگل (راش، بلوط، ممرز، توسکا، افراپلت، شیردار، نمدار، ملج، و خرمندی) طی دوره ده ساله، از شاخص‌های زاویه‌ی یکنواخت، آمیختگی مینگ لینگ، نزدیک‌ترین همسایه و شاخص تمایز اندازه قطر و ارتفاع درختان استفاده شد. یافته‌ها: نتایج بدست آمده میانگین شاخص‌های زاویه‌ی یکنواخت، آمیختگی مینگ لینگ، نزدیک‌ترین همسایه و شاخص تمایز اندازه قطر و ارتفاع درختان در اول دوره و انتهای دوره پایش پایش به ترتیب 552/0 و 591/0، 762/0 و 720/0، 645/5 و 35/5، 582/0 و 472/0، 598/0 و 525/0 محاسبه شد؛ که به ترتیب نشان دهنده الگوی پراکنش تصادفی متمایل به کپه‌ای، تنوع آمیختگی مطلوب، تراکم بالا، و اختلاف متوسط و آشکاربین قطر و ارتفاع درختان مرجع نسبت به درختان همسایه می‌باشد. به منظور مقایسه تنوع گونه‌ای، مکانی و اندازه قطر و ارتفاع درختان از آزمون تی‌جفتی استفاده شد؛ نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج آزمون تی جفتی نشان داد که اختلاف معناداری میان این شاخص‌ ها قبل و بعد از دوره پایش (یعنی دوره ده ساله) وجود ندارد.همچنین نتایج حاصل از آزمون تی جفتی برای تک تک گونه‌ها اثبات نمود، که بین شاخص تمایز قطری درخت ممرز قبل و بعد از پایش اختلاف معناداری وجود دارد. اما میان سایر گونه‌ها قبل و بعد از پایش اختلاف معنا داری وجود نداشت. که علت آن چیرگی درختان ممرز نسبت به درختان همسایه می‌باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating structure monitoring indicators for wooden species of Northern forests of Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sajjad Babaie 1
  • Mahmoud Bayat 2
  • Manochehr namiranian 3
  • Sahar Heidari Masteali 4
1 university of Tehran
2 Assistant Prof., Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran.
3 university of Tehran
4 Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background and objectives: Monitoring forest structure, to understand many issues in ecology and forest management is essential. In general, the term "structure" emphasizes the combination of tree communities in terms of specific characteristics. Monitoring forest structure is essential for understanding many issues in ecology and forest management. Today, many indicators have been developed for assessing the position and biodiversity of the trees, which simplifies the structural analysis of the forest. The use of these indices in constant sample units facilitates population dynamics studies over time and makes it possible to monitor the diversity of the location, dimensions, diversity of trees and height of the trees. Due to the smallness of these indicators and the possibility of comparing a mass at two different times, these indicators are a useful tool for achieving sustainable forest management.
Materials and methods: Combination indexes, uniform angles, diameters and altitudes are among the most important indices in the analysis of forest spatial structure in static studies. These indicators are preferable to other methods because of their simplicity in calculations and balancing accuracy. In this research, using a randomized random method, a rectangular grid of 200 * 150 * meters was used to identify the Gorazbon of Kheyroud forest in the city of Noshahr. Then, in order to study the structure of the forest species (beech, oak, hornbeam, alder, apple, lambs, lambs, almonds, and durum wheat) over a period of ten years, the uniform angle index, Ming-Ling blending, close The largest neighbor and the index of differentiation of diameter and height of trees were used.Results: According to The results, Average indexes uniform angle index, mixing Ming Ling, nearest neighbor and the diameter and height dominate the index, in the first period and the end of the monitoring period was calculated) 0/598 and 0/525, 0/582 and 5/645 and 5/35, 0/762 and 0/720, 0/5521 and 0/591 respectively This represents a cluster random distribution pattern, an optimal mix of diversity and high density and the average dispute between the diameter and height of neighboring trees then the reference tree. In order to compare species diversity, location, and size, paired t-test was used.
Conclusion: Paired t-test results showed that there is no significant difference between these indices before and after the period of monitoring (ie, the ten-year period). Also, the results of t-pair test for each species were proved, that there is a significant difference between the indices of differentiation of hornbeam tree before and after the observation. But there was no significant difference between the other species before and after the observation. This is due to the dominance of hornbeam trees in neighboring trees.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Forest structure
  • Diversity of locations
  • species diversity
  • Monitoring
1. Aguirre, O., Hui, G., Gadow, K.V., and Jimenez, J. 2003. An analysis of forest structure
using neighborhood-based variables. Forest Ecology and Management, 183: 137-145.
2. Alijani, V., Feghhi, J., Zobeiri, M., and Marvi Mohadjer, M.R. 2012. Quantifying the spatial
structure in Hyrcanian submountain forest (Case study: Gorazbon district of Kheirud
Forest, Nowshahr-Iran). Journal of Natural Environmental, 65: 1. 111-125. (In Persian)
3. Alijani, V., Feghhi, J., and Marvi Mohadjer, M.R. 2012. Investigation on the beech and oak
spatial structure in a mixed forest (Case study: Gorazbon district, Kheirud forest). Wood &
Forest Science and Technology., 19: 3. 21-35. (In Persian)
4. Alijani, V., Feghhi, J., Zobeiri, M., and Marvi Mohajer, M.R. 2013. Investigation of different
forest type’s structure with applying nearest neighbor indices (Case study: Gorazon district,
Kheyrud forest). Iranian Journal of Applied Ecology, 2(3): 13-24 (In Persian)
5. Alijani, V., Sagheb-Talebi Kh., and Akhavan, R. 2014. Quantifying structure of intact beech
(Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stands at different development stages (Case study: Kelardasht
area, Mazandaran). Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar Research, 21: 3. 36-50. (In Persian)
6. Aguirre, O., Hui, G., Gadow, K.V., and Jimenez, J. 2003. An analysis of forest structure
using neighborhood-based variables. Forest Ecology and Management, 183: 137-145.
7. Basiri, R., Sohrabi, H., and Mozayen, M. 2006. A Statistical Analysis of the Spatial Pattern
of Trees Species in Ghamisheleh Marivan Region, Iran. Iranian Journal of Natural
Resources, 59: 579-588. (In Persian)
8. Chao, W.C., Wu, Sh.H., and Chao, KJ. 2007. Distribution Patterns of Tree Species in the
Lanjenchi Lowland Rain Forest.Taiwan, 52: 4. 343-361.
9. Corona, P., D’Orazio, P., Lamonaca, A., and Portoghesi, L. 2005. L’indice Winkelmass per
l’inventariazione a fini assestamentali della diversità strutturale di soprassuoli forestali. [The
Winkelmass index as a forest management tool for inventorying stand structure]. Forest, 2:
225–232.
10.Erfani Fard, S.Y., Feghhi, J., Zobeiri, M., and Namiranian, M. 2008. Investigation on the
Spatial Pattern of Trees in Zagros Forests. Iranian Journal of Natural Resources, 60: 13. 19-
1328. (In Persian)
11.Erfani Fard, S.Y., and Mahdavian, F. 2012. Comparative investigation on the methods of
true spatial pattern analysis of trees in forests, Case study: Wild pistachio research forest,
Fars province, Iran. Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar Research, 20(1): 62-73 (in Persian)
12.Etemad, V. 2002. Investigation on quantity and quality of beech seed at forests of
Mazandaran province. PhD thesis, Department of Forestry and Forest Economics, Faculty of
Natural Resources, University of Tehran, 258p.
13.Farhadi, P., Soosani, J., Adeli, K., and Alijani, V. 2014. Investigation of positioning and
species diversity changes caused by local communities in Zagros forests (Case Study:
Ghalehgol forest, Zagros, IRAN). Wood and Forest Science and Technology, 20: 61-80. (In
Persian)
14.Farhadi, P., Soosani, J., and Erfani Fard, Y. 2017. Assessment of tree diversity level of
Hircany forest using mixture structural diversity index. Iranian Journal of Forest and Poplar
Research, 3: 495-505 (In Persian)
15.Gadow, K.V., Zhang, C.Y., Wehenkel, C., Pommerening, A., Corral-Rivas, J., Korol, M.,
and Myklush, S.V. 2012. Forest Structure and Diversity. In: Pukkala T, Gadow Kv (eds)
Continuous Cover Forestry. Second edition, Pp: 29-84.
16.Graz., P.F. 2006. Spatial diversity of dry savanna woodlands. Biodiversity and Conservation,
15143-1157.
17.Habashi, H., Hosseini, S.M., Mohammadi, J., and Rahmani, R. 2007. Stand structure and
spatial pattern of trees in mixed Hyrcanian Beech forest of Iran. Forest and Poplar Res., 15:
1. 55-64. (In Persian)
18.Hassani, M., and Amani, M. 2010. Investigation on structure of oriental beech Fagus
orientalis Lipsky) stand at optimal stege in Sangdeh forest. Iran. Forest and Poplar Res., 18:
2. 163-176. (In Persian)
19.Haji Mirza Aghayee, S., Jalilvand, H., Kooch, Y., and Pormajidian, M.R. 2010. Analysis of
important value and spatial pattern of woody species in ecological units (Case study:
Sardabrood forests of Chalous). Iranian Journal of Forest, 1: 51-60. (In Persian)
20.Hui, G.Y., Kiviste, A., and Zhao, X.H. 2012. Forest Structure and Diversity. Springer,
21.Hui, G.Y., and Gadow, K.V. 2002. Das Winkelmaß. Herleitung des optimalen
Standardwinkels. [The uniform angle index Derivation of the optimal standard angle].
Allgemeine forest-und jagdzeitung, 173: 1-12.
22.Kint, N., Lust, R., Ferris, and Olsthoorn, A.F.M. 2000. Quantification of forest stand
structure applied to Scote Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests, Agraria. Sistemas y Recursos
Forestales, 1: 147-163.
23.Kint, V., Van Meirvenne, M., Nachtergale, L., Geudens, G., and Lust, N. 2003. Spatial
methods for quantifying forest stand structure development: a comparision between nearest
neighbor indices and variogram analysis. Forest Sci., 49: 36-49.
24.McElhinny, C. 2002. Forest and woodland structure as an index of biodiversity: a review.
Published by Department of Forestry, Australian National University, Canberra, 80p.
25.Motz, K., Sterba, H., and Pommerening, A. 2010. Sampling measures of tree diversity.
Forest Ecology and Management, 260: 1985-1996.
26.Neef, T., Biging, G., Dutra, LV., Freits, CC., and Santos, JRD. 2005. Interferometric forest
hegth for modeling spatial tree pattern in Amazonia. Revista Brasileaia de Catographic, 571:
1621-1628.
27.Nelson, T., Niemann, K.O., and Wulder, M.A. 2002. Spatial statistical techniques for
aggregating point objects extracted from high spatial resolution remotely sensed imagery.
Geographic Systems, 4: 423-433.
28.Nouri, M., Zobeiri, M., Feghhi, J., and Marvi Mohadjer, M.R. 2014. Application criteria
nearest neighbor in the study of the structure of the stands Virgin beech forest Noshahr
Kheyrud Applied Ecology, fourth / No. XII / Summer 139. (In Persian)
29.Pastorella, F., and Paletto, A. 2013. Stand structure indices as tools to support forest
management: an application in Trentino forests (Italy). Journal of Forest Science, 59(4): 159-
168.
30.Pommerening, A. 2006. Evaluating structural indices by reversing forest structural analysis.
Forest Ecology and Management, 224: 266-277.
31.Pourbabaei, H., Zandi Navgaran, Sh., and Adel, M.N. 2012. Spatial Pattern of Three Oak
Species in Chenareh forest of Marivan, Kordestan. Natural Environment. 65: 3. 329 - 339.
32.Ruprecht, H., Dhar, A., Aigner, B., Oitzinger, G., Raphael, K., and Vacik, H. 2010.
Structural diversity of English yew (Taxus baccata L.) populations. European Journal of
Forest Research, 129: 189-198.
33.Safari, O., and Sohrabi, H. 2015. Implementation of uniform angle index in determination of
trees spatial pattern in a forest reserve of Hyrcanian zoneforest in Hircanian forest. Forest
sustainable development, 1: 45-56 (In Persian)
34.Scheoeder, D. 2002. A Comparsion of Large-Scal Spatiale Vegetation Pattern Following
Clearcuts and Fire in Ontario Boreal Forest. Forest Ecology and Management, 159: 217-230.
35.Sefidi, K., Marvie Mohadjer, M.R., Mosandl, R., and Copenheaver, C.A. 2011. Canopy gaps
and regeneration in old-growth Oriental beech (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) stands, northern
Iran. Forest Ecology and Management, 262: 6. 1094-1099. (In Persian)
36.Sefidi, K. 2012. Late Successional stage dynamics in mixed beech stands. Ph.D. thesis
Department of Forestry University Tehran.Tehran. 175p. (In Persian)
37.Sefidi, K., Coopenheaver, C.A., Keivan Behjou, F., and Kakavand, M. 2014. Structural
diversity within mature forests in Northern Iran: a case study from a relic population of
Persian ironwood (Parrotia persica C.A. Mey.). Forest Sci., 16(2): 258-265.
38.Staudhammer, C.L., and Lemay, V.M. 2001. Introduction and evaluation of possible indices
of stand structural diversity. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 31: 1105-1115.
39.Szmyt, J., and Ceitel, J. 2011. Zróżnicowanie przestrzenne i grubościowe drzew w
niepielęgnowanych drzewostanach sosnowych o różnym zagęszczeniu początkowym
[Spatial and size diversity of trees in untended pine stands of different initial density].
Sylwan, 155: 749-759.
40.Wang, H., Zhang, G., Hui, G., Li, Y., Hu, Y., and Zhao, Zh. 2016. The influence of sampling
unit size and spatial arrangement pattern on neighborhood-based spatial structure analyses of
forest stands. Forest Systems, 25(1): 1-9.