机构地区:[1]贵州大学林学院,贵州大学生物多样性与自然保护研究中心,贵阳550025 [2]贵州梵净山国家级自然保护区管理局,江口554400 [3]贵州麻阳河国家级自然保护区管理局,沿河565300 [4]贵州省兴义市林业局,兴义562400 [5]湖南张家界大鲵国家级自然保护区事务中心,张家界427400
出 处:《林业科学》2022年第3期117-128,共12页Scientia Silvae Sinicae
基 金:生态环境部典型生态系统的生物多样性观测与评估项目(2018-02-06-M2019-48);贵州省科技计划项目(黔科合支撑[2019]2842号)。
摘 要:【目的】研究梵净山东北部同域分布的黔金丝猴和藏酋猴的时空分布格局,了解二者与环境的相互关系,加深认识二者的种间关系及其生存适应特点。【方法】2017—2020年,在梵净山东北部的不同海拔与植被类型中布设了66台红外相机,监测研究黔金丝猴和藏酋猴的时空分布。【结果】藏酋猴在研究区域内普遍分布,黔金丝猴则主要分布于远离旅游索道的高海拔区域,且完全重叠于藏酋猴分布范围内。在栖息地选择方面,藏酋猴呈现普遍选择,黔金丝猴呈现专一选择。在植被类型选择上,藏酋猴的分布未见显著差异(P=0.27),黔金丝猴呈极显著差异(P<0.01),在1600~1900 m海拔范围的相对丰富度最高。在植被类型选择上,藏酋猴的分布未见显著差异(P=0.27),黔金丝猴呈极显著差异(P<0.01),在中山常绿落叶阔叶林的相对丰富度最高。在共现位点中,发现黔金丝猴与藏酋猴15天内相遇的位点有45个,占总监测位点数的68.18%,占黔金丝猴分布总位点数的91.84%,栖息地空间重叠度极高。它们在同一位点的的相遇时间不存在显著差异(P=0.48),平均5~6天一次,且不存在季节性变化(P=0.35)。黔金丝猴与藏酋猴为完全昼行性物种,黔金丝猴日间为晨昏型活动,藏酋猴日间为单峰型活动,二者日活动节律呈极显著差异(P<0.01),重叠度为0.76。二者日活动节律存在季节性变化,季节性重叠程度各有不同(冬=0.64<春=0.68<夏=0.75<秋=0.82),但二者的日活动节律均呈现极显著差异(P春夏秋冬<0.01)。【结论】通过红外相机监测,揭示了梵净山东北部的黔金丝猴与藏酋猴的时空分布特点,表明在时空关系上二者生态位划分明显。同时,对黔金丝猴与藏酋猴的有效保护和监管工作提供了科学基础数据。【Objective】In this study,we investigated the temporal and spatial distribution pattern of sympatric Rhinopithecus brelichi and Macaca thibetana in the northeast of Fanjingshan Reserve,in order to further understand the their interspecific relationship and adaptation characteristics to the environment.【Method】From 2017 to 2020,66 infrared cameras were deployed in different vegetation types and altitudes in the northeast of Fanjingshan Reserve to monitor the temporal and spatial distribution of R.brelichi and M.thibetana.【Result】The results showed that M.thibetana were widely distributed in the whole study area,while R.brelichi were mainly located in high-altitude areas far away from tourist trails and the distribution range completely overlapped that of M.thibetana generally was found in variety of habitats,while R.brelichi showed specific selection for habitats.In terms of altitude selection,there was no significant difference(P=0.27)in the distribution of M.thibetana over various altitudes,while an extremely significant difference(P<0.01)was found in the distribution of R.brelichi at different altitudes,mostly occupying the habitats from 1600-1900 m altitude.In terms of the selection of vegetation types,there was no significant difference in the selection of vegetation types for M.thibetana(P=0.27),while there was a very significant difference in the distribution of R.brelichi(P<0.01),with their relative abundance being the highest in evergreen and deciduous broad-leaved forests.Nevertheless,R.brelichi and M.thibetana had the co-occurrence habitats.It was found that there were 45 co-occurring sites in which R.brelichi and M.thibetana met within 15 days,accounting for 68.18%of the total monitored sites and 91.84%of the sites where R.brelichi was ever detected.The spatial overlap of habitats was very high.There was no significant difference in meeting times of the two species at the same site(P=0.48),and they appeared at the same site once every 5-6 days on average,without any seasonal difference(P=0.3
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...