【作者】 禹坤；

【导师】 邹运鼎；

【作者基本信息】 安徽农业大学 ， 生态学， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 本研究在对大笨子石榴园进行节肢动物群落系统调查的基础上,用群落分析方法分析了石榴园节肢动物群落结构及其时间、空间动态变化,并利用灰色系统、生态位、聚集强度等数学方法分析了石榴园主要害虫与其天敌的相互关系,为石榴园害虫的综合防治提供理论依据。根据石榴园节肢动物群落中物种的营养和取食的关系将总群落划分为植食类亚群落、捕食类亚群落、寄生-中性类亚群落。2008年共调查到节肢动物82种,分属于56科;节肢动物总群落的优势度为0.5256,各亚群落的优势度为植食类(0.7313)>寄生-中性类(0.3531)>捕食类(0.2081);节肢动物总群落优势集中性为0.2893,各亚群落的优势集中性分别为植食类(0.5447)>寄生-中性类(0.2433)>捕食类(0.1500);节肢动物总群落的多样性指数在7月17日最高,均匀度指数在3月27日最高。2009年春-夏季共调查到节肢动物34种,分属于32科;节肢动物总群落的多样性指数在5月23日最高,均匀度指数在4月1日最高。2008年石榴园节肢动物总群落的各项指标均表现为波浪型变化,通过对2008年石榴园节肢动物总群落的多样性指数与其它指标进行通经分析,结果得出其决定系数为R=0.9940,剩余通径系数Pe=0.0774,石榴园节肢动物群落多样性指数与均匀度关系密切(相关系数r=0.9796),均匀度越大,多样性指数也越大,表现出密切的相关性;与优势度和优势集中性的关系越大,相应群落的多样性指数就越小;优势度对群落的直接作用并不大,为-0.3035,它的主要作用是通过物种数和均匀度的作用表现出来的。利用2008年石榴园节肢动物群落多样性指标作为群落聚类分析的指标进行聚类分析,当聚类距离d=1.68时,可以把总群落聚为4类;当聚类距离d=1.46时,可将植食类亚群落分为5类;当聚类距离d=1.83时,可将捕食类亚群落分为5类。利用有序样本的最优分割法对2008年石榴园节肢动物总群落进行分析,得出总群落随时间的最优分割为2008年3月27日;4月10日-5月8日;5月22日-9月11日;9月25日-11月6日4个阶段。植食类亚群落的时间的最优分割为为4月10日-4月24日;5月8日-5月22日;6月5日-9月11日;9月25日-11月6日。捕食类亚群落的时间的最优分割为3月27日;4月10日-5月8日;5月22日-7月17日;7月31日-11月6日。利用群落结构的物种数S、个体数N、优势集中性指数C、Pielou均匀度J、优势度D、物种丰富度R和多样性指数H′进行主成分的分析,得出这7个主分量的特征值及其贡献率。总群落中第二主分量的累计贡献率为93.2203%,植食类亚群落中第二主分量的累计贡献率为94.7354%,捕食类亚群落中第二主分量的累计贡献率为89.0818%。采用灰色关联度分析的方法、生态位分析的方法和空间格局聚集强度指数分析的方法分析石榴园主要害虫与其天敌在数、时、空方面的关系,综合排序得出:棉蚜的主要天敌是异色瓢虫、中华草蛉和八斑球腹蛛;小绿叶蝉主要天敌是粽管巢蛛、三突花蟹蛛和草间小黑蛛;黄刺蛾的主要天敌是粽管巢蛛、锥腹肖蛸和八斑球腹蛛;扁刺蛾的主要天敌是锥腹肖蛸、八斑球腹蛛和粽管巢蛛;小袋蛾的主要天敌是三突花蟹蛛、粽管巢蛛和异色瓢虫。棉蚜种群聚集均数λ值大于2,其聚集是本身原因引起的,而小绿叶蝉、黄刺蛾、扁刺蛾和小袋蛾的λ值小于2,其聚集是环境中某些因子引起的。对2008年和2009年春-夏季石榴园棉蚜及其主要捕食性天敌在数量、时间、空间格局等方面进行分析,综合排序的结果是2008年春-夏季棉蚜主要的捕食性天敌依次是异色瓢虫、八斑球腹蛛、黑带食蚜蝇、锥腹肖蛸和三突花蟹蛛;2009年春-夏季棉蚜主要的捕食性天敌依次是异色瓢虫、黑带食蚜蝇、粽管巢蛛、锥腹肖蛸和中华草蛉。两年春-夏季主要的天敌均有异色瓢虫、黑带食蚜蝇、锥腹肖蛸。2008年秋季棉蚜主要的捕食性天敌依次是中华草蛉、异色瓢虫、粽管巢蛛、三突花蟹蛛和草间小黑蛛。两年春-夏季石榴园中棉蚜数量之间差异不显著(t=1.1369,t<t0.05),八斑球腹蛛数量之间差异显著(t=2.7333,t>t0.05),其余天敌数量之间差异均不显著。2008年秋季和2009年春-夏季之间八斑球腹蛛差异显著(t=3.0858, t>t0.05),其余差异不显著,两年春-夏季和2008年秋季棉蚜与其捕食性天敌之间差异均不显著。更多还原

【Abstract】 Based on the thorough investigation, the dynamics of the arthropod communities in pomegranate fields and interaction of main insects with its natural enemies were studied by meas of community analysis, path analysis, greysystematic analysis, ecological niche analysis, and aggregation level index. These provided theory foudation for IPM.In 2008, the arthropod community in pomegranate fields was divided into several sub-communities, which were phytophages, predators, parastitoids and neutralities. The results were showed 82 species of arthropod belonging to 56 famlies, and relative abundance of the arthropod community were 0.5256. The relative abundance of phytophages sub-communities were 0.7313;predators were 0.2081;parastitoids and neutralities were 0.3531. The dominant concentration of the arthropod community were 0.2893, phytophages(0.5447)> parastitoids and neutralities(0.2433)> predators(0.1500), then the arthropod community were highest: the diversity index were in 7.17,evenness index were in 3.27. In 2009 spring-summer season, the arthropod community in pomegranate fields were 34 species belonging to 56 famlies. Then the arthropod community were highest: the diversity index were in 5.23,evenness index were in 4.1.The relationship between diversity indexes and other ecological indexes in every communities were analyzed by Path analysis, the most relative with evenness (0.9796), which showed the higher evenness, the higher diversity indexes .Total community and phytophage, predacious sub-community in 2008 were analyzed by clustering. The result: The total community was divided into 4 clusters when d is 1.68; the phytophage sub-community was divided into 5 clusters when d is 1.46; the predacious was divided into 5 clusters when d is 1.83. The clustering result of the optimization partitions in the arthropod total communities in 2008 was 3.27, 4.10-5.8, 5.22-9.11, 9.25-11.6 ; phytophage sub-community: 4.10-4.24, 5.8-5.22, 6.5-9.11, 9.25-11.6; predacious sub-community: 3.27, 4.10-5.8, 5.22-7.17, 7.31-11.6.Diversity indexes (individuls, species, dominant concentrtion, pielou evenness, dominance, speicies richness and hill divesity) of arthropod communities were analyzed by principal component analtsis , in the second principal component, the contribution of arthropod community, phytophagous sub-community and predacious sub-community was 93.2203%、94.7354%、89.0818% respectively.Studied on the relationships of the number, time and space of the major pests and their natural enemies using the correlation analysis, ecological niche analysis and spatial pattern of aggregation intensity index analysis, the result indicated that the order of the main natural enemies of Aphis gossypii was Harmonia axyridis, Chrysopa sinica and Theridion octomaculatum; Cnidocampa flavescens: Clubiona japonicola, Misumenops tricuspidatus, Erigonidium graminicolum; Empoasca flavescens : C. japonicola, Tetragnatha maxillosa and T. octomaculatum; Thosea sinensis: Tetragnatha maxillosa, T. octomaculatum, C. japonicola; Cryptothelea minuscula: M. tricuspidatus, C. japonicola, H. axyridis. Gathering averages of A. gossypii of major five pests were more than 2 due to the aggregation nature of the insect, while those of C. flavescens, E. flavescens, T. sinensis and C. minuscula was less than 2 due to the certain environmental factors.The synthetic ranking result indicated that the order of main enemies of A. gossypic in spring-summer season was H. axyridis, T. octomaculatum, E. fallaeids,P. japonica and M. tricuspidatus in 2008; The order of main natural enemies of A. gossypic in spring-summer season was H. axyridis, E. fallaeids,C. japonicola, P. japonica and C. sinica in 2009. The order of main natural enemies was H. axyridis, E. fallaeids and P. japonica in the two years. The order of main natural enemies of A. gossypic in autumn season was C. sinica, H. axyridis, C. japonicola, M. tricuspidatus and E. graminicola. The numbers of A. gossypic between the two years in pomegranate orchard was compared using T-test (t= 1.1369, t<t0.05), which showed no significant difference, there were significant differences in the numbers of T. octomaculatum (t=2.7333,t>t0.05)between the two yesrs in pomegranate orchard, there were significant differences in the numbers of T. octomaculatum (t=3.0858, t>t0.05)between autumn season in 2008 and spring-summer season in 2009, the rest were no significant difference. The numbers of the rest natural enemies were no significant difference. The numbers of A. gossypic and its predatory natural enemies were no significant difference among spring-summer season in the two years and in autumn season in 2009.更多还原