基于叶、枝特性的柳树苗期观赏性评判
Ornamental Judge of Willow Based on Leaf and Branch Characteristics
-
摘要: [目的] 建立基于叶、枝特性的柳树观赏性评判模型，快速评判柳树无性系的观赏性。[方法] 以在北京地区适应性良好的20个柳树无性系1年生苗为试验材料，确立与叶、枝特性相关的13个评价指标，利用层次分析法建立快速评判柳属树种观赏性的结构模型。据柳树的观赏特性并结合专家意见，拟定评分准则。构造判断矩阵并进行一致性检验，确定各指标对总目标的权重。柳树无性系性状的分值乘以对应权重得出综合分值，根据综合分值对其进行聚类，根据聚类结果划分等级。[结果] 评价模型的准则层中，叶片所占权重为0.75，枝干所占权重为0.25。因子层中各指标对总目标的权重排序为：成叶颜色F2（0.255 9）> 叶片形状F3（0.152 7）> 幼叶颜色F1（0.127 3）> 侧枝颜色F11（0.080 2）> 小枝颜色F10（0.074 0）> 叶片密度F4（0.066 7）> 叶长F6（0.052 6）> 叶面积F5（0.047 1）> 主干颜色F12（0.039 2）> 发枝角度F9（0.031 5）> 叶宽F7（0.029 9）> 发枝数量F13（0.025 3）> 托叶F8（0.017 9）。成熟叶色、叶片形状、幼叶颜色、侧枝颜色和小枝颜色是影响柳树观赏性的主要因子。根据综合得分和聚类结果，将20个柳树无性系划分为4个等级：第Ⅰ等级包括红叶腺柳、SH31、绵毛柳、旱柳、垂109、苏柳J799、金丝垂柳，观赏价值最高；第Ⅱ等级包括银柳、毛枝柳、竹柳、黑柳19，观赏价值较高；第Ⅲ等级包括圆头柳、DQ1、漳河柳、垂爆柳、G7、朝鲜柳、杞柳，观赏价值中等；第Ⅳ等级包括沙柳、蒿柳，观赏价值较低。[结论] 利用层次分析法建立的柳树观赏性评价模型可以有效地从叶、枝特性方面快速评判出观赏价值高的柳树无性系，为柳树的进一步选育和园林应用提供参考。
-
关键词:
- 柳树无性系
- / 观赏价值
- / 层次分析法(AHP)
- / 评判
Abstract: [Objective] The aim of this study is to establish ornamental judge model of willow based on leaf and branch characteristics and judge ornamental value of willow clones rapidly. [Methods] Taking one-year-old willow clone seedlings adapted to Beijing area as the object, their ornamental value were evaluated based on thirteen characteristics relevant to leaf and branch by establishing analytic hierarchy process (AHP) structural model of willow ornamental value. According to the ornamental characteristics of willow, the score criteria were established combined with expert advice. The judgment matrix and consistency test were conducted. The weight of index was determined with respect to the overall target. The willow trait scores were multiplied by the corresponding weights to obtain its composite score. The willow clones were clustered based on the comprehensive score and graded according to clustering result. [Results] In criteria layer of the model, the leaves were weighted as 0.75, branches were weighted as 0.25. The order of factor layers according to their weight relative to the target layer is: mature leaf color F2 (0.2559) > leaf shape F3 (0.1527) > young leaf color F1 (0.1273) > lateral branch color F11 (0.0802) > twigs color F10 (0.0740) > leaf density F4 (0.0667) > leaf length F6 (0.0526) > leaf area F5 (0.0471) > trunk color F12 (0.0392) > branching angle F9 (0.0315) > leaf width F7 (0.0299) > branching amount F13 (0.0253) > stipule F8 (0.0179). The mature leaf color, leaf shape, young leaf color, lateral branches color and twigs color are the major factors affecting willow ornamental value. According to AHP composite score and clustering results, the 20 willow clones were divided into four levels: GradeⅠincludes S. Chaenomeloides var. iegata, SH31, S.erioclada, S.matsudana, S.babylonica, S.×Jiangsuensis CL.‘799’, S.×aureo-pendula, with the highest ornamental value; GradeⅡ includes S. argyracea, S. dasyclados, bamboo willow, S. cheilophila, with high ornamental value; GradeⅢ includes S. capitata, DQ1, S. matsudanaf. lobato-glandulosa, S.×chulbeozhv, G7, S. koreensis, S. integra, with medium ornamental value; GradeⅣ includes S. cheilophila, S. viminalis, with lower ornamental value. [Conclusion] Analytic hierarchy process can judge willow ornamental value effectively from the aspects of leaf and branch characteristics. It can provide a reference for further breeding of willow and landscaping applications.-
Key words:
- willow clone
- / ornamental values
- / analytical hierarchy process (AHP)
- / judge
-
[1] Argus G W. Salix (Salicaceae) distribution maps and a synopsis of their classification in North America, north of Mexico [J]. Harvard Papers in Botany, 2007, 12(2): 335-368. [2] 王战. 中国植物志:第 20 卷第二分册[M].北京:科学出版社,1984. [3] 涂忠虞. 柳树育种与栽培[M]. 南京:江苏科学技术出版社,1982. [4] 施士争. 柳树的园林应用类型与改良[J]. 西北林学院学报,2008,23(4):200-204. [5] 施士争,潘明建,张珏,等. 高生物量灌木柳无性系的选育研究[J]. 西北林学院学报,2010,25(2):61-66. [6] 刘治昆,陈彩虹,陈光才,等. Cu2+胁迫对2种速生柳幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2011,31(6):1195-1202. [7] Dimitriou I, Aronsson P, Weih M. Stress tolerance of five willow clones after irrigation with different amounts of landfill leachate[J]. Bioresource technology, 2006, 97(1): 150-157. [8] Dickinson N M, Pulford I D. Cadmium phytoextraction using short-rotation coppice Salix: the evidence trail [J].Environment International, 2005, 31(4): 609-613. [9] 王校锋,张文辉,崔豫川. 瑞典能源柳4 个无性系对土壤Hg2+胁迫的生理响应[J]. 西北植物学报,2013,33(3): 555-563. [10] Przyborowski J A, Sulima P. The analysis of genetic diversity of Salix viminalis genotypes as a potential source of biomass by RAPD markers [J]. Industrial Crops and Products, 2010, 31(2): 395-400. [11] 虞晓芬,傅玳. 多指标综合评价方法综述[J]. 统计与决策,2004(11):119-121. [12] 鲜小林,陈睿,万斌,等. 西南地区野生春石斛资源搜集、保存与观赏利用价值评价[J].西南农业学报,2013,26(3):1184-1189. [13] 李周园,刘艳红,戴腾飞,等. 应用层次分析法建立北京市引种乔木评价体系[J]. 北京林业大学学报,2010,32(S1):100-104. [14] 刘孟霞,张延龙,牛立新,等. 运用层次-关联分析法综合评价加拿大引种草本花卉[J]. 西北农业学报,2009,18(4):261-266. [15] 芦建国,杜毅. 层次分析法在高速公路缀花草地评价中的应用[J]. 南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2010,34(3):161-164. [16] 蒋艾平,刘军,姜景民. 基于层次分析法的乐东拟单性木兰优良种源选择[J]. 林业科学研究,2015,25(1):50-54. [17] 刘希华,丁昌俊,张伟溪,等. 不同基因型欧洲黑杨幼苗氮素利用效率差异及其机理初探[J]. 林业科学研究,2010,23(3):368-374. [18] 王斌会. 多元统计分析及R语言建模[M]. 广州:暨南大学出版社,2010. [19] 吴晓星,刘凤栾,房义福,等. 36个欧美观赏海棠品种(种)应用价值的综合评价[J]. 南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2015,39(1):93-98. [20] 程红梅,周耘峰,窦维奇. 蜡梅品种园艺学性状综合评价模型及其应用[J]. 北京林业大学学报,2010,32(S2):160-165. [21] 徐亮,司马永康,郝佳波. 园林树木的分类方法及观赏特性评价[J]. 西部林业科学,2007,36(1):123-126. [22] 陈俊愉,邓朝佐. 用百分制评选三种金花茶优株试验[J]. 北京林业大学学报,1986(3):35-43. [23] 林绍生,李华芬. 应用模糊数学评价观叶植物的观赏性[J]. 亚热带植物通讯,2000,29(2):43-47. [24] 芦艳,樊保国,鲁周民. 果树的园林观赏性灰色综合评价[J]. 西北林学院学报,2014,29(2):248-251. [25] 郭宝林,杨俊霞. 主成分分析法在仁用杏品种主要经济性状选种上的应用研究[J]. 林业科学,2000,36(6):53-56. [26] Wang G, Cao F. Integrated evaluation of soil fertility in Ginkgo (Ginkgo biloba L.) agroforestry systems in Jiangsu, China [J]. Agroforestry systems, 2011, 83(1): 89-100. [27] 廖浩斌,冯志坚,戴磊,等. 广东省11种杜英属植物园林观赏特性评价[J]. 广东园林,2012,34(3):66-69. -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 2922
- HTML全文浏览量: 412
- PDF下载量: 641
- 被引次数: 0
下载:
