生态学
植物生理生态植物生理生态
    本研究调查了外来入侵植物互花米草在漳江口红树林自然保护区的分布状况。选择代表性土著红树植物秋茄，测定秋茄和互花米草成熟叶片的光合特性、叶绿素含量、渗透势、质膜透性、自由水与束缚水含量等生理特性，对比分析二者对潮间带生境的适应能力；沿漳江流域从上游到出海口设置4个样地，跟踪测定1个生长季内不同生长阶段互花米草的生长特征，探讨潮间带环境因子和互花米草的个体和群落生长之间的关系。同时，在对应的样地内，通过人工插植秋茄胚轴，定期调查秋茄胚轴的数量和秋茄幼苗的生长，探讨互花米草群落对秋茄幼苗更新生长的影响，研究结果如下：
    1. 漳江口红树林自然保护区沿江不同盐度梯度下都有互花米草的生长分布，相比红树植物，互花米草具有较宽的生态幅度，盐度适应范围也较广（2‰~30‰）,且不同盐度具有不同的分布状况，说明互花米草可以通过自身的表型可塑性来调节适应不同的环境水平。
    2. 在相同环境条件下，互花米草叶片的净光合速率均高于红树植物秋茄，且差异极显著（p<0.01），其中在秋茄分布下限的样地中，互花米草的净光合速率是秋茄的2.14倍；秋茄叶片的蒸腾速率及气孔导度随着盐度的升高速度下降较快，且低于互花米草；不同样地的互花米草叶绿素含量均高于秋茄，叶绿素a的含量最高可以达到1.13±0.15 mg.g-1；互花米草的渗透势较低，最低只有-3.50±0.12 Mpa，能够在较高的盐境条件下积累更多的渗透调节物质，具有较强的渗透调节能力，同时，电解质外渗率高于秋茄，可以通过自身的调节机制来减少细胞膜所受的伤害，从而适应恶劣的环境胁迫；互花米草与秋茄的含水量差异极显著（p<0.01），比秋茄具有更高的束缚水含量，保水能力较好，说明相对于红树植物，互花米草在生理上具备一定的优势，而正是由于互花米草在生理上的优势可能导致其与红树植物之间竞争上的优势，从而使其能够在红树林群落中成功入侵。
    3. 互花米草主要以无性繁殖的方式扩散，苗期是快速扩散时期，在互花米草与红树植物分布集中区，互花米草在苗期的扩散距离最大，可达到238±20 cm，适当的盐度（15‰左右）可以促进互花米草的繁殖扩散，25‰以上的高盐度对互花米草的繁殖扩散则有明显的抑制作用；土壤有机质含量与互花米草的生长呈极显著正相关（p<0.01），盐度对互花米草的生长有显著的抑制作用，随着沿江盐度的增加，互花米草的株高、基径、叶面积都显著降低，在25‰以上的高盐度，互花米草生长才开始受到较大的抑制；单株生物量也是随着盐度的升高呈现下降的趋势，但是盐度在15‰左右互花米草具有较大的单位面积生物量，这表明15‰左右的盐度是互花米草群体生长的最适范围。4.秋茄胚轴的萌芽生长一般在1个月左右，潮汐的涨落、潮间带螃蟹等动物的啃食以及滩涂的盐度等都会影响胚轴的固着生长，以最上游样地中的固着率最高，达到97.5%，最下游样地的固着率只有22.5%；在秋茄幼苗的生长过程中，光照是极其重要的因素，由于互花米草遮荫的影响，秋茄幼苗的生长缺乏正常的光照而生长缓慢，茎杆纤细，叶片由于光照不足部分失绿；到了生殖生长期以后，互花米草全部倒伏，秋茄幼苗由于互花米草的倒伏覆盖完全失去光照，最终全部死亡。 [英文摘要]：     This study investigated the distribution of the invasive plant Spartina alterniflora along the Zhangjiang River in Fujian. Choosed the representational indigenous mangrove species Kandelia obovata, photosynthetic characteristics, chlorophyll content, osmotic potential, membrane permeability, free water and bound water content and other physiological characteristics of mature leaves of K. obovata and S. alterniflora were measured, and their adaptability to the intertidal habitats were analyzed. According to the distribution of plant community, this study set up four sample plots along the Zhangjiang River from the upstream to the downstream, growth characteristics of S. alterniflora in differeant growth phases were measured within one year, and the relationship between environmental factors and the growth of S. alterniflora were analyzed. At the same time, in the corresponding plots, we survey the number of K. obovata hypocotyl and the growth of K. obovata seedings through artificial implantation of K. obovata hypocotyl, the influence of the S. alterniflora community to the growth of K. obovata seedings were discuss. And the research results are as follows:
    1. S. alterniflora can grow and propagate along the river under different salinity gradients in Zhangjiang Estuary, compared to mangrove species, it has a wider ecological amplitude, as for the wider scope to adapt the salinity (2‰~30‰), and a different distributional state to different salinity. Show that S. alterniflora can adapt themselves to the different level of environment by phenotypic plasticity.
    2. In the same environmental conditions, the chlorophyll content and net photosynthetic rate in S. alterniflora are higher than K. obovata, and the difference is significant (p<0.01); the transpiration rate and stomatal conductance of K. obovata leaf decline more quickly as the salinity decreasing, and lower than the S. alterniflora; S. alterniflora has lower osmotic potential and can accumulate a lot of material that can regulate the osmotic potential in the environment that has higher salt level. At the same time, its electrolyte extravasation rate is higer than those of K. obovata, and it can reduce the harm to the cytoplasm throgh its self-regulatory ability, so that which can adjust the extream environment. The water content between S. alterniflora and K. obovata are quite different (p<0.01). The S. alterniflora has higer bond water content than that of K. obovata, which indicate that S. alterniflora has better ability of stranding the water.
    3. S. alterniflora proliferates by asexual reproduction. The seeding stage spreads rapidly. The appropriate salinity (about 15‰) stimulated the proliferation of the S. alterniflora while higer salinity (above 25‰) inhibited its proliferation. As the salinity increasing along the the river, the height, basal diameter and leaf area of the S. alterniflora are decreasing significantly. In the salintiy level of 25‰, the growth of the S. alterniflora start to be inhibited. Above-ground biomass of the individual decreased with the increase of the salinity. Howerer, the S. alterniflora has higher above-ground biomass per area which indicate that the 15‰ salinity is the most appropriate salinity of the growth of the groups of the S. alterniflora.
    4. Hypocotyl of K. obovata can germinate within one month. Boitic and abiotic factors such as inter-tidal animal predation, tidal fluctuation, light and salinity could affect the fixation of the hypocotyl of the K. obovata. During the growth of the seedlings, light is an important factor. Being sheltered by the S. alterniflora, the seedlings of K. obovata grow slowly which has thinner stems and yellow leaves. Most of all, mature S. alterniflora plants were lodged in autumn, the seedlings of K. obovata were sheltered completely and died for starving of light. [参考文献]：     [1] Adam P. Saltmarsh Ecology [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1990.
    [2] An S Q, Gu B H, Zhou C F, et al. Spartina invasion in China: implications for invasive species management and fut-ure research [J]. Weed Research, 2007, 47: 183-191.
    [3] Ayres D R, Smith D L, Zaremba K, et al. Spread of exotic cordgrasses and hybrids (Spartina sp.) in the tidal marsh-es of San Francisco Bay [J]. Biological Invasions, 2004, 6: 221-231.
    [4] Ayres D R, Strong D R. The Spartina invasion of San Francisco Bay [J]. Aquatic Nuisance Species Digest, 2002, 4(4): 37-39.
    [5] Bakker J, Wilson S. Competitive abilities of introduced and native grasses [J]. Plant Ecology, 2001, 157(2): 117-125.
    [6] Bertness M D. Zonation of Spartina patens and Spartina alterniflora in a New England salt marsh [J]. Ecology, 1991, 72: 138-148.
    [7] Bertness M D, Wikler K, Chatkupt T. Flood tolerance and the distribution of Iva frutescens across New England salt marshes [J]. Oecologia, 1992. 91: 171-178.
    [8] Blum M J, Christina M S, Debra R A, et al. Characterization of microsatellite loci in Spartina species (Poaceae). Molecular Ecology Notes, 2004, 4: 39-42.
    [9] Brady N C, Weil R R. Soils organic matter [M]. The Nature and Properties of Soils (13th Edition). Upper Saddle River, N J: Prentice-Hall, Inc, 2002.
    [10] Chen Z Y, Li B, Zhong Y, et al. Local competitive effects of introduced Spartina alterniflora on Scirpus mariqueter at Dongtan of Chongming Island, the Yangtze River estuary and their potential ecological consequences [J]. Hydro-biologia, 2004, 528 (1-3): 99-106.
    [11] Clarke P J, Kerrigan R A, Westphal C J. Dispersal potential and early growth in 14 tropical mangroves: do early life history traits correlate with patterns of adult distribution? [J]. Journal of Ecology, 2001, 89(4): 648-659.
    [12] Costa C S B, Marangoni J C, Azevedo A M G. Plant zonation in irregularly flooded salt marshes: relative importance of stress tolerance and biological interactions [J]. Journal of Ecology, 2003, 91: 951-965.
    [13] Costanza R, D'Arge R, De Groot R, et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital [J]. Nature, 1997, 387: 253-260.
    [14] Cronk Q C B, Fuller J L. Plant invaders: the threat to natural ecosystems [M]. London: Chapman and Hall, 1995, 10-50.
    [15] Downton W J S. Growth and osmotic relations of the mangrove Avicennia marina, as influenced by salinity [J]. Aust Journal Plant Physiol, 1982, 9: 519-528.
    [16] El-Haddad E S H, Noaman M M. Leaching requirement and salinity threshold for the yield and agronomic characteristics of halophytes under salt stress [J]. Journal of Arid Emaronments. 2001, 49: 865-874.
    [17] Elton C S.The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. London: Methuen & Co.Ltd, l958.
    [18] Ewanchuk P J, Bertness M D. The role of waterlogging in maintaining forb pannes in northern New England salt marshes [J]. Ecology, 2004, 85: 1568-1574.
    [19] Grosholz E. Ecological and evolutionary consequences of coastal invasions [J]. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 2002, 17: 22-27.
    [20] Groves R H. Plant invasions of Australia: an over view In: Groves R H and Budron J J.(eds.), Eeology of biological invasions[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986, 137-149.
    [21] Hertling U M, Lubke R A. Assessing the potential for biologicainvasion—the case of Ammophila arenaria in South Africa [J]. South African Journal Science, 2000, 96(9-10): 520-527.
    [22] Kangas P C, Lugo A E. The distribution of mangroves and saltmarsh in Florida (USA) [J]. Tropical Ecology, 1990, 31(1): 32-39.
    [23] Kavi kishor P B, Hong Z, Miao G H, et al. Over expression of Δ’-pyrroline-5-carboxylate synthetase increases proline production and confers osmotolerance in transgenic plants [J]. Plant Physiology, 1995, 108: 1387-1394.
    [24] Krauss K W, Allen J A. Factors influencing the regeneration of the mangrove Bruguiera gymnorrhiza(L.) Lamk. on a tropical Pacific island [J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2003, 176(1-3): 49-60.
    [25] Lana P D C, Guiss C, Disaro S T. Seasonal variation of biomass and production dynamics for aboveground and belowground components of a Spartina alterniflora marsh in the Euhaline sector of Paranagua Bay (SE Brazil) [J]. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 1991, 32(3): 231-242.
    [26] Landin M C. Growth habits and other considerations of smooth cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora Loisel., University of Washington, Seattle: Washington Sea Grant Program, 1991.
    [27] Lareher W. Physiological plant ecology[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidel berg, 1987.
    [28] Lewis M A, Weber D E. Effect of substrate salinity on early seedling survival and growth of Scirpus robustus Pursh and Spartina alterniflora Loisel [J]. Ecotoxicology, 2002, 11: 19-26.
    [29] Li B, Shi Bu Ya T, Yo Go Y, et al. Effects of light quantity and Quality on Growth and Reproduction of a Clonal Sedge, Cyperus esculentus [J]. Plant Species Biology, 2001 (16): 69-81.
    [30] Lin P, Fu Q. Environmental Ecology and Economic Utilization of Mangroves in China [M]. Beijing and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg: China Higher Education Press, 2000.
    [31] Lin P. Mangrove Ecosystem in China [M]. Beijing: Science Press, 1999.
    [32] Losos J B, WarheitK I, SchoenerTW. Adaptive differentiationfollowing experimental island colonization in Anolis lizards [J]. Nature, 1997, 387: 70-73.
    [33] Lu C M, Qiu N W, Lu Q T. Does salt stress lead to increased susceptibility of photosystem II to photoinhibition and changes in photosynthetic pigment composition in halophyte Suaeda salsa grown outdoors? [J]. Plant Science, 2002, 63: 1063-1068.
    [34] Mckinney M L and Lockwood J L. Biotic homogenization: a few winners replacing many losers in the next mass extinction [J]. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 1999, 14: 451-453.
    [35] Metcalfe W S, Ellison A M, Bertness M D. Survivorship and spatial development of Spartina alterniflora Loisel. (Gramineae) seedlings in a New England salt marsh [J]. Annals of Botany. 1986, 58: 249-258.
    [36] Minchinton T E. Canopy and substratum heterogeneity influence recruitment of the mangrove Avicennia marina [J]. Journal of Ecology, 2001, 89(5): 888-902.
    [37] Mooney H A and Cleland E E. The evolutionary impacts of invasive species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. USA, 2001, 98: 5446-5451.
    [38] Munns R. Physiological processes limiting plant growth in saline soils some dogmas and hypotheses [J]. Plant Cell Environment, 1993, (16): 15-20.
    [39] Nadoo G, Mckee K L, Mendelssohn I A. Anatomical and metabolic responses to waterlogging and salinity in Spartina alterniflora and S. patens (Poaceae) [J]. American Journal of Botany, 1992, 79: 765-770.
    [40] Niels V, Christian C, Jesper B. Colonisation of Spartina on a tidal water divide, Danish Wadden Sea [J]. Danish Journal of Geography, 2001, 101: 11-20.
    [41] Nieva F J J, Castellanos E M, Figueroa M E, et al. Gas exchange and chlorophyll fluorescence of G andq saltmars species [J]. Photosynthetica, 1999, 36: 397-406.
    [42] Patterson C S, Mendelssohn I A, Swenson E M. Growth and survival of Avicennia germinans seedlings in a mangal/salt-marsh community in Louisiana, USA [J]. Journal of coastal Research, 1993, 9(3): 801-810.
    [43] Pennings S C, Moore D J. Zonation of shrubs in western Atlantic salt marshes [J]. Oecologia, 2001, 126: 587-594.
    [44] Petren K and Case T J. An experimental demonstration of exploitation competition in an ongoing invasion [J]. Eeology, 1996, 77(1):118-132.
    [45] Pilus Zambi M M, Yaacob A J, Kamal M, Paramananthan S. The determination of soil factors on growth of cashew on bri soil [J]. Part I Pertanika, 1982, (5): 200-206.
    [46] Poorter L. Light dependent changes in biomass allocation and their importance of growth of rain forest trees species [J]. Functional Ecology, 2001, 15: 113-123.
    [47] Primentel D L, Lach L, Zuniga R, et al. Environmental and economic costs of non-indigenous species in the United States [J]. BioScience, 2000, 50: 53-65.
    [48] Qin P, Xie M, Jiang Y S. Spartina green food ecological engineering [J]. Ecological. Engineering, 1998, 11: 47-156.
    [49] Sala O E, Chapin F S, Armesto J J, et al. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100 [J]. Science, 2000, 287: 1770-1774.
    [50] Smart R M. Distribution and Environmental Control of Productivity and Growth Form of Spartina alterniflora (Loisel.) [J]. In: Sen D N, Rajpurohit K S eds. Tasks for Vegetation Science. The Hague: Dr W.Junk Publishers. 1982, 2: 127-142.
    [51] Tavilia Jafarim, A Zare Chahukim. A study on plant-soil relation ship in Markazi Iran- rangelands [C]. 17th WCSS, Thailand, 2002.
    [52] Thompson J D. The biology of an invasive plant (Spartina angelica) [J]. BioScience, 1991, 41:393-401.
    [53] Ungar I A. Ecophysiology of Vascular Halophytes [M]. Boca Raton: CRC Press. 1991.
    [54] Vitousek P M, D'Antonio C M, Loope L L, Rejmanek M and Westbrooks R. Introduced species: A significant component of human-caused global change [J]. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 1997, 21: 1-16.
    [55] Walker, L R and Smith, S D. Impacts of invasive plants on community and ecosystem properties. In: Luken, J O and Thieret, J W. ed. Assessment and managemgnt of Plant Invasions [M]. New York: Springer-Verlag, Inc. 1997, 69-94.
    [56] Wang Q, Wang C H, Zhao B, et al. Effects of growing conditions on the growth of and interactions between salt marsh plants: implications for invasibility of habitats [M]. Biological Invasions, 2006.
    [57] Weis J S and Weis P. Is the invasion of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into tidal marshes of the eastern US an ecological disaster? [J]. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2003, 46: 816-820.
    [58] Wijte A, Gallagher J L. Effect of oxygen availability and salinity on early life history stages of salt marsh plant. 2. Early seeding development advantage of Spartina alterniflora over Phragmites australis (Poaceae) [J]. American Journal of Botany , 1996, 83: 1343-1350.
    [59] Willamson M. Can the impacts of invasive species be predicted? [M]. In (R H Groves, F D Panetta, J G Virtue [eds.]). Australia: Weed risk assessment CSIRO, Collingwood, Victoria, 2001, 20-33.
    [60] Xu C Y, Zhang W J, Fu, C Z, et al. Genetic diversity of alligator weed in China by RAPD analysis [J]. Biodiversity and Conservation, 2003, 12(4): 637-645.
    [61] Ye W H, Li J, Cao H, L et al. Genetic uniformity of Alternanthera Philoxeroides in South China [J]. Weed Research, 2003, 43:297-302.
    [62] Zhang S T, Qin P and Wan S W. Analysis on the resource allocation structure of Spartina alterniflora ecological engineering from the energy benefits aspect [J]. Acta Ecological Sinica, 2000, 20(6): 1045-1049.
    [63] 曹洪麟, 陈树培, 丘向宇. 发展互花米草开发华南热带海滩[J]. 热带地理, 1997, 17(1): 41-46.
    [64] 车晋滇, 郭喜红. 北美一枝黄花[J]. 杂草科学, 1999, 1:17.
    [65] 陈家宽. 上海九段沙湿地自然保护区科学考察集[M]. 北京: 科学出版社. 2003, 94–115.
    [66] 陈宜瑜. 中国湿地研究[M]. 长春: 吉林科学技术出版社, 1995. 1-41.
    [67] 陈玉军, 郑松发, 廖宝文, 等. 珠海市淇澳岛红树林引种扩种问题的探讨. 广东林业科技, 2002, 18: 31-36.
    [68] 陈玉军, 郑松发, 廖宝文, 等. 红树植物海桑天然更新的初步研究[J]. 林业科学研究. 2003, 16(3): 306-311.
    [69] 陈中义, 李博, 陈家宽. 互花米草与海三棱藨草的生长特征和相对竞争能力[J]. 生物多样性, 2005, 13(2): 130-136.
    [70] 陈中义, 李博, 陈家宽. 米草属植物入侵的生态后果及管理对策[J]. 生物多样性, 2004, 12(2): 280-289.
    [71] 邓自发, 安树青, 智颖飙, 等. 外来种互花米草入侵模式与爆发机制[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(8): 2678-2686.
    [72] 董鸣, 刘建, 缪世利. 植物入侵性和克隆性. 第三届现代生态学讲座论文摘要集, 2005, 29-31.
    [73] 董世魁, 张媛, 温璐, 等. 生物入侵：无声的灾难. 环境保护圆桌论坛, 2008.
    [74] 谷艳芳, 丁圣彦, 李婷婷, 等. 盐胁迫对冬小麦幼苗干物质分配和生理生态特性的影响[J]. 生态学报. 2009, 29(2): 840-845.
    [75] 洪河. 受伤的“地球之肾”[J]. 生态经济, 2003, (07).
    [76] 黄华, 郭水良. 外来植物加拿大一枝黄花生理指标的季节动态及其适应意义[J]. 浙江师范大学学报(自然科学版)[J], 2005, 28(2): 201-205.
    [77] 黄华梅, 张利权. 上海九段沙互花米草种群动态遥感研究[J]. 植物生态学报, 2007, 31(1): 75-82.
    [78] 雷安平, 唐旭蔚. 不同盐度对红树植物——秋茄的胚轴生长发育的影响[J]. 广西林业科学, 2004, 33(3): 124-125.
    [79] 李博, 陈家宽. 生物入侵生态学: 成就与挑战. 世界科学技术研究与发展. 2002, 24(2): 26-36.
    [80] 李博, 徐炳声, 陈家宽. 从上海外来杂草区系剖析植物入侵的一般特征[J]. 生物多样性, 2001, 9(4): 446-457.
    [81] 李博. 生态学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2000. 279-286.
    [82] 李贺鹏. 外来入侵植物互花米草控制的生态学研究[D]. 华东师范大学, 2007.
    [83] 李合生. 植物生理生化实验原理与技术[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2000.
    [84] 李加林, 杨晓平, 童亿勤, 等. 互花米草入侵对潮滩生态系统服务功能的影响及其管理[J]. 海洋通报, 2005, 24(5):33-38.
    [85] 李媛媛, 赵磊, 陈小勇, 等. 上海的水花生来源于同一克隆[J]. 华东师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2004, (2): 107-109.
    [86] 梁霞, 张利权, 赵广琦. 芦苇与外来植物互花米草在不同CO2浓度下的光合特性比较[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(3): 842-848.
    [87] 廖宝文, 郑德璋, 郑松发, 等. 红树植物秋茄造林技术的研究[J]. 林业科学研究, 1996, 9(6): 586-592.
    [88] 廖岩, 陈桂株. 盐度对红树植物影响研究[J]. 湿地科学. 2007, 5(3): 266-273.
    [89] 林鹏, 陈德海, 肖向明, 等. 盐度对两种红树植物叶片糖类含量的影响[J]. 海洋学报. 1984, 6(6): 851-855.
    [90] 林鹏, 傅勤. 中国红树林环境生态及经济利用[M]. 北京, 高等教育出版社, 1995.
    [91] 林鹏. 中国东南部沿海岸红树林的类群及其分布[J]. 生态学报, 1981, 1(3): 283-290.
    [92] 林鹏. 中国红树林生态系统[M]. 北京：科学出版社. 1997.
    [93] 林鹏. 福建漳江口红树林湿地自然保护区综合科学考察报告[M]. 厦门:厦门大学出版社, 2001.
    [94] 刘建, 黄建华, 余振希, 等. 大米草的防除初探[J]. 海洋通报, 2000, 19(5): 68-72.
    [95] 鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法[M]. 北京:中国农业科技出版社, 1999.
    [96] 陆霞梅, 周长芳, 安树青, 等. 植物的表型可塑性、异速生长及其入侵能力. 生态学杂志, 2007, 26(9): 1438-1444.
    [97] 莫竹承, 何斌源, 范航清. 抚育措施对红树植物幼树生长的影响[J]. 广西科学. 1999, 6(3): 231-234.
    [98] 欧建, 卢昌义. 厦门外来种植物入侵风险指标体系的建立——以互花米草入侵风险评价为例[J]. 台湾海峡, 2006, 25(3): 437-444.
    [99] 潘瑞炽, 董愚得. 植物生理学[M]. 第3版. 北京:高等教育出版社. 1995, 16-17.
    [100] 彭少麟, 向言词. 植物外来种入侵及其对生态系统的影响[J]. 生态学报, 1999, 19(4): 560-568.
    [101] 沈永明, 刘咏梅, 陈全站. 江苏沿海互花米草(Spartina alterniflora Loisel)盐沼扩展过程的遥感分析[J]. 植物资源与环境学报, 2002, 11(2): 33-38.
    [102] 沈永明, 杨劲松, 曾华, 等. 我国对外来种互花米草的研究进展与展望[J]. 海洋环境科学, 2008, 27(4): 391-396.
    [103] 沈允钢, 许大全. 光合机构对环境的响应与适应. 见:余叔文主编. 植物生理与分子生物学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1992. 225-235.
    [104] 石福臣, 鲍芳. 盐和温度胁迫对外来种互花米草(Spartina alterniflora)生理生态特性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2007, 27(7): 2733-2741.
    [105] 宋连清. 互花米草及其对海岸的防护作用[J]. 东海海洋, 1997, 3(1): 11-18.
    [106] 宋明华, 董鸣. 群落中克隆植物的重要性[J]. 生态学报, 2002. 22(11): 1960-1967.
    [107] 孙兰菊, 岳围峰, 王金霞, 等. 植物耐盐机制的研究进展[J]. 海洋科学, 2001, 25(4): 28-3.
    [108] 孙书存, 朱旭斌, 吕超群. 外来种米草的生态功能评价与控制[J]. 生态学杂志, 2004, 23(3): 93-98.
    [109] 陶勇, 陈少风, 江明喜. 空心莲子草对水分变化的形态适应研究, 长江流域资源与环境, 2004, 13(5): 454-460.
    [110] 万方浩, 郭建英, 王德辉. 中国外来入侵生物的危害与管理对策[J]. 生物多样性, 2002, 10(1): 119-125.
    [111] 王虹扬, 黄沈发, 何春光, 等. 中国湿地生态系统的外来入侵种研究[J]. 湿地科学, 2006, 4(1): 7-12.
    [112] 王俊峰, 冯玉龙, 梁红柱. 紫茎泽兰光合特性对生长环境光强的适应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2004, 15(8): 1373-1377.
    [113] 王卿, 安树青, 马志军, 等. 入侵植物互花米草——生物学、生态学及管理[J]. 植物分类学报. 2006, 44(5): 559-588.
    [114] 王树功, 杨海生, 周永章, 等. 湿地植物生长模型在红树林湿地人工恢复调控中的应用——以珠江口淇澳岛红树林湿地恢复为例[J]. 西北植物学报, 2005, 25(10): 2024-2029.
    [115] 王文卿, 林鹏. 盐度对红树植物木榄生长的影响[J]. 厦门大学学报（自然科学版）, 1999, 38(2): 273-279.
    [116] 吴克强. 初谈滇池流域的生态平衡. 国内湖泊（水库）协作网通讯, 1993.1:47-49.
    [117] 吴彦琼, 胡玉佳. 外来植物南美蟛蜞菊、裂叶牵牛和五爪金龙的光合特性[J]. 生态学报, 2004, 24 (10): 2334-2339.
    [118] 伍世平, 王君健, 于志熙. 11种地被植物的耐荫性研究[J]. 武汉植物学研究, 1994, 12(4): 360-364.
    [119] 肖强, 郑海雷, 陈瑶, 等. 盐度对互花米草生长及脯氨酸、可溶性糖和蛋白质含量的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2005, 24(4) :373-376.
    [120] 徐炳声. 上海植物志[M]. 上海: 科学与技术出版. 1998.
    [121] 徐汝梅, 叶万辉. 生物入侵理论与实践[M]. 北京:科学出版社, 2003.
    [122] 徐阳春, 沈其荣, 冉炜. 长期免耕与施用有机肥对土壤微生物生物量碳、氮、磷的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2002, 39(1): 89-96.
    [123] 许卉, 赵丽萍. 盐胁迫对金银花生理生化的影响[J]. 湖北林业科技, 2007, 143: 9-12.
    [124] 许凯扬, 叶万辉, 李 静, 等. 入侵种喜旱莲子草对土壤水分的表型可塑性反应[J]. 华中师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2005, 39(1): 100-103.
    [125] 阎秀峰, 孙国荣, 李敬兰, 等. 羊草和星星草光合蒸腾日变化的比较研究[J]. 植物研究, 1994, 14(3): 287-291.
    [126] 张东, 杨明明, 李俊祥, 陈小勇. 崇明东滩互花米草无性扩散能力[J]. 华东师范大学学报（自然科学版）, 2006, 2: 130-135.
    [127] 张东. 崇明东滩互花米草的无性扩散与相对竞争力[D]. 华东师范大学, 2006.
    [128] 张宜辉, 王文卿, 吴秋城, 等. 福建漳江口红树林区秋茄幼苗生长动态[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(6): 1648-1656.
    [129] 张忠华, 胡刚, 梁士楚. 广西红树林资源与保护. 海洋环境科学, 2007, 26: 275-279, 282.
    [130] 张治国, 马福武. 土壤有机质对坡耕地土壤侵蚀及作物产量的影响[J]. 中国水土保持, 1997, (8): 11-13.
    [131] 张志良. 植物生理学实验指导（第二版）[M]. 北京：高等教育出版社, 1990.
    [132] 章成逸. 中国海岸带滩涂资源开发利用及综合评价[J]. 自然资源, 1991, 13(3): 10-13.
    [133] 赵广琦, 李贺鹏. 上海地区外来植物互花米草的入侵现状与治理探讨[J]. 园林科技, 2008, 1: 37-42.
    [134] 赵广琦, 张利权, 梁霞. 芦苇与入侵植物互花米草光合特性的比较[J]. 生态学报, 2005, 25(7): 1604-1611.
    [135] 赵明范, 葛成, 翟志中. 干旱地区次生盐碱地主要造林树种抗盐指标的确定及耐盐能力的排序[J]. 林业科学研究, 1997, 10(2): 194-198.
    [136] 郑松发, 陈玉军, 陈文沛等. 华南沿海基围渔塘内无瓣海桑 Sonneratia apetala 的生长效应[J]. 生态科学, 2004, 23(4): 320-322.
    [137] 中国国家环境保护总局《关于发布中国第一批外来入侵物种名单的通知》, 环发[2003] 11号.
    [138] 仲崇信, 卓荣宗, 周鸿彬. 互花米草引种栽培实验及其改土效果[J]. 南京大学学报(互花米草研究论文集), 1985, 44-82.
    [139] 朱晓佳, 钦佩. 外来种互花米草及米草生态工程[J]. 海洋科学, 2005, 27(12): 14-19.
    [140] 朱新广, 张其德, 匡廷云. NaCl对光合作用影响的研究进展[J]. 植物学通报, 1999, (3): 11-13.
    [141] 邹 琦. 植物生理学实验指导[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
    [142] 诸姮, 胡宏友, 卢昌义. 盐度对药用红树植物老鼠簕种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 厦门大学学报（自然科学版）, 2008, 47(1): 131-135.