放牧生态学与草地管理的相关概念：Ⅰ.偏食性

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2014.03.001

草地学报 ›› 2014, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (3): 433-438.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2014.03.001

• 专论与综述 • 下一篇

放牧生态学与草地管理的相关概念：Ⅰ.偏食性

王德利, 王岭

东北师范大学草地科学研究所植被生态科学教育部重点实验室, 吉林长春 130024

收稿日期:2013-09-03 修回日期:2013-11-18 出版日期:2014-06-15 发布日期:2014-06-04
作者简介:王德利（1963- ），男，辽宁锦州人，教授，研究方向为草地生态学，E-mail：wangd@nenu.edu.cn
基金资助:
农业部行业公益项目（201003019）；国家自然科学基金（31230012）（31370453）资助

Notes on the Concept of Preference in Grazing Ecology and Grassland Management

WANG De-li, WANG Ling

Institute of Grassland Science, Northeast Normal University, Key Laboratory of Vegetation Ecology, Ministry of Education, Changchun, Jilin Province 130024, China

Received:2013-09-03 Revised:2013-11-18 Online:2014-06-15 Published:2014-06-04

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本文对放牧生态学中的一个基本概念-偏食性的涵义（属性）与维度等进行了相对全面地释义；并对比分析了与之密切相关的适口性概念。偏食性是指动物基于自身特性以及动物体状态（包括遗传特征、发育阶段、生理与营养状态等），在不受食物供给量限制的条件下，对所在生境中食物（或植物种类）表现出的采食程度差异，它具有动物依赖性、动态性及相对性。偏食性的测度能够一定程度地反映动物的食性选择趋向，或者体现动物对生境中不同食物的潜在采食或消耗量；对偏食性的分析还有助于解释动物的食性选择策略，有益于揭示动物的采食行为规律。偏食性的维度包括持续偏食性与即时偏食性，以及绝对偏食性与相对偏食性。持续偏食性是动物经过长期进化形成的、对某种食物表现出较长时间的稳定的采食强度，即时偏食性是动物在某一时间对食物的采食强度，即动物偏食性的瞬时度量；绝对偏食性是动物在面对某种单一食物、于自由采食状态下所度量的对该食物的采食强度，绝对偏食性可以被认为是动物最基本的偏食性维度，而相对偏食性是指同时提供2种或多种食物背景下，所度量的动物对某种食物的自由选择采食强度。深刻认识、理解动物的偏食性概念及涵义，并将之有效地应用于实际的草地放牧管理之中，对于发展动物采食理论，动、植物协同适应及进化理论，有效实施草地家畜管理都具有突出的科学价值和实践意义。

关键词: 偏食性, 适口性, 采食, 放牧生态学, 草地管理

Abstract:

For this paper, preference as one of the basic concepts is described from its contexts and dimensions. Firstly, preference in generally is defined by foraging intensity without grazing pressure, and animal preference, having species-specific, i.e. endogenous genetic structure and developmental or physiological characters, also may refer to potential diet selectivity or foraging strategy. Second, based on foraging time-scale and habitat, two couples of preference dimension are put forward as continuous preference vs. instaneous preference, and absolute preference vs. relative preference. Continuous preference is characterized as a stable long-term foraging intensity under evolutionary experiences, but instaneous preference for a short-term foraging intensity for animals. Absolute preference is here defined by voluntary intake within the foraging habitat with one kind of food, and relative preference refers to those foraging habitats within two or multiple foods. We suggested that it is essential to further explore the contexts, significances, and measurement of animal preference, and their implications to foraging theory, co-adaptation and co-evolution between plant and herbivore, as well as grassland or grazing management practices.

Key words: Preference, Palatability, Foraging, Grazing ecology, Grassland management

中图分类号:

王德利, 王岭. 放牧生态学与草地管理的相关概念：Ⅰ.偏食性[J]. 草地学报, 2014, 22(3): 433-438.

WANG De-li, WANG Ling. Notes on the Concept of Preference in Grazing Ecology and Grassland Management[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2014, 22(3): 433-438.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2014.03.001

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2014/V22/I3/433

参考文献

[1] Hodgson J, Illius A W. The ecology and management of grazing systems [M]. Australia, Wallingford: CAB International, 1996
[2] Wang D L, Han G D, Bai Y G. Interaction between foraging behaviour of herbivores and grassland resources in the eastern Eurasian steppes[M]//Grassland: A globe resource. The Netherlands:Wageningen Academic Publishers,2005:97-110
[3] 滕星,王德利,张宝田. 羊草(Leymus chinensis)草地雨天放牧与非雨天放牧的绵羊采食特征[J]. 生态学报,2006,26(3):762-767
[4] Gordon I J, Prins H H T. The ecology of browsing and grazing [M]. Germany: Spring-Verlag, 2008
[5] Krebs C J. Ecological methodology [M]. 2nd Edition. California: US Addison, Menlo Park: Wesley Longman, Inc., 1999
[6] Liu J S, Wang L, Wang D L, et al. Plants can benefit from herbivory: Stimulatory effects of sheep saliva on growth of Leymus chinensis [J]. PLoS ONE,2012,7(1):e29259
[7] Olff H, Ritchie M E, Prins H H T. Global environmental controls of diversity in large herbivores [J]. Nature, 2002,415(6874):901-904
[8] Wang L, Wang D L, He Z B, et al. Mechanisms linking plant species richness to foraging of a large herbivore [J]. Journal of Applied Ecology,2010,47(4):868-875
[9] Crawley M J. Herbivory: The dynamics of animal-plant interactions [M]. UK, Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1983
[10] 王德利. 植物与草食动物之间的协同适应及进化[J]. 生态学报,2004,24(11):2641-2648
[11] 陈化鹏,马建章,高晓芳. 有蹄类动物对食物的选择性及其确定[J]. 野生动物,1992,69(5):29-31
[12] 王旭,王德利,刘颖,等. 羊草草地生长季放牧山羊采食量和食性选择[J]. 生态学报,2002,22(5):661-667
[13] Wang L, Wang D L, Liu J S, et al. Diet selection variation of a large herbivore in a feeding experiment with increasing species numbers and different plant functional group combinations [J]. Acta Oecologica,2011,37(3):263-268
[14] Villalba J J, Provenza F D. Self-medication and homeostatic behaviour in herbivores: Learning about the benefits of nature's pharmacy [J]. Animal,2007,1(9):1360-1370
[15] 中国农业大学. 草地学[M]. 北京:中国农业出版社,1982:69-70
[16] Molyneux R J, Ralphs M H. Plant toxins and palatability to herbivores [J]. Journal of Range Management,1992,45(1):13-18
[17] 任继周. 草业大辞典[M]. 北京:中国农业出版社,2008:748
[18] 王岭,王德利. 放牧家畜食性选择机制研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报,2007,18(1):205-211
[19] Forbes J M. Consequences of feeding for future feeding [J]. Comparative and Biochemistry and Physiology,2001,128(3):463-470
[20] Krueger W C. Evaluating animal forage preference [J]. Journal of Range Management,1972,25(6):471-475
[21] Wang L, Wang D L, Bai Y G, et al. Spatial distributions of multiple plant species affect herbivore foraging selectivity [J]. Oikos,2010,119(2):401-408
[22] Wang L, Wang D L, Bai Y G, et al. Spatially complex neighboring relationships among grassland plant species as an effective mechanism of defense against herbivory [J]. Oecologia,2010,164(1):193-200
[23] Loehle C, Rittenhouse L R. An analysis of forage preference indices [J]. Journal of Range Management,1982,35(3):316-319
[24] Manly B F J, McDonald L, Thomas D L. Resource selection by animals: Statistical design and analysis for field studies [M]. 2nd Ed. London: Chapman & Hall, 1992
[25] Huang Y, Wang Y, Wang D L, et al. The effect of plant spatial pattern within a patch on foraging selectivity of grazing sheep [J]. Landscape Ecology,2012,27(6):911-919
[26] 王德利,王岭. 草食动物与草地植物多样性互作关系研究进展[J]. 草地学报,2011,19(4):699-704

放牧生态学与草地管理的相关概念：Ⅰ.偏食性

Notes on the Concept of Preference in Grazing Ecology and Grassland Management

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	侯路路, 王旭, 张翔, 闫玉春, 闫瑞瑞, 程利, 辛晓平. 放牧强度对肉牛行为的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 1974-1982.
[2]	高娟婷, 孙飞达, 霍霏, 张履冰, 周俗, 杨廷勇, 边巴扎西. 无人机遥感技术在草地动植物调查监测中的应用与评价[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(1): 1-9.
[3]	张艳芬, 杨晓霞, 董全民, 张春平, 俞旸, 杨增增, 冯斌, 褚晖, 魏琳娜, 张小芳. 牦牛和藏羊混合放牧对放牧家畜采食量和植物补偿性生长的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2019, 27(6): 1607-1614.
[4]	童涛, 张开栋, 吴玉江, 索朗达, 巴贵, 杨芳, 陈玉林, 杨雨鑫. 西藏那曲地区放牧草地营养和产量的季节性变化与西藏绒山羊采食喜好研究[J]. 草地学报, 2019, 27(1): 104-111.
[5]	王樱洁, 蒋梦宇, 陈孝龙, 常思颖, 孙海霞. 不同季节虎尾草对绵羊采食量和养分消化率的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(6): 1449-1453.
[6]	李艳龙, 石椿珺, 程建伟, 郭旭东, 张桐瑞, 李永宏. 内蒙古典型草原三种家畜采食量和食性选择的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(5): 1091-1096.
[7]	张昌吉, 李成, 成述儒, 张利平, 滚双宝. 甘肃高山细毛羊成年母羊四季采食量及消化率测定[J]. 草地学报, 2017, 25(3): 651-656.
[8]	穆少杰, 朱超, 周可新, 李建龙. 内蒙古草地退化防治对策及碳增汇途径研究[J]. 草地学报, 2017, 25(2): 217-225.
[9]	孙海霞, 常思颖, 陈孝龙, 钟荣珍, 房义, 周道玮. 不同季节刈割羊草对绵羊采食量和养分消化率的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2016, 24(6): 1369-1373.
[10]	吴铁成, 吴建平, 赵生国, 焦婷, 九麦扎西, 梁建勇, 刘振恒, 卡召加. 甘南玛曲不同年龄欧拉型藏羊放牧采食量季节动态研究[J]. 草地学报, 2016, 24(2): 317-321.
[11]	朱玉浩, 穆蓁, 张艳艳, 王忠美, 王堃, 戎郁萍. 差额法和粪氮指数法对估测放牧绵羊采食量的影响研究[J]. 草地学报, 2015, 23(4): 865-869.
[12]	武瑞鑫, 邵新庆, 胡新振, 钟梦莹, 位晓婷, 潘多, 张德罡. 披针叶黄华茎叶性状对不同草地管理措施的响应及其生长关系研究[J]. 草地学报, 2015, 23(3): 476-482.
[13]	格根图, 刘燕, 贾玉山. 草木樨干草营养价值及饲喂绒山羊的效果研究[J]. , 2013, 21(2): 401-405.
[14]	孙泽威, 邓波, 娄玉杰, 周道玮. 饱和链烷烃技术测定放牧动物营养状况的几个关键问题[J]. 草地学报, 2012, 20(3): 389-392.
[15]	李凌浩, 王堃, 斯琴毕力格. 新时期我国草地环境科学发展战略的思考[J]. , 2012, 20(2): 199-206.