Seed dispersal of Korean pine Pinus koraiensis labeled by two different tags in a northern temperate forest, northeast China
Seed dispersal of Korean pine Pinus koraiensis labeled by two different tags in a northern temperate forest, northeast China
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11284-007-0392-x
复制
发表时间：
2008-03
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
X. Yi;Zhishu Xiao;Zhibin Zhang
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
X. Yi;Zhishu Xiao;Zhibin Zhang
采用10 ~ 12 cm金属线系在红松种子上1 × 3 cm锡标签（总重0.32 g）和2 × 4 cm白色塑料标签（总重0.57 g）两种标记方法，研究了两种方法对红松小鼠类种子传播的影响。共释放种子600粒，主要评估4个方面：(1)种子存活率差异，(2)小鼠类贮藏行为差异，(3)传播距离差异，(4)种子丢失比例差异。结果表明，金属丝塑料标记的种子脱粒速度快于金属丝锡标记的种子。在现场取食种子的比例上无明显差异（线塑标记的种子为42%，线锡标记的种子为52%）。我们发现41%和1%的种子被移走和储存在电线塑料标记和电线锡标记的种子中。然而，电线塑料标记和电线锡标记的种子缺失率分别为2.33%和14%，其最终命运未知。我们发现电线塑料标签的种子比电线锡标签的种子更容易跟踪，因为白色塑料标签在野外环境中比锡标签更突出。线塑标记种子和线锡标记种子的平均传播距离分别为4.11±2.40 m和3.01±2.06 m，差异较大。尽管大多数种子被就地食用或移除后被吃掉，但41%的种子被储存起来，以获取带有金属丝塑料标签的种子，远高于带有金属丝锡标签的种子。钢丝塑料标记种子共发现71个主缓存（123个种子），平均缓存大小为1.73，最大缓存大小为6。然而，只发现了三个贮藏点，而且贮藏点的大小与金属锡标记的种子的大小相同。上述数据表明，使用不同的标记方法来跟踪种子命运存在一定的不确定性。尽管它们在帮助追踪种子传播的啮齿动物的种子传播或运动方面很有效，但不同的标记方法——包括大小、颜色和质量——需要在圈闭实验中得到充分的了解。
Two types of tagging methods, i.e., a 1 × 3-cm tin tag attached to seed with a 10- to 12-cm metal wire (total weight 0.32 g) and a 2 × 4-cm white plastic tag fastened to seed with an identical metal wire (total weight 0.57 g) were used to study their effects on seed dispersal of Korean pine by small rodents. A total of 600 seeds were released to assess four main points: (1) difference in seed survival rates, (2) difference in caching behaviors of small rodents, (3) difference in dispersal distances, and (4) proportion of seed missing. The results demonstrated that seed removal for wire-plastic-tagged seeds was faster than that for wire-tin-tagged seeds. There was no apparent difference in the proportion of seeds eaten in situ (42% and 52% for wire-plastic-tagged seeds and wire-tin-tagged seeds, respectively). We found 41% and 1% of seeds were moved and hoarded for wire-plastic-tagged seeds and wire-tin-tagged seeds, respectively. However, 2.33% and 14% of seeds were missing, and their ultimate fates were not known for wire-plastic-tagged seeds and wire-tin-tagged seeds, respectively. We found the wire-plastic-tagged seeds easier to track than the wire-tin-tagged seeds due to the fact that the white plastic tags were more salient than the tin tags in field environments. The average dispersal distances were 4.11 ± 2.40 m and 3.01 ± 2.06 m for wire-plastic-tagged seeds and wire-tin-tagged seeds, respectively, and showed great difference. Despite most being eaten in situ or after removal, 41% of seeds were cached for wire-plastic-tagged seeds, much more than for wire-tin-tagged seeds. A total of 71 primary caches (123 seeds) were found for wire-plastic-tagged seeds, with the average and maximum cache sizes being 1.73 and 6, respectively. However, only three caches were found, and cache size was equal to one for wire-tin-tagged seeds. The above data suggests there is some uncertainty in different tagging methods to used track seed fates. Despite their effectiveness in helping to trace seed dispersal or movement by seed-dispersing rodents, different tagging methods—including size, color, and mass—need to be fully understand in enclosure experiments.