(3.238.206.122) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/21 09:21
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:宋馥珊
研究生(外文):Fu-Shan Sung
論文名稱:墾丁高位珊瑚礁森林鳥類及哺乳動物對三種榕屬植物榕果之利用
論文名稱(外文):Fig consumption by birds and mammals of three Ficus species in a karst forest in Kenting, Southern Taiwan
指導教授:吳海音
指導教授(外文):Hai-Yin Wu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立東華大學
系所名稱:自然資源管理研究所
學門:環境保護學門
學類:環境資源學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2005
畢業學年度:94
語文別:中文
論文頁數:59
中文關鍵詞:種子掠食者榕果澀葉榕金氏榕大葉赤榕潛在種子傳播者雌雄異株
外文關鍵詞:dioeciousseed predatorspotential seed dispersersfigF. irisanF. ampelasF. caulocarpa
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:6
  • 點閱點閱:623
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:72
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
榕屬植物為多種食果動物重要的食物資源,特別是在其他果實缺乏的季節,因此有關鍵物種(keystone species)之稱。對共域不同種的榕樹而言,其提供動物食物資源的情形,利用榕果的動物種類與其相對利用頻度為何,諸多食果動物是其種子的掠食者亦或潛在傳播者,是本研究擬探討的問題。本研究以墾丁高位珊瑚礁森林中雌雄同株的大葉赤榕(F. caulocarpa)、雌雄異株的金氏榕(F. ampelas)及澀葉榕(F. irisana)為對象,於2004年12月至2005年12月期間,對三種榕樹分別選取26株、24株與30株樣樹,觀察並記錄各樣樹的結果期與榕果的發育期程,以及利用榕果的動物種類與數量。為界定榕果的發育期程,並建立由外觀區別的標準,對每一種/性別榕樹選取四樣樹,自果期開始起,每隔14天摘取10顆果樣測量果徑與果色,並各取出10粒種子進行萌芽實驗以計算發芽率。利用發芽率的變化將榕果的發育期程區分為種子未成熟(I)、部分成熟(II)與成熟(III)三階段,檢測各階段的果色與果徑是否具顯著差異,作為在野外判別果期的依據,並以各結果樣樹上多數榕果的發育階段作為該樣樹果期的發育階段。利用動物對I與III階段樣樹的造訪率(其在I或III階段被記錄到的總造訪隻次,除以對該階段的總觀察時數),判斷其在種子掠食者與潛在傳播者兩種角色扮演上的偏向。結果顯示研究期間所標定的三目標樹種之樣樹中,各月份皆有樣樹結果,可做為動物之食物資源。此外,共記錄到二種哺乳類及十種鳥類利用三目標樹種的榕果,其中以利用大葉赤榕榕果之動物種類最多,利用金氏榕榕果之動物種類次之,澀葉榕則最少被動物利用。利用榕果的動物中,鳥類以紅嘴黑鵯、哺乳類以台灣獼猴之相對數量最多。三目標樹種的果色在三階段間有別,且在各樣樹間的差異性小,較適合做為區分各階段榕果的外觀標準。對三目標樹種而言,除台灣獼猴對大葉赤榕偏向扮演種子掠食者外,其餘動物皆偏向扮演潛在種子傳播者。最後,在雌雄異株的金氏榕與澀葉榕中,動物對其雄果的利用情形,不論是在造訪動物的種類或數量上,都明顯較雌果為低。
Figs (Ficus spp., Moraceae) are important fruit resources for many frugivores, particularly during the period when other fruits are scarce, and so be called “ keystone species”. The present study was to explore the species composition of diurnal fig-eaters, their relative frequencies of consumption and the role as seed predators or potential seed dispersers to three sympatric Ficus species (monoecious F. caulocarpa, dioecious F. ampelas and F. irisana) in a karst forest in Kenting. A total of 80 sample trees of the three species were observed to record the occurrence and development of the figs as well as the frequencies of visit to the fruiting trees by different fig-eaters during Dec 2004 and Dec 2005. Four sample trees of each species/gender were chosen to monitor the development of the figs. Ten figs were collected from each sample tree since the crop began, and the diameters and colours were measured every 14 days. Ten seeds were obtained from each fig for germination experiment. The result showed that, among the sample trees of the three Ficus species, there were trees bearing figs every month. A total of two mammal species and ten bird species were seen to eat figs of the three Ficus species. More species of fig-eaters were recorded on F. caulocarpa, followed by F. ampelas and F. irisana. Among fig-eaters, Hypsipetes madagascariensis was found to be the most frequent avian visitor to the fruiting trees, while Macaca cyclopis was the most frequent mammalian visitor. According to the result of germination experiment, the development of a fig could be divided into three stages: immature (I), partly mature (II) and mature (III). And the color of figs was found to be a reliable criterion for stage determination. The fig crop of a sample tree could be identified according to the stage of the majority of figs. The tendency of each animal species as seed predators or potential seed dispersers was determined by the relative rates of its visit to fig-bearing trees in stage I versus stage III. Only M. cyclopis played the role as seed-predators for F. caulocarpa, while all the other species served as potential seed-dispersers of the three Ficus species. As for the two dioecious Ficus species, the number of fig-eating species and their relative frequencies of consumption were less for male trees than for female trees.
1.前言 1
2.研究地描述 5
3.材料與方法 6
3.1大葉赤榕、金氏榕及澀葉榕結果情形記錄 6
3.2造訪大葉赤榕、金氏榕及澀葉榕的動物種類及數量調查 8
3.3造訪大葉赤榕、金氏榕及澀葉榕的動物扮演角色之偏向評估 11
4.結果 14
4.1大葉赤榕、金氏榕及澀葉榕之結果情形 14
4.2造訪大葉赤榕、金氏榕及澀葉榕的動物種類及數量 15
4.3造訪大葉赤榕、金氏榕及澀葉榕的動物扮演角色之偏向 17
4.4金氏榕與澀葉榕雄果之發育階段及被動物利用的情形 22
5.討論 24
5.1榕屬植物對動物食物來源之提供 24
5.2動物對榕屬植物種子命運的影響 24
5.3雄果與雌果被取食情況的差異及影響 30
5.4後續研究建議 31
6.引用文獻 32
尤仲妮(2000)。恆春熱帶植物園區台灣獼猴活動模式與食性。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
巫紅霏(1996)。陽明山地區牛奶榕與牛奶榕小蜂之共生生態。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
吳海音、林曜松(1988)。墾丁地區台灣獼猴(Macaca cyclopis)的行為與生態學研究。行政院農委會生態研究第002號。
林佩蓉(2000)。福山試驗林食果動物對五種樟科樹木果實與種子的利用。國立東華大學自然資源管理研究所碩士論文。
周蓮香(1982)。台北植物園赤腹松鼠之行為研究。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
范孟雯(2003)。恆春熱帶植物園區台灣獼猴選果行為之研究。國立台灣大學生態學與演化生物學研究所碩士論文。
姚若潔(1998)。薜荔榕小蜂(Wiebesia pumilae(Hill))與薜荔(Ficus pumila var. pumila L.)之共生關係。國立台灣大學植物病蟲害學研究所碩士論文。
胡樹萱(1998)。墾丁高位珊瑚礁森林稜果榕開花週期與榕果小蜂交互關係之研究。私立東海大學生物學系碩士論文。
陳主恩(1999)。福山試驗林台灣獼猴(Macaca cyclopis)對於植物種子傳播的影響。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
陳燕玲(2000)。澀葉榕(Ficus irisana Elm.)與榕果小蜂之物候週期及種間關係,國立中興大學昆蟲學系碩士論文。
張可揚(1999)。宜蘭福山試驗林台灣獼猴之覓食策略。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
張雯純(2003)。嘉義地區金氏榕開花物候與授粉生態之研究。國立嘉義大學森林資源學系碩士論文。
曾喜育(1997)。蕙蓀林場牛奶榕與牛奶容小蜂之共生研究。國立中興大學森林學系碩士論文。
曾喜育(2004)。台灣產榕屬植物分類之研究。國立中興大學森林學系博士論文。
曾麗蓉(1999)。蕙蓀林場台灣榕開花物後與授粉生態之研究。國立中興大學森林學系碩士論文。
楊子欣(2004)。恆春地區台灣獼猴活動範圍使用之研究。國立東華大學自然資源管理研究所碩士論文。
楊遠波、劉和義、呂勝由(1999)。台灣維管束植物簡誌。台北市:中華民國行政院農業委員會。
裴家騏、陳貞志、邱春火、陳美汀、郭耀臨、劉彥芳(2002)。墾丁國家公園陸域野生哺乳類動物調查研究(第二年)。內政部營建署墾丁國家公園管理處保育研究報告第111號。
趙榮台、方國運、葛兆年、陳一銘、葉文琪(1993)。台北植物園內赤腹松鼠利用植物之研究。林業試驗所研究報告季刊,8(1),39-50。
劉業經、呂福原、劉辰雄(1994)。台灣樹木誌。國立中興大學農學院叢書,329-348。
蘇秀慧(1993)。宜蘭仁澤地區台灣獼猴(Macaca cyclopis)之食性研究。國立台灣大學動物學研究所碩士論文。
蘇鴻傑、蘇中原(1988)。墾丁國家公園植群之多變數分析。中華林學季刊,21(4),17-32。
Anstett, M. C., Hossaert-Mckey, & Kjellberg, F. (1997). Figs and fig pollinators: evolutionary conflicts in a coevolved mutualism. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12(3), 94-99.
August, A. V. (1981). Fig fruit comsumption and seed dispersal by Artibeus jamaicensis in the llanos of Venezuela. Reproductive botany, 70-76.
Beauchamp, G. (1998). The effect of group size on mean food intake rate in birds. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 73, 449-472.
Bleher, B., Potgieter, C. J., Johnson, D. N., & Böhning-Gaese, K. (2003). The important of figs for frugivores in a south African coastal forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 19, 375-386.
Borges, R. M. (1993). Figs, Malabar Giant Squirrels, and fruit shortages within two tropical Indian forest. Biotropica, 25(2), 183-190.
Breitwisch, R. (1983). Frugivores at a fruiting Ficus vine in a southern Cameroon tropical wet forest. Biotropica, 15(2), 125-128.
Bronstein J. L., & Hoffmann, K. (1987). Spatial and temporal variation in frugivory at a Neotropical fig, Ficus pertusa. Oikos, 49, 261-268.
Compton. S. G., Craig, A. J. F. K., & Waters, I. W. R. (1996). Seed dispersal in an African fig trees: Birds as high quantity, low quality dispersers? Journal of Biogeography, 23(4), 553-563.
Conklin, N. L., & Wrangham, R. W. (1994). The value of figs to a hind-gut fermenting frugivore: a nutritional analysis. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology, 22, 137-151.
Corlett, R. T. (1987). The phenology of Ficus fistulosa in Singapore. Biotropica, 19(2), 122-124.
Dumont, E. R., Weiblen, G. D., & Winkelmann, J. R. (2004). Preference of fig wasps and fruit bats for figs of functionslly dioecious Ficus ungens. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 20, 233-238.
Figueiredo, R. A. D. (1996). Vertebrates at neotropical fig species in a forest fragment. Tropical Ecology, 37, 139-141.
Gautier-Hion, A., Duplantier, J. M., Quris, R., Feer, F., Sourd, C., & Decoux, J. P. et al. (1985). Fruit characters as a basis of fruit choice and seed dispersal in a tropical forest vertebrate community. Oecologia, 65, 324-337.
Harrison, R. D., Yamamura, N., & Inoue, T. (2000). Phenology of a common roadside fig in Sarawak. Ecological Research, 15, 47-61.
Herrera, C. M., & Jordano, P. (1981). Prunus mahaleb and birds: the high-efficiency seed dispersal system of a temperate fruiting tree. Ecological Monographs, 51(2),203-218.
Howe, H. F. (1977). Bird activity and seed dispersal of a tropical wet forest tree. Ecology, 58(3),539-550.
Howe, H. F. (1980). Monkey dispersal and waste of a neotropical fruit. Ecology, 6(4), 944-959.
Howe, H. F., and Kerckhove, G. A. V. (1981). Removal of wild nutmeg (Virola surinamensis) corps by birds. Ecology, 62(4), 1093-1106.
Janzen, D. H. (1979). How to be a fig. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 10, 13-51.
Jordano, P. (1982). Migrant birds are the main seed dispersers of blackberries in southern Spain. Oikos, 38, 183-193.
Kalko, E. K. V., Herre, E. A., & Handley, C. O. (1996). Relation of fig fruit characteristics to fruit-eating bats in the New and Old World tropics. Jaurnal of Biogeography, 23, 565-576.
Keoning, W. D., Mumme, R.L., Carmen, W.J., & Stanback, M. T. (1994). Acorn production by oaks in central coastal California: variation within and among years. Ecology,75, 99-109.
Kjellberg, F., & Maurice, S. (1989). Seasonality in the reproductive phenology of Ficus: its evolution and its consequences. Experientia, 45, 653-660.
Knight, R. S., & Siegfried, W. R. (1983). Inter-relationship between type, size and colour of fruits and dispersal in Southern African trees. Oecologia, 56, 405-412.
Lambert, F. R., & Marshall, A. G. (1991). Keystone characteristics of bird-dispersed Ficus in a Malaysian lowl& rain forest. Journal of Ecology, 79, 793-809.
Mckey, D. (1975). The ecology of coecolving seed dispersal systems. In L. E. Gilbert & P. H. Raven (Eds), Coevolution of animals and plants(pp.159-191). University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, USA..
Mckey, D. B. (1989). Population biology of figs: applications for conservation. Experientia, 45, 661-673.
Mckey, M. H., Gibernau, M., & Frey, J. E. (1994). Chemosensory attraction of fig wasps to substances produced by receptive fig. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 70, 185-191.
Morton, E. S. (1979). A comparative survey of avian social systems in northern Venezuelan habitats. In J. F. Eisenberg (Ed), Vertebrate ecology in the northern neotropics(pp. 233-259). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Nason, J. D., Herre, E. A. & Hamrick,J. L. (1998). The breeding structure of a tropical keystone plant resource. Nature, 391 , 685-687.
Norconk, M. A., Grsfton, B. W., & Conklin-Brittatin, N.L. (1998). Seed dispersal by neotropical seed predators. American Journal of Primatology, 45(1), 103-126.
Patel, A. M., Hossaert-Mckey, M., & Mckey, D. (1993). Ficus-pollinator research in India: Past, present, and future. Current Science, 65, 243-253.
Sallabanks, R. (1992). Fruit fate, frugivory , and fruit characteristics: a study of the hawthorn, Crataegus monogyna (Rosaceae). Oecologia, 91, 296-304.
Serio-Silva, J. C., & Rico-Gray, V. (2002). Interacting effects of forest fragmentation and howler monkey foraging on germination and dispersal of fig seeds. Oryx, 36, 266-271.
Shanahan, M., So, S., Compton, S. G., & Corlett, R. (2001). Fig-eating by vertebrate frugivores: a global review. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 76, 529-572.
Spencer, H., Weiblen, G., & Flick, B. (1996). Phenology of Ficus variegata in a seasonal wet tropical forest at Cape Tribulation, Australia. Journal of Biogeography, 23(4), 467-475.
Terborgh, J. (1986). Keystone plant resources in the tropical forest. In M. E. Soulé (Ed.), Conservation biology : the science of scarcity and diversity (pp.330-344). Sinauer Associates, Inc., Publisher, Sunderl&, Massachusetts.
Ware, A. B., & Compton, S. G. (1994). Responses of fig wasps tp host plant volatile cues. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 24(3), 785-802.
Willson, M. F. (1993). Mammals as seed-dispersal mutualists in North America. Oikos, 67(1), 159-176.
Wrangham, R. W., Conklinm N. L., Etot, G., Obua, J., Hunt, K. D., Hauser, M. D., et al. (1993). The value of figs to chimpanzees. International Journal of Primatology, 14(2), 243-256.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔