臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

Braun-Blanquet學派之植群分類方法適用於建立正式之分類系統。然而，台灣學界目前所使用之量測介量以Wisconsin學派的重要值指數為主，此與Braun-Blanquet學派所採用之覆蓋度-豐量級為量測介量，兩者間之植群分類結果是否有差異，為本研究之目的。選擇濁口溪流域作為研究地區，利用多變數分析法之非計量多向度量度法與雙向指標種進行植群分析，並比較不同介量間之群叢與群團單位的樣區、特徵種與優勢種。結果發現在群叢階層不同介量之植群型間並無穩定的對應模式，在群團階層則有，此有待以DBH與覆蓋度兩種介量進一步研究。

Vegetation classification of Braun-Blanquet approach of vegetation ecology is widely accepted as a method to establish formal classification system. However, the measuring parameter commomly used by Taiwan ecologists is important value index (IVI) of Wisconsin school. The purpose of this paper is to study whether the different measuring parameters (IVI vs. cover-abundance scales) result in different vegetation classifications or not. Jhuokou River Basin was used as the studied area. Vegetation sampling data based on different parameters were analyzed by nonmetric multdimesional scaling（NMDS）and two-way indicator species analysis（TWINSAPN）and the resulted associations and alliances compared with their member plots, character species and dominant species. The results indicated that these attributes of alliances from both methods were higher regularity than associations, but further research is still needed to clarify these regularity patterns.

摘要 I
Abstract II
目次 III
圖目次 V
表目次 VI
壹、前言 1
貳、材料與方法 3
一、研究地區概述 3
(一) 地理位置 3
(二) 地形、地質與土壤 3
(三) 氣候 4
(四) 前人研究 4
二、取樣方法與樣區設置 5
(一) 取樣方法 5
(二) 樣區設置 5
三、植物社會調查 6
(一) 計數樣區法─胸高直徑測量 6
(二) 抽取樣取法─覆蓋度-豐富級 6
四、資料統計與分析 8
(一) 原始資料彙整 8
(二) 資料分析之方法 9
參、結果 13
一、 抽取樣區法(含木本、草本層) 之植群分類 13
(一) 植群分析 13
(二) 植群分類階層系統 14
二、 抽取樣取法(含木本、草本)與計數樣區法(IVI)之植群分類比較 14
(一) 以群叢階層為比較基礎 14
(二) 以群團階層為比較基礎 15
三、 抽取樣區法(只含木本)之植群分類 16
(一) 植群分析 16
(二) 植群分類階層系統 17
四、 抽取樣取法(只含木本)與計數樣區法(IVI)之植群分類比較 17
(一) 以群叢階層為比較基礎 17
(二) 以群團階層為比較基礎 18
五、 各植群型的FPFI相似度 19
肆、討論 21
一、 樣區比較 21
二、 特徵種比較 21
三、 優勢種比較 22
四、 相似度比較 24
伍、引用文獻 25

王相華 1991 扇平及南鳳山地區之植群分類及分布序列 林業試驗所研究報告季刊 6 (2)：185-201。
交通部觀光局茂林國家風景管理處 2002 茂林國家風景區區內潛在危險區域調查暨應變系統建構規劃。
沈瑞琛、陳立楨、黃獻文 2003 溪南山地區植群之研究 中華林學季刊 35 (2)：105-130。
林坤益 2003 藤枝森林遊樂區植群生態之研究 國立屏東科技大學森林系碩士學位論文。
林逸盈、劉和義 2005 第三屆台灣植群多樣性研討會論文集 行政院農委會 Pp. 112-128。
陳永修 1992 多納溫泉溪上游集水區植群生態之研究 國立台灣大學森林系碩士學位論文。
葉慶龍、范貴珠 1997 雙鬼湖自然保護區植群生態研究 台灣省林務局保育研究系列89-07號。
鈴木時夫 1938 臺灣北部桶後溪地域照葉喬木林形成之植物群叢 (預報) 生態學研究 4 (4): 297-314。(日文)
劉和義 2004 植群多樣性之分析方法 第二屆台灣植群多樣性研討會論文集 行政院農業委會 Pp. 39-54。
歐辰雄、呂金誠、邱清安、王志強、張瓊美、曾喜育 1994 雙鬼湖自然保護區植群生態調查 台灣省林務局保育研究系列。
鄭美麗 1998 整合性地理資訊系統應用於植群監測之研究－以出雲山自然保留區為例 國立中興大學森林系碩士論文。
蘇鴻傑 1986 植群生態多變數分析方法之研究 I. 原始資料檔案之編製 中華林學季刊 19 (4): 87-103。
蘇鴻傑 1987 森林生育地因子及其定量評估 中華林學季刊 20 (1): 1-4。
蘇鴻傑 1995 台灣森林植群研究之回顧與展望 林業試驗所百年慶學術研討會論文集 行政院農業委員會 Pp. 23-27。
Biging, G. S. & Dobbertin, M. 1992. A comparison of distance dependence competition measures for height and basal area growth of individual conifer trees. For. Sci. 38(3): 695-720.
Biging, G. S. & Dobbertin, M. 1995. Evaluation of competition indices in individual tree growth models. For. Sci. 41(2): 360-377.
Braun-Blanquet, J. 1932. Plant Sociology: The study of plant communities. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, USA.
Bruelheide, H. & Chytrý, M. 2000. Towards unification of national vegetation classification: A comparison of two methods for analysis of large data sets. J. Veg. Sci. 11: 295-306.
Chytrý, M., Tichý, L, Holt, J. & Botta-Dutát, Z. 2002. Determination of diagnostic species with statistical fidelity measures. J. Veg. Sci. 13: 79-90.
Curtis, J. T. & McIntosh, R. P. 1950. The interrelations of certain analytic and synthetic phytosociological characters. Ecology, 31(3): 434-455.
Gauch, H. G.. 1977. Ordiflex - A flexible computer program for four ordination techniques: weighted averages, polar ordination, principal components analysis, and reciprocal averaging, Release B. Ecology and Systematics, Ithaca, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, New York, USA.
Grabherr, G. & Kojima, S. 1993. Vegetation diversity and classification systems. In Solomon, A. M. & Shugart, H. H. (eds.), Vegetation dynamics and global change. Chapman & Hall, New York, USA.
Grabherr, G. Gottfried, M. & Pauli, H. 2000. GLORIA: A global observation research initiative in alpine environments. Mt. Res. Dev. 20(2): 190-192.
Grossman, D. H., Faber-Langendoen, D., Weakley, M., Anderson, M., Bourgeron, P., Crawford, R., Goodin, K., Landaal, S., Metzler, K., Patterson, K., Pyne, M., Reid, M., & Sneddon, L. 1998. Terrestrial vegetation of the United States, Vol.Ⅰ The natural vegetation classification system: development, status and applications. The Natural Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
Grote R. 2003. Estimation of crown radii and crown projection area from stem size and tree position. Ann. For. Sci. 60: 393-402.
Hennekens, S. M. & Schaminée, J. H. J. 2001. TURBOVEG, a comprehensive database management system for vegetation data. J. Veg. Sci. 12: 589-591.
Kent, M. & Corker, P. 1992. Vegetation description and analysis: a practical approach. John Wiley & Sons, London, UK.
Lawrence R. G. & Dennis M. M. 1995. The Relationship of diameter at breast height and crown diameter for four species groups in Hardin County, Tennessee. South. J. Appl. For. 19(4): 177-181.
Maybury, K. P. (ed.), 1999. Seeing the forest and the tree: ecological classification for conservation. The Nature Conservancy, Arlingtion, Virginia, USA.
McCune, B. & Grace, J. B. 2002. Analysis of ecological communities. MjM software design, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USA.
McCune, B. & Mefford, M. J. 1999. PC-ORD multivariate analysis of ecological data. Version 4.27. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, USA.
Mueller-Dombois, D. & Ellenberg, H. 1974. Amis and methods of vegetation ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York,USA.
Numata, M., Miyawaki, A. & Itow, D. 1972. Natural and semi-natural vegetation of Japan. Blumea 20(2): 435-496.
Oksanen, J. & Minchin, P.R. 1997. Instability of ordination results under changes in input data data order: explanations and remedies. J. Veg. Sci. 8: 447-454.
Pignatti, S., Oberdofer, E., Schaninée, J. H. J. & Westhoff, V. 1995. On the concept of vegetation class in phytosociology. J. Veg. Sci. 6: 143-152.
Rohlf, F. J. 2000. NTSYSpc, Numerical taxanomy and multivariate analysis system Version 2.11S. Applied Biostastistics Inc., New York, USA.
Samantha J. G., Gregory S. B. & Eward C. M. 2000. Modeling conifer tree crown radius and estimating canopy cover. For. Ecol. Manag. 126: 405-416.
Su, H. J. 1984. Studies on the climate and vegetation types of the natural forests in Taiwan. II: Alititudinal vegetation zones in relation to temperature. Quart. J. Chin. Forest. 17(4): 57-73.
Tausch, R. J., Charlet, D. A., Weixelman, D. A. & Zamudio, D. C. 1995. Patterns of ordination and classification instability resulting from changes in input data order. J. Veg. Sci. 6: 897-902.
Tichý, L. 2002. JUICE, software for vegetation classification. J. Veg. Sci. 13: 451-253.
Tichý L. 2005. New similarity indices for the assignment of relevés to the vegetation units of an existing phytosociological classification. Plant Ecol. 179:67-72.
van der Maarel, E. 2005. Vegetation ecology - an overview. Pp.1-51. in: van der Maarel, E. (ed.), Vegetation ecology. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
van Groenewoud, H. 1992. The robustness of correspondence, detrended correspondence and TWINSPAN Analysis. J. Veg. Sci. 3: 239-246.
van Tongeren, O. F. R. 1995. Similarity and dissimilarity. Pp. 176-179. in: Jongman, R. H. G., ter Braak, C. J. F. & van Tongeren, O. F. R. (eds.), Data analysis community and landscape ecology. Cambrige Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.
Walter, H. & Breckle, S.-W. 2002. Walter’s vegetation of the earth: the ecological system of the geo-biosphere; translated from the 7th completely revised and enlarged German edition by Gudrun and David Lawlor.-4th, completely rev. and enl. ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, German.
Westhoff, V. & van der Maarel, E. 1978. The Braun-Blanquet approach. Pp. 287-399. in: Whittaker, R. H. (ed.), Classification of plant communities. Junk, Hague, Netherlands.
Whittaker, R. H. 1962. Classification of natural communities. Bot. Rev. 28: 1-239.
Whittaker, R. H. 1978. Approach to classifying vegetation. Pp.1-31. in: Whittaker, R. H. (ed.), Classification of plant communities. Junk, Hague, Netherlands.