臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

小葉欖仁目前於台灣各地普遍栽植，乃近二十年來頗受喜愛的新樹種，而這批成木其中部份乃當初採嫁接方式所繁殖的苗木，其砧木為欖仁。隨時間這些嫁接苗已長成大樹，也明顯出現嫁接變異。除於嫁接之癒合處特別腫脹外，砧木還明顯細縮，中央主幹也不再筆直，且樹幹會於嫁接處之上、下部位出現不同之樹皮顏色，下部為欖仁其樹皮明顯較暗褐色，且幹基易形成板根。本研究主要目的係探討嫁接小葉欖仁於目前之生長狀況，瞭解嫁接對小葉欖仁所產生的變異，並比較嫁接與非嫁接之差異，以及預測嫁接苗木未來可能引發的問題。本研究採實地調查方法，以中正大學與台中市為調查樣區。研究結果顯示嫁接之小葉欖仁較易形成板根，其板根規模明顯較非嫁接者長、厚且高，乃因砧木為欖仁較小葉欖仁易形成明顯之粗大板根。另外發現嫁接位置(癒合處)之高低會影響莖幹細縮百分比，同胸徑比較發現嫁接位置越低其莖幹細縮越不明顯；癒合處高低差會影響砧木粗細高差，癒合處高差越小(平切之高差為零)其砧木粗細高差也越小。本研究結果證實嫁接會產生變異，較明顯的現象乃砧木細縮，擔心未來細縮越來越明顯時，高大之小葉欖仁會於細縮處折斷而潛伏倒塌危機。因此建議中大型觀賞喬木最好不要以嫁接方式繁殖，萬不得已時嫁接部位以越低越好，低至根部嫁接較不會產生明顯細縮，另外建議嫁接採平切而不要斜切，中央主幹較易保有其平直挺拔的特性。至於目前樹幹已明顯細縮之嫁接小葉欖仁，建議除截頂以降低其株高外並加強支柱，以降低不預警時之倒塌對人車所造成的威脅。

At present, Terminalia boivinii has been widely planted throughout Taiwan, which is considered as a prevalent and new plant species for the past twenty years. Some of the adult trees are bred from the grafted nursery stocks, whose rootstock is Terminalia catappa As the times goes by, these grafted stocks have grown into big trees, which also exhibit obvious grafting variation. In addition to particular swelling at the callus, the rootstock is notably thinned and shrunk, and the tree trunks are no longer straight or upright. Grafted branch would have different bark colors on the upper and lower parts. Since the lower part is Terminalia catappa, its bark is distinctly dark brown. The root may form buttress. The main purpose of this study is to investigate the current growing state of the grafted Terminalia boivinii, understand the variation of grafting on Terminalia boivinii, compare the difference between grafted and non-grafted Terminalia boivinii, and predict the possible problems of grafted stocks. This study was based on on-site investigation, and the research area was National Chung Cheng University and Taichung City. The results showed that the grafted Terminalia boivinii is likely to form buttress, and the size of buttress is much larger, in length, thickness, and height, than non-grafted samples. Terminalia boivinii with rootstock of Terminalia may easily form large buttress. Also, the position of the callus may affect the percentage of trunk thinning and shrinking. Comparison of the diameter of trunk showed that, as the grafting position is lower, the trunk thinning and shrinking is less obvious. The position of callus would affect the thickness and height of the rootstock. When the height difference of the callus of callus (height difference of horizontal cutting is zero), the thickness and height difference of the rootstock is also smaller. The results proved that the grafting produces variation, notably the rootstock thinning and shrinking, which may be more serious as the tree grows. The thinning and shrinking branch on tall Terminalia boivinii may likely to break, thus leading to collapse. Therefore, it is suggested to avoid using grafting to breed landscape trees. If grafting is necessary, the grafting position should be as low as possible so that the root grafting would not have obvious thinning and shrinking. In addition, the grafting should adopt horizontal cutting, instead of oblique cutting, so that the trunks can retain straight and upright. For the grafted Terminalia boivinii whose trunks are obviously thinned and shrunk, it is suggested to cut off the tree top to reduce its height and strengthen its strut, in order to avoid the risk of sudden collapse.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 研究範圍 3
第三節 研究內容與流程 3
第二章 文獻回顧 5
第一節 名詞釋義 5
第二節 小葉欖仁與欖仁基本特性 7
第三節 嫁接相關理論 13
第四節 喬木根系相關理論 20
第三章 先驅研究 25
第一節 初步調查計畫 25
第二節 初步調查結果 28
第四章 研究方法 34
第一節 研究基地概述 34
第二節 研究架構 42
第三節 研究假設 45
第四節 調查方法 47
第五章 結果與討論 54
第一節 嫁接 54
第二節 非嫁接 94
第三節 嫁接與非嫁接小葉欖仁比較 102
第四節 相關分析 114
第六章 結論與建議 127
第一節 結論 127
第二節 建議 132
參考文獻 138
附錄 調查基本資料 143

1.小葉欖仁被腰斬光禿禿很難看， (2006) ，聯合報，C2版。
2.中央氣象局(2000)，臺灣累年氣象報告，臺北。
3.王露儀、洪西洲、李明仁，（2003），台灣烏心石與蘭嶼烏心石之嫁接及其生理特性，中華林學季刊，36(2)，149-158。
4.行道樹根伸長路面被翻起， (2003)，聯合報，B2版。
5.吳昭祥、王銘琪，（1981），圖解觀賞植物繁殖技術，台北：淑馨出版社。
6.阮明淑，（1998），園藝科技術語，台北：農業科學資料服務中心。
7.林怡凡，（2007），台中市垂榕地面氣生根對人行道硬體破壞之研究，碩士論文，東海大學景觀研究所，台中。
8.林松青，(2000)，強颱掠境路樹倒了三千株，聯合報，17版。
9.邵偉榕，（2001），樹木根系對人行道破壞之研究-以臺北市十種行道樹為例，碩士論文，東海大學景觀研究所，台中。
10.范榮達，(2007)，路樹遭潑鹽酸枝葉枯黃死亡，聯合報，C2版。
11.張弘昌，(2005)，東英公園地不平老人常摔倒，聯合報，C2版。
12.許仁宏、吳玉珍，（2002），園藝學，台北：徐氏文教基金會。
13.陳依苓，（2005），木棉造成民眾困擾程度之研究，碩士論文，東海大學景觀研究所，台中。
14.陳俊雄、高瑞卿，（2004），台灣的行道樹圖鑑，台北：貓頭鷹出版社。
15.章錦瑜，（1999），台中市行道樹之根系對鋪面與路緣石破壞程度之調查，東海學報，40（6），49-55。
16.章錦瑜，（2000），植物根群及其對構造物之破壞，科學農業，48(11，12)，314-321。
17.章錦瑜，（2003），台灣行道樹 賞葉 賞花篇，台北：田野影像。
18.章錦瑜、彭映潔，（2005），台灣平地常見六種觀賞喬木其板根於自然環境形成，東海學報，46，165-175。
19.黃曉菊，（2003），行道樹根系對人行道硬體破壞之研究-以高雄市十種行道樹為例，碩士論文，東海大學景觀研究所，台中。
20.楊榮啟、林文亮，(2003)，森林測計學，台北：國立編譯錧。
21.劉芳吟，（2003），行道樹缺點對民眾影響之研究-以台中市黑板樹為例，碩士論文，東海大學景觀研究所，台中。
22.鄭文正、金武鳳，(2006) ，包商亂整路樹剪得像狗啃，聯合報，C1版。
23.諶克終，（1962），園藝學總論，台北：正中出版社。
24.薛聰賢，（1991），圖解栽培繁殖技術，彰化：薛氏家庭園藝出版部。
25.薛聰賢，（1999），台灣花卉實用圖鑑(第九輯)觀賞樹木185種，台北：台灣普綠。
26.羅紹平，(2007) ，路樹砍半邊給農作物日光浴，聯合報，C1版。
27.鐘詩文、陳建志，（2004），台灣賞樹春夏秋冬-夏日篇，台北：田野影像。
28.Barker, P. A. (1995a). Managed development of tree roots. I.Ultra-deep rootball and root barrier effects on European hackberry. J. Arboric. 21:203-207.
29.Barker, P. A. (1995b). Managed development of tree roots. II. Ultra-deep rootball and root barrier effects on Southwestern black cherry. J. Arboric.21:251-258.
30.Barker, P. A.,and P. J. Peper. (1993). Strategies to prevent damage to sidewalks by tree roots. J. Arboric.19:295-309.
31.Carlson, C. (1999). A survey of municipal root pruning policies in the United States. City Trees. 35:15-18.
32.Copes, D. L. (1980a). Anatomical symptoms of graft incompatibility in Pinus monticola and P. ponderosa. Silvae Genet. 29:77-82.
33.Copes, D. L. (1980b). Development of internal graft incompatibility symptoms in Pinus radiata D. Don. New Zealand J. For. Sci. 10:367-380.
34.Costello, L.R., C.L. Elmore, and S. Steinmaus. (1997). Tree root response to circling root barriers. J. Arboric. 23:211-218.
35.D'Amato, N.,T.D. Sydnor, and B. Bishop. (2002). Which comes first the root or the crack. J. Arboric. 28:277-282.
36.Eleftheriou E.P.(1985). Adecline disorder of pear in Greece: pear decline or scion-rootstock incompatibility. Scientea Hort. 27:241-250.
37.Francis, J., B. Parresol, and J. De Patino (1996). Probability of damage to sidewalks and curbs by street trees in the tropics. J. Arboric. 22:193-197.
38.Gilman, EF. 1988. Predicting root spread from trunk diameter and branch spread. J. Arboric. 4:85-89.
39.Hudler, G. W., & Beale, M. A. (1981). Anatomical features of girdling roots. J. Arboric. , 7:29-32.
40.McPherson, E.G.(2000). Expenditures associated with conflicts between street tree root growth and hardscape in California. J.Arboric. 26:289-297.
41.Santamour, F.S.(1988).Graft incompatibility related to cambial peroxidase isozymes in Chinese chestnut. J. Environ. Hort. 6:33-39.
42.Sydnor, D., D. Gamstetter, J. Nichols, B. Bishop, J. Favorite,C. Blazer, and L. Turpin. (2000). Trees are not the root of sidewalk problems. J. Arboric. 26:20-29.
43.Wagar, J.A., and P.A. Barker. (1983). Tree root damage to sidewalks and curbs. J. Arboric. 9(7):177-181.
44.Westwood, M. N.(1988).Rootstocks: their propagation, function and performance. In: Temperate Zone Pomology. W. H. Freeman & Co. San Francisco. 428pp