对宁德市低海拔茶园进行定点定期调查,共采集到蜘蛛1β682头,隶属于21科、39种。其中游猎型蜘蛛是最大的一个类群,有28种,占个体总数的62.49%;结网型蜘蛛是第二大类群,有10种,占个体总数的36.15%。茶园蜘蛛群落多样性、均匀度、丰富度和优势度指数随时间变化而波动,其中多样性和丰富度的波动较大,而均匀度和优势度指数波动较小。宁德低海拔茶园全年都有蜘蛛活动,沟渠豹蛛、草间钻头蛛和机敏漏斗蛛为当地优势种。整个蜘蛛群落及3种蜘蛛优势种种群密度的变化动态与气象因子的变化密切相关。通过灰色关联分析表明,极端低温对整个蜘蛛群落、草间钻头蛛和机敏漏斗蛛种群密度影响最大;极端高温对沟渠豹蛛种群密度影响最大,其次是月日照时数。
Through the investigation on tea field at low altitude in Ningde City, 1β682 individual spiders belonged to 39 species of 21 families were collected and identified. Vagabundae spiders was the largest group, with 28 species and 62.49% of the total individual of spiders, and sedentariae spider was the second largest group, with 10 species and 36.15% of the total individual of spiders. The diversity index, evenness index, richness and dominance index of the spider communities in the tea field fluctuated with time went on. The fluctuations of the diversity index and richness were large, while the evenness index and dominance indices were small. Within the tea field spiders were active in the whole year, in which the three species of spiders, Pardosa laura, Hylyphantes graminicola and Agelena difficilis, were the local dominant species. The occurrence dynamics of the whole spider community and the fluctuation of the three dominant species were closely related to the changes in the climate factors. The results of analyses from the gray theory showed that lowest temperature was the most important factor in influencing the population density of the whole spider community, the species of Hylyphantes graminicola and Agelena difficilis; highest temperature was the most important factors in influencing the population densities of Pardosa laura, and the next was the sunshine hours.
[1] 陈银方, 宋昌琪, 刘林敏, 等. 中国茶园蜘蛛种类研究[J]. 茶叶科学, 2000, 20(1): 59-66.
[2] 陈银方, 宋昌琪, 刘文炜, 等. 中国茶园蜘蛛调查和保护研究综述[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2004(6): 343-345.
[3] 曾明森, 吴光远, 王庆森, 等. 福建茶园蜘蛛种类与种群动态的初步研究[J]. 贵州科学, 2008, 26(2): 36-38.
[4] 张觉晚, 王沅江. 茶园蜘蛛优势种对假眼小绿叶蝉的控制效应[J]. 茶叶通讯, 1992(3): 8-10.
[5] 张觉晚. 捕食小绿叶蝉的茶园蜘蛛种群动态研究[J]. 茶叶通讯, 1996(2): 21-23.
[6] 戴轩. 假眼小绿叶蝉的天敌蜘蛛种类及其物种多样性研究[J]. 昆虫天敌, 1999, 21(4): 164-169.
[7] 赵冬香, 陈宗懋, 程家安. 迷宫漏斗蛛对假眼小绿叶蝉的捕食功能反应[J]. 植物保护, 2001, 27(4): 1-3.
[8] 韩宝瑜. 茶园黑刺粉虱天敌名录及对该害虫的制约[J]. 安徽农业科学, 1996, 24(1): 40-41, 43.
[9] 王义平, 陈学新, 柯俊华. 浙江茶树黑剌粉虱的发生危害及天敌的研究[J]. 昆虫天敌, 2001, 23(4): 162-165.
[10] 林海清, 尤民生, 陈李林. 草间小黑蛛对茶蚜的捕食功能反应[J]. 华东昆虫学报, 2007(1): 44-47.
[11] 潘亚飞, 赵敬钊. 斜纹猫蛛对茶尺蠖幼虫捕食作用的初步研究[J]. 蛛形学报, 1996, 5(2): 149-153.
[12] 王国昌, 孙晓玲, 董文霞, 等. 不同温度下鞍形花蟹蛛亚成蛛对茶尺蠖3日龄幼虫的捕食功能[J]. 茶叶科学, 2010, 30(3): 173-176.
[13] 刘杰, 陈建, 彭宇, 等. 陷阱法调查棉田蜘蛛的分布动态[J]. 昆虫知识, 2006, 43(3): 300-304.
[14] 丁岩钦. 昆虫数学生态学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1994: 438-470.
[15] Shannon CE, Weaver W.The Mathematical Theory of Communication[M]. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1949.
[16] Peilou EC. Mathematical Ecology, 2nd[M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 1977: 309-326.
[17] Magurran AE.Ecological diversity and its measurement[M]. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1988.
[18] Berger WH, Parker FL.Diversity of planktonic foraminifera in deep-sea sediments[J]. Science, 1970, 168: 1345-1347.
[19] 罗庆成. 灰色关联与应用[M]. 南京: 江苏科技出版社, 1989: 8-50.
[20] 唐启义, 冯明光. 实用统计分析及其DPS数据处理系统[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002: 491-510.
[21] 朱璧然, 王定锋, 刘丰静, 等. 福建省蜘蛛新纪录及其地理分布[J]. 茶叶科学技术, 2011(2): 29-30.
[22] 李巍巍, 刘玉, 张丽霞, 等. 泰山茶园蜘蛛种类调查及优势种动态分析[J]. 茶叶科学, 2012, 32(4): 341-346.
[23] 黄安平, 周凌云, 王沅江, 等. 陷阱法调查茶园蜘蛛多样性及种群动态[J]. 茶叶通讯, 2012, 39(2): 12-16.
[24] 颜亨梅, 尹长民, 王洪全. 武陵山地区蜘蛛群落多样性的研究[J]. 湖南师范大学自然科学学报, 1994, 17(3): 65-71.
[25] 赵敬钊. 温度对蜘蛛个体发育的影响[J]. 蛛形学报, 2001, 10(1): 58-64.
[26] 赵敬钊, 刘凤想, 常瑾, 等. 温度对蜘蛛繁殖力和实验种群的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2002, 22(9): 1470-1477.
[27] 刘凤想, 肖群支, 常瑾, 等. 蜘蛛抗逆能力的研究[J]. 蛛形学报, 2005, 14(1): 42-46.
浙公网安备 33019902000101号 
