不同放牧强度对内蒙古草甸草原群落根系功能性状的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2026.15.015

中国农业科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (15): 3440-3451.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2026.15.015

不同放牧强度对内蒙古草甸草原群落根系功能性状的影响

孔梦桥¹^,²(), 李辉²^,³, 李子好²^,³, 平晓燕¹, 姜翠霞²^,³, 郭昊南²^,³, 杨怡静²^,⁴, 辛晓平²()

¹ 北京林业大学草业与草原学院，北京 100083
² 北方干旱半干旱耕地高效利用全国重点实验室/呼伦贝尔草原生态系统国家野外科学观测研究站/中国农业科学院农业资源与农业区划研究所，北京 100081
³ 兰州大学生态学院，兰州 734000
⁴ 西北农林科技大学草业与草原学院，陕西杨凌 712100

收稿日期:2025-04-02 接受日期:2026-06-04 出版日期:2026-08-01 发布日期:2026-08-03
通信作者:
辛晓平，E-mail：xinxiaoping@caas.cn
联系方式: 孔梦桥，E-mail：3432959155@qq.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金重点项目(32130070); 林草联合基金(U2571209)

Effects of Grazing Intensities on Root Functional Traits in Plant Communities of Inner Mongolia Meadow Steppe

KONG MengQiao¹^,²(), LI Hui²^,³, LI ZiHao²^,³, PING XiaoYan¹, JIANG CuiXia²^,³, GUO HaoNan²^,³, YANG YiJing²^,⁴, XIN XiaoPing²()

¹ School of Grassland Science, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083
² State Key Laboratory of Efficient Utilization of Arid and Semi-arid Arable Land in Northern China / National Hulunber Grassland Ecosystem Observation and Research Station / Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081
³ College of Ecology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000
⁴ College of Prataculture and Grassland， Northwest Agricultural and Forestry University， Yangling 712100, Shaanxi

Received:2025-04-02 Accepted:2026-06-04 Published:2026-08-01 Online:2026-08-03

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】根系是植物最重要的地下器官，研究探讨放牧干扰对草甸草原群落根系功能性状的动态影响，明晰放牧对草地群落根系结构和功能的影响机制，为草原植物应对放牧干扰的调节机制和生存策略提供参考。【方法】采用微根管技术测定了不放牧(G0)、轻度放牧(G1)、轻中度放牧(G2)、中度放牧(G3)、重度放牧(G4)、极度放牧(G5)，6种放牧强度下根系的功能性状，包括总根长、根尖数、分叉数、根平均直径、根表面积和总根体积，每个放牧强度处理下设有9个根管重复。【结果】(1)地下生物量和根土比均随土壤深度增加呈显著降低趋势(P<0.05)，在0—10 cm表层土壤中，G4处理下地下生物量和根土比均达到最大值，但不同放牧处理对地下生物量无显著影响。(2)草甸草原根系形态特征随生长季推进变化显著，并受放牧强度影响，总根长和分叉数随生长季呈增加趋势，根平均直径和总根体积在7月达到峰值后下降，而不同放牧强度下根系特征变化各异，适度放牧（G1—G3）在生长季前期促进根系生长，重度或极度放牧在生长季后期促进总根长和分叉数增加，但抑制根平均直径和总根体积。(3)比根长和比根面积随生长季推进呈增加趋势，在9月达到峰值，而根组织密度为波动变化。随放牧强度，6—7月比根长和比根面积在G3处理下最大，8—9月比根长逐渐增加而比根面积呈降低趋势，根组织密度在G3—G5处理下普遍高于G0—G2处理。(4)随时间变化，植物高度和盖度逐渐增加并在9月达峰值，而根冠比逐渐降低。随放牧强度，各月份高度和盖度均显著降低，根冠比则显著增加。(5)比根长和比根面积与植物群落特征显著相关，总根长和根组织密度与根冠比相关性较强，而根平均直径和根尖数与土壤因子及植物群落特征无显著相关。【结论】根系形态特征对放牧强度的响应呈现动态差异，反映出群落根系在不同时期对资源获取和结构强度的权衡策略。群落物种组成和植物根系功能性状关联性较大，未来需进一步研究。研究结果为草甸草原植物根系对放牧强度和季节动态变化的响应机制和适应性提供了一定的参考价值。

关键词: 根系功能性状, 微根管, 草甸草原, 放牧强度

Abstract:

【Objective】Roots are the most critical underground organs of plants. This study investigates the dynamic effects of grazing disturbance on the root functional traits of meadow steppe communities, aiming to clarify the mechanisms by which grazing affects the structure and function of grassland community roots. It provides insights into the regulatory mechanisms and survival strategies of grassland plants under grazing disturbance.【Method】The root functional traits including total root length, number of root tips, number of root forks, root average diameter, root surface area, and total root volume were measured using minirhizotron technology under six grazing intensity treatments: no grazing (G0), light grazing (G1), light moderate grazing (G2), moderate grazing (G3), heavy grazing (G4), and extreme grazing (G5). Each grazing intensity treatment was replicated with nine minirhizotron tubes.【Result】(1) Both below-ground biomass and root-soil ratio exhibited significant decreasing trends with increasing soil depth (P<0.05). The maximum below-ground biomass and root-soil ratio were observed in the 0-10 cm soil layer under G4 grazing treatment, but there were no significant differences in below-ground biomass among grazing treatments. (2) The root morphological characteristics of meadow steppe communities vary significantly with the progression of the growing season and are affected by grazing intensity, with total root length and number of root forks showing an increasing trend over the growing season, whereas both root average diameter and total root volume reached their maxima in July before subsequent declines. Under varying grazing intensity gradients, root traits exhibit distinct patterns: moderate grazing (G1-G3) promotes root growth in the early growing season, whereas heavy or extreme grazing increases total root length and number of root forks in the late growing season but still reduces root average diameter and total root volume. (3) Specific root length (SRL) and specific root area (SRA) showed an increasing trend as the growing season progressed, peaking in September, while root tissue density (RTD) fluctuated. From June to July, SRL and SRA were highest under G3 grazing intensity, while from August to September, SRL increased with grazing intensity, and SRA decreased. RTD was generally higher under G3-G5 intensities compared to G0-G2. (4) Over time, plant height and coverage increased seasonally and peaked in September, while root-shoot ratio (R:S) decreased. With increasing grazing intensity, both height and coverage significantly decreased significantly in each month, while R:S significantly increased. (5) SRL and SRA were significantly correlated with plant community characteristics, and total root length and RTD were strongly correlated with R:S. However, average root diameter and number of root tips showed no significant correlation with soil factors or plant community characteristics.【Conclusion】The response of root morphological traits to grazing intensity exhibited dynamic differences, reflecting trade-offs in resource acquisition and structural strength at different periods. The functional composition of plant communities was strongly correlated with root traits, warranting further research. This study provides valuable insights into the response mechanisms and adaptability of meadow steppe plant roots to grazing intensity and seasonal dynamics.

Key words: root functional traits, minirhizotron, meadow steppe, grazing intensity

孔梦桥, 李辉, 李子好, 平晓燕, 姜翠霞, 郭昊南, 杨怡静, 辛晓平. 不同放牧强度对内蒙古草甸草原群落根系功能性状的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(15): 3440-3451.

KONG MengQiao, LI Hui, LI ZiHao, PING XiaoYan, JIANG CuiXia, GUO HaoNan, YANG YiJing, XIN XiaoPing. Effects of Grazing Intensities on Root Functional Traits in Plant Communities of Inner Mongolia Meadow Steppe[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(15): 3440-3451.

图/表 7

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 46

[1]	余露, 雷雪霞, 李昂, 胡如梅. 面向实现多功能目标的国有草原治理路径探析[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(9): 2590-2597.
	Yu L, Lei X X, Li A, Hu R M. Study on the governance pathway of state-owned grassland oriented by multiple functions[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(9): 2590-2597.(in Chinese)
[2]	司雨凡, 李辉, 李子好, 姜翠霞, 郭昊南, 杨培志, 席杰军, 闫瑞瑞, 乌仁其其格, 山丹, 辛晓平. 草甸草原关键物种功能性状对长期放牧和停牧恢复的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(18): 3693-3708. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.18.016.
	Si Y F, Li H, Li Z H, Jiang C X, Guo H N, Yang P Z, Xi J J, Yan R R, Wurenqimuge, Shan D, Xin X P. Response of functional traits of key species in meadow steppe to long-term grazing and grazing exclusion[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(18): 3693-3708. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.18.016.(in Chinese)
[3]	任继周. 草原文化是华夏文化的活泼元素[J]. 草业学报, 2010, 19(1): 1-5.
	Ren J Z. Grassland culture is an integral part in Chinese culture[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2010, 19(1): 1-5.(in Chinese)
[4]	Zheng S X, Lan Z C, Li W H, Shao R X, Shan Y M, Wan H W, Taube F, Bai Y F. Differential responses of plant functional trait to grazing between two contrasting dominant C3 and C4 species in a typical steppe of Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Plant and Soil, 2011, 340(1): 141-155.
[5]	da Silva J R, Yule T S, de Aquino Ribas A C, Scremin-Dias E. Do root secondary xylem functional traits differ between growth forms in Fabaceae species in a seasonally dry Neotropical environment?[J]. Annals of Botany, 2023, 132(3): 401-412.
[6]	Yan S Y, Weng B S, Jing L S, Bi W X, Yan D H. Adaptive pathway of summer maize under drought stress: Transformation of root morphology and water absorption law[J]. Frontiers in Earth Science, 2022, 10.: 1020553.
[7]	Biedrzycki M L, Bais H P. Kin recognition in plants: Did we learn anything from roots?[J]. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 2022, 9: 785019.
[8]	王政权, 郭大立. 根系生态学[J]. 植物生态学报, 2008, 32(6): 1213-1216.
	Wang Z Q, Guo D L. Root Ecology[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2008, 32(6): 1213-1216.(in Chinese)
[9]	赵广帅, 刘珉, 石培礼, 宗宁, 张鑫, 张宪洲. 羌塘高原降水梯度植物叶片、根系性状变异和生态适应对策[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(1): 295-309.
	Zhao G S, Liu M, Shi P L, Zong N, Zhang X, Zhang X Z. Variation of leaf and root traits and ecological adaptive strategies along a precipitation gradient on Changtang Plateau[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(1): 295-309.(in Chinese)
[10]	Baker-Brosh K F, Peet R K. The ecological significance of lobed and toothed leaves in temperature forest trees[J]. Ecology, 1997, 78(4): 1250-1255.
[11]	Bardgett R D, Mommer L, De Vries F T. Going underground: Root traits as drivers of ecosystem processes[J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2014, 29(12): 692-699.
[12]	Wright I J, Reich P B, Westoby M, Ackerly D D, Baruch Z, Bongers F, Cavender-Bares J, Chapin T, Cornelissen J H C, Diemer M, Flexas J, Garnier E, Groom P K, Gulias J, Hikosaka K, Lamont B B, Lee T, Lee W, Lusk C, Midgley J J, et al. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum[J]. Nature, 2004, 428(6985): 821-827.
[13]	Reich P B. The world-wide ‘fast-slow’ plant economics spectrum: A traits manifesto[J]. Journal of Ecology, 2014, 102(2): 275-301.
[14]	Freschet G T, Swart E M, Cornelissen J H C. Integrated plant phenotypic responses to contrasting above- and below-ground resources: Key roles of specific leaf area and root mass fraction[J]. New Phytologist, 2015, 206(4): 1247-1260.
[15]	Ryan P R, Delhaize E, Watt M, Richardson A E. Plant roots: Understanding structure and function in an ocean of complexity[J]. Annals of Botany, 2016, 118(4): 555-559.
[16]	王树凤, 胡韵雪, 孙海菁, 施翔, 潘红伟, 陈益泰. 盐胁迫对2种栎树苗期生长和根系生长发育的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2014, 34(4): 1021-1029.
	Wang S F, Hu Y X, Sun H J, Shi X, Pan H W, Chen Y T. Effects of salt stress on growth and root development of two oak seedlings[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014, 34(4): 1021-1029.(in Chinese)
[17]	崔家宝, 魏晨, 王宁, 曹建军. 高寒草地不同径级根形态对围封年限的响应[J]. 生态学报, 2023, 43(8): 3327-3338.
	Cui J B, Wei C, Wang N, Cao J J. The response of the root morphology under different diameter classes to grazing exclosure duration in alpine grassland[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2023, 43(8): 3327-3338.(in Chinese)
[18]	董亭, 李群, 赵萌莉, 贾乐, 阿穆拉, 韩国栋, 白玮杰. 放牧对大针茅根系生物量影响的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2011, 19(2): 237-241.
	Dong T, Li Q, Zhao M L, Jia L, Han G D, Bai W J. Effect of grazing intensity on root biomass of Stipa grandis[J]. Acta Agrectir Sinica, 2011, 19(2): 237-241.(in Chinese)
[19]	位晓婷, 刘月华, 钟梦莹, 武瑞鑫, 潘多, 邵新庆. 羊草个体性状对不同放牧模式响应的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2014, 22(5): 949-953.
	Wei X T, Liu Y H, Zhong M Y, Wu R X, Pan D, Shao X Q. Responses of Leymus chinensis individual traits to different grazing patterns[J]. Acta Agrectir Sinica, 2014, 22(5): 949-953.(in Chinese)
[20]	Bonin C, Flores J, Lal R, Tracy B. Root characteristics of perennial warm-season grasslands managed for grazing and biomass production[J]. Agronomy, 2013, 3(3): 508-523.
[21]	Wei X T, Zhong M Y, Liu Y H, Wu R X, Shao X Q. Covariation in root traits of Leymus chinensis in response to grazing in steppe rangeland[J]. The Rangeland Journal, 2019, 41(4): 313-322.
[22]	Maire V, Wright I J, Prentice I C, Batjes N H, Bhaskar R, van Bodegom P M, Cornwell W K, Ellsworth D, Niinemets Ü, Ordonez A, Reich P B, Santiago L S. Global effects of soil and climate on leaf photosynthetic traits and rates[J]. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2015, 24(6): 706-717.
[23]	缪雨珏, 宗宁, 李振威. 高寒植物功能性状权衡策略研究进展[J]. 应用与环境生物学报, 2025, 31(7): 1157-1172.
	Miao Y J, Zong N, Li Z W. Research progress on trade-off strategies for functional traits in alpine plants[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology, 2025, 31(7): 1157-1172.(in Chinese)
[24]	白文明, 程维信, 李凌浩. 微根窗技术及其在植物根系研究中的应用[J]. 生态学报, 2005, 25(11): 3076-3081.
	Bai W M, Cheng W X, Li L H. Applications of minirhizotron techniques to root ecology research[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2005, 25(11): 3076-3081.(in Chinese)
[25]	吐地·依米提, 于洪亮, 王旭, 平晓燕, 吴宜倩, 王崇伟. 草原蘑菇圈对生态系统碳、水通量特征的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(9): 1804-1815. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.09.010.
	Tudi·Yimiti, Yu H L, Wang X, Ping X Y, Wu Y Q, Wang C W. Effects of fairy rings on carbon and water fluxes in Hulunbuir meadow steppe[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(9): 1804-1815. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.09.010.(in Chinese)
[26]	李金花, 李镇清, 任继周. 放牧对草原植物的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2002, 11(1): 4-11.
	Li J H, Li Z Q, Ren J Z. The effects of grazing on grassland plants[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2002, 11(1): 4-11.(in Chinese)
[27]	Trumbore S E, Gaudinski J B. The secret lives of roots[J]. Science, 2003, 302(5649): 1344-1345.
[28]	van der Maarel E, Titlyanova A. Above-ground and below-ground biomass relations in steppes under different grazing conditions[J]. Oikos, 1989, 56(3): 364-370.
[29]	孙熙麟, 王明玖, 陈海军, 陈丽丽, 娜乐. 短花针茅荒漠草原地下生物量对不同强度放牧的响应[J]. 内蒙古农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2010, 31(4): 101-104.
	Sun X L, Wang M J, Chen H J, Chen L L, Na L. Response of underground biomass to different grazing intensities in the Stipa breviflora desert steppe[J]. Journal of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University (Natural Science Edition), 2010, 31(4): 101-104.(in Chinese)
[30]	字洪标, 阿的鲁骥, 马力, 胡雷, 陈焱, 杨有芳, 王长庭. 高寒草甸不同类型草地群落根土比、土壤养分变化[J]. 西南农业学报, 2016, 29(12): 2916-2921.
	Zi H B Adiluji, Ma L, Hu L, Chen Y, Yang Y F, Wang C T. Change of ratio of root to soil and soil nutrient content at different grassland types in alpine meadow[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 29(12): 2916-2921.(in Chinese)
[31]	Briske D D, Richards J H. Plant responses to defoliation: A physiological, morphological and demographic evaluation[M]//Wildland Plants: Physiological Ecology and Developmental Morphology. Denver: Society for Range Management, 1995: 635-710.
[32]	Khasanova A, Lovell J T, Bonnette J, Weng X Y, Jenkins J, Yoshinaga Y, Schmutz J, Juenger T E. The genetic architecture of shoot and root trait divergence between mesic and xeric ecotypes of a perennial grass[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2019, 10: 366.
[33]	Zhou M, Wang J, Bai W, Zhang Y, Zhang W. The response of root traits to precipitation change of herbaceous species in temperate steppes[J]. Functional Ecology, 2019, 33: 2030-2041.
[34]	de la Riva E G, Marañón T, Pérez-Ramos I M, Navarro-Fernández C M, Olmo M, Villar R. Root traits across environmental gradients in Mediterranean woody communities: Are they aligned along the root economics spectrum?[J]. Plant and Soil, 2018, 424(1): 35-48.
[35]	孙佳慧, 史海兰, 陈科宇, 纪宝明, 张静. 植物细根功能性状的权衡关系研究进展[J]. 植物生态学报, 2023, 47(8): 1055-1070.
	Sun J H, Shi H L, Chen K Y, Ji B M, Zhang J. Research advances on trade-off relationships of plant fine root functional traits[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2023, 47(8): 1055-1070.(in Chinese)
[36]	Han M G, Chen Y, Li R, Yu M, Fu L C, Li S F, Su J R, Zhu B. Root phosphatase activity aligns with the collaboration gradient of the root economics space[J]. The New Phytologist, 2022, 234(3): 837-849.
[37]	覃桂丽, 玉舒中. 降香黄檀根系性状对石灰岩石砾的适应响应[J]. 西南林业大学学报(自然科学), 2023, 43(3): 24-32.
	Qin G L, Yu S Z. Adaptive response of root characteristics of Dalbergia odorifera to limestone gravel[J]. Journal of Southwest Forestry University (Natural Sciences), 2023, 43(3): 24-32.(in Chinese)
[38]	杨孟晴, 黄盛怡, 王斌, 周志春, 徐小牛, 徐卫可, 吴仁超. 赤皮青冈容器苗生长和根系发育对缓释肥添加的动态响应[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2025, 49(1): 103-111.
	Yang M Q, Huang S Y, Wang B, Zhou Z C, Xu X N, Xu W K, Wu R C. Response of the growth and root development of Cyclobalanopsis gilva container seedlings to the slow-release fertilizer addition[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition), 2025, 49(1): 103-111.(in Chinese)
[39]	周永姣, 程林, 王满堂, 朱国洁, 钟全林, 郭炳桥, 程栋梁. 武夷山不同海拔黄山松细根性状季节变化[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(12): 4530-4539.
	Zhou Y J, Cheng L, Wang M T, Zhu G J, Zhong Q L, Guo B Q, Cheng D L. Seasonal changes of fine root traits in Pinus taiwanensis Hayata at different altitudes in the Wuyi Mountains[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(12): 4530-4539.(in Chinese)
[40]	An N N, Lu N, Fu B J, Chen W L, Keyimu M, Wang M Y. Root trait variation of seed plants from China and the primary drivers[J]. Journal of Biogeography, 2021, 48(10): 2402-2417.
[41]	许宏斌, 辛晓平, 宝音陶格涛, 闫瑞瑞, 王旭, 陈宝瑞, 金东艳, 姚静, 刘志英. 放牧对呼伦贝尔羊草草甸草原生物量分布的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(3): 768-774.
	Xu H B, Xin X P, Baoyintaogetao, Yan R R, Wang X, Chen B R, Jin D Y, Yao J, Liu Z Y. Effects of grazing on biomass distribution on the Leymus chinensis meadow steppe of Hulunbeier[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2020, 28(3): 768-774.(in Chinese)
[42]	万里强, 陈玮玮, 李向林, 何峰, 刘树军. 放牧对草地土壤含水量与容重及地下生物量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2011, 27(26): 25-29.
	Wan L Q, Chen W W, Li X L, He F, Liu S J. Effects of grazing on soil moisture, bulk and pasture underground biomass[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2011, 27(26): 25-29.(in Chinese)
[43]	武帅楷, 郝杰, 刁华杰, 居新, 宁亚楠, 苏原, 董宽虎, 王常慧. 晋北农牧交错带草地生物量对短期放牧强度的响应[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(8): 2446-2454.
	Wu S K, Hao J, Diao H J, Ju X, Ning Y N, Su Y, Dong K H, Wang C H. Response of grassland biomass to short-term grazing intensities in the agro-pastoral ecotone in northern Shanxi[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(8): 2446-2454.(in Chinese)
[44]	Wang S Y, Comas L H, Reich P B, McCormack M L, Phillips R P, Gu J C, Sun T. Variation of root resource acquisition and conservation strategies in a temperate forest is linked with plant growth forms[J]. Tree Physiology, 2025, 45(4): tpaf027.
[45]	Niu K C, He J S, Lechowicz M J. Grazing-induced shifts in community functional composition and soil nutrient availability in Tibetan alpine meadows[J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2016, 53(5): 1554-1564.
[46]	Wang C N, Li X, Lu X M, Wang Y, Bai Y F. Intraspecific trait variation governs grazing-induced shifts in plant community above- and below-ground functional trait composition[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2023, 346: 108357.

不同放牧强度对内蒙古草甸草原群落根系功能性状的影响

Effects of Grazing Intensities on Root Functional Traits in Plant Communities of Inner Mongolia Meadow Steppe

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 46

相关文章 11

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	司雨凡, 李辉, 李子好, 姜翠霞, 郭昊南, 杨培志, 席杰军, 闫瑞瑞, 乌仁其其格, 山丹, 辛晓平. 草甸草原关键物种功能性状对长期放牧和停牧恢复的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(18): 3693-3708.
[2]	王淼,张宇,李瑞强,辛晓平,朱晓昱,曹娟,周忠义,闫瑞瑞. 放牧强度对羊草草甸草原植物器官及群落氮磷化学计量的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(7): 1371-1384.
[3]	闫瑞瑞, 高娃, 沈贝贝, 张宇, 王淼, 朱晓昱, 辛晓平. 草甸草原放牧场退化定量评估指标体系建立[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(15): 3343-3354.
[4]	闫瑞瑞,张宇,辛晓平,卫智军,乌仁其其格,郭美兰. 刈割干扰对羊草草甸草原植物功能群及多样性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2573-2583.
[5]	侯路路,闫瑞瑞,张宇,辛晓平. 放牧强度对草甸草原羊草功能性状的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2562-2572.
[6]	张宇, 侯路路, 闫瑞瑞, 辛晓平. 放牧强度对草甸草原植物群落特征及营养品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2550-2561.
[7]	武崎，吴鹏飞，王群，文勇立，高艳美，张荣芝，龙伟. 放牧强度对高寒草地不同类群土壤动物的群落结构和多样性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(9): 1826-1834.
[8]	王红梅, 孙启忠, 花梅. 草甸草原区不同植物群落牧草的青贮效果[J]. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(12): 2566-2575.
[9]	邱新强, 高阳, 黄玲, 李新强, 孙景生, 段爱旺. 冬小麦根系形态性状及分布[J]. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(11): 2211-2219.
[10]	马红彬,谢应忠 . 不同放牧强度下荒漠草原植物的补偿性生长[J]. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(11): 3645-3650 .
[11]	范春梅,廖超英,李培玉,孙长忠,许喜明. 放牧强度对林草地土壤物理性状的影响 --以黄土高原丘陵沟壑区为例[J]. 中国农业科学, 2006, 39(7): 1501-1506 .