Based on introduction and collection of wetland ornamental plants in Guangzhou, a comprehensive evaluation model with 14 evaluation indices was established by Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The results showed that ornamental period, stress resistance and maintenance management were the major factors affecting application value of wetland ornamental plants. Ninety-six wetland plants were classified into four grades. The gradeⅠ(≥8.5) including 9 kinds of plants, had the highest comprehensive application value, 30 kinds of plants in the grade Ⅱ(8.0~8.5) had the higher application value.
HE Zhong-jian
,
ZHANG Ji-fang
,
CHEN Ying
,
FENG Yi-min
,
HE Man-mei
. Introduction and Comprehensive Evaluation of Wetland Ornamental Plants in Guangzhou[J]. Subtropical Plant Science, 2018
, 47(1)
: 38
-42
.
DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-7791.2018.01.008
[1] 邓培雁,陈桂珠,刘威. 湿地价值分析及其基本原则[J]. 城市环境与城市生态, 2003,16(4): 24—26.
[2] 熊汉锋,彭有轩,孙海元,史玉虎,吴翠. 10种湿地水生经济植物综合评价[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2009,37(32): 15815—15816.
[3] 孙华,侯新. 重庆市湿地观赏植物资源及其应用[J]. 现代园艺, 2014(11): 33—34.
[4] 陈子牛,翟书华,毛芳芳,刘德琼,杨晓虹. 滇池地区湿地观赏植物种类及应用研究[J]. 昆明学院学报, 2010,32(6): 72—83, 86.
[5] Barbier B E, Acreman M, Knowler D. Economic Valuation of Wetlands[M]. Gland: Ramsar Convention Bureau, 1997.
[6] 赵广琦,崔心红,张群,何成新. 水生植物引种的生态安全评价[J]. 广西植物, 2009,29(4): 488—492.
[7] 张继方,张俊涛,刘文,王伟,贺漫媚,李许文,代色平. 广州地区地毯式屋顶绿化植物筛选及其评价[J]. 热带农业科学, 2014,34(12): 98—104.
[8] 黄柳青,邢福武,周劲松,陈红锋. 广州野生观赏种子植物资源调查与观赏评价[J]. 福建林业科技, 2010,37(2): 82—89.
[9] 朱纯,代色平. 广东野生观赏植物资源开发利用的综合评价[J]. 广东园林, 2008,30(4): 9—131.
[10] 刘迎春,王莲英. 芍药品种的数量分类研究根据[J]. 武汉植物学研究, 1995,13(2): 116—126.
[11] 杨卫彬,肖光明. 广东状元湖森林公园旅游资源与评价[J]. 广东林业科技, 2008,24(2): 104—108.
[12] 田如男,孙欣欣,魏勇. 不同类型水生植物群落对铜绿微囊藻的化感作用[J]. 生态环境学报, 2010,19(9): 2149—2154.
[13] 苗金,原海燕,黄苏珍. 10种水生观赏植物对不同富营养化水体的净化效果研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2015,29(2): 60—64.
