Citation: | LI Xiang, TIAN Huimin, WU Jingying, CHEN Siyu, ZHAO Mingming, XU Ping, CHEN Xuechu, YOU Wenhui. Distribution characteristics and influencing factors of crabs and crab burrows in the Fengxian coastal wetland[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2021, (2): 160-170. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.2021.02.016 |
[1] |
KRISTENSEN E. Mangrove crabs as ecosystem engineers; with emphasis on sediment processes [J]. Journal of Sea Research, 2007, 59(1): 30-43.
|
[2] |
王金庆. 长江口盐沼优势蟹类的生境选择与生态系统工程师效应 [D]. 上海: 复旦大学, 2008.
|
[3] |
GIL P, FABRIZIO B, SAMWEL L, et al. Are fiddler crabs potentially useful ecosystem engineers in mangrove wastewater wetlands? [J]. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2009, 58(11): 1694-1703.
|
[4] |
ALEXANDRIA M. What is the role of ecosystem engineers in new England salt marshes? A mesocosm study of the fiddler crab and the purple marsh crab [J]. Wetlands, 2019, 3(2): 371-379.
|
[5] |
盛强. 崇明东滩不同高程上蟹类对植物种间关系的影响 [D]. 上海: 复旦大学, 2011.
|
[6] |
POMBO M, DE OLIVEIRA A L, XAVIER L Y, et al. Natural drivers of distribution of ghost crabs Ocypode quadrata and the implications of estimates from burrows [J]. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 2017, 565: 131-147.
|
[7] |
SCHLACHE T A, LUCREZI S, PETERSON C H, et al. Estimating animal populations and body sizes from burrows: Marine ecologists have their heads buried in the sand [J]. Journal of Sea Research, 2016, 112: 55-64.
|
[8] |
STELLING-WOOD T P, CLARK G F, POORE A G B. Responses of ghost crabs to habitat modification of urban sandy beaches [J]. Marine Environmental Research, 2016, 116: 32-40.
|
[9] |
MACHADO G B, GUSMãO-JUNIOR J B, COSTA T M. Burrow morphology of Uca uruguayensis and Uca leptodactylus (Decapoda: Ocypodidae) from a subtropical mangrove forest in the western Atlantic [J]. Integrative Zoology, 2013, 8(3): 307-314.
|
[10] |
WANG M, GAO X Q, WANG W Q. Differences in burrow morphology of crabs between Spartina alterniflora marsh and mangrove habitats [J]. Ecological Engineering, 2014, 69(4): 213-219.
|
[11] |
赵建春, 戴志军, 李九发, 等. 强潮海湾近岸表层沉积物时空分布特征及水动力响应—以杭州湾北岸为例 [J]. 沉积学报, 2008, 26(6): 1043-1051.
|
[12] |
黄华梅. 上海滩涂盐沼植被的分布格局和时空动态研究 [D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2009.
|
[13] |
王琰, 童春富. 长江口芦苇和互花米草盐沼湿地蟹类洞穴分布特征及主要影响因子 [J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(16): 5504-5513.
|
[14] |
高雪芹. 互花米草群落与红树林群落蟹洞形态的比较研究 [D]. 福建 厦门: 厦门大学, 2011.
|
[15] |
骆蓓菁, 李翔, 罗鼎晖, 等. 天津厚蟹与褶痕相手蟹对杭州湾北岸典型盐沼植物的摄食偏好 [J]. 华东师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2019(6): 123-131.
|
[16] |
孟寒玉. 互花米草入侵下漳江口红树林区两种蟹类分布与生境选择研究 [D]. 福建 厦门: 厦门大学, 2017.
|
[17] |
LI S Z, CUI B S, XIE T, et al. What drives the distribution of crab burrows in different habitats of intertidal salt marshes, Yellow River Delta, China [J]. Ecological Indicators, 2018, 92: 99-106.
|
[18] |
上海奉贤区统计局. 2019年奉贤统计年鉴(上) [EB/OL]. (2019-09-06)[2020-05-29]. https://www.fengxian.gov.cn/tjj/tjsj/20190906/004002_218ac76d-7cb4-4c6e-9122-07480a7b67f5.htm.
|
[19] |
茅志昌, 郭建强, 虞志英, 等. 杭州湾北岸岸滩冲淤分析 [J]. 海洋工程, 2008, 26(1): 112-117.
|
[20] |
骆蓓菁. 杭州湾北岸优势蟹类对典型盐沼植物的摄食偏好及作用研究 [D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2019.
|
[21] |
WALTON M E, VAY L L, LEBATA J H, et al. Assessment of the effectiveness of mangrove rehabilitation using exploited and non-exploited indicator species [J]. Biological Conservation, 2007, 138: 180-188.
|
[22] |
KURODA M, WADA K, KAMADA M. Factors influencing coexistence of two brachyuran crabs, Helice tfidens and Parasesarma plicatum, in an estuarine salt marsh [J]. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 2005(2): 146-153.
|
[23] |
余婕. 河口潮滩湿地有机质来源、组成与食物链传递研究 [D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2008.
|
[24] |
袁兴中, 陆健健. 潮滩微地貌元素-“生物结构”与小型底栖动物的空间分布 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2003, 22(6): 124-126.
|
[25] |
鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法 [M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2000.
|
[26] |
王琰. 长江河口典型盐沼湿地蟹类洞穴的分布特征及其生态效应 [D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2018.
|
[27] |
SCHUCHMAN E, WARBURG M R. Dispersal, population structure and burrow shape of Ocypode cursor [J]. Marine Biology, 1978, 49(3): 255-263.
|
[28] |
戴爱云. 蟹类的行为Ⅱ: 群体行为 [J]. 四川动物, 1991, 10(3): 16-19.
|
[29] |
戴爱云. 蟹类的行为Ⅰ: 个体行为 [J]. 四川动物, 1991, 10(2): 19-22.
|
[30] |
杨泽华, 童春富, 陆健健. 长江口湿地三个演替阶段大型底栖动物群落特征 [J]. 动物学研究, 2006(4): 411-418.
|
[31] |
王卿. 互花米草在上海崇明东滩的入侵历史、分布现状和扩张趋势的预测 [J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2011, 20(6): 53-59.
|