Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/34950
標題: 台灣大蟋蟀是低投入草坪的好幫手
Formosan Giant Cricket is a Good Helper in Low Input Lawn
作者: 林明鼎
Lin, Ming-Ting
關鍵字: Formosan giant cricket
台灣大蟋蟀
extension of tunnel
abondened tunnels
low input lawn
地道擴建
空洞
低投入草坪
出版社: 水土保持學系所
引用: 吳文哲、蔡明諭、王清玲、李奇峰、陳淑佩、楊正澤、楊曼妙、蕭旭、顏聖紘、蔡經甫、Dávid Rédei (2008) 台灣六足總綱之研究回顧及現況。http://2008checklist.biodiv.tw/disc2008/doc/Wen-Jer%20Wu.doc 洪炳煌、梁昇、林德貴 (2009) 「台灣大蟋蟀地道形狀之研究〜木賊葉木麻黃防風林案例」中華水土保持學會論文集(2009) 洪炳煌(2010) 「台灣大蟋蟀棲地成蟲地道之研究」國立中興大學水土保持保持學系碩士論文。」 梁昇(1979) 「農地露之觀測及其對大豆生育產量與病蟲害之後影響」國科會出版。 梁昇(1980) 「中部山區枇杷園防霜研究」國科會出版。 梁昇、林明鼎 (2009) 「不同海岸防風林台灣大蟋蟀若蟲數量之比較」農林學報58(2)107-120。 梁昇(2010a) 「台灣大蟋蟀」農業世界322,94-96。 梁昇(2010b) 個人通訊 連裕益、楊逺波(2003) 「菁山生態教育園展示設置調查及評估」(初版),陽明山國家公園管理處,27頁。 章加寶(1989),臺灣葡萄主要害蟲及其他有害動物生態與管理技術,73~75頁 柴田明夫(2009) 糧食爭奪戰(孫玉珍譯,2009)商周 楊平世(1988),臺灣主要農作物病蟲害彩色圖鑑第173頁 楊正澤(1997)「地棲蟋蟀及棲所保育」。台灣省政府農林廳 葉士財(1983) 甜柿蟲害之發生與防治 http://72.14.235.132. 鄭明修、詹榮桂、馮豐隆、曾晴賢、楊正澤, (1996) 東北角海岸風景特定區自然生態資源調查與監測(二),觀光局東北角海岸風景特定區管理處,184頁。 蔡在壽、李明忠、林金盾、吳京一 (1994):實驗室內台灣大蟋蟀之生活史 師大生物學報 29(2):65-70。 7729Chris@台南市安平區億載國民小學, 2009,「洞悉真相-台灣大蟋蟀」,http://www.greenschool.moe.edu.tw/tags/7729Chris@台南市安平區億載國小。 Barth, C. (1995).:” Toward a Low Input Lawn.” Watershed Protection Techniques. 2(1): 254-264. Chapin III, F. S. E. S. Zavaleta, V. T. Eviner, R. L. Naylor, P. M. Vitousek,H. L. Reynolds, D. U. Hooper, S. Lavorel, O. E. Sala, S. E. Hobbie, M. C. Mack and S.Diaz (2000) ”Consequences of Changing Biodivisity,”. Nature, 405, 234-242. Edwards, J. S., (1998) “Insects used as food in central Java. Food InsectsNewslet11(3)(Indonesia)” Gaddir, SR. R. R., and D. E. Douglas ( 1977) Earthworms for Ecology & Profit Volume II Earthworm and the Ecology, Bookworm Publishing Company Hill, D. S. ( 2008)”Pests of Crops in Warmer Climates and Their Control,”Springer,708p. Holldobler, B., and E. O. Wilson (1994) Journey to the Ants, Arts & Licensing International, Inc. USA. Hooper, D. U. D. E.Bignell,V. K. Brown, L. Brussaard,m J. M. Dangerfield, D. H. Wall, D. A. Wardle, D. C. Coleman, K. E. Giller, P. Lavelle, W. H. Van Der Putten, P. C. De Ruiter, J. Rusek,W.L.Silver,J.M.Tiedje,andV.Wolters,(2000),“Interactions between Aboveground and Belowground Biodivisity in Terrestrial Ecosystems: Pattern, Mechanisms, and Feedbacks,” Bioscience 50(12)1049-1061. Jha,L.K. & P.K. Sen-sarma(1994)”Forest Entomology”Ashish publishing,387p. Jouquet, p. , c., Hartmann, C. Choosal, Y. Hanboonsoong, D. Brunet, and J-P. Montoroi ( 2008) “Different effects of earthworms and ants on soil properties of paddy fields in North-East Thailand,” Paddy and Water Environment 6,3981-386. Labandeira, C. (2007). "The origin of herbivory on land: Initialpatterns of plant tissue consumption by arthropods". Insect Science 14 (4): 259–275. Lee, H. J., and W. Lohor, (1995),”Changes in the Behavior of the Female Short-tailed Cricket, Anurogrylles muticus (De Gaer)(Orthoptera: Gryllidar) following Mating,” J. of Insect Behavior,8(4)547-549. Loreau, M. S. Naeem, P. Inchausti, J. Bengtsson, J. P. Grime, A. Hector, D.U. Hooper, M. A. Huston, D. Raffaelli, B. Schmid, D. Tilman, and D. A. Wardle (2001) “Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Current Knowledge and Future Challenges,” Science, 294, 804-809. Micheneau, C., J. Fournel, B. H. Warren, S. Hugel, A.. ,Gauvin-Bialecki, T. Pailler, D. S.Berg, and M. W. Chase,(2010). “Orthoptera, a new order of pollinator,” Annals of Botany, 105(3)355-364. Olff, H., V.K. Brown, and R.H. Drent (editors) (1999) “Herbivores between plants and Predatorsm”, Science p. 639. Oleynik, A. S., and B. A. Byzov ( 2008) “Response of bacteria to earthworm surface excreta,” Microbiology, 77(6)765-773. Poverda, K. I. Steffan-Dewenter, S. Scheu, and T. Tschartke (2003) ” Effects of Below- and Above-ground Herbivores on Plant Growth, Flower visitation And Seed Set,” Oecologia 135P:601-605. Raksakantong , P. , N. Meeso, J. Kubola , S. Siriamornpun,(2010):” Fatty acids and proximate composition of eight Thai edible terricolous insects,” Food Research International 43, 350-355. Sheffer, M.S., Carpenter, J.A., Foley, C. F., and B. Walker, (2001) “Catastrophic Shifts in Ecosystems,” Nature, 413:591-596. Sugden, A., R. Stone, and C. Ash,(2004)” Ecology in the Underworld ,“ Science 304 (5677), p.1613. Swann, C. (1999). “A survey of residential nutrient behaviors in the Chesapeake Bay.” Widener-Burrows, Inc. Chesapeake Research Consortium. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. 112 pp. Tsai, J. H. (1982)”Entomology in the people’s Republic of China,”New York Entomological Society XC(3)186-212. Vogel, Gretchen (2010) “For More Protein, Filet of Cricket,” Science 12 February 2010:Vol. 327. no. 5967, p. 8 Zhenghong, P. (2003),”Insect Pests of Eucalypts in China,” ACIAR Proceeding No. 111, 183-184.
摘要: 最近的研究指出台灣島上台灣大蟋蟀棲地是森林草坪(forest lawn),如進一步研討,較佳的定義是低投入草坪(low input lawn)。本研究認為主要原因是此草坪之維持依賴台灣大蟋蟀地道的演化而非依賴人類的管理。本研究根據三種時段不同形狀地道的逕流處理功能、取水方法、地道功能區對棲地的影響的觀察與試驗,認定台灣大蟋蟀在棲地之功能可補人類之不足,十分吻合低投入的定義。即若蟲期幼蟲(0.3 -1.5cm)、青年(2.5-3.5 cm)、與成蟲(4.0-4.5cm)地道形狀均不同,但在有逕流的條件下均呈穩定透水,地道具有數種功能能維持草坪棲地不必規劃灌溉與除草。台灣大蟋蟀利用(1)穿口無法著根(2)土塚低肥分與低含水量差異減少植物(3)側支上方薄土層不利著根(4)空洞不利長草(5)地道直徑的擴大,增大逕流消減(6)露水機制與水分供應給台灣大蟋蟀的特殊狀況,即小石頭與雜草的露水形成與(7)葉與根的剪斷與取食水份,此七項功能共同塑造出近似草坪剪修兼灌溉功效。 地道在地面僅有一穿口,隨身驅增大,穿口直徑愈來愈大;到成蟲期可達到1.5〜2.0 cm。穿口處無土壤,故無植生。穿口外面堆積有掘洞時土屑稱為土塚,以穿口為中心直徑,若蟲期最大可達到7.0cm;土塚土粒養分與含水量大大不如表土;對草類繁衍甚為不利。側支上土層淺薄,不利著根。若蟲期十分重要的遷移行為造成空洞,上方無法長草。成蟲期配對後每一隻母蟲均會擴建,地道最重要的變化是直徑的加大變化。一隻雄成蟲可能引來數隻雌成蟲,地道的新擴建愈行壯觀。擴建後地道縱橫交叉,從不重疊,空洞密度增加或空洞區加大迫使地表著根空間減少。已有配對的雌成蟲,離洞後其舊洞則無土塚封口,也不再使用。同時,擴大的地道顯著提升地道處理地表逕流的能力。
The better definition for the habitat of Formosan giant crickets should be called as Low Input Lawn rather the name of Forest Lawn recently used, due to the sole manager is crickets rather human being. Observations were based on the runoff dissipation, water supply, and functional implements from earth tunnels of Formosan giant crickets. Three stages, say, body lengthes of 0.3 to 1.5 cm and of 2.5 to 3.5 cm during the nymphal period, and of the adult of 4.0 to 4.5 cm, respectively. There were 7 points listed as evidences: (1). No roots would be grown in the places of the through hole. (2). Low fertility and low water content put off the plant growth among soil pellets from the soil dome. (3). Few plants could be grown over the sites of lateral tunnel due to thin covering soil.. (4). No plants will be grown in the abondened tunnel sites due to no soils. (5).The expansion from the diameter of earth tunnel burrow increased the runoff dissipation pontentials. (6).Formation mechanism of dew offers the regular water supply for Formosan giant crickets. (7). Cutting roots and leaves for water is an special approach of water supply for Formosan giant crickets. The 7 items above listed made the equivalent function of irrigation and mowing. All of them is completely offered by Formosan giant crickets in site. The diameters of through hole and soil dome can be reached 1.5 to 2.0cm and 7.0cm, respectively, during the adult period of Formosan giant crickets. The low water content and low fertility of the soil pellets of soil dome decreased the opportunity of plants. The abondened soil tunnel burrow occured in the transfer action during nymphqal stage and the adults female during the matching stages. Since there is no soil for tunnel parts, abondened tunnel means aboudon plants. The upper layer of Lateral branch is too thin to grow plants. The expansion of earth tunnel during the matching period in June to August, increased the runoff dissipation significantly.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/34950
其他識別: U0005-2308201008095800
Appears in Collections:水土保持學系

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.