柠条（Caragana korshinskii）在地上组织破坏后进行补偿性生长，这是重复利用柠条资源的基础，但对柠条不同刈割方式下营养生长补偿的模式有待探讨。该文通过5种刈割方式：去除主枝长的30%（30%RSL）、去除主枝长的60%（60%RSL）、去除分枝数的25%（25%RSN）、去除分枝数的50%（50%RSN）和去除分枝数的100%（100%RSN）来研究柠条的营养生长补偿。结果表明：刈割处理的柠条生物量当年发生了超补偿，当年生枝数/枝、当年生枝长、当年生枝生物量/枝、当年生枝生物量/株比对照高。对照、30%RSL和60%RSL 处理未长出基梢。 100%RSN处理的基梢数/刈割枝、基梢长、单个基梢平均生物量显著高于25%RSN和50%RSN处理,基梢生物量/株随刈割去除生物量的增加而增加。100%RSN 处理未结果，其它处理果实产量表现出超补偿或精确补偿。对照处理营养生长和生殖生长均低，其它处理当年生枝生物量与果实产量成显著负相关。从整个生长季节来看,营养生长主要集中在果实成熟之前。我们认为，100%RSN处理是柠条地上组织破坏后尽快恢复的合理方式，其当年生生物量远高于其它处理。顶端优势的破坏促使休眠芽的萌发，根冠比的改变使地上组织获得较多养分和水分，根系储存的碳水化合物的供应是促使刈割柠条营养生长超补偿的的可能机制，而减少生殖生长对资源的消耗，是100%RSN处理地上生物量尽快恢复的另一重要因素。
Background and Aims After browsing or clipping, Caragana korshinskii can compensate for loss of biomass, which is the foundation for repeated use of resources of this species. However, the pattern of vegetative compensatory growth under different clipping treatments is still poorly understood.
Methods In order to test the effects of removal of partial shoot length (RSL) and partial shoot number (RSN) on vegetative growth, we removed 30% (30%RSL), 60% (60%RSL) of main shoot length, and 25% (25%RSN), 50% (50%RSN), and 100% (100%RSN) of main shoot number.
Key Results Clipped shrubs overcompensated for tissue loss, and current years hoot number per shoot, current year shoot length, current year shoot biomass per shoot and current year shoot biomass per shrub were higher than those of the control. The control, 30%RSL and 60% RSL shrubs did not resprout after clipping, while 25%RSN, 60%RSN and 100%RSN treatments did resprout and the biomass per shrub increased when more shoot biomass were removed. Differences in resprout number per removal shoot, resprout length, individual resprout biomass were not significant between 25%RSN and 50%RSN treatment, but resprout number per removal shoot, resprout length, individual resprout biomass of both were less than those of 100%RSN treatment. Fruit production in clipping treatments was higher or equal to that of the control with the exception of 100%RSN, which grew no fruit. There was a negative relationship between annual shoot biomass and fruit production with the exception of the control, which had less fruit production and the annual shoots almost did not grow. During growth season, biomass of current year vegetative growth increased quickly from current year’s shoot growth to fruit ripeness. In the following three months, from fruit ripeness to leaf abscission, however, it increased slowly.
Conclusions 100%RSN treatment may be a reasonable mode to prompt shrubs to recover quickly from damage. Plants’ responses associated with compensation may include: increased branching or tillering after alteration of the apical dominance, increased availability of water and/or nutrients after the change in the ratio of shoot to root, and remobilization of resources reserved in roots to aboveground organs. Decreased allocation of resources to reproductive growth may be another important mechanism for 100%RSN shrubs to compensate for the loss of organs.