| 引用本文: | 刘禹.2026.年轮上的中国——中国树木年轮科学发展历史及展望[封面文章][J].地球环境学报,17(4):869-893 |
| LIU Yu.2026.Tree rings in China: the development and future of tree-ring science in China[Cover][J].Journal of Earth Environment,17(4):869-893 |
|
| |
|
|
| 本文已被：浏览 653次 下载 145次 |
码上扫一扫！ |
| 年轮上的中国——中国树木年轮科学发展历史及展望[封面文章] |
|
刘禹
|
|
中国科学院地球环境研究所 黄土科学全国重点实验室，西安 710061
|
|
| 摘要: |
| 树木年轮是树木生长的年度记录，也是重建过去气候、生态、水文与人类活动变化的重要自然档案。中国古代文献中长期存在关于“木理”、“轮囷”、“轮”和“晕”等树木纹理、木材结构和岁月积累的观察，但这些经验知识与现代树木年轮学之间并非简单连续关系。文章从知识史、学科史和文献计量3个层面系统梳理中国树木年轮相关认知与研究的发展过程，分析现代树轮学在中国的引入、方法体系建立、研究方向拓展以及学术共同体形成过程。古代部分重点区分木材工艺中的纹理与材性知识、通过生长层判断树龄的年龄意识以及文学史学中的树木意象；现代部分则重点讨论20世纪树轮学方法的引入、国家需求驱动下的发展、改革开放后的交叉定年和标准化方法体系建立，以及21世纪以来多指标和多领域快速发展的阶段。现代树轮研究以交叉定年、年表标准化和气候校准为基础，由早期以年轮宽度为主的气候重建，逐步拓展至稳定同位素、最大晚材密度、蓝光强度、定量木材解剖、形成层活动监测和树轮化学等多指标体系，并形成树轮气候学、树轮水文学、树轮生态学、树轮考古学及环境过程等多方向研究格局。基于文献计量分析，截至2026年7月18日，检索到中国学者发表树轮相关论文4222篇，其中Web of Science（WoS）收录2479篇，中国知网（CNKI）收录1743篇。21世纪以来，中国树轮研究快速发展，国内外论文发表呈现不同变化趋势：CNKI发文量在快速增长后进入相对稳定阶段，而WoS发文量自2010年前后明显增加，表明中国树轮研究成果传播逐渐由国内期刊向国际期刊拓展。研究方向上，树轮生态学已成为近年来增长较快的领域，气候与环境重建仍占重要地位，定量木材解剖、形成层活动监测等过程性研究不断增加。与此同时，中国树轮学术共同体逐渐形成，据不完全统计，目前已有约80家树轮研究相关单位；全国树轮大会参会人数由首届的87人增加至第八届（2024年，西安）的近500人，反映出研究队伍和学术交流平台的持续发展。中国树木年轮学的发展特点并非古代木材经验向现代科学的简单延续，而是在传统木理认知、国家科学发展需求和独特自然环境背景共同作用下形成的现代学科体系。近年来，中国树轮研究已在发展高山亚洲长期气候重建、干旱区水文气候变化以及森林生态系统全球变化响应等领域形成了一批具有国际影响力的研究成果。未来，中国树轮研究仍需进一步加强交叉定年质量控制、多指标融合、原始数据开放共享以及与遥感、生态模型和水文模型的结合，以推动树轮科学由过去环境重建进一步走向生态过程解释和未来环境风险评估。 |
| 关键词: 树木年轮学 中国树轮发展历史 交叉定年 树轮指标 树轮研究方向 文献计量分析 |
| DOI：10.7515/JEE2026093 |
| CSTR：32259.14.JEE2026093 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:中国科学院基础与交叉前沿科研先导专项（XDB1660102）；国家自然科学基金项目（42371073）；黄土科学全国重点实验室重点项目（SKLLQGZD2506） |
| 英文基金项目: |
|
| Tree rings in China: the development and future of tree-ring science in China[Cover] |
|
LIU Yu
|
|
State Key Laboratory of Loess Science, Institute of Earth Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi’an 710061 , China
|
| Abstract: |
| Background, aim, and scope Tree rings provide annual records of tree growth and serve as important natural archives for reconstructing past climate, ecosystem dynamics, hydrological changes, and human-environment interactions. Chinese historical documents contain long-standing records of wood structure, timber properties, and temporal accumulation represented by concepts such as “wood grain,” “lunwen” (ring-like structures), and growth layers. However, these empirical observations did not develop into modern dendrochronology through a simple linear transition. This study reviews the development of tree-ring science in China from the perspectives of knowledge history, disciplinary history, and bibliometric analysis. It examines the introduction of modern dendrochronology, the establishment of methodological frameworks, the expansion of tree-ring parameters and research directions, and the formation of the scientific community. The historical part distinguishes among craft-based knowledge of wood structure and properties, age estimation based on growth layers, and symbolic representations of trees in literature and historical writings. The modern part focuses on the introduction of tree-ring methods in the twentieth century, the development driven by national scientific demands, the establishment of cross-dating and standardization procedures after China’s reform and opening-up, and the multiproxy, network-based, and internationally collaborative development since the twenty-first century. Materials and methods This study integrates approaches from the history of science, disciplinary development analysis, and bibliometric analysis. Historical documents were reviewed to examine early Chinese observations related to wood structure and tree age estimation, while modern tree-ring research was evaluated through publication statistics, research themes, proxy systems, and institutional development based on Chinese and international literature databases. Results The development of tree-ring science in China can be divided into four major stages: early introduction and exploration of dendrochronological concepts, national-demand-driven development, methodological standardization through international exchange, and rapid expansion of multiproxy and international collaborative research since the twenty-first century. Modern tree-ring studies have been established on crossdating, chronology standardization, and climate calibration, and have expanded from tree-ring width-based climate reconstruction to multiple proxy systems including maximum latewood density (MXD), stable isotopes, blue intensity, quantitative wood anatomy, cambial monitoring, and dendrochemistry. These developments have promoted the formation of diverse research directions, including dendroclimatology, dendrohydrology, dendroecology, dendroarchaeology, and environmental process studies. Bibliometric analysis shows that, by July 18, 2026, Chinese researchers had published 4222 tree-ring-related papers, including 2479 papers indexed in Web of Science (WoS) and 1743 papers indexed in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Since the twenty-first century, Chinese tree-ring research has expanded rapidly. Publications in CNKI increased rapidly during the 2000s and then entered a relatively stable phase, whereas publications indexed by WoS increased markedly after around 2010, indicating a gradual shift of research dissemination from domestic journals toward international journals. Dendroecology has become one of the rapidly growing research directions, while climate and environmental reconstruction remain an important field. Process-oriented studies, including dendrohydrology, quantitative wood anatomy, and cambial activity monitoring, have also increased. Meanwhile, the Chinese tree-ring research community has gradually developed, with approximately 80 related research institutions currently identified. The number of participants at national tree-ring conferences increased from 87 at the first conference to nearly 500 at the eighth conference held in Xi’an in 2024, reflecting the continued expansion of the research community and academic exchange platforms. Discussion The development of Chinese tree-ring science reflects both continuity and discontinuity between traditional knowledge and modern scientific systems. Ancient observations of wood properties and tree longevity represent an important cultural tradition, but modern dendrochronology was established through the introduction of cross-dating, statistical methods, and standardized analytical procedures. Recent advances in multiproxy approaches have substantially improved the reliability and ecological interpretation of tree-ring records. Chinese tree-ring research has produced internationally recognized achievements in long-term climate reconstruction of High Mountain Asia, hydroclimatic variability in arid regions, and forest ecosystem responses to global change. Conclusions The development of tree-ring science in China does not represent a simple transformation of ancient wood-related knowledge into modern science. Instead, it has emerged from the interaction among traditional observations of trees, national scientific demands, and unique environmental settings. Chinese dendrochronology has developed from a climate reconstruction-oriented discipline into a multidisciplinary research system integrating climatology, hydrology, ecology, archaeology, and Earth system science. Recommendations and perspectives Future research should further strengthen cross-dating quality control, multiproxy integration, open access to raw data and metadata, and collaborations between tree-ring studies and remote sensing, ecological models, and hydrological models. These efforts will promote the transition of tree-ring science from reconstructing past environmental changes toward understanding ecological processes and assessing future environmental risks. |
| Key words: dendrochronology history of tree-ring science in China cross-dating tree-ring proxy systems research directions bibliometric analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
