您的位置：山东大学 -> 科技期刊社 -> 《山东大学学报（理学版）》

《山东大学学报(理学版)》 ›› 2020, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (1): 117-126.doi: 10.6040/j.issn.1671-9352.0.2019.362

•   • 上一篇    

熵权-TOPSIS法在华北石质山区常用造林树种抗旱性评价中的应用

李泽东1(),曹振1,张如明1,李亦然1,程甜甜2,张永涛1,*()   

  1. 1. 山东农业大学林学院, 山东省土壤侵蚀与生态修复重点实验室, 山东泰山森林生态系统国家定位研究站, 山东 泰安 271018
    2. 莱芜市水土保持办公室, 山东 莱芜 271100
  • 收稿日期:2019-05-31 出版日期:2020-01-20 发布日期:2020-01-10
  • 通讯作者: 张永涛 E-mail:lizedong19940708@163.com;yongtaozhang@126.com
  • 作者简介:李泽东(1994—),男,硕士研究生,研究方向为林业生态工程. E-mail:lizedong19940708@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    欧洲投资银行贷款沿海防护林工程项目(SCSFP-KY-3);世界银行贷款山东生态造林项目(SEAP-KY-1)

Application of entropy weight-TOPSIS method to drought resistance evaluation of common afforestation tree species in the lithoid hilly area of North China

Ze-dong LI1(),Zhen CAO1,Ru-ming ZHANG1,Yi-ran LI1,Tian-tian CHENG2,Yong-tao ZHANG1,*()   

  1. 1. Forestry College, Shandong Agricultural University, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Ecological Restoration, Mountain Tai Forest Ecosystem Research Station of State Forestry Administration, Taian 271018, Shandong, China
    2. Office of the Development of Laiwu Water Conservancy, Laiwu 271100, Shandong, China
  • Received:2019-05-31 Online:2020-01-20 Published:2020-01-10
  • Contact: Yong-tao ZHANG E-mail:lizedong19940708@163.com;yongtaozhang@126.com

RichHTML

12

PDF (PC)

369

摘要：

为了探求熵权-TOPSIS法在植物抗旱性评价中的应用,采用盆栽试验控水的试验方法,测定白蜡等7个华北石质山区常用造林树种在持续干旱条件下的净光合速率(Pn)、叶绿素含量、气孔导度、水分利用效率(WUE)、丙二醛(MDA)含量、细胞膜透性、超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)活性、脯氨酸含量和叶片相对含水量9个生理指标对干旱胁迫的响应,并对不同植物在遭受干旱胁迫时的光合效应和渗透调节效应分别进行评价。结果表明:干旱胁迫时,皂荚的光合效应和渗透调节效应的Ci值均高于其他树种的,分别为0.669和0.528,即皂荚的抗旱性在7个树种中居于首位;基于熵权-TOPSIS原理对7个树种9个指标进行抗旱性综合评价排序为皂荚>苦楝>麻栎>刺槐>黄栌>白蜡>栾树。运用基于熵权-TOPSIS法对各个树种的抗旱性评价所得结果与植物实际生长状况和前人研究结果基本一致,验证了运用此方法对植物抗旱性进行综合评价的可行性。

关键词: 熵权-TOPSIS法, 华北石质山区, 抗旱性评价

Abstract:

In order to explore the application of entropy weight-TOPSIS method in plant drought resistance evaluation, taking potted water control as experimental method and seedlings of 7 common afforestation tree species in lithoid hilly area of North China such as F.chinensis were used as experimental materials, then measured their net photosynthetic rate (Pn), chlorophyll content, stomatal conductance(gs), water use efficiency (WUE), malondialdehyde (MDA) content, cell membrane permeability, superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity, proline content and relative water content of the leaves. The responses of these indicators to drought stress were analyzed, and the photosynthesis and osmotic adjustment effects of different plants under drought stress were evaluated. The results showed that, under drought stress, the Ci of photosynthetic effect and osmotic regulation effect of G.sinensis were higher than those of other tree species, which were 0.669 and 0.528, this indicates that the G.sinensis has the strongest drought resistance. Based on entropy weight-TOPSIS principle, the drought resistance of 7 tree species was evaluated by comprehensive evaluation: G.sinensis>M.azedarach>Q.acutissima>R.pseudoacacia>C.coggygria>F.chinensis>K.paniculata. The results of drought resistance evaluation of tree species based on entropy weight-TOPSIS method were consistent with the actual growth of plants and previous studies. So the comprehensive evaluation of the drought resistance of the plant is feasible by using the method.

Key words: entropy weight-TOPSIS method, lithoid hilly area of North China, drought resistance evaluation

中图分类号: 

  • S175.1

图1

干旱胁迫对植物光合作用的影响"

表1

干旱胁迫下植物光合作用各评价指标熵值与权重"

树种 Pn下降程度/% 叶绿素含量/(μg·g-1) 气孔导度/(μmol·m-2·s-1) 水分利用效率/(mmol·mol-1)
白蜡 0.987 21.324 144.800 1.958
刺槐 0.812 8.914 123.200 1.717
麻栎 0.683 15.019 94.833 2.140
黄栌 0.770 14.073 116.000 2.682
皂荚 0.149 16.429 256.067 1.748
苦楝 1.000 33.479 111.067 2.681
栾树 1.028 18.217 104.583 2.283
熵值 0.461 0.287 0.285 0.268
权重 0.200 0.264 0.265 0.271

表2

干旱胁迫下不同树种光合作用Ci值与排序结果"

树种 D+ D- Ci 排序
白蜡 0.188 0.073 0.280 3
刺槐 0.220 0.021 0.086 7
麻栎 0.206 0.039 0.160 6
黄栌 0.203 0.055 0.213 4
皂荚 0.097 0.196 0.669 1
苦楝 0.186 0.134 0.419 2
栾树 0.205 0.055 0.211 5

表3

干旱胁迫下植物渗透调节各评价指标熵值与权重"

树种 MDA含量上升幅度/% 细胞膜透性/% SOD活性/(U·g-1) 脯氨酸含量/(mg·g-1) 叶片相对含水量/%
白蜡 42.206 42.547 172.062 18.335 38.792
刺槐 49.296 19.623 171.689 232.587 19.577
麻栎 30.394 29.312 271.181 20.555 6.744
黄栌 40.456 20.212 244.384 154.906 39.328
皂荚 75.912 38.680 180.452 233.011 11.347
苦楝 45.250 24.817 215.662 542.275 36.179
栾树 52.792 34.426 221.493 80.049 33.403
熵值 0.273 0.275 0.268 0.407 0.357
权重 0.213 0.212 0.214 0.173 0.188

表4

干旱胁迫下不同树种渗透调节作用Ci值与排序结果"

树种 D+ D- Ci 排序Rank
白蜡 0.158 0.037 0.191 7
刺槐 0.100 0.086 0.462 2
麻栎 0.142 0.083 0.370 4
黄栌 0.107 0.082 0.436 3
皂荚 0.124 0.058 0.318 5
苦楝 0.051 0.147 0.740 1
栾树 0.141 0.035 0.201 6

表5

干旱胁迫下植物各评价指标熵值与权重"

树种 Pn下降
程度/%		 叶绿素含量/
(μg·g-1)		 气孔导度/
(μmol·m-2·s-1)		 水分利用效率/
(mmol·mol-1)		 MDA含量
上升幅度/%		 细胞膜
透性/%		 SOD活性
/(U·g-1)		 脯氨酸含量
/(mg/g)		 叶片相对
含水量/%
白蜡 98.658 21.324 144.800 1.958 42.206 42.547 172.062 18.335 38.792
刺槐 81.159 8.914 123.200 1.717 49.296 19.623 171.689 232.587 19.577
麻栎 68.286 15.019 94.833 2.14 30.394 29.312 271.181 20.555 6.744
黄栌 77.016 14.073 116.000 2.682 40.456 20.212 244.384 154.906 39.328
皂荚 14.896 16.429 256.067 1.748 75.912 38.680 180.452 233.011 11.347
苦楝 100.000 33.479 111.067 2.681 45.250 24.817 215.662 542.275 36.179
栾树 102.830 18.217 104.583 2.283 52.792 34.426 221.493 80.049 33.403
熵值 0.461 0.287 0.285 0.268 0.273 0.275 0.268 0.407 0.287
权重 0.088 0.117 0.117 0.120 0.119 0.118 0.120 0.097 0.117

表6

干旱胁迫下不同树种Ci值与排序结果"

树种 D+ D- Ci 排序Rank
白蜡 0.139 0.038 0.216 6
刺槐 0.127 0.052 0.289 4
麻栎 0.121 0.084 0.411 3
黄栌 0.125 0.050 0.288 5
皂荚 0.088 0.099 0.528 1
苦楝 0.110 0.101 0.480 2
栾树 0.137 0.031 0.184 7

图2

干旱胁迫对植物渗透调节作用的影响"

1 杨吉华, 张永涛, 孙明高, 等. 石灰岩丘陵土壤旱作保水技术的研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2000, 14 (3): 62- 66.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2000.03.013
YANG Jihua , ZHANG Yongtao , SUN Minggao , et al. Study on technique of dry farming and water retention in limestone hill[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2000, 14 (3): 62- 66.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1009-2242.2000.03.013
2 杜满义, 封焕英, 张连金, 等. 华北石质山区不同植被恢复类型土壤碳、氮特征[J]. 生态学杂志, 2018, 37 (6): 1849- 1855.
DU Manyi , FENG Huanying , ZHANG Lianjin , et al. Soil carbon and nitrogen characteristics in different vegetation restoration types in the lithoid hilly area of North China[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2018, 37 (6): 1849- 1855.
3 孙守家, 孟平, 张劲松, 等. 华北石质山区核桃-绿豆复合系统氘同位素变化及其水分利用[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30 (14): 3717- 3726.
SUN Shoujia , MENG Ping , ZHANG Jinsong , et al. Deuterium isotope variation and water use in an agroforestry system in the rocky mountainous area of North China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30 (14): 3717- 3726.
4 蔡建国, 章毅, 孙欧文, 等. 绣球抗旱性综合评价及指标体系构建[J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29 (10): 3175- 3182.
CAI Jianguo , ZHANG Yi , SUN Ouwen , et al. Comprehensive evaluation and construction of drought resistance index system in Hydrangea macrophylla[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2018, 29 (10): 3175- 3182.
5 赵文达, 杨晓鹏, 孙铭, 等. 不同扁穗雀麦种质苗期抗旱性鉴定与评价[J]. 草业科学, 2018, 35 (11): 2664- 2671.
doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2018-0013
ZHAO Wenda , YANG Xiaopeng , SUN Ming , et al. Evaluation of drought tolerance in germplasm collection of Bromus catharticus at seedling stage[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2018, 35 (11): 2664- 2671.
doi: 10.11829/j.issn.1001-0629.2018-0013
6 田山君, 杨世民, 孔凡磊, 等. 西南地区玉米苗期抗旱品种筛选[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23 (1): 50- 57.
TIAN Shanjun , YANG Shimin , KONG Fanlei , et al. Screening in Southwest China of drought-resistant varieties of maize at the seedling stage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23 (1): 50- 57.
7 刘光辉, 陈全家, 吴鹏昊, 等. 棉花花铃期抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2016, 17 (1): 53- 62, 69.
LIU Guanghui , CHEN Quanjia , WU Penghao , et al. Screening and comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance indices of cotton at blossing and boll-forming stages[J]. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2016, 17 (1): 53- 62, 69.
8 ARSLAN T . A weighted euclidean distance based TOPSIS method for modeling public subjective judgments[J]. Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research, 2017, 34 (3): 97- 112.
9 信桂新, 杨朝现, 杨庆媛, 等. 用熵权法和改进TOPSIS模型评价高标准基本农田建设后效应[J]. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33 (1): 238- 249.
XIN Guixin , YANG Chaoxian , YANG Qingyuan , et al. Post-evaluation of well-facilitied capital farmland construction based on entropy weight method and improved TOPSIS model[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural, 2017, 33 (1): 238- 249.
10 高洁芝, 郑华伟, 刘友兆. 基于熵权TOPSIS模型的土地利用多功能性诊断[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27 (11): 2496- 2504.
GAO Jiezhi , ZHENG Huawei , LIU Youzhao . Diagnosis of the multi-functionality of land use based on an entropy weight TOPSIS model[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2018, 27 (11): 2496- 2504.
11 李亦然, 张兴刚, 李泽东, 等. 基于TOPSIS法的鲁中南山区不同混交林水土保持效应评价[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2018, 16 (6): 111- 120.
LI Yiran , ZHANG Xinggang , LI Zedong , et al. Evaluation of soil and water conservation effect of different mixed forests in Central and Southern Shandong Province based on TOPSIS method[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2018, 16 (6): 111- 120.
12 尤立, 刘平, 张俊龙, 等. 基于熵权的改进TOPSIS方法对黄河水土保持生态工程综合效益评估[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2017, 45 (5): 232- 235.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2017.05.077
YOU Li , LIU Ping , ZHANG Junlong , et al. Evaluation of social and economic benefits of soil and water conservation project of the Yellow River through entropy-weight TOPSIS method[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 45 (5): 232- 235.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2017.05.077
13 FLEXAS J , BOTA J , et al. Keeping a positive carbon balance under adverse conditions: responses of photosynthesis and respiration to water stress[J]. Physiologia Plantarum, 2006, 127 (3): 208- 220.
14 张珊珊, 杨文忠, 康洪梅, 等. 光强和土壤含水量对云南蓝果树幼苗生长及光合特征的影响[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2018, 46 (3): 16- 23.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2018.03.004
ZHANG Shanshan , YANG Wenzhong , KANG Hongmei , et al. Effects of light intensities and water conditions on growth and photosynthetic characteristics of Nyssa yun-nanensisseedlings[J]. Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2018, 46 (3): 16- 23.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2018.03.004
15 周怀林, 周广胜. 玉米叶片水分利用效率的保守性[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39 (6): 2156- 2167.
ZHOU Huailin , ZHOU Guangsheng . Water conservation in terms of leaf water use efficiency of maize[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39 (6): 2156- 2167.
16 陈平, 万福绪, 顾汤华, 等. 干旱胁迫下侧柏、苦楝等树种的生理生化响应及抗旱性评价[J]. 林业科技开发, 2012, 26 (4): 43- 48.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-8101.2012.04.011
CHEN Ping , WAN Fuxu , GU Tanghua , et al. Physiological and biochemical response and drought tolerance evaluation on five tree species under drought stress[J]. China Forestry Science and Technology, 2012, 26 (4): 43- 48.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-8101.2012.04.011
17 CHEN H , JIANG J G . Osmotic adjustment and plant adaptation to environmental changes related to drought and salinity[J]. Environmental Reviews, 2010, 18 (18): 309- 319.
18 万里强, 石永红, 李向林, 等. PEG胁迫下3个多年生黑麦草品种抗性生理研究[J]. 草地学报, 2009, 17 (4): 440- 444.
WAN Liqiang , SHI Yonghong , LI Xianglin , et al. Physiological resistance of three lolium perenne L.varieties under PEG stress[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2009, 17 (4): 440- 444.
19 丁玉梅, 马龙海, 周晓罡, 等. 干旱胁迫下马铃薯叶片脯氨酸、丙二醛含量变化及与耐旱性的相关性分析[J]. 西南农业学报, 2013, 26 (1): 106- 110.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4829.2013.01.022
DING Yumei , MA Longhai , ZHOU Xiaogang , et al. Effects of drought stress on free proline and malonaldedyde contents in potato leaves and correlation analysis of drought-tolerant level among different varieties[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 26 (1): 106- 110.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4829.2013.01.022
20 张海娜, 鲁向晖, 金志农, 等. 高温条件下稀土尾砂干旱对4种植物生理特性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39 (7): 2426- 2434.
ZHANG Haina , LU Xianghui , JIN Zhinong , et al. Effects of drought on physiological characteristics of seedlings of four species grown on rare earth mill tailings at high temperatures[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39 (7): 2426- 2434.
21 孟鹏, 李玉灵, 张柏习, 等. 沙地彰武松与樟子松苗木抗旱生理特性比较[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46 (12): 56- 63.
doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20101209
MENG Peng , LI Yuling , ZHANG Baixi , et al. A comparative study on physiological characteristics of drought resistance of pinus densiflora var.zhangwuensis and p.sylvestris var.mongolica in sandy soil[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2010, 46 (12): 56- 63.
doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20101209
22 叶霜, 熊博, 邱霞, 等. 果实品质综合评价体系的建立及其在黄果柑果实上的应用[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017, 29 (12): 2038- 2050.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2017.12.12
YE Shuang , XIONG Bo , QIU Xia , et al. Establishment of comprehensive evaluation system of fruit quality and its application on Huangguogan fruit[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2017, 29 (12): 2038- 2050.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2017.12.12
23 徐小万, 雷建军, 李颖, 等. 现蕾期辣椒耐高温多湿性CA-TOPSIS综合评定[J]. 热带作物学报, 2013, 34 (9): 1747- 1751.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2013.09.021
XU Xiaowan , LEI Jianjun , LI Ying , et al. Comprehensive evaluation for high temperature and humidity resistance in pepper (capsicum annuum l.) budding[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2013, 34 (9): 1747- 1751.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2013.09.021
24 张彬, 杨联安, 冯武焕, 等. 基于改进TOPSIS和COK的土壤养分综合评价[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2016, 30 (7): 180- 185.
ZHANG Bin , YANG Lianan , FENG Wuhuan , et al. Comprehensive evaluation of soil nutrients based on improved TOPSIS and COK[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2016, 30 (7): 180- 185.
25 张宇君, 赵丽丽, 王普昶, 等. 燕麦萌发期抗旱指标体系构建及综合评价[J]. 核农学报, 2017, (11): 162- 168.
ZHANG Yujun , ZHAO Lili , WANG Puchang , et al. Construction and comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance index system in oatmea during germination[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2017, (11): 162- 168.
26 郁慧. 干旱胁迫对5种植物叶绿体和线粒体超微结构的影响[J]. 植物研究, 2011, 31 (2): 152- 158.
YU Hui . Effect of drought stress on the ultramicrostructures of chloroplasts and mitochondria of five plants[J]. Bulletin of Botanical Research, 2011, 31 (2): 152- 158.
27 孙景宽, 张文辉, 张洁明, 等. 种子萌发期4种植物对干旱胁迫的响应及其抗旱性评价研究[J]. 西北植物学报, 2006, 26 (9): 1811- 1818.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-4025.2006.09.010
SUN Jingkuan , ZHANG Wenhui , ZHANG Jieming , et al. Response to droughty stresses and drought-resistances evaluation of four species during seed germination[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2006, 26 (9): 1811- 1818.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-4025.2006.09.010
28 贾军.山西三个乡土灌木树种的抗旱性和耐盐性研究[D].晋中:山西农业大学, 2016.
JIA Jun. Study on drought resistance and salt tolerance of three native shrup species in Shanxi[D]. Jinzhong: Shanxi Agricultural University, 2016.
29 胡学俭. 10树种苗期抗旱特性及抗旱评价指标体系的研究[D].泰安:山东农业大学, 2005.
HU Xuejian. Study on characteristics of drought tolerance and evaluation system of ten tree species in seedings stage[D]. Tai'an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2005.
30 李俊辉, 李秧秧, 赵丽敏, 等. 立地条件和树龄对刺槐和小叶杨叶水力性状及抗旱性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23 (9): 2397- 2403.
LI Junhui , LI Yangyang , ZHAO Limin , et al. Effects of site conditions and tree age on Robinia pseudoacacia and Populus simonii leaf hydraulic traits and drought resistance[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2012, 23 (9): 2397- 2403.
31 王丁.喀斯特地区六种苗木水分生理与抗旱性研究[D].南京:南京林业大学, 2009.
WANG Ding. A study on the relationship between water physiological characteristic and drought resistance of 6 tree species seedlings in karst area[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Forestry University, 2009.
32 刘红茹.延安城区主要绿化树种的抗旱性研究[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2013.
LIU Hongru. Drought resistance research on main landscape plants in Yanan urban area[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2013.
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 彭振华,徐义红*,涂相求. 近似拟不变凸集值优化问题弱有效元的最优性条件[J]. 山东大学学报（理学版）, 2014, 49(05): 41 -44 .
[2] 胡明娣1,2,折延宏1,王敏3. L3*系统中逻辑度量空间的拓扑性质[J]. J4, 2010, 45(6): 86 -90 .
[3] 袁晖坪 . 行（列）对称矩阵的Schur分解和正规阵分解[J]. J4, 2007, 42(10): 123 -126 .
[4] 郭兰兰1,2,耿介1,石硕1,3,苑飞1,雷丽1,杜广生1*. 基于UDF方法的阀门变速关闭过程中的#br# 水击压强计算研究[J]. 山东大学学报（理学版）, 2014, 49(03): 27 -30 .
[5] 史开泉. 信息规律智能融合与软信息图像智能生成[J]. 山东大学学报（理学版）, 2014, 49(04): 1 -17 .
[6] 章 玲,周德群 . λ模糊测度及其Mbius变换和关联系数间关系的推导[J]. J4, 2007, 42(7): 33 -37 .
[7] 何海伦， 陈秀兰*. 变性剂和缓冲系统对适冷蛋白酶MCP-01和中温蛋白酶BP-01构象影响的圆二色光谱分析何海伦， 陈秀兰*[J]. 山东大学学报（理学版）, 2013, 48(1): 23 -29 .
[8] 王碧玉,曹小红*. 算子矩阵的Browder定理的摄动[J]. 山东大学学报（理学版）, 2014, 49(03): 90 -95 .
[9] 丁超1,2, 元昌安1,3*, 覃晓1,3. 基于GEP的多数据流预测算法[J]. J4, 2010, 45(7): 50 -54 .
[10] 郭红,何晓英 . X70钢在含SO2弱酸性溶液中的防腐研究[J]. J4, 2006, 41(5): 144 -147 .
版权所有 © 2018 《山东大学学报(理学版)》编辑部　
地址: 山东省济南市山大南路27号山东大学中心校区（250100）　电话: +86-0531-88366917　E-mail: xblxb@sdu.edu.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发