黄土丘陵沟壑区生态风险动态变化及其地形梯度分析——以陕西省米脂县为例
|
摘要
以黄土丘陵沟壑区陕西省米脂县为研究区,综合考虑区域农耕生态背景与社会经济发展状况,建立了以农耕生态风险概率与自然-社会复合系统损失度耦合的综合生态风险评价体系,分析了2009年、2015年土地利用生态风险的时空分异,并依托地形分布指数探究了生态风险与地形起伏度的关系,得出如下结论:米脂县土地利用变化明显,主要表现为耕地减少,林地与荒地增加;米脂县2009年、2015年综合生态风险指数分别为0.1466、0.1607,农耕风险胁迫增大,风险高值区片状分布于米脂县中部,研究期间有向川道集聚的趋势;低风险优势分布于起伏度高值区,高风险则优势分布于起伏度低值区,研究期间风险向较高地形起伏度迁移明显,同时高风险区域在起伏度低值区上的分布也更加集聚。
The land ecosystem,the area utilized by man for economic gain,is an essential part of the global terrestrial ecosystem. Anthropogenic changes to land use inevitably result in a variety of changes to the structure and ecological processes of ecosystems,which result in ecological risks. It is therefore important to quantify and evaluate the ecological risks driven by many different sources. Ecological risk assessment can provide a strong scientific basis for future research on the relationship between the ecological environment and anthropogenic effects,especially in the loess hilly-gully region of Mizhi County,Shaanxi Province,China. Land use data for 2009—2015 showed that seven types of land use can be categorized in this area: farmland,forest,grassland,orchard,water body,construction land,and wasteland. A 2 km× 2km grid was established as the auxiliary evaluation unit for this area,and Arc GIS was used as the data integration analysis platform. The agricultural background and socioeconomic development of the research area were taken into consideration and the Agricultural Ecological Risk Possibility( AERP) and Natural-Social Loss Index( NSLI) were used to construct a Comprehensive Ecological Risk( CER) evaluation system. The land use change characteristics in the research area were analyzed quantitatively and maps of comprehensive ecological risk were then generated using spatial interpolation. The spatial-temporal variation for ecological risk was also investigated. Finally,the relationship between ecological risk and terrain relief was examined using the terrain distribution index. Several conclusions were drawn from this analysis: 1)although land use in the Mizhi area has experienced considerable change,farmland and grassland still accounted for more than 68% of the land use in this region. However,land use change data showed that there had been a reduction in farmland and an increase of forest and wasteland. The policy of returning farmland to forest or wasteland,a result of various economic factors,has led to a significant transformation of farmland to forests. 2) The study area was divided into five ecological risk classes using the natural breaks method. These were risk region I( CER < 0. 095),risk region II( 0. 095 ≤ CER <0.139),risk region III(0.139 ≤ CER < 0.183),risk region IV( 0.183 ≤ CER < 0.24),and risk region V( CER >0.24). Between 2009 and 2015,the comprehensive ecological risk index increased from 0.1466 to 0.1607,which was an increase of 9.65%. The ecological risk levels showed a tendency to increase during the study period,which indicated that ecosystems had become degraded. The ecological risk assessment showed that the comprehensive ecological risk level moved from the II/III level to the III/IV level between 2009 and 2015. Spatial differences in comprehensive ecological risk were also significantly different in the research area. Regions with a higher risk level were mainly located towards the center of the research region,and are the key areas for ecological restoration and pattern regulation. 3) Ecological risk was closely related to terrain relief. Regions with lower risk levels were mainly distributed in areas with a higher relief,and vice versa. The results showed that at risk areas began to move on to the higher relief land during the study period. However,regions with higher risk levels were mainly concentrated in the lower relief areas.
The land ecosystem,the area utilized by man for economic gain,is an essential part of the global terrestrial ecosystem. Anthropogenic changes to land use inevitably result in a variety of changes to the structure and ecological processes of ecosystems,which result in ecological risks. It is therefore important to quantify and evaluate the ecological risks driven by many different sources. Ecological risk assessment can provide a strong scientific basis for future research on the relationship between the ecological environment and anthropogenic effects,especially in the loess hilly-gully region of Mizhi County,Shaanxi Province,China. Land use data for 2009—2015 showed that seven types of land use can be categorized in this area: farmland,forest,grassland,orchard,water body,construction land,and wasteland. A 2 km× 2km grid was established as the auxiliary evaluation unit for this area,and Arc GIS was used as the data integration analysis platform. The agricultural background and socioeconomic development of the research area were taken into consideration and the Agricultural Ecological Risk Possibility( AERP) and Natural-Social Loss Index( NSLI) were used to construct a Comprehensive Ecological Risk( CER) evaluation system. The land use change characteristics in the research area were analyzed quantitatively and maps of comprehensive ecological risk were then generated using spatial interpolation. The spatial-temporal variation for ecological risk was also investigated. Finally,the relationship between ecological risk and terrain relief was examined using the terrain distribution index. Several conclusions were drawn from this analysis: 1)although land use in the Mizhi area has experienced considerable change,farmland and grassland still accounted for more than 68% of the land use in this region. However,land use change data showed that there had been a reduction in farmland and an increase of forest and wasteland. The policy of returning farmland to forest or wasteland,a result of various economic factors,has led to a significant transformation of farmland to forests. 2) The study area was divided into five ecological risk classes using the natural breaks method. These were risk region I( CER < 0. 095),risk region II( 0. 095 ≤ CER <0.139),risk region III(0.139 ≤ CER < 0.183),risk region IV( 0.183 ≤ CER < 0.24),and risk region V( CER >0.24). Between 2009 and 2015,the comprehensive ecological risk index increased from 0.1466 to 0.1607,which was an increase of 9.65%. The ecological risk levels showed a tendency to increase during the study period,which indicated that ecosystems had become degraded. The ecological risk assessment showed that the comprehensive ecological risk level moved from the II/III level to the III/IV level between 2009 and 2015. Spatial differences in comprehensive ecological risk were also significantly different in the research area. Regions with a higher risk level were mainly located towards the center of the research region,and are the key areas for ecological restoration and pattern regulation. 3) Ecological risk was closely related to terrain relief. Regions with lower risk levels were mainly distributed in areas with a higher relief,and vice versa. The results showed that at risk areas began to move on to the higher relief land during the study period. However,regions with higher risk levels were mainly concentrated in the lower relief areas.
引文
[1]傅伯杰.地理学:从知识、科学到决策.地理学报,2017,72(11):1923-1932.
[2]彭建,党威雄,刘焱序,宗敏丽,胡晓旭.景观生态风险评价研究进展与展望.地理学报,2015,70(4):664-677.
[3]张小飞,彭建,王仰麟,吴文斌,杨鹏,刘焱序,宋治清,薛怡珍.全球变化背景下景观生态适应性特征.地理科学进展,2017,36(9):1167-1175.
[4]冯舒,赵文武,陈利顶,吕楠.2010年来黄土高原景观生态研究进展.生态学报,2017,37(12):3957-3966.
[5]彭建,谢盼,刘焱序,胡晓旭.低丘缓坡建设开发综合生态风险评价及发展权衡---以大理白族自治州为例.地理学报,2015,70(11):1747-1761.
[6]张思锋,刘晗梦.生态风险评价方法述评.生态学报,2010,30(10):2735-2744.
[7]刘世梁,刘琦,张兆苓,邓丽,董世魁.云南省红河流域景观生态风险及驱动力分析.生态学报,2014,34(13):3728-3734.
[8]Xie H L,Wang P,Huang H S.Ecological risk assessment of land use change in the Poyang Lake eco-economic zone,China.International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,2013,10(1):328-346.
[9]Liu D D,Qu R J,Zhao C H,Liu A P,Deng X Z.Landscape ecological risk assessment in Yellow River Delta.Journal of Food,Agriculture&Environment,2012,10(2):970-972.
[10]高宾,李小玉,李志刚,陈玮,何兴元,齐善忠.基于景观格局的锦州湾沿海经济开发区生态风险分析.生态学报,2011,31(12):3441-3450.
[11]吴健生,乔娜,彭建,黄秀兰,刘建政,潘雅婧.露天矿区景观生态风险空间分异.生态学报,2013,33(12):3816-3824.
[12]周汝佳,张永战,何华春.基于土地利用变化的盐城海岸带生态风险评价.地理研究,2016,35(6):1017-1028.
[13]徐羽,钟业喜,冯兴华,徐丽婷,郑林.鄱阳湖流域土地利用生态风险格局.生态学报,2016,36(23):7850-7857.
[14]许妍,高俊峰,郭建科.太湖流域生态风险评价.生态学报,2013,33(9):2896-2906.
[15]许开鹏,王晶晶,迟妍妍,刘敏,鲁海杰.基于综合生态风险的云贵高原土地利用优化与持续利用对策.生态学报,2016,36(3):821-827.
[16]李谢辉,王磊,李景宜.基于GIS的渭河下游河流沿线区域生态风险评价.生态学报,2009,29(10):5523-5534.
[17]虞燕娜,朱江,吴绍华,周生路,李保杰.多风险源驱动下的土地生态风险评价---以江苏省射阳县为例.自然资源学报,2016,31(8):1264-1274.
[18]张雅洲,谢小平.基于RS和GIS的南四湖生态风险评价.生态学报,2015,35(5):1371-1377.
[19]杜悦悦,彭建,赵士权,胡智超,王仰麟.西南山地滑坡灾害生态风险评价---以大理白族自治州为例.地理学报,2016,71(9):1544-1561.
[20]Malekmohammadi B,Blouchi L R.Ecological risk assessment of wetland ecosystems using Multi Criteria Decision Making and Geographic Information System.Ecological Indicators,2014,41:133-144.
[21]方广玲,香宝,王宝良,金霞,胡钰,张立坤.苏南经济快速发展地区人类活动生态风险评价---以镇江市丹徒区为例.应用生态学报,2014,25(4):1076-1084.
[22]胡和兵,刘红玉,郝敬锋,安静.流域景观结构的城市化影响与生态风险评价.生态学报,2011,31(12):3432-3440.
[23]范建容,张子瑜,李立华.四川省山地类型界定与山区类型划分.地理研究,2015,34(1):65-73.
[24]徐浩田,周林飞,成遣.基于PSR模型的凌河口湿地生态系统健康评价与预警研究.生态学报,2017,37(24):8264-8274.
[25]李景刚,何春阳,李晓兵.快速城市化地区自然/半自然景观空间生态风险评价研究---以北京为例.自然资源学报,2008,23(1):33-47.
[26]周自翔,李晶,任志远.基于GIS的关中-天水经济区地形起伏度与人口分布研究.地理科学,2012,32(8):951-957.
[27]哈凯,丁庆龙,门明新,许皞.山地丘陵区土地利用分布及其与地形因子关系---以河北省怀来县为例.地理研究,2015,34(5):909-921.
[2]彭建,党威雄,刘焱序,宗敏丽,胡晓旭.景观生态风险评价研究进展与展望.地理学报,2015,70(4):664-677.
[3]张小飞,彭建,王仰麟,吴文斌,杨鹏,刘焱序,宋治清,薛怡珍.全球变化背景下景观生态适应性特征.地理科学进展,2017,36(9):1167-1175.
[4]冯舒,赵文武,陈利顶,吕楠.2010年来黄土高原景观生态研究进展.生态学报,2017,37(12):3957-3966.
[5]彭建,谢盼,刘焱序,胡晓旭.低丘缓坡建设开发综合生态风险评价及发展权衡---以大理白族自治州为例.地理学报,2015,70(11):1747-1761.
[6]张思锋,刘晗梦.生态风险评价方法述评.生态学报,2010,30(10):2735-2744.
[7]刘世梁,刘琦,张兆苓,邓丽,董世魁.云南省红河流域景观生态风险及驱动力分析.生态学报,2014,34(13):3728-3734.
[8]Xie H L,Wang P,Huang H S.Ecological risk assessment of land use change in the Poyang Lake eco-economic zone,China.International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,2013,10(1):328-346.
[9]Liu D D,Qu R J,Zhao C H,Liu A P,Deng X Z.Landscape ecological risk assessment in Yellow River Delta.Journal of Food,Agriculture&Environment,2012,10(2):970-972.
[10]高宾,李小玉,李志刚,陈玮,何兴元,齐善忠.基于景观格局的锦州湾沿海经济开发区生态风险分析.生态学报,2011,31(12):3441-3450.
[11]吴健生,乔娜,彭建,黄秀兰,刘建政,潘雅婧.露天矿区景观生态风险空间分异.生态学报,2013,33(12):3816-3824.
[12]周汝佳,张永战,何华春.基于土地利用变化的盐城海岸带生态风险评价.地理研究,2016,35(6):1017-1028.
[13]徐羽,钟业喜,冯兴华,徐丽婷,郑林.鄱阳湖流域土地利用生态风险格局.生态学报,2016,36(23):7850-7857.
[14]许妍,高俊峰,郭建科.太湖流域生态风险评价.生态学报,2013,33(9):2896-2906.
[15]许开鹏,王晶晶,迟妍妍,刘敏,鲁海杰.基于综合生态风险的云贵高原土地利用优化与持续利用对策.生态学报,2016,36(3):821-827.
[16]李谢辉,王磊,李景宜.基于GIS的渭河下游河流沿线区域生态风险评价.生态学报,2009,29(10):5523-5534.
[17]虞燕娜,朱江,吴绍华,周生路,李保杰.多风险源驱动下的土地生态风险评价---以江苏省射阳县为例.自然资源学报,2016,31(8):1264-1274.
[18]张雅洲,谢小平.基于RS和GIS的南四湖生态风险评价.生态学报,2015,35(5):1371-1377.
[19]杜悦悦,彭建,赵士权,胡智超,王仰麟.西南山地滑坡灾害生态风险评价---以大理白族自治州为例.地理学报,2016,71(9):1544-1561.
[20]Malekmohammadi B,Blouchi L R.Ecological risk assessment of wetland ecosystems using Multi Criteria Decision Making and Geographic Information System.Ecological Indicators,2014,41:133-144.
[21]方广玲,香宝,王宝良,金霞,胡钰,张立坤.苏南经济快速发展地区人类活动生态风险评价---以镇江市丹徒区为例.应用生态学报,2014,25(4):1076-1084.
[22]胡和兵,刘红玉,郝敬锋,安静.流域景观结构的城市化影响与生态风险评价.生态学报,2011,31(12):3432-3440.
[23]范建容,张子瑜,李立华.四川省山地类型界定与山区类型划分.地理研究,2015,34(1):65-73.
[24]徐浩田,周林飞,成遣.基于PSR模型的凌河口湿地生态系统健康评价与预警研究.生态学报,2017,37(24):8264-8274.
[25]李景刚,何春阳,李晓兵.快速城市化地区自然/半自然景观空间生态风险评价研究---以北京为例.自然资源学报,2008,23(1):33-47.
[26]周自翔,李晶,任志远.基于GIS的关中-天水经济区地形起伏度与人口分布研究.地理科学,2012,32(8):951-957.
[27]哈凯,丁庆龙,门明新,许皞.山地丘陵区土地利用分布及其与地形因子关系---以河北省怀来县为例.地理研究,2015,34(5):909-921.