A Study on Identification Methods of Ecological Source Area In Aksu Area, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region

Xu Caifang; Cao Yuee; Xu Zhonglin; Yang Jianjun; Zeng Zhiyong

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2021.04.025

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

A Study on Identification Methods of Ecological Source Area In Aksu Area, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region

- A Study on Identification Methods of Ecological Source Area In Aksu Area, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region
- Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation Vol. 41, Issue 4, Pages: 174-181(2021)
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 新疆大学资源与环境科学学院,新疆,乌鲁木齐,830046
  2. 绿洲生态教育部重点实验室,新疆,乌鲁木齐,830046
  3. 上海师范大学环境与地理科学学院,上海,200234
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2021.04.025
  CLC： X171.1;F301.24
- Published：2021
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
Xu Caifang, Cao Yuee, Xu Zhonglin, et al. A Study on Identification Methods of Ecological Source Area In Aksu Area, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2021, 41(4): 174-181.
DOI：

Xu Caifang, Cao Yuee, Xu Zhonglin, et al. A Study on Identification Methods of Ecological Source Area In Aksu Area, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2021, 41(4): 174-181. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2021.04.025.

摘要

[目的

]

对新疆阿克苏地区生态源地进行识别，为该地区生态安全格局构建和可持续的国土空间生态修复提供策略与建议。[方法

]

以新疆阿克苏地区为例，采用定性（生态保护红线直接识别法）和定量（基于InVEST模型的综合评估法）方法识别生态源地，并在此基础上，比较两种结果之间的差异及其原因，判定目前划定的生态保护红线能否体现人类对生态系统服务需求。[结果

]

①基于InVEST模型的综合评估法识别的生态源地面积为11 433.6 km

，占研究区总面积的8.9%，主要分布于区内河流及其周边区域；基于生态保护红线直接识别的生态源地面积为22 746.8 km

，占研究区总面积的17.7%，主要分布于天山南麓和区内河流周边区域；②两种方法界定的生态源地在空间分布在上存在着较大差异。综合评估法界定的生态源地中有59.4%不在生态保护红线内，面积为6 787.0 km

。③导致两种结果差异的主要原因在于生态保护红线侧重于对生态用地本身生态功能的保护，而生态源地的概念结合了人的需求，更侧重于各类生态系统为人类生产生活提供的服务。[结论

]

未来的工作中，需要考虑如何将侧重满足社会需求的生态源地与侧重生态环境保护的生态红线相统一，应选择以定量识别生态源地为主，以定性识别生态源地为辅，综合划定生态源区，并提出潜在的规划和政策建议，以实现社会经济和自然环境的协调发展。

Abstract

[Objective] The ecological source area was identified in Akesu area

Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region

in order to provide strategies and suggestions for the construction of the ecological security pattern of the region and the sustainable ecological restoration of the land and space. [Methods] Taking Aksu area in Xinjiang as an example

the ecological source area were identified by quantitative method (comprehensive evaluation method based on the InVEST model) and qualitative method (the ecological conservation redline was identified in the direct way). On this basis

the differences between the two results and their causes were compared to determine whether the ecological protection red line could reflect human demand for ecosystem services. [Results] ① The ecological source area identified based on the comprehensive evaluation method using the InVEST model was 11 433.6 km2

accounting for 8.9% of the total area

mainly distributed in the rivers and surrounding areas. The ecological source area identified directly based on the ecological conservation redline was 22 746.8 km2

accounting for 17.7% of the total study area

mainly distributed in the south of Tianshan Mountain and surrounding areas of rivers. ② There are great differences in the spatial distribution of the ecological source areas identified by the two methods. About 59.4% area of the ecological source identified by comprehensive evaluation was not in the ecological conservation redline

occupying 6 787.0 km2. ③ The main reason for the difference between the two results was that the ecological conservation redline focused on the protection of ecological functions of the ecological land

while the concept of ecological source combined the requirements of human beings

and prefered the services that the ecological system provided to human production and living. [Conclusion] In the future

it is necessary to consider how to unify the concept of the ecological source areas that focus on meeting the social requirements with the ecological conservation redline that focus on the ecological environment conservation. We should define the ecological source in a comprehensive manner

based on the quantitively identified ecological source as the primary factor and the qualitatively identified ecological source as the secondary factor

and propose advices for potential plans and policies to realize the coordinated development of the social economy and natural environment.

关键词

Keywords

references

刘时栋, 刘琳, 张建军, 等. 基于生态系统服务能力提升的干旱区生态保护与修复研究:以额尔齐斯河流域生态保护与修复试点工程区为例[J].生态学报, 2019, 39(23):8998-9007.

彭建, 吕丹娜, 董建权, 等. 过程耦合与空间集成:国土空间生态修复的景观生态学认知[J].自然资源学报, 2020, 35(1):3-13.

王克林, 岳跃民, 陈洪松, 等. 喀斯特石漠化综合治理及其区域恢复效应[J].生态学报, 2019, 39(20):7432-7440.

中共中央办公厅.国务院办公厅印发《关于建立以国家公园为主体的自然保护地体系的指导意见》[R/OL].http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2019-06/26/content_5403497.htm.2019.

苏冲, 董建权, 马志刚, 等. 基于生态安全格局的山水林田湖草生态保护修复优先区识别:以四川省华蓥山区为例[J].生态学报, 2019, 39(23):8948-8956.

吴茂全, 胡蒙蒙, 汪涛, 等. 基于生态安全格局与多尺度景观连通性的城市生态源地识别[J].生态学报, 2019, 39(13):4720-4731.

吴健生, 张理卿, 彭建, 等. 深圳市景观生态安全格局源地综合识别[J].生态学报, 2013, 33(13):4125-4133.

于成龙, 刘丹, 冯锐, 等. 基于最小累积阻力模型的东北地区生态安全格局构建[J].生态学报, 2021, 41(1):1-12.

钟晓春.云浮市生态安全格局构建方法研究[D].江西赣州:江西理工大学, 2017.

吴健生, 岳新欣, 秦维.基于生态系统服务价值重构的生态安全格局构建:以重庆两江新区为例[J].地理研究, 2017, 36(3):429-440.

杨姗姗, 邹长新, 沈渭寿, 等. 基于生态红线划分的生态安全格局构建:以江西省为例[J].生态学杂志, 2016, 35(1):250-258.

李国煜, 林丽群, 伍世代, 等. 生态源地识别与生态安全格局构建研究:以福建省福清市为例[J].地域研究与开发, 2018, 37(03):120-125.

徐德琳, 邹长新, 徐梦佳, 等. 基于生态保护红线的生态安全格局构建[J].生物多样性, 2015, 23(6):740-746.

王鹏, 王亚娟, 刘小鹏, 等. 干旱区生态移民土地利用景观格局变化分析::以宁夏红寺堡区为例[J].干旱区资源与环境, 2018, 32(12):69-74.

朱亚楠, 蒲春玲.乌鲁木齐市土地利用景观格局变化及生态安全分析[J].生态科学, 2020, 39(2):133-144.

梁二敏, 张军民.新疆玛纳斯河流域景观格局变化的生态安全分析[J].水土保持研究, 2016, 23(3):170-175.

张飞, 塔西甫拉提·特依拜, 曹鑫, 等. 干旱区内陆艾比湖流域景观格局时空变化及生态安全评价[J].水土保持通报, 2015, 35(1):249-255, 363.

刘维忠, 陈彤, 柴军.新疆塔城盆地生态安全格局与可持续发展对策研究[J].新疆农业大学学报, 2002, 25(2):83-86.

Naveh Z. From biodiversity to ecodiversity:A landscape-ecologu approach to conservation and restoration[J].Restoration Ecology, 1994, 2(3):180-189.

彭建.区域生态安全格局构建研究进展与展望[J].地理研究, 2017, 36(3):407-419.

Daily G C. Nature's Services:Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems[M].Washington D C:Island Press, 1997.

Toth F L. Ecosystems and Human Well:A Frame-work for Assessment[M].Washington D C:Island Press, 2005.

王晓峰, 程昌武, 尹礼唱, 等. 新疆生态系统服务时空变化及权衡协同关系[J].生态学杂志, 2020, 39(3):990-1000.

刘方田, 许尔琪.基于土地利用的新疆兵团与非兵团生境质量时空演变的对比[J].应用生态学报, 2020, 31(7):2341-2351.

刘春芳,王川,刘立程.三大自然区过渡带生境质量时空差异及形成机制:以榆中县为例[J].地理研究,2018,37(2):419-432.

张学儒,周杰,李梦梅.基于土地利用格局重建的区域生境质量时空变化分析[J].地理学报,2020,75(1):160-178.

郭丽洁,尹小君,苟贞珍,等. 基于InVEST模型的阿克苏河流域产水量评估及环境因素影响研究[J].石河子大学学报(自然科学版),2020,38(2):216-224.

段峥嵘,祖拜代·木依布拉,夏建新.新疆阿克苏地区潜在蒸散量时空演变及驱动因素[J].新疆大学学报(自然科学版),2018,35(4):493-501,512.

Fischer G, Nachtergaele F, Prieler S, et al. Global agro-ecological zones assessment for agriculture (GAEZ2008)[M]. Laxenburg, Austria:ⅡASA, 2008.

周文佐.基于GIS的我国主要土壤类型土壤有效含水量研究[D].江苏南京:南京农业大学,2003.

窦攀烽,左舒翟,任引,等. 气候和土地利用/覆被变化对宁波地区生态系统产水服务的影响[J].环境科学学报,2019,39(7):2398-2409.

李军玲,郭其乐,彭记永.基于MODIS数据的河南省冬小麦产量遥感估算模型[J].生态环境学报,2012,21(10):1665-1669.

徐自为,张智杰.基于土地利用变更调查的2010-2016年新疆尉犁县生态系统碳储量时空变化.环境科学研究,2018,31(11):1909-1917.

中共中央办公厅.国务院办公厅印发《关于在国土空间规划中统筹划定落实三条控制线的指导意见》[R/OL].http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2019-11/01/content_5447654.htm.2019.

Views

1066

下载量

CSCD

Alert me when the article has been cited

提交

Tools

Publicity Resources

Impacts of climate， land use and ecological governance on water ecosystem services in Haihe River basin

Research progress and trends of ecological environment of key lakes in Yangtze River economic belt based on bibliometric analysis

Impacts of multi-scenario land use changes on carbon storage and habitat quality in Sanjiangyuan region

Prediction of water conservation function in Chengde City of Hebei Province based on PLUS-InVEST model

Analysis and evaluation of ecological resource baseline status in ‘one river and three mountains’ region of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region

Related Author

Shi Xiaolei

Zhang Guijun

Mo Jiawei

Chen Fangfang

Tang Yuanyuan

Wang Kaihua

Zou Pu

Peng Yi

Related Institution

Land and Resources College， Hebei Agricultural University

Hebei Provincial Key Laboratory of Farmland Ecological Environment

Changsha General Survey of Natural Resources Center， China Geological Survey

School of Geological Engineering， Qinghai University

School of Engineer， Qinghai Institute of Technology

⁰