Analysis and Prediction of Landscape Ecological Risk in Yellow River Basin

Du Wentao; Li Xinping; Song Jiawei; Meng Chengzhen; Wang Zhixiao

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2022.05.014

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

Analysis and Prediction of Landscape Ecological Risk in Yellow River Basin

- Analysis and Prediction of Landscape Ecological Risk in Yellow River Basin
- Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation Vol. 42, Issue 5, Pages: 105-113(2022)
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 河南省地质矿产勘查开发局第一地质矿产调查院,河南,洛阳,471000
  2. 河南省金银多金属成矿系列与深部预测重点实验室,河南,洛阳,471000
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2022.05.014
  CLC： P901;TP79
- Published：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
Du Wentao, Li Xinping, Song Jiawei, et al. Analysis and Prediction of Landscape Ecological Risk in Yellow River Basin[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2022, 42(5): 105-113.
DOI：

Du Wentao, Li Xinping, Song Jiawei, et al. Analysis and Prediction of Landscape Ecological Risk in Yellow River Basin[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2022, 42(5): 105-113. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2022.05.014.

摘要

[目的

]

探究黄河流域近20 a土地利用变化并对2030年土地利用进行预测，分析景观格局指数，揭示生态风险状况，助力黄河流域景观保护修复和规划治理。[方法

]

使用FLUS模型，根据2000，2010，2020年土地利用数据，结合社会、经济、地形、气候等因子对该区2030年土地利用状况进行预测，通过景观指数构建景观生态风险指数，并进行深入分析探讨。[结果

]

①2000—2020年耕地面积减少12 150 km

，林地面积增加2 514 km

，建设用地面积增加10 620 km

。②黄河流域优势景观为草地和耕地，但优势性逐渐降低，整体景观连通性增加、聚集性减弱，景观多样性呈增长趋势，但整体仍不均衡。③工作区景观生态风险以低、较低风险为主，中风险为辅，共占该区总面积88%以上，各生态风险区在空间上相对稳定，在时间上呈逐步恶化趋势。④预测2030年建设用地面积增速减缓，耕地、草地、未利用地面积继续减少，景观破碎度增加，低、较低生态风险区域增加1.12%，高风险区域增加0.26%，其余风险区域变化较小。[结论

]

国家人口增长、城市逐步扩张对土地利用影响巨大，进而导致景观破碎，加之黄河流域环境脆弱，风沙强度大，荒漠化程度高，区域生态风险增高，需要国家更加关注该区域的生态保护和高质量发展。

Abstract

[Objective] The land use changes in the Yellow River basin during the past two decades were analyzed in order to predict land use in 2030

analyze the landscape pattern index

reveal ecological risk status

and assist with landscape protection

restoration

planning

and governance of the Yellow River basin. [Methods] The FLUS model with land use data from 2000

2010

and 2020 was used combined with social

economic

topographic

and climatic data and other factors to predict the land use status of the area in 2030. A landscape ecological risk index was constructed through the landscape index

and an in-depth analysis was conducted. [Results] ① From 2000 to 2020

the area of cultivated land decreased by 12 150 km2

the area of forest land increased by 2 514 km2

and the area of construction land increased by 10 620 km2. ② The dominant landscapes in the Yellow River basin were grassland and cultivated land

but the dominance gradually decreased

the overall landscape connectivity increased

aggregation decreased

and landscape diversity increased over time

but the overall landscape was still unbalanced. ③ Landscape ecological risks in the work area were dominated by low and lower risks

supplemented by medium risk

accounting for more than 88% of the total area. The ecological risk areas were relatively stable in space and gradually deteriorated over time. ④ By 2030

the growth rate of construction land area will slow down

the area of cultivated land

grassland

and unused land will continue to decrease

and landscape fragmentation will increase. The low and lower ecological risk areas increased by 1.12%

the high risk areas increased by 0.26%

and the rest of the risk areas changed little. [Conclusion] The country’s population growth and the gradual expansion of cities have had a huge impact on land use

resulting in fragmented landscapes. In addition

the environment of the Yellow River basin is fragile

with high sandstorm intensity

high degree of desertification

and increased regional ecological risks. The country needs to give more attention to ecological protection and high-quality development of the region.

关键词

Keywords

references

习近平.在黄河流域生态保护和高质量发展座谈会上的讲话[J].中国水利,2019(20):1-3.

O’Neill R V, Krummel J R, Gardner R H, et al. Indices of landscape pattern [J]. Landscape Ecology, 1988,1(3):153-162.

常玉旸,高阳,谢臻,等.京津冀地区生境质量与景观格局演变及关联性[J].中国环境科学,2021,41(2):848-859.

Hunsaker C T, Graham R L, Suter G W, et al. Assessing ecological risk on a regional scale [J]. Environmental Management, 1990,14(3):325-332.

巫丽芸.区域景观生态风险评价及生态风险管理研究:以东山岛为例[D].福建福州:福建师范大学,2004.

彭建,党威雄,刘焱序,等.景观生态风险评价研究进展与展望[J].地理学报,2015,70(4):664-677.

孙姝博,孙虎,徐崟尧,等.运城黄河湿地景观空间格局变化及其驱动因素[J].水生态学杂志,2021,42(1):17-25.

张锋,陈伟强,马月红,等.基于景观结构的黄河沿岸土地利用生态风险时空变化分析:以河南省为例[J].水土保持通报,2021,41(2):250-257.

宋雨桐,张子璇,牛蓓蓓,等.2005—2018年黄河三角洲景观格局脆弱性的时空变化规律[J].水土保持通报,2021,41(3):258-266.

付扬军,师学义,和娟.汾河流域景观格局脆弱性时空分异特征[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(3):197-202.

Pidd M, Coyle R G. System dynamics modelling: A practical approach [J]. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1997,48(5):544.

Batty M, Couclelis H, Eichen M. Urban systems as cellular automata [J]. Environment and Planning B (Planning and Design), 1997,24(2):159-164.

Liu Xiaoping, Liang Xun, Li Xia, et al. A future land use simulation model (FLUS) for simulating multiple land use scenarios by coupling human and natural effects [J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2017,168:94-116.

Verburg P H, Soepboer W, Veldkamp A, et al. Modeling the spatial dynamics of regional land use: The CLUE-S model [J]. Environmental Management, 2002,30(3):391-405.

Li Xia, Yeh G O. Taylor & Francis Online: Neural-network-based cellular automata for simulating multiple land use changes using GIS-International [J]. Journal of Geographical Information Science, 2002,16(4):323-343.

刘晓娟,黎夏,梁迅,等.基于FLUS-InVEST模型的中国未来土地利用变化及其对碳储量影响的模拟[J].热带地理,2019,39(3):397-409.

王雪然,潘佩佩,王晓旭,等.基于GeoSOS-FLUS模型的河北省土地利用景观格局模拟[J].江苏农业学报,2021,37(3):667-675.

朱志强,马晓双,胡洪.基于耦合FLUS-InVEST模型的广州市生态系统碳储量时空演变与预测[J].水土保持通报,2021,41(2):222-229.

徐岚,赵羿.利用马尔柯夫过程预测东陵区土地利用格局的变化[J].应用生态学报,1993,4(3):272-277.

王秀兰,包玉海.土地利用动态变化研究方法探讨[J].地理科学进展,1999,18(1):83-89.

Turner M. Landscape ecology: The effect of pattern on process [J]. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1989,20(1):171-197.

Riitters K H, O’Neill R V, Hunsaker C T, et al. A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics [J]. Landscape Ecology, 1995,10(1):23-39.

Fan Feifei, Liu Yanxu, Chen Jixing, et al. Scenario-based ecological security patterns to indicate landscape sustainability: A case study on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [J]. Landscape Ecology, 2021,36(7):2175-2188.

Zhang Min, Wang Xuejie, Liu Yun. Modeling and analysis of ecological urban landscape pattern evolution based on multisource remote sensing data [J]. Complexity, 2021,2021:8158158.

Wang Jia, Li Long, Zhang Ting, et al. Optimal grain size based landscape pattern analysis for Shanghai using landsat images from 1998 to 2017 [J]. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 2021,30(3):2799-2813.

Wu Jianguo. Landscape sustainability science (Ⅱ): Core questions and key approaches [J]. Landscape Ecology, 2021,36(8):2453-2485.

孙丽蓉,周冬梅,岑国璋,等.基于地理探测器模型的疏勒河流域景观生态风险评价及驱动因素分析[J].干旱区地理,2021,44(5):1384-1395.

杜军,赵胜朝,邱士可,等.2000—2015年豫西黄土丘陵区土地利用变化及景观生态风险评价[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(1):279-284.

张学斌,石培基,罗君,等.基于景观格局的干旱内陆河流域生态风险分析:以石羊河流域为例[J].自然资源学报,2014,29(3):410-419.

高宾,李小玉,李志刚,等.基于景观格局的锦州湾沿海经济开发区生态风险分析[J].生态学报,2011,31(12):3441-3450.

韩振华,李建东,殷红,等.基于景观格局的辽河三角洲湿地生态安全分析[J].生态环境学报,2010,19(3):701-705.

刘希朝,李效顺,蒋冬梅.基于土地利用变化的黄河流域景观格局及生态风险评估[J].农业工程学报,2021,37(4):265-274.

肖东洋,牛海鹏,闫弘轩,等.1990—2018年黄河流域(河南段)土地利用格局时空演变[J].农业工程学报,2020,36(15):271-281.

Views

656

下载量

CSCD

Alert me when the article has been cited

提交

Tools

Publicity Resources

Spatial and Temporal Change of Land Use Ecological Risk Along Yellow River Based on Landscape Structure—A Case Study in He'nan Province

Land Use and Landscape Pattern Change in Source Region of the Yellow River

Ecological Risking Assessment in Shandong Province Based on Landuse Landscape Structure

Change of Landscape Pattern in Upper Reaches of Hanjiang River During 1988 to 2007

Ecological Risk Analysis Based on Land Use in Shaanxi Province

Related Author

Zhang Feng

Chen Weiqiang

Ma Yuehong

Geng Yiwei

PAN Jing-hu

LIU Ju-ling

YANG Yong-feng

SUN Xi-hua

Related Institution

College of Resources and Environment, Henan Agricultural University

School of Geographic and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University

School of Network, Lanzhou University

北京林业大学水土保持学院

山东省水利厅

⁰