东阳江流域生态系统健康评价

吴涛; 解雪峰; 蒋国俊; 于海燕; 马勇

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.061

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

东阳江流域生态系统健康评价

试验研究

- 东阳江流域生态系统健康评价
- Ecosystem Health Assessment of Dongyang River Basin
- 水土保持通报 2015年35卷第2期页码：326-331
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 浙江师范大学地理与环境科学学院,浙江,金华,321004
  2. 浙江省环境监测中心,浙江,杭州,310015
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  浙江省科技厅公益性项目"浙江省基岩淤泥质海湾围垦潜力评价技术研究"(2013C33029);浙江省新苗人才计划项目(2013R40405,014R404058);浙江省教育厅资助项目(Y201226102)
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.061
  中图分类号：
- 纸质出版：2015
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
吴涛, 解雪峰, 蒋国俊, 等. 东阳江流域生态系统健康评价[J]. 水土保持通报, 2015,35(2):326-331.

WU Tao, XIE Xuefeng, JIANG Guojun, et al. Ecosystem Health Assessment of Dongyang River Basin[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2015, 35(2): 326-331.
吴涛, 解雪峰, 蒋国俊, 等. 东阳江流域生态系统健康评价[J]. 水土保持通报, 2015,35(2):326-331. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.061.

WU Tao, XIE Xuefeng, JIANG Guojun, et al. Ecosystem Health Assessment of Dongyang River Basin[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2015, 35(2): 326-331. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.02.061.

摘要

[目的] 通过对东阳江流域生态系统健康进行评价

旨在为该区生态补偿体制的制订提供参考。[方法] 参考环保部《流域生态系统健康评价技术指南》

建立水域生境结构、水生生物、水域生态压力、陆域生态格局、陆域生态功能和陆域生态压力共6大类17项评价指标

对东阳江流域29个评价单元进行生态系统健康评估。[结果] (1)东阳江流域生态健康等级处于一般及以上水平

其中优秀、良好和一般的评价单元分别占6%

60%和34%。(2)水域生态系统健康的主要限制因子是水质质量指数;陆域生态系统主要限制因子为森林覆盖率、建设用地比例、重要生境保持率及水源涵养功能指数等。(3)山地丘陵地区流域生态系统健康等级高

平原与盆地地区健康等级低;上游健康等级高

中下游人口密集地区健康评价等级偏低。[结论] 东阳江流域生态系统健康等级差异的根本原因是人类活动类型及强度的地区差异

而干流水质质量较差

建设用地比例高

点、面污染源排放量大是其主要的生态环境问题。

Abstract

[Objective] Taking Dongyang River basin as the research area

to carry out watershed ecosystem health assessment

in order to provide conferences for decision-makings of ecological comensation system in this region.[Methods] According to technical guidelines of watershed ecosystem health assessment issued by Ministry of Environmental Protection

we set 6 evaluation categories

17 indexes to assess the ecosystem health of 29 units in Dongyang River basin. The evaluation categories included water habitat structure

aquatic organisms

water ecological pressure

land ecological pattern

land ecological function and land ecological pressure.[Results] The project had completed the ecosystem health assessment of 29 units in Dongyang River basin. The evaluation results showed that:The ecosystem health of Dongyang River basin can be classified as excellent

good and general

accounting for 6%

60% and 34% of the total area

respectively. The main limiting factor of aquatic ecosystems was water quality index

while land ecological limiting factors were mainly the forest coverage rate

the proportion of construction land

important habitat retention and water conservation functions. Ecosystem health was at a higher level in hilly area

and found at a lower level in plains and basins; and meanwhile

the upper stream ecosystem health level was higher

while densely-populated middle and lower reaches were at lower level.[Conclusion] It was the types and intensity of human activities that led to the regional difference of ecosystem health in Dongyang River basin. The most serious ecological environment problems in the basin listed:the poor water quality in the main stream

highly occupied proportion of construction land

point and surface sources of pollution.

关键词

Keywords

references

Rapport D J. What constitute ecosystem health?[J]. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 1989,33(1):120-132.

Rapport D J, Costanza R, McMichael A J. Assessing Ecosystem Health[J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 1998,13(10):397.

刘永,郭怀成.湖泊-流域生态系统管理研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2008:106-132.

王文杰,张哲,王维,等.流域生态健康评价框架及其评价方法体系研究(1)[J].环境工程技术学报,2012,2(4):271-277.

Karr J R. Biological integrity:A long-neglected aspect of water resource management[J]. Ecological Applications, 1991,1(1):66-84.

Karr J R. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities[J]. Fisheries, 1981,6(6):21-27.

Deshon J E. Development and Application of the Invertebrate Community Index(ICI)[M]//Davis W S, Simon T P, eds. Biological Assessment and Criteria:Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making. Boca Raton. F L:Lewis Publishers, 1995:217-243.

Ohio E P A. The Use of Biocriteria in the Ohio EPA Surface Water Monitoring and Assessment Program Columbus[R]. Columbia:Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Ecological Assessment Section, Division of Water Quality Planning and Assessments, 1990.

Ladson A R, White L J, Doolan J A, et al. Development and testing of an index of steam condition for waterway management in Australia[J]. Fresh Water Biology, 1999,41(2):453-468.

Kleynhans C J. A qualitative procedure for the assessment of the habitat integrity status of the Luvuvhu River(Limpopo system, South Africa)[J]. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health, 1996,5(1):41-54.

Plafkin J L, Barbour M T, Porter K D, et al. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers:Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish[M]//Washington DC:US Environmental Protection Agency, 1989.

陈文波,肖笃宁,李秀珍.景观指数分类、应用及构建研究[J].应用生态学报,2002,13(1):121-125.

杨帆,赵冬至,马小峰,等. RS和GIS技术在湿地景观生态研究中的应用进展[J].遥感技术与应用,2007,22(3):471-478.

张松,郭怀成,盛虎,等.河流流域生态安全综合评估方法[J].环境科学研究,2012,25(7):826-832.

Campbell K R, Bartell S M. Ecological Models and Ecological Risk Assessment[M]//Newman M C, eds. Risk Assessment:Logic and Measurement. Michigan:Ann Arbor Press, 1998:69-100.

崔保山,杨志峰.湿地学[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2006:3-15.

王备新,杨莲芳.用河流生物指数评价秦淮河上游水质的研究[J].生态学报,2003,23(10):2082-2091.

马陶武,黄清辉,王海,等.太湖水质评价中底栖动物综合生物指数的筛选及生物基准的确立[J].生态学报,2008,8(3):1192-1200.

李春晖,崔嵬,庞爱萍,等.流域生态健康评价理论与方法研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2008,27(1):9-17.

吴炳方,罗治敏.基于遥感信息的流域生态系统健康评价:以大宁河流域为例[J].长江流域资源与环境,2007,16(1):102-106.

蒋卫国,李京,李加洪,等.辽河三角洲湿地生态系统健康评价[J].生态学报,2005,25(3):408-414.

中国环境科学研究院.流域生态健康评估技术指南[R].北京:中国环境科学研究院,2013.

解雪峰,吴涛,肖翠,等.基于PSR模型的东阳江流域生态安全评价[J].资源科学,2014,36(8):1702-1711.

浏览量

1835

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

纵向岭谷区高速公路沿线生态系统健康评价

河溪缓冲带的生态功能及其管理原则

青藏高原东北缘地带50多年来农业生态经济系统可持续发展分析

基于生态足迹模型的喀斯特高原山地生态系统健康评价研究

城市湿地主导生态系统服务功能及价值评估--以江苏省镇江市为例