| 徐博伦,张繁顺,范学琴.黄河小浪底生态系统服务功能时空动态及权衡关系研究[J].林业调查规划,2025,50(2):110-116 |
| 黄河小浪底生态系统服务功能时空动态及权衡关系研究 |
| Spatiotemporal Dynamics and Trade-off of Ecosystem Services inXiaolangdi of the Yellow River |
| |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 生态系统服务功能 InVEST 模型 权衡协调 黄河流域 |
| 英文关键词: ecosystem services InVEST model trade-off Yellow River basin |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金(31600579);河南省科技智库项目(HNKJZK-2020-01C). |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 66 |
| 全文下载次数: 54 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 小浪底是国家级水利工程枢纽风景区,是治理开发黄河的关键性工程,对其生态系统服务功
能进行定量评估及分析内在的权衡与协同关系,对于黄河流域中下游段生态保护与高质量发展具
有重要意义。以2000—2020年3期Landsat系列遥感影像为基础数据,对其土地利用进行重分类,
基于InVEST 模型对库区水源供给、土壤保持、碳储量、生境质量4 个生态服务功能的时空动态及权
衡关系进行定量分析。结果表明,研究区域内的主要用地类型以农业用地为主,并在2000—2020
年间部分转入建设用地和水域。农田面积呈递减趋势,水域和建设用地面积呈递增趋势,其他用地
类型变化较小。2000—2020年库区产水量呈上升趋势,增幅达10.7%,而其他3种生态系统服务
功能没有明显的变化;4种生态系统服务功能价值跟土地类型密切相关,产水量的高值分布在城区
的建设用地,而其他3种的高值分布在植被密集、人群扰动少的林地和草地区域。产水量与其他3
种生态系统服务呈负相关,互为权衡关系,其中与碳储量的负相关性明显,具有较强的权衡关系;而
土壤保持、碳储量和生境质量之间呈正相关性,三者之间互为协同关系,其中碳储量和生境质量之
间正相关性显著,具有较强的协同关系。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Xiaolangdi is a national key scenic spot of water conservancy project, and a key project to harness
and develop the Yellow River. It is of great significance to quantitatively evaluate its ecosystem services
and analyze the inherent trade-off and synergies for the ecological protection and high-quality development
of the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River Basin. Based on Landsat remote sensing images from 2000 to 2020, land use was reclassified, and spatial-temporal dynamics and trade-off of water
supply, soil conservation, carbon storage and biodiversity in Xiaolangdi Reservoir area were quantitatively
analyzed using InVEST model. The results showed that the agricultural land was the main type of land in
the study area, and part of the land transferred to construction land and water area from 2000 to 2020.
Farmland area showed a decreasing trend, water area and construction land area showed an increasing
trend, and other land types had little change. The water production in Xiaolangdi Reservoir area increased
by 10.7% from 2000 to 2020, while the other three ecosystem services did not change significantly;
the four ecosystem services were closely related to land type, the high value of water production
was distributed in the urban construction land, while the high value of the other three ecosystem services
was distributed in the forest and grassland areas with dense vegetation and little disturbance by people.
Water production was negatively correlated with the other three ecosystem services, and there was a strong
trade-off between water production and carbon storage. Soil conservation, carbon storage and habitat
quality were positively correlated with each other. There was a significant positive correlation between
carbon storage and habitat quality, with a strong synergistic relationship. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
