PDF Download HTML

]" id="html" rel="external">HTML

[1]ZOU Qinying,SHI Xueyi,ZHANG Zhen.Effects of Temporal and Spatial Changes of Soil Erosion and Landscape Pattern in the Upper Reaches of the Fenhe River[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(04):15-21.

Copy

Effects of Temporal and Spatial Changes of Soil Erosion and Landscape Pattern in the Upper Reaches of the Fenhe River

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 28 Number of periods: 2021 04 Page number: 15-21 Column: Public date: 2021-08-10

Title:: Effects of Temporal and Spatial Changes of Soil Erosion and Landscape Pattern in the Upper Reaches of the Fenhe River

Author(s):: ZOU Qinying¹, SHI Xueyi¹, ZHANG Zhen²; (1.College of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China; 2.College of Forestry, Shanxi Agricultural University, Jinzhong, Shanxi 030810, China)

Keywords:: soil erosion; landscape pattern; RUSLE model; temporal and spatial change

CLC:: S157

DOI:: -

Abstract:: In order to understand the soil erosion status and landscape pattern changes in the upper reaches of the Fenhe River, with the help of the RUSLE model, the soil erosion modulus in the upper 12 years of the Fenhe River was calculated, factor gradient analysis and a study on the landscape pattern of soil erosion in the watershed were carried out. The results show that:(1)the average erosion modulus has decreased year by year; the area of soil erosion intensity has shifted from a high level of soil intensity to a low level; the erosion pattern has gradually changed from southeast and northwest, and the pattern of low in the middle has gradually changed from northwest to southeast;(2)in the past 12 years, the areas of grassland and construction land have decreased significantly, and the areas of cultivated land and forest land have increased significantly; cultivated land, forested land and grassland are the main types prone to soil erosion, and the potential amount of soil erosion is severe;(3)the disturbance of human activities to the landscape of the upper Fenhe River weakens with time; the shapes of the landscape patches at each erosion intensity in the region tend to be simplified, the degree of patch reunion is strengthened, the average area of the patches increases, and connectivity of the advantage patches is good, the landscape fragmentation level of each erosion type is low, and the soil erosion situation has been improved. It can be seen that the soil erosion situation in the upper reaches of the Fen River has improved in the past 12 years, the landscape pattern has been optimized, and the quality of the habitat has been improved.

References:: [1] Poesen J. Soil erosion in the anthropocene: Research needs[J]. Earth Surface Processes and Landform,2018,43(1):64-84.
[2] 张志勇.改革开放40年山西水土保持发展回顾[J].中国水土保持,2018(12):63-66.
[3] 赵弘峰,毕彦斌.坚持构建《山水林田湖草》生态保护思路:促进山西生态文明转型发展[J].华北自然资源,2019(3):126-130.
[4] 刘宇.土壤侵蚀研究中的景观连通度:概念、作用及定量[J].地理研究,2016,35(1):195-202.
[5] 彭月,何丙辉,黄世友.基于景观破碎化的三峡库区(重庆)土壤侵蚀评价[J].土壤学报,2012,49(4):636-645.
[6] 肖笃宁,李秀珍.景观生态学的学科前沿与发展战略[J].生态学报,2003,23(8):1615-1621.
[7] 傅伯杰,徐延达,吕一河.景观格局与水土流失的尺度特征与耦合方法[J].地球科学进展,2010,25(7):673-681.
[8] 陈文波,肖笃宁,李秀珍.景观空间分析的特征和主要内容[J].生态学报,2002,22(7):1135-1142.
[9] 赵亮,刘宇.耦合景观破碎化和土壤侵蚀的“源”“汇”边界指数[J].地理与地理信息科学,2018,34(1):98-104.
[10] 刘红玉,李玉凤,曹晓,等.我国湿地景观研究现状、存在的问题与发展方向[J].地理学报,2009,64(11):1394-1401.
[11] 索安宁,洪军,林勇.黄土高原景观格局与水土流失关系的研究[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(9):1719-1723.
[12] 邬建国.生态学范式变迁综论[J].生态学报,1996,16(5):449-460.
[13] 陈利顶,刘洋,吕一河,等.景观生态学中的格局分析:现状、困境与未来[J].生态学报,2008,28(11):5521-5531.
[14] 梅嘉洺,刘洋,岳朋芸,等.旬河流域景观格局变化对泥沙输出的影响[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(3):45-50,56.
[15] 王库,史学正,于东升,等.基于景观格局分析的兴国县土壤侵蚀演变研究[J].水土保持学报,2003,17(4):94-116.
[16] 李阳兵,邵景安,杨华,等.重庆市土壤侵蚀空间格局研究[J].重庆师范大学学报:自然科学版,2007,24(4):12-15.
[17] 漆良华,张旭东,周金星,等.湘西北侵蚀小流域生态恢复适宜度与景观格局特征[J].山地学报,2009,27(5):524-530.
[18] 康磊,刘世荣,刘宪钊.岷江上游景观格局与土壤侵蚀变化:以杂古脑流域为例[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(1):23-28,325.
[19] 刘宇.景观指数耦合景观格局与土壤侵蚀的有效性[J].生态学报,2017,37(15):4923-4935.
[20] 王欢,高江波,侯文娟.基于地理探测器的喀斯特不同地貌形态类型区土壤侵蚀定量归因[J].地理学报,2018,73(9):1674-1686.
[21] 何莎莎,叶露培,朱文博,崔耀平,朱连奇.太行山淇河流域2000—2015年土壤侵蚀和水源供给变化研究[J].地理研究,2018,37(9):1775-1788.
[22] Liu B Y, Xie Y, Li Z G, et al. The assessment of soil loss by water erosion in China[J],International Soil and Water Conservation Research,2020,8(4),430-439.
[23] 蔡崇法,丁树文,史志华,等.应用USLE和地理信息系统IDRISI预测小流域土壤侵蚀量的研究[J].水土保持学报,2000,14(2):19-24.
[24] 潘美慧,伍永秋,任斐鹏,等.基于USLE的东江流域土壤侵蚀量估算[J].自然资源学报,2010,25(12):2154-2164.
[25] 刘婷,邵景安.基于BP神经网络的三峡库区土壤侵蚀强度模拟[J].自然资源学报,2018,33(4):669-683.
[26] 李慧颖,李晓燕,于皓,等.基于多源遥感信息的过去40年间吉林省长吉示范区森林面积损失与景观破碎化研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2018,32(2):128-135.
[27] 张金茜,巩杰,柳冬青.地理探测器方法下甘肃白龙江流域景观破碎化与驱动因子分析[J].地理科学,2018,38(8):1370-1378.
[28] 付刚,肖能文,乔梦萍,等.北京市近二十年景观破碎化格局的时空变化[J].生态学报,2017,37(8):2551-2562.
[29] 刘红玉,吕宪国,张世奎,等.三江平原流域湿地景观破碎化过程研究[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(2):289-295.
[30] 中华人民共和国水利部.土壤侵蚀分类分级标准SL190—2007[S].北京:中国水利水电出版社,2008.
[31] 高江波,蔡运龙.区域景观破碎化的多尺度空间变异研究:以贵州省乌江流域为例[J].地理科学,2010,30(5):742-747.
[32] 付扬军,师学义,和娟.汾河流域景观破碎化时空演变特征[J].自然资源学报,2019,34(8):1606-1619.
[33] 黄杰,姚志宏,查少翔,等.USLE/RUSLE中水土保持措施因子研究进展[J].中国水土保持,2020(3):37-39.
[34] 鹿晨昱,张琳,薛冰,等.基于GIS的太原市土壤侵蚀定量研究[J].水土保持通报,2013,33(6):247-251.
[35] 何莎莎,朱文博,崔耀平,等.基于RUSLE模型的太行山淇河流域土壤侵蚀特征研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2019,28(2):426-439.
[36] 张养安,张鑫,江仕嵘.基于GIS与RS的杨凌区土壤侵蚀时空变异性研究[J].水土保持学报,2018,32(6):130-133,235.
[37] 康磊,刘世荣,刘宪钊.岷江上游景观格局与土壤侵蚀变化:以杂古脑流域为例[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(1):23-28,325.
[38] 周伟,官炎俊,刘琪,等.黄土高原典型流域生态问题诊断与系统修复实践探讨:以山西汾河中上游试点项目为例[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8817-8825.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 2021-08-20