PDF Download HTML

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

[1]ZHANG Meili,LI Zhi,ZHANG Yichen,et al.Identification of Key Areas of Ecological Restoration of Land and Space Based on Ecological Security Pattern[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2021,28(03):299-307.

Copy

Identification of Key Areas of Ecological Restoration of Land and Space Based on Ecological Security Pattern

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 28 Number of periods: 2021 03 Page number: 299-307 Column: Public date: 2021-04-20

Title:: Identification of Key Areas of Ecological Restoration of Land and Space Based on Ecological Security Pattern

Author(s):: ZHANG Meili¹, LI Zhi¹, ZHANG Yichen¹, ZHENG Jianle¹, LIN Changwei¹, WANG Shutao²; (1.College of Resources and Environmental Science, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071000, China; 2.College of Land and Resources, Agricultural University, Baoding 071000, China)

Keywords:: ecological source; Invest model; linkage mapper; ecological security pattern; ecological restoration

CLC:: X171.4

DOI:: -

Abstract:: Ecological restoration of territorial space is of great significance for ensuring national ecological security, but the current research on identifying and restoring key areas of territorial space ecosystem from a high degree of overall connectivity is still lacking. In order to fully identify the key areas of land and space ecological restoration in Fuping County, this study used the granularity inverse method, the habitat quality module in the Invest model, the MCR model and the linkage mapper analysis to finally determine the key areas for the ecological restoration of the land and space mainly including ecological pinch points to be repaired, ecological obstacle points to be repaired, and ecological break points to be repaired in Fuping County through the method of constructing the ecological security pattern of the land and space. The results show that:(1)Fuping County has a total ecological source area of 518.35 km² including forestland and water area; ecological corridor totals 481.85 km;(2)by constructing an ecological pattern, 28 ecological pinch areas to be restored, 66 ecological obstacles to be repaired and 23 ecological breakpoints to be repaired were diagnosed; the broken space to be repaired totals 100.20 km², which concentrates in Chengnanzhuang Town, Longquanguan Town, and Fuping Town;(3)the spatial distribution characteristics and land use status of the key areas of various types of ecological restoration were identified by comprehensive analysis, and corresponding restoration strategies were proposed, which can provide reference significance for the restoration and healthy development of the land space ecosystem in Fuping County.

References:: [1] 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.
[2] 叶艳妹,林耀奔,刘书畅,等.山水林田湖草生态修复工程的社会—生态系统(SES)分析框架及应用:以浙江省钱塘江源头区域为例[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8846-8856.
[3] 韩宗伟,焦胜,胡亮,等.廊道与源地协调的国土空间生态安全格局构建[J].自然资源学报,2019,34(10):2244-2256.
[4] 俞孔坚,张健.基于自然,让自然做功:国土空间规划与生态修复之本[J].景观设计学,2020,8(1):6-9,4-5.
[5] 孔令桥,郑华,欧阳志云.基于生态系统服务视角的山水林田湖草生态保护与修复:以洞庭湖流域为例[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8903-8910.
[6] 倪庆琳,侯湖平,丁忠义,等.基于生态安全格局识别的国土空间生态修复分区:以徐州市贾汪区为例[J].自然资源学报,2020,35(1):204-216.
[7] 李红举,宇振荣,梁军,等.统一山水林田湖草生态保护修复标准体系研究[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8771-8779.
[8] 吴钢,赵萌,王辰星.山水林田湖草生态保护修复的理论支撑体系研究[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8685-8691.
[9] 王军,钟莉娜.生态系统服务理论与山水林田湖草生态保护修复的应用[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8702-8708.
[10] 曹宇,王嘉怡,李国煜.国土空间生态修复:概念思辨与理论认知[J].中国土地科学,2019,33(7):1-10.
[11] 田野,冯启源,唐明方,等.基于生态系统评价的山水林田湖草生态保护与修复体系构建研究:以乌梁素海流域为例[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8826-8836.
[12] 罗明,于恩逸,周妍,等.山水林田湖草生态保护修复试点工程布局及技术策略[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8692-8701.
[13] 王晓玉,冯喆,吴克宁,等.基于生态安全格局的山水林田湖草生态保护与修复[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8725-8732.
[14] 李涛,唐涛,邓红兵,等.湖北省三峡地区山水林田湖草系统原理及生态保护修复研究[J].生态学报,2019,39(23):8896-8902.
[15] 方莹,王静,黄隆杨,等.基于生态安全格局的国土空间生态保护修复关键区域诊断与识别:以烟台市为例[J].自然资源学报,2020,35(1):190-203.
[16] 王慧.县域生态安全格局关键地段识别研究[D].江苏徐州:中国矿业大学,2018.
[17] 王朋冲,于强,裴燕如,等.翁牛特旗景观格局尺度效应分析[J].农业机械学报,2020,051(5):223-231,181.
[18] 陆禹.基于系统动力学和粒度反推法的海口市景观格局优化[D].长沙:中南林业科技大学,2018.
[19] 陆禹,佘济云,罗改改,等.基于粒度反推法和GIS空间分析的景观格局优化[J].生态学杂志,2018,37(2):534-545.
[20] 肖洋,张路,张丽云,等.渤海沿岸湿地生物多样性变化特征[J].生态学报,2018,38(3):909-916.
[21] Zhang X, Zhou J, Li G, et al. Spatial pattern reconstruction of regional habitat quality based on the simulation of land use changes from 1975 to 2010[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2020,30:601-620.
[22] Rahimi L, Malekmohammadi B, Yavari A R. Assessing and modeling the impacts of wetland land cover changes on water provision and habitat quality ecosystem services[J]. Natural Resources Research, 2020,29,3701-3718.
[23] Zhu K, Chen Y, Zhang S, et al. Identification and prevention of agricultural non-point source pollution risk based on the minimum cumulative resistance model[J]. Global Ecology and Conservation, 2020,23:e01149.
[24] 刘建华,张启斌, YANG Di,等.基于MCR-ANN-CA模型的包头市生态用地演变模拟[J].农业机械学报,2019,50(2):187-194.
[25] 黄雪飞,吴次芳,游和远,等.基于MCR模型的水网平原区乡村景观生态廊道构建[J].农业工程学报,2019,35(10):243-251.
[26] McRae B H, Dickson B G, Keitt T H, et al. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation[J]. Ecology, 2008,89(10):2712-2724.
[27] Merrick M J, Koprowski J L. Circuit theory to estimate natal dispersal routes and functional landscape connectivity for an endangered small mammal[J]. Landscape Ecology, 2017,32(6):1163-1179.
[28] Wang C, Yu C, Chen T, et al. Can the establishment of ecological security patterns improve ecological protection?An example of Nanchang, China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020,740:140051.
[29] Carroll K A, Hansen A J, Inman R M, et al. Testing landscape resistance layers and modelling connectivity for wolverines in the western United States[J]. Global Ecology and Conservation, 2020,23:e01125.
[30] McRae B H, Hall S A, Beier P, et al. Where to restore ecological connectivity?Detecting barriers and quantifying restoration benefits[J]. Plos One, 2012,7(12):e52604.
[31] McRae B H, Shah V B, Mohapatra T K. Circuitscape 4 user guide[R]. Seattle Wa:the Nature Conservancy, Seattle, 2013.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 2021-04-20