[1]YUAN Yuan,LUO Zhijun,ZHAO Jie,et al.Landscape Ecological Security Evaluation of Nanchang City Based on Landscape Structure and Spatial statistics[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2020,27(03):247-255.
Copy
Landscape Ecological Security Evaluation of Nanchang City Based on Landscape Structure and Spatial statistics
Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume:
27
Number of periods:
2020 03
Page number:
247-255
Column:
目次
Public date:
2020-04-20
- Title:
- Landscape Ecological Security Evaluation of Nanchang City Based on Landscape Structure and Spatial statistics
- CLC:
- F301.2
- DOI:
- -
- Abstract:
- With the accelerating urbanization process,a series of urban common diseases have emerged one after another,such as environmental pollution,resource shortage,and land use contradictions,and urban ecological environment problems have become increasingly prominent.It is very important to Analyze the impact of changes of landscape types on regional landscape ecological security in the process of urbanization to solve urban ecological problems and coordinate regional ecological security. This study takes Nanchang City of Jiangxi Province as the research area, and based on remote sensing image data of 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2017, DEM and other data of Nanchang, we analyzed the landscape pattern in Nanchang first, then constructed the landscape ecological security evaluation model, and used geostatistics, spatial correlation analysis and other methods to evaluate and analyze the landscape ecological security of Nanchang City. The results show that the landscape types of Nanchang are mainly cultivated land, forestland and water area, and the cultivated land area has decreased by 80 018.72 hm2, while the construction land area has increased by 78 843.51 hm2. The results of geostatistical analysis show that the optimal models of landscape ecological security index of Nanchang City from 2000 to 2017 are the spherical model, and the ratio of gold to abutment is about 25%. The landscape ecological security index has strong spatial autocorrelation. The regional landscape ecological security level of Nanchang City had a high positive spatial correlation during the study period, and the high value of landscape ecological safety index was found in the area surrounding Nanchang City, and the low value of landscape ecological safety index was found in the central area of Nanchang City, cluster of the landscape ecological safety index of Nanchang City in each period was significant. And the distributions of high value—high value area and low value—low value area are basically consistent with the distribution of landscape ecological security. The landscape ecological security index of Nanchang City decreased from 0.632 in 2000 to 0.573 in 2017, and the areas of middle and high security zones changed to medium, low and low security zones. Overall, the landscape ecological security level showed the deteriorating trend. The results are of great significance for regulating the spatial pattern of Nanchang City, optimizing the utilization of regional land resources, and ensuring the sustainable development of the region.
- References:
-
[1] 阳文锐.北京城市景观格局时空变化及驱动力[J].生态学报,2015,35(13):4357-4366.
[2] 李建春,袁文华.基于GIS格网模型的银川市土地生态安全评价研究[J].自然资源学报,2017,32(6):988-1001.
[3] Zhou K, Liu Y, Tan R, et al. Urban dynamics, landscape ecological security, and policy implications:A case study from the Wuhan area of central China[J]. Cities, 2014,41:141-153.
[4] 赵筱青,王兴友,谢鹏飞,等.基于结构与功能安全性的景观生态安全时空变化:以人工园林大面积种植区西盟县为例[J].地理研究,2015,34(8):1581-1591.
[5] 于潇,吴克宁,郧文聚,等.三江平原现代农业区景观生态安全时空分异分析[J].农业工程学报,2016,32(8):253-259.
[6] 苏海民,何爱霞.基于RS和地统计学的福州市土地利用分析[J].自然资源学报,2010,25(1):91-99.
[7] 李建春,袁文华.基于GIS格网模型的银川市土地生态安全评价研究[J].自然资源学报,2017,32(6):988-1001.
[8] 黄木易,何翔.近20年来巢湖流域景观生态风险评估与时空演化机制[J].湖泊科学,2016,28(4):785-793.
[9] 吴莉,侯西勇,邸向红.山东省沿海区域景观生态风险评价[J].生态学杂志,2014,33(1):214-220.
[10] 戴文远,黄华富,黄万里,等.海岛生态脆弱区景观生态安全时空分异特征:以福建海坛岛为例[J].生态科学,2017,36(4):152-159.
[11] 陈亚娟.石漠化地区景观生态安全动态评价与预测[D].贵阳; 贵州师范大学,2017.
[12] 裴欢,魏勇,王晓妍,等.耕地景观生态安全评价方法及其应用[J].农业工程学报,2014,30(9):212-219.
[13] 李月臣.中国北方13省市区生态安全动态变化分析[J].地理研究,2008,27(5):1150-1160,1227.
[14] 郭泺,薛达元,余世孝,等.泰山景观生态安全动态分析与评价[J].山地学报,2008,26(3):331-338.
[15] 李谢辉,李景宜.基于GIS的区域景观生态风险分析:以渭河下游河流沿线区域为例[J].干旱区研究,2008,25(6):899-903.
[16] 谢花林.基于景观结构的土地利用生态风险空间特征分析:以江西兴国县为例[J].中国环境科学,2011,31(4):688-695.
[17] 王娟,崔保山,姚华荣,等.纵向岭谷区澜沧江流域景观生态安全时空分异特征[J].生态学报,2008,28(4):1681-1690.
[18] 曾永年,靳文凭,王慧敏,等.青海高原东部土地利用变化模拟与景观生态风险评价[J].农业工程学报,2014,30(4):185-194.
[19] 曾永年,何丽丽,靳文凭,等.长株潭城市群核心区城镇景观空间扩张过程定量分析[J].地理科学,2012,32(5):544-549.
[20] 胡砚霞,黄进良,杜耘,等.2000—2015年丹江口库区植被覆盖时空变化趋势及其成因分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(4):862-872.
[21] 王毅,郭跃.喀斯特地貌区植被覆盖与地形因子的空间关系分析:以贵州普定县为例[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(1):157-167.
[22] 彭文甫,王广杰,周介铭,等.基于多时相Landsat5/8影像的岷江汶川—都江堰段植被覆盖动态监测[J].生态学报,2016,36(7):1975-1988.
[23] Liang S L, Li X W, Wang J D. Advanced remote sensing:Terrestrial information extraction and applications[R]. Pennsylvania:Academic Press, 2012.
[24] 李营,张峰,王桥.呼伦贝尔盟草原植被覆盖状况时空演变特征分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2010,24(6):126-131.
[25] Deering D W. Rangeland reflectance characteristics measured by aircraft and spacecraft sensors[R]. Texas:Texas A&M University, College Station, 1978.
[26] 王景,李文华,任青山,等.西藏森林生态系统服务价值[J].自然资源学报,2007,22(5):831-841.
[27] 孙翔,朱晓东,李杨帆.港湾快速城市化地区景观生态安全评价:以厦门市为例[J].生态学报,2008,28(8):3563-3573.
[28] 游巍斌,何东进,巫丽芸,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观生态安全度时空分异规律[J].生态学报,2011,31(21):6317-6327.
[29] Dale V H, Kline K L. Issues in using landscape indicators to assess land changes [J]. Ecological Indicators, 2013,28:91-99.
[30] 刘世梁,刘琦,张兆苓,等.云南省红河流域景观生态风险及驱动力分析[J].生态学报,2014,34(13):3728-3734.
[31] Wang J, Cui B S, Yao H R, et al. The temporal and spatial characteristic of landscape ecological security at Lancang River Watershed of longitudinal range gorge region in Southwest China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008,28(4):1681-1690.
[32] Du P, Xia J, Du Q, et al. Evaluation of the spatio-temporal pattern of urban ecological security using remote sensing and GIS[J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2013,34(3):848-863.
[33] 欧朝蓉,朱清科,孙永玉.元谋干热河谷景观生态安全时空变化[J].中国水土保持科学,2018,16(1):131-140.
- Similar References:
Memo
-
Last Update:
2020-04-30