HU Mengshan,YE Zhangsheng,GU Moli.Assessment on Landscape Ecological Risk in Nanchang City Based on Impervious Surface Expansion[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2023,30(03):448-459.[doi:10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.03.024]
基于不透水地表扩展的南昌市景观生态风险评价
- Title:
- Assessment on Landscape Ecological Risk in Nanchang City Based on Impervious Surface Expansion
- 文章编号:
- 1005-3409(2023)03-0448-12
- Keywords:
- landscape ecological risk; impervious surface; influencing factors; geographic detector; Nanchang City
- 分类号:
- X171.1
- 文献标志码:
- A
- 摘要:
- [目的]景观生态风险是识别区域生态风险和衡量区域生态安全的有效指标。基于不透水地表构建,可直观判定人类活动对风险形成及恶化的环境响应。分析区域景观生态风险评价及风险加剧区的影响因素,对遏制风险加剧区的滋生与蔓延具有科学意义及实践价值。[方法]以南昌市为例,获取不透水地表信息构建景观生态风险指数,分析其时空演变特征,运用地理探测器对研究区景观生态风险的影响因素进行测度。[结果](1)2010—2020年南昌市不透水地表面积剧烈增长,由648.63 km2增至1 075.12 km2,农用地及生态用地资源不断下降,不透水地表主要由耕地、林地、水域等景观转换而来,人类活动干扰程度加大;(2)2010—2020年南昌市景观生态风险指数空间分布以“中间低—两边高”呈现,平均值整体下降。2010年、2015年、2020年南昌市景观生态高风险区面积分别为519.73 km2,324.82 km2,365.04 km2,景观生态高风险区面积先降后升,区域以景观生态中高风险区及中风险区为主;(3)2010年、2015年、2020年南昌市景观生态风险的影响因素由社会经济因子与距离因子为主导,影响因子的交互作用均大于单因子的解释程度,距离因子对自然气候因子与社会经济因子具有正向提升作用;(4)南昌市景观生态风险加剧区以林地、水域、耕地等景观类型为主,加剧区是自然环境、社会经济及可达性等多重因素导致,但人为活动影响更为突出。[结论]南昌市景观生态状况向好。自然环境、社会经济、距离等因子对景观生态风险指数及风险加剧区的影响呈现差异性和交互性。研究结果对维护区域生态安全和可持续发展具有重要意义。
- Abstract:
- [Objective]Landscape ecological risk is an effective indicator to identify regional ecological risks and measure regional ecological security. Based on the construction of impervious surface, the environmental response of human activities to the formation and exacerbation of risks can be intuitively determined. Regional landscape ecological risk assessment and the influencing factors of the aggravated risk areas are analyzed, which has scientific significance and practical value for curbing the emerging and spreading of risk exacerbation zones. [Methods] Nanchang City was taken as an example, the information of impervious surface was obtained to construct a landscape ecological risk index. The spatiotemporal evolution characteristics of landscape ecological risk were analyzed. The influencing factors of landscape ecological risk in the study area was measured by using geographic detectors. [Results](1)From 2010 to 2020, the area of impervious surface in Nanchang City increased dramatically, from 648.63 km2 to 1 075.12 km2, and the resources of agricultural land and ecological land continued to decline. The impervious surface was mainly converted from landscapes such as cultivated land, forest land, and water areas, and the degree of interference from human activities increased.(2)From 2010 to 2020, the spatial distribution of Nanchang's landscape ecological risk index was presented as low in the middle and high on both sides. The average value of landscape pattern index decreased as a whole. In 2010, 2015, and 2020, the areas of high-risk areas of landscape ecology in Nanchang City were 519.73 km2, 324.82 km2, and 365.04 km2, respectively. The area of landscape ecological high-risk areas first decreased and then increased. The areas were dominated by landscape ecological medium-high-risk areas and medium-risk areas.(3)The influencing factors of landscape ecological risk in Nanchang City in 2010, 2015 and 2020 were dominated by socio-economic factors and distance factors. The interaction effects of the influencing factors were all larger than the explanation degree of a single factor. The distance factor had a positive effect on natural climate factors and socioeconomic factors.(4)The landscape ecological risk exacerbation zone in Nanchang City was dominated by landscape types such as forest land, water area and cultivated land. Exacerbation zones were caused by multiple factors such as natural environment, socio-economics, and accessibility, but the impact of human activities was more prominent. [Conclusion] The landscape ecological status of Nanchang City has been improving. The impacts of natural environment, social economy, distance and other factors on the landscape ecological risk index and risk exacerbation areas are different and interactive. These research results are of great significance for maintaining regional ecological security and sustainable development.
参考文献/References:
[1] 王敏,胡守庚,张绪冰,等.干旱区绿洲城镇景观生态风险时空变化分析:以张掖绿洲乡镇为例[J].生态学报,2022,42(14):5812-5824.
[2] 李发志,朱高立,姬超,等.基于不透水表面指数的城市扩张趋势及驱动机制分析:以南京市为例[J].长江流域资源与环境,2021,30(3):575-590.
[3] 尉芳,刘京,夏利恒,等.基于LUCC的陕西渭北旱塬区景观生态风险评价[J].中国环境科学,2022,42(4):1963-1974.
[4] 朱润苗,陈松林.1980—2020年福建省景观生态风险与生态系统服务价值的空间关系[J].应用生态学报,2022,33(6):1599-1607.
[5] Hope B K. An examination of ecological risk assessment and management practices[J]. Environment International, 2006,32(8):983-995.
[6] 盛文菲.城市化背景下济南岩溶区土地利用变化的生态风险研究[D].济南:山东师范大学,2019.
[7] 雷慧敏.鄱阳湖生态经济区城镇化与区域生态风险耦合关系研究[D].南昌:东华理工大学,2016.
[8] 李杨帆,林静玉,孙翔.城市区域生态风险预警方法及其在景观生态安全格局调控中的应用[J].地理研究,2017,36(3):485-494.
[9] Duong H A, Phung T V, Nguyen T N, et al. Occurrence, distribution, and ecological risk assessment of antibiotics in selected urban lakes of Hanoi, Vietnam[J]. Journal of Analytical Methods in Chemistry, 2021, DOI:org/10.1155/2021/6631797
[10] Berni I, Menouni A, El G I, et al. Health and ecological risk assessment based on pesticide monitoring in Saïss plain(Morocco)groundwater[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2021,276:116638.
[11] Kimberley K A, Wayne G L. A bayesian approach to landscape ecological risk assessment applied to the upper grande ronde watershed, Oregon[J]. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment:An International Journal, 2012,18(5):946-970.
[12] 赵曦,黄艺,李娟,等.大型垃圾焚烧厂周边土壤重金属含量水平、空间分布、来源及潜在生态风险评价[J].生态环境学报,2015,24(6):1013-1021.
[13] 雷昌文,曹莹,周腾耀,等.太湖水体中5种有机磷农药混合物生态风险评价[J].生态毒理学报,2013,8(6):937-944.
[14] 毛志刚,谷孝鸿,陆小明,等.太湖东部不同类型湖区疏浚后沉积物重金属污染及潜在生态风险评价[J].环境科学,2014,35(1):186-193.
[15] 白立敏,修春亮,冯兴华.基于土地利用变化的长春市生态风险评价[J].生态科学,2019,38(3):26-35.
[16] Wu C, Murray A T. Estimating impervious surface distribution by spectral mixture analysis[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2003,84(4):493-505.
[17] Liu C, Shao Z, Chen M, et al. MNDISI:a multi-source composition index for impervious surface area estimation at the individual city scale[J]. Remote Sensing Letters, 2013,4(8):803-812.
[18] Yang L, Huang C, Homer C G, et al. An approach for mapping large-area impervious surfaces:synergistic use of Landsat-7 ETM+and high spatial resolution imagery[J]. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 2003,29(2):230-240.
[19] Bauer M E, Loffelholz B C, Wilson B. Estimating and mapping impervious surface area by regression analysis of Landsat imagery[M]. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, 2007.
[20] 胡和兵,刘红玉,郝敬锋,等.流域景观结构的城市化影响与生态风险评价[J].生态学报,2011,31(12):3432-3440.
[21] 侯蕊,李红波,高艳丽.基于景观格局的武汉市江夏区土地利用生态风险评价[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(1):323-330,403.
[22] 王飞,叶长盛,华吉庆,等.南昌市城镇空间扩展与景观生态风险的耦合关系[J].生态学报,2019,39(4):1248-1262.
[23] 李方刚,李二珠,阿里木·赛买提,等.融合多源时序遥感数据大尺度不透水面覆盖率估算[J].遥感学报,2020,24(10):1243-1254.
[24] 张学斌,石培基,罗君,等.基于景观格局的干旱内陆河流域生态风险分析:以石羊河流域为例[J].自然资源学报,2014,29(3):410-419.
[25] 郭彦君,郭文炯.“三生空间”视角下山西中部盆地城市群景观生态风险分析[J].生态学杂志,2022,41(9):1813-1824.
[26] 张文静,孙小银,单瑞峰,等.1975—2018年南四湖流域景观生态风险时空变化及其驱动因素研究[J].生态科学,2020,39(3):172-181.
[27] 孙丽蓉,周冬梅,岑国璋,等.基于地理探测器模型的疏勒河流域景观生态风险评价及驱动因素分析[J].干旱区地理,2021,44(5):1384-1395.
[28] 王飞.南昌市城镇空间扩展及其生态风险效应研究[D].南昌:东华理工大学,2019.
[29] 奚世军,蔡沛伶,安裕伦.2000—2018年贵州喀斯特山区小流域综合生态风险变化及其驱动因素[J].生态与农村环境学报,2020,36(9):1106-1114.
[30] 高彬嫔,李琛,吴映梅,等.川滇生态屏障区景观生态风险评价及影响因素[J].应用生态学报,2021,32(5):1603-1613.
[31] 钟旭珍,张素,吴瑞娟,等.沱江流域土壤侵蚀动态变化及驱动力分析[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(2):43-49,56.
[32] 戴兰,王海军,高娟,等.快速城市化背景下景观生态安全时空动态分析:以南昌市区为例[J].华中师范大学学报:自然科学版,2015,49(2):267-273.
[33] 徐宇,龚云龙,鲁向晖.南昌市水土保持生态建设区划探讨[J].江西水利科技,2017,43(6):457-461.
[34] 李媛洁,叶长盛,黄小兰.基于CLUE-S模型的南昌市“三生”空间时空演变及情景模拟研究[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(5):325-332.
[35] 李志,李鹏,刘强.长江中游大城市不透水面增长模式及其驱动因素[J].生态学报,2018,38(11):3766-3774.
[36] 金贵,邓祥征,赵晓东,等.2005—2014年长江经济带城市土地利用效率时空格局特征[J].地理学报,2018,73(7):1242-1252.
[37] 余敦,梁珍宝,肖志娟,等.基于景观生态思维的南昌市土地生态风险时空特征分析[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(1):213-220.
[38] 胡梦姗,叶长盛,卢磊.南昌市生态空间和生态保护红线划定研究[J].生态环境学报,2021,30(3):631-643.
[39] 良保.江西严守3.09×1010 m2耕地红线,今年底基本完成农村土地确权登记颁证[J].江西农业,2015(2):7.
[40] 李志,魏宗强,刘雅静,等.1995年以来中国中部城市不透水面增长变化监测及其增长模式研究:以南昌市为例[J].地理科学,2015,35(11):1444-1451.
[41] Ai J W, Yu K Y, Zeng Z, et al. Assessing the dynamic landscape ecological risk and its driving forces in an island city based on optimal spatial scales:Haitan Island, China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2022,137:108771.
[42] Ran P L, Hu S G, Frazier A E, et al. Exploring changes in landscape ecological risk in the Yangtze River Economic Belt from a spatiotemporal perspective[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2022,137:108744.
[43] 刘晓波,韩祯,王世岩,等.长江大保护视角下鄱阳湖湿地保护的研究思考[J].中国水利水电科学研究院学报,2021,19(2):201-209.
[44] 赵安周,刘宪锋,裴韬,等.京津冀地区不透水表面覆盖率的时空演变及其对植被的影响[J].地理研究,2021,40(6):1582-1595.
[45] 雷享勇,高路,马苗苗,等.鄱阳湖流域极端降水时空分布和非平稳性特征[J].应用生态学报,2021,32(9):3277-3287.
[46] 侯立春,林振山,琚胜利,等.环鄱阳湖旅游圈旅游经济联系与区域发展策略[J].长江流域资源与环境,2017,26(4):508-518.
[47] 李苗,臧淑英,吴长山,等.哈尔滨市城乡结合部不透水面时空变化及驱动力分析[J].地理学报,2017,72(1):105-115.
相似文献/References:
[1]孙丽娜,宋戈.松嫩高平原黑土区土地利用/覆被变化及其景观生态风险分析[J].水土保持研究,2012,19(01):148.
SUN Li-na,SONG Ge.Land Use/Cover Change and Its Landscape Ecological Risk Analysis in the Black Soil Region of Songnen High Plain——A Case Study of Bayan County[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2012,19(03):148.
[2]田颖,李冰,王水.江苏沿海地区景观格局的生态风险研究[J].水土保持研究,2015,22(01):241.
TIAN Ying,LI Bing,WANG Shui.Study on Landscape Ecological Risk of the Coastal Areas of Jiangsu Province[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2015,22(03):241.
[3]谢刚,谢元贵,廖小锋,等.基于水土流失敏感性的岩溶地区景观生态风险评价——以黔南州为例[J].水土保持研究,2018,25(03):298.
XIE Gang,XIE Yuangui,LIAO Xiaofeng,et al.Ecological Risk Assessment Based on Soil and Water Loss in Karst Area—A Case Study of Qiannan Prefecture[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2018,25(03):298.
[4]刘迪,陈海,张敏,等.生态脆弱区景观生态风险时空分异及其地形梯度分析——以陕西省米脂县为例[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(04):239.
LIU Di,CHEN Hai,ZHANG Min,et al.Analysis of Spatial-temporal Distribution of Landscape Ecological Risk in Ecologically Vulnerable Areas and Its Terrain Gradient—A Case Study of Mizhi County of Shaanxi Province.[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2019,26(03):239.
[5]李小燕,柳书俊,王志杰.南水北调中线汉中市水源地景观生态风险评价与特征[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(05):181.
LI Xiaoyan,LIU Shujun,WANG Zhijie.Landscape Ecological Risk Characteristics of Water Source Site in Hanzhong City of the Middle Route of the South-to-North Water Transfer Project of China[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2019,26(03):181.
[6]张师赫,李宝银,林玉英,等.基于生态系统服务的景观生态风险评价及其驱动因素研究——以福建省为例[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(06):174.
ZHANG Shihe,LI Baoyin,LIN Yuying,et al.Research on Landscape Ecological Risk Assessment and Driving Factors Based on Ecosystem Services[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2022,29(03):174.
[7]李 鑫,杨朝现,信桂新,等.基于地形梯度的三峡库区景观生态风险特征[J].水土保持研究,2023,30(02):156.[doi:10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.02.019]
LI Xin,YANG Chaoxian,XIN Guixin,et al.Landscape Ecological Risk Characteristics of Three Gorges Reservoir Area Based on Terrain Gradient[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2023,30(03):156.[doi:10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.02.019]
备注/Memo
收稿日期:2022-03-29 修回日期:2022-04-18
资助项目:国家自然科学基金(42061041); 东华理工大学研究生创新专项资金项目(DHYC-202125)
第一作者:胡梦姗(1997—),女,江西宜春人,硕士研究生,研究方向:土地利用变化与规划。E-mail:humengshan1102@163.com
通信作者:叶长盛(1977—),男,江西抚州人,教授,博士,研究方向:城乡发展、土地资源利用与保护。E-mail:ycs519@163.com