福州鼓岭避暑旅游区景观格局及生态风险分析
|
摘要
基于2015年Landsat_ETM+遥感影像,利用Arc GIS和Fragstats软件对福州鼓岭避暑旅游区景观格局及生态风险进行研究.结果表明:2015年研究区景观以林地为基质,优势度最大,分离度最低;高程在500～750 m的平缓高地景观构成丰富,适宜避暑开发; 500 m以下的山坡地坡度陡,景观破碎度低,连接性好;研究区内景观稳定性较差,鹅鼻片区破碎度最高、优势度最低,东部旅游休闲区内斑块连接性最好;生态风险空间分布差异明显,高风险区分布在研究区北部和中部,低风险区分布在边缘区;鹅鼻片区、恩顶片区、鼓岭核心区生态风险等级较高,东部旅游休闲区和鼓山片区生态风险等级较低.
The paper studied on the landscape pattern and ecological risk of the Guling Summer Resort in Fuzhou city with ArcGIS and Fragstats,based on Landsat ETM + remote sensing data in2015. The results show that: In 2015,woodland dominated the landscape matrix of the research area,with the highest degree of dominance,and the lowest degree of separation. The landscape of the gently upland at the height of 500 ～ 750 m in the research area is rich.,best for summer resort.The degree of fragmentation is low while connection between the patches is good,as for the steep slope of the upland below the height of 500 m. The stability of the patches in the research area is bad. The degree of fragmentation of the Ebiarea is the highest and the dominance is the lowest. The connectivity between the patches in the eastern tourism is the best. Significant differences in the spatial distribution of ecological risks in the research area. Ecologically higher risk area mainly located in the northern and centre of the area. The lower risk zone mainly located in fringe area. The ecological risk level of the Ebi area,Endin area and the Guling core area is higher,while that of the eastern tourist recreation area and the Guling area is lower.
The paper studied on the landscape pattern and ecological risk of the Guling Summer Resort in Fuzhou city with ArcGIS and Fragstats,based on Landsat ETM + remote sensing data in2015. The results show that: In 2015,woodland dominated the landscape matrix of the research area,with the highest degree of dominance,and the lowest degree of separation. The landscape of the gently upland at the height of 500 ～ 750 m in the research area is rich.,best for summer resort.The degree of fragmentation is low while connection between the patches is good,as for the steep slope of the upland below the height of 500 m. The stability of the patches in the research area is bad. The degree of fragmentation of the Ebiarea is the highest and the dominance is the lowest. The connectivity between the patches in the eastern tourism is the best. Significant differences in the spatial distribution of ecological risks in the research area. Ecologically higher risk area mainly located in the northern and centre of the area. The lower risk zone mainly located in fringe area. The ecological risk level of the Ebi area,Endin area and the Guling core area is higher,while that of the eastern tourist recreation area and the Guling area is lower.
引文
[1]彭建,党威雄,刘焱序,等.景观生态风险评价研究进展与展望[J].地理学报,2015,70(4):664-677.
[2]许妍,曹可,李冕,等.海岸带生态风险评价研究进展[J].地球科学进展,2016,31(2):137-146.
[3]彭建,吕慧玲,刘焱序,等.国内外多功能景观研究进展与展望[J].地球科学进展,2015,30(4):465-476.
[4]彭建,刘焱序,潘雅婧,等.基于景观格局—过程的城市自然灾害生态风险研究:回顾与展望[J].地球科学进展,2014,29(10):1186-1196.
[5] PENG Jian,ZONG Minli,HU Yina,et al. Assessing landscape ecological risk in a mining city:acase study in Liaoyuan City,China[J]. Sustainability,2015,7(7):8312-8334.
[6] PENG Jian,WANG Yanglin,ZHANG Yuan,et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of landscape metrics in quantifying spatial patterns[J]. Ecological Indicators,2010,10(2):217-223.
[7]洪佳,卢晓宁,王玲玲. 1973-2013年黄河三角洲湿地景观演变驱动力[J].生态学报,2016,36(4):924-935.
[8]廖柳文,秦建新.环长株潭城市群湿地生态安全研究[J].地球信息科学学报,2016,18(9):1217-1226.
[9]周永博,沙润,杨燕,等.旅游景观意象评价——周庄与乌镇的比较研究[J].地理研究,2011,30(2):359
[10]虞虎,刘青青,陈田,等.都市圈旅游系统组织结构、演化动力及发展特征[J].地理科学进展,2016,35(10):1288-1302.
[11]张莹,雷国平,林佳,等.扎龙自然保护区不同空间尺度景观格局时空变化及其生态风险[J].生态学杂志,2012,31(5):1250-1256.
[12]刘焱序,王仰麟,彭建,等.基于生态适应性循环三维框架的城市景观生态风险评价[J].地理学报,2015,70(7):1052-1067.
[13]杜悦悦,彭建,赵士权,等.西南山地滑坡灾害生态风险评价——以大理白族自治州为例[J].地理学报,2016,71(9):1544-1561.
[14]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.
[15]吴健生,乔娜,彭建,等.露天矿区景观生态风险空间分异[J].生态学报,2013,33(12):3816-3824.
[16]周利军,张雪萍,陈设.扎龙自然保护区土地利用变化与生态风险评价[J].自然灾害学报,2009,18(2):186-190.
[17]蒙晓,任志远,张翀.咸阳市土地利用变化及生态风险[J].干旱区研究,2012,29(1):137-142.
[18]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.
[19]石浩朋,于开芹,冯永军.基于景观结构的城乡结合部生态风险分析——以泰安市岱岳区为例[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(3):705-712.
[20]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.
[21]孙洪波,杨桂山,苏伟忠,等.沿江地区土地利用生态风险评价——以长江三角洲南京地区为例[J].生态学报,2010,30(20):5616-5625.
[22]林银铃.鼓岭国家级旅游度假区总体规划景观评价研究[D].福州:福州大学,2014.
[23]郭怀成,都小尚,刘永,等.基于景观格局分析的区域规划环评方法[J].地理研究,2011,30(9):1713-1724.
[24]李小妹,严平.中国北方地区沙漠与河流景观格局[J].地理科学进展,2014,33(9):1198-1208.
[25]巩杰,赵彩霞,谢余初,等.基于景观格局的甘肃白龙江流域生态风险评价与管理[J].应用生态学报,2014,25(7):2041-2048.
[26]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.
[27]时卉,杨兆萍,韩芳,等.新疆天池景区生态安全度时空分异特征与驱动机制[J].地理科学进展,2013,32(3):475-485.
[28]康鹏,陈卫平,王美娥.基于生态系统服务的生态风险评价研究进展[J].生态学报,2016,36(5):1192-1203.
[29]苏浩,吴次芳.基于景观结构的农林交错带土地利用生态风险时空分异研究[J].经济地理,2017,37(5):158-165.
[30]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.
[31]高宾,李小玉,李志刚,等.基于景观格局的锦州湾沿海经济开发区生态风险分析[J].生态学报,2011,31(12):3441-3450.
[32]巫丽芸.区域景观生态风险评价及生态风险管理研究[D].福州:福建师范大学,2004.
[2]许妍,曹可,李冕,等.海岸带生态风险评价研究进展[J].地球科学进展,2016,31(2):137-146.
[3]彭建,吕慧玲,刘焱序,等.国内外多功能景观研究进展与展望[J].地球科学进展,2015,30(4):465-476.
[4]彭建,刘焱序,潘雅婧,等.基于景观格局—过程的城市自然灾害生态风险研究:回顾与展望[J].地球科学进展,2014,29(10):1186-1196.
[5] PENG Jian,ZONG Minli,HU Yina,et al. Assessing landscape ecological risk in a mining city:acase study in Liaoyuan City,China[J]. Sustainability,2015,7(7):8312-8334.
[6] PENG Jian,WANG Yanglin,ZHANG Yuan,et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of landscape metrics in quantifying spatial patterns[J]. Ecological Indicators,2010,10(2):217-223.
[7]洪佳,卢晓宁,王玲玲. 1973-2013年黄河三角洲湿地景观演变驱动力[J].生态学报,2016,36(4):924-935.
[8]廖柳文,秦建新.环长株潭城市群湿地生态安全研究[J].地球信息科学学报,2016,18(9):1217-1226.
[9]周永博,沙润,杨燕,等.旅游景观意象评价——周庄与乌镇的比较研究[J].地理研究,2011,30(2):359
[10]虞虎,刘青青,陈田,等.都市圈旅游系统组织结构、演化动力及发展特征[J].地理科学进展,2016,35(10):1288-1302.
[11]张莹,雷国平,林佳,等.扎龙自然保护区不同空间尺度景观格局时空变化及其生态风险[J].生态学杂志,2012,31(5):1250-1256.
[12]刘焱序,王仰麟,彭建,等.基于生态适应性循环三维框架的城市景观生态风险评价[J].地理学报,2015,70(7):1052-1067.
[13]杜悦悦,彭建,赵士权,等.西南山地滑坡灾害生态风险评价——以大理白族自治州为例[J].地理学报,2016,71(9):1544-1561.
[14]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.
[15]吴健生,乔娜,彭建,等.露天矿区景观生态风险空间分异[J].生态学报,2013,33(12):3816-3824.
[16]周利军,张雪萍,陈设.扎龙自然保护区土地利用变化与生态风险评价[J].自然灾害学报,2009,18(2):186-190.
[17]蒙晓,任志远,张翀.咸阳市土地利用变化及生态风险[J].干旱区研究,2012,29(1):137-142.
[18]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.
[19]石浩朋,于开芹,冯永军.基于景观结构的城乡结合部生态风险分析——以泰安市岱岳区为例[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(3):705-712.
[20]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.
[21]孙洪波,杨桂山,苏伟忠,等.沿江地区土地利用生态风险评价——以长江三角洲南京地区为例[J].生态学报,2010,30(20):5616-5625.
[22]林银铃.鼓岭国家级旅游度假区总体规划景观评价研究[D].福州:福州大学,2014.
[23]郭怀成,都小尚,刘永,等.基于景观格局分析的区域规划环评方法[J].地理研究,2011,30(9):1713-1724.
[24]李小妹,严平.中国北方地区沙漠与河流景观格局[J].地理科学进展,2014,33(9):1198-1208.
[25]巩杰,赵彩霞,谢余初,等.基于景观格局的甘肃白龙江流域生态风险评价与管理[J].应用生态学报,2014,25(7):2041-2048.
[26]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.
[27]时卉,杨兆萍,韩芳,等.新疆天池景区生态安全度时空分异特征与驱动机制[J].地理科学进展,2013,32(3):475-485.
[28]康鹏,陈卫平,王美娥.基于生态系统服务的生态风险评价研究进展[J].生态学报,2016,36(5):1192-1203.
[29]苏浩,吴次芳.基于景观结构的农林交错带土地利用生态风险时空分异研究[J].经济地理,2017,37(5):158-165.
[30]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.
[31]高宾,李小玉,李志刚,等.基于景观格局的锦州湾沿海经济开发区生态风险分析[J].生态学报,2011,31(12):3441-3450.
[32]巫丽芸.区域景观生态风险评价及生态风险管理研究[D].福州:福建师范大学,2004.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |