长江中下游区域生态系统对极端降水的脆弱性评估研究

doi:10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.01.009

自然资源学报 ›› 2012, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (1): 82-89.doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.01.009

长江中下游区域生态系统对极端降水的脆弱性评估研究

於琍¹, 李克让², 陶波²

1. 国家气候中心,北京 100081;
2. 中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所,北京 100101

收稿日期:2010-12-08 修回日期:2011-06-22 出版日期:2012-01-20 发布日期:2012-01-20
作者简介:於琍(1976- ),女,博士,高级工程师,主要从事气候变化影响评估研究。E-mail: yuli@cma.gov.cn
基金资助:
公益性行业科研专项(GYHY201106013)。

Assessment on Ecosystem Vulnerability to Extreme Precipitation in the Upper and Middle Yangtze Valley

YU Li¹, LI Ke-rang², TAO Bo²

1. Center on Climate Change, China Meteorological Administration, Beijing 100081, China;
2. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China

Received:2010-12-08 Revised:2011-06-22 Online:2012-01-20 Published:2012-01-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 气候变化背景下,极端气候事件对生态系统的影响更甚于气候平均态的变化,对极端气候事件的影响评估及机理研究有更为重要的现实意义。研究以极端降水为例,选择我国旱涝频繁的长江中下游地区为研究对象,基于生态系统过程模型的动态模拟,选择与极端降水显著相关的生态系统功能特征量,根据IPCC脆弱性的定义,以生态系统功能特征量偏离多年平均状况的程度及其变化趋势分别定义系统对极端降水的敏感性和适应性,从而评估其脆弱性。研究表明,长江中下游地区生态系统多年平均脆弱度为轻度脆弱,轻度脆弱及以下地区占区域总面积的大半,约65%,脆弱度较高的区域占20%,主要分布在长江中下游的西北部。极端降水会增加长江中下游区域生态系统的脆弱度,多表现为不脆弱转变为轻度脆弱,中度脆弱及以上的生态系统所占比例变化不大。干旱和洪涝对区域内生态系统脆弱度的分布格局影响不大,但干旱的影响程度高于洪涝。不论是干旱还是洪涝,区域内生态系统的脆弱度在灾害过后的下一个生长季能基本恢复,没有连年灾害的情况下,长江中下游区域的旱涝灾害对生态系统的影响不会持续到下一年度。

关键词: 生态系统, 脆弱性, 极端降水事件, 长江中下游地区

Abstract: The hazards of extreme weather events are likely greater than the change of climatic mean variables under the background of climate change. The assessment on impacts and vulnerability of ecosystem to extreme events is important and realistic. The process-based model (CEVSA) was used to simulate the responses of ecosystem to extreme precipitation in the upper and middle Yangtze Valley because of its frequency of drought and flood. The net primary productivity (NPP) in summer which has high correlation with precipitation anomalies was analyzed as an indicator of ecosystem to extreme precipitation. The variability of NPP and its changing tendency were defined as the sensitivity and adaptive capacity of ecosystem to extreme precipitation, respectively, and the vulnerability of ecosystem to extreme precipitation was calculated based on them. The results suggested that most of the ecosystem was gently vulnerable and took 65% of the upper and middle Yangtze Valley during 1961-1990, and the higher vulnerable ecosystem took about 20%, mainly distributed in the northwestern part. Extreme precipitation would increase the vulnerability of ecosystem, whatever drought or flood. The main change of vulnerability was shifted from nonvulnerable state to gently vulnerable state during the extreme precipitation years. The higher vulnerable ecosystem was mainly located in the northern part of the upper and middle Yangtze Valley, and its percent was hardly changed under different extreme precipitation. Compared with the impacts of drought and flood, the vulnerability in drought years was higher than in flood years, and even it was the same in the next year of extreme precipitation. However, the ecosystem vulnerability in most part of the valley could get back to the level of multi-year mean state in the next years of extreme precipitation.

Key words: ecosystem, vulnerability, extreme events, the upper and middle Yangtze Valley

中图分类号:

P426.6

於琍, 李克让, 陶波. 长江中下游区域生态系统对极端降水的脆弱性评估研究[J]. 自然资源学报, 2012, 27(1): 82-89.

YU Li, LI Ke-rang, TAO Bo. Assessment on Ecosystem Vulnerability to Extreme Precipitation in the Upper and Middle Yangtze Valley[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2012, 27(1): 82-89.

参考文献

[1] WMO. No. 695, Extreme weather events might increase. Geneva, July 2, 2003. [2] Gerald A M, Thomas K, David R E, et al. An introduction to trends in extreme weather and climate events: Observations, socioeconomic impacts, terrestrial ecological impacts, and model projections[J]. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2000, 81(3): 413-416. [3] IPCC. Climate Change 2007—Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. [4] 丁一汇, 任国玉, 石广玉, 等. 气候变化国家评估报告(Ⅰ): 中国气候变化的历史和未来趋势[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2006, 2(1): 3-8. [5] Walther, Camille, Beebee, Trevor, et al. Ecological responses to recent climate change[J]. Nature, 2002, 416: 389-395. [6] Easterling D R, Evans J L, Groisman P Y, et al. Observed variability and trends in extreme climate events: A brief review[J]. Bulletin of the American Meterorological Society, 2000, 81: 417-425. [7] Craig D Allen, David D Breshears. Drought-induced shift of a forest-woodland ecotone: Rapid landscape response to climate variation[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of American, 1998, 95: 14839-14842. [8] 胡中民, 于贵瑞, 樊江文, 等. 干旱对陆地生态系统水碳过程的影响研究进展[J]. 地理科学进展, 2006, 25(6): 12-20. [9] Vincent P G, Hormoz B. Extreme events as shaping physiology, ecology, and evolution of plants: Toward a unified definition and evaluation of their consequences[J]. New Phytologist, 2003, 160: 21-42. [10] 曹明奎, 于贵瑞, 刘纪远, 等. 陆地生态系统碳循环的多尺度试验观测和跨尺度机理模拟[J]. 中国科学 D辑, 2004, 34(增刊2): 1-14. [11] Anthony Patt, Richard J T Klein, Anne de la Vega-Leibert. Taking the uncertainty in climate change vulnerability assessment seriously[J]. Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 2005, 337: 411-424. [12] 吴绍洪, 尹云鹤, 赵慧霞, 等. 生态系统对气候变化的适应的辨识[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2005, 1(3): 115-118. [13] 张琼, 吴国雄. 长江流域大范围旱涝与南亚高压的关系[J]. 气象学报, 2001, 59(5): 569-577. [14] YU Li, CAO Ming-kui, LI Ke-rang. Climate-induced changes in the vegetation pattern of China in the 21st century[J]. Ecological Research, 2006, 21(6): 912-919. [15] 於琍, 曹明奎, 陶波, 等. 基于潜在植被的中国自然生态系统对气候变化的脆弱性定量评价[J]. 植物生态学报, 2008, 32(3): 521-530. [16] CAO Ming-kui, Woodward F Ian. Dynamic responses of terrestrial ecosystem carbon cycling to global climate change[J]. Nature, 1998, 393: 249-252 [17] CAO Ming-kui, Stephen D Prince, LI Ke-rang, et al. Response of terrestrial carbon uptake to climate interannual variability in China[J]. Global Change Biology, 2003, 9: 536-546. [18] ZHU Wen-quan, PAN Yao-zhong, YANG Xiao-qiong, et al. Comprehensive analysis of the impact of climatic changes on Chinese terrestrial net primary productivity[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2007, 52(23): 3250-3260 [19] Landres Peter B, Penelope Morgan, Frederick J Swanson. Overview of the use of natural variability concepts in managing ecological systems[J]. Ecological Applications, 1999, 9(4): 1179-1188. [20] David Coulson, Linda Joyce. Indexing variability: A case study with climate change impacts on ecosystems[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2006(6): 749-769

长江中下游区域生态系统对极端降水的脆弱性评估研究

Assessment on Ecosystem Vulnerability to Extreme Precipitation in the Upper and Middle Yangtze Valley

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	关凤峻, 刘连和, 刘建伟, 付英, 王凌云, 王峰, 李勇, 余星涤, 车娜, 肖颖. 系统推进自然生态保护和治理能力建设——《全国重要生态系统保护和修复重大工程总体规划（2021—2035年）》专家笔谈[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(2): 290-299.
[2]	胡其玉, 陈松林. 基于生态系统服务供需的厦漳泉地区生态网络空间优化[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(2): 342-355.
[3]	许闯胜, 刘伟, 宋伟, 李寒. 差异化开展国土空间生态修复的思考[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(2): 384-394.
[4]	赵雪雁, 杜昱璇, 李花, 王伟军. 黄河中游城镇化与生态系统服务耦合关系的时空变化[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(1): 131-147.
[5]	刘晶晶, 王静, 戴建旺, 翟天林, 李泽慧. 黄河流域县域尺度生态系统服务供给和需求核算及时空变异[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(1): 148-161.
[6]	谢丽霞, 白永平, 车磊, 乔富伟, 孙帅帅, 杨雪荻. 基于价值—风险的黄河上游生态功能区生态分区建设[J]. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(1): 196-207.
[7]	贾建辉, 陈建耀, 龙晓君, 陈记臣. 水电开发对河流生态系统服务的效应评估与时空变化特征分析——以武江干流为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(9): 2163-2176.
[8]	刘春芳, 王韦婷, 刘立程, 李鹏杰. 西北地区县域生态系统服务的供需匹配——以甘肃古浪县为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(9): 2177-2190.
[9]	耿甜伟, 陈海, 张行, 史琴琴, 刘迪. 基于GWR的陕西省生态系统服务价值时空演变特征及影响因素分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(7): 1714-1727.
[10]	徐超璇, 鲁春霞, 黄绍琳. 张家口地区生态脆弱性及其影响因素[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(6): 1288-1300.
[11]	王祥, 淮建军. 基于三级分层框架的农业气象灾害多风险评估[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(6): 1460-1471.
[12]	燕守广, 李辉, 李海东, 张银龙. 基于土地利用与景观格局的生态保护红线生态系统健康评价方法——以南京市为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(5): 1109-1118.
[13]	张宇硕, 吴殿廷, 吕晓. 土地利用/覆盖变化对生态系统服务的影响：空间尺度视角的研究综述[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(5): 1172-1189.
[14]	和娟, 师学义, 付扬军. 基于生态系统服务的汾河源头区域生态安全格局优化[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(4): 814-825.
[15]	邓元杰, 姚顺波, 侯孟阳, 张童越, 鲁亚楠, 龚直文, 王怡菲. 退耕还林还草工程对生态系统碳储存服务的影响——以黄土高原丘陵沟壑区子长县为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(4): 826-844.