汾河流域景观破碎化时空演变特征

doi:10.31497/zrzyxb.20190804

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

以1990年、2000年、2015年遥感影像解译数据为基础,利用Fragstats 4.2软件分别采取标准法和移动窗口法获取最佳分析尺度;在此基础上探索各景观指数空间分异特征,揭示流域景观破碎化时空演变过程;采用空间自回归模型分析景观破碎化的影响因子。结果表明：随着粒度和幅度的改变,部分景观指数呈现一定规律性,90 m栅格大小、900 m方形窗口尺寸为研究区最佳分析尺度;斑块密度、蔓延度、有效网格大小、香农多样性指数在三个时期均存在空间集聚效应,且空间集聚类型分布形态具有较强的相似性;1990-2015年汾河流域景观破碎化空间分布格局发生明显变化,破碎化集聚区域呈现碎斑化;坡度、高程、距建设用地距离是影响三个时期流域景观破碎化的主要影响因素。

关键词: 分析尺度, 景观破碎化, 驱动力, 汾河流域

Abstract:

There is fragmented land and fragile ecological environment in the loess hilly and gully region. With the rapid population growth and socio-economic development in recent years, the degree of fragmentation has been further aggravated. Therefore, based on the interpretation data of remote sensing images in 1990, 2000 and 2015, this paper uses Fragstats 4.2 to obtain the best analysis scale combined with the standard method and moving window method. On this basis, the spatial differentiation characteristics of each landscape index are explored; The spatial and temporal evolution process of watershed landscape fragmentation is revealed; The spatial autoregressive model is used to analyze the impact factors contributing to landscape fragmentation. The results show that with the change of grain size and extent, some landscape indices show a regularity to certain degree. The 90 m grid size and 900 m square window size are the best analysis scales in the Fenhe River Basin; patch density, contagion, effective grid size, and Shannon's diversity index have a spatial agglomeration effect in the three periods, and the spatial agglomeration type distribution has strong similarity. From 1990 to 2015, the spatial pattern of landscape fragmentation in the study area has obviously changed; the slope, elevation and distance from the construction land are the main factors affecting landscape fragmentation of river basin during the three periods. The research results can provide reference for landscape fragmentation analysis in Northwest China, and provide basis for future regional landscape pattern optimization and effective land management.

Key words: analysis scale, landscape fragmentation, driving force, Fenhe River Basin

付扬军, 师学义, 和娟. 汾河流域景观破碎化时空演变特征[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(8): 1606-1619.

FU Yang-jun, SHI Xue-yi, HE Juan. The spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of landscape fragmentation in Fenhe River Basin[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2019, 34(8): 1606-1619.

图/表 8

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

表1

图6

表2

参考文献 25

[1]	王宪礼, 布仁仓, 胡远满, 等. 辽河三角洲湿地的景观破碎化分析. 应用生态学报, 1996, 7(3): 299-304.
	[WANG X L, BU R C, HU Y M, et al.Analysis on landscape fragment of Liaohe delta wetlands. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 1996, 7(3): 299-304.]
[2]	王艳芳, 沈永明, 陈寿军, 等. 景观格局指数相关性的幅度效应. 生态学杂志, 2012, 31(8): 2091-2097.
	[WANG Y F, SHEN Y M, CHEN S J, et al.Range effect of the correlation among landscape metrics. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2012, 31(8): 2091-2097.]
[3]	张景华, 吴志峰, 吕志强, 等. 城乡样带景观梯度分析的幅度效应. 生态学杂志, 2008, 27(6): 978-984.
	[ZHANG J H, WU Z F, LYU Z Q, et al.Extent effect of landscape gradient analysis of urban rural transect. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2008, 27(6): 978-984.]
[4]	JENERETTE G D, WU J G.On the definitions of scale. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 2000, 81(1): 104-105.
[5]	JELINSKI D E, WU J G.The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology, 1996, 11(3): 129-140.
[6]	吴未, 范诗薇, 许丽萍, 等. 无锡市景观指数的粒度效应研究. 自然资源学报, 2016, 31(3): 413-424.
	[WU W, FAN S W, XU L P, et al.Grain size effect of landscape metrics in Wuxi city. Journal of Natural Resources, 2016, 31(3): 413-424.]
[7]	谢作轮, 赵锐锋, 张丽华, 等. 干旱内陆河流湿地景观破碎化模型构建与尺度分析: 以黑河中游湿地为例. 自然资源学报, 2015, 30(11): 1834-1845.
	[XIE Z L, ZHAO R F, ZHANG L H, et al.Landscape fragmentation model construction and scale ana-lysis for wetland in arid region: A case study of the middle reaches of the Heihe River. Journal of Natural Resources, 2015, 30(11): 1834-1845.]
[8]	陆禹, 佘济云, 陈彩虹, 等. 基于粒度反推法的景观生态安全格局优化: 以海口市秀英区为例. 生态学报, 2015, 35(19): 6384-6393.
	[LU Y, SHE J Y, CHEN C H, et al.Landscape ecological security pattern optimization based on the granularity inverse method: A case study in Xiuying district, Haikou. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2015, 35(19): 6384-6393.]
[9]	陈利顶, 傅伯杰, 徐建英, 等. 基于“源—汇”生态过程的景观格局识别方法: 景观空间负荷对比指数. 生态学报, 2003, 23(11): 2406-2413.
	[CHEN L D, FU B J, XU J Y, et al.Location-weighted landscape contrast index: A scale independent approach for landscape pattern evaluation based on "Source-Sink" ecological processes. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2003, 23(11): 2406-2413.]
[10]	李帅, 马文超, 顾艳文, 等. 宁夏黄河流域景观破碎化时空变化特征. 生态学报, 2016, 36(11): 3312-3320.
	[LI S, MA W C, GU Y W, et al.Analysis of spatial-temporal changes in landscape fragmentation in the Ningxia Yellow River Valley. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(11): 3312-3320.]
[11]	陈雅如, 肖文发, 滕明君, 等. 三峡库区景观格局粒度效应及其对土地利用变化过程的响应. 自然资源学报, 2018, 33(4): 588-599.
	[CHEN Y R, XIAO W F, TENG M J, et al.Grain size effect of landscape pattern and its response to land use change in the three gorges reservoir area. Journal of Natural Resources, 2018, 33(4): 588-599.]
[12]	翟俊, 侯鹏, 赵志平, 等. 青海湖流域景观格局空间粒度效应分析. 国土资源遥感, 2018, 30(3): 159-166.
	[ZHAI J, HOU P, ZHAO Z P, et al.An analysis of landscape pattern spatial grain size effects in Qinghai Lake watershed. Remote Sensing for Land & Resources, 2018, 30(3): 159-166.]
[13]	黄青, 王让会, 吴世新. 塔里木河上游景观破碎化的时空动态变化分析. 干旱区资源与环境, 2007, 21(9): 73-77.
	[HUANG Q, WANG R H, WU S X.Spatial-temporal dynamic changes of landscape fragmentation in the upper reaches of Tarim River. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2007, 21(9): 73-77.]
[14]	姜朋辉, 赵锐锋, 赵海莉, 等. 黑河中游湿地景观破碎化与气候变化的关系. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24(6): 1661-1668.
	[JIANG P H, ZHAO R F, ZHAO H L, et al. Relationships of wetland landscape fragmentation with climate change in middle reaches of Heihe River, China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2013, 24(6): 1661-1668.]
[15]	尚宗波, 高琼. 流域生态学: 生态学研究的一个新领域. 生态学报, 2001, 21(3): 468-473.
	[SHANG Z B, GAO Q.Watershed ecology: A new research area of ecology. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2001, 21(3): 468-473.]
[16]	杨海乐, 陈家宽. 流域生态学的发展困境: 来自河流景观的启示. 生态学报, 2016, 36(10): 3084-3095.
	[YANG H L, CHEN J K.Watershed ecology in a dilemma: Inspiration from riverine landscape analysis. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(10): 3084-3095.]
[17]	中国科学院. 地理空间数据云. (2016-12-01) [2017-08-09]. .
	[Chinese Academy of Sciences. Geospacial Data Cloud. (2016-12-01) [2017-08-09]. .]
[18]	邬建国. 景观生态学—格局、过程、尺度与等级. 第2版. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2007.
	[WU J G. Landscape Ecology-Pattern, Process, Scale and Hierarchy. The Second Edition. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2007.]
[19]	CLIFF A D, ORD J K. Spatial Autocorrelation. London: London Point Ltd, 1973.
[20]	ANSELIN L.Local indicators of spatial association-LISA. Geographical Analysis, 1995, 27(2): 93-115.
[21]	ANSELIN L.Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.
[22]	赵文武, 傅伯杰, 陈利顶. 景观指数的粒度变化效应. 第四纪研究, 2003, 23(3): 326-333.
	[ZHAO W W, FU B J, CHEN L D.The effects of grain change on landscape indices. Quaternary Sciences, 2003, 23(3): 326-333.]
[23]	布仁仓, 李秀珍, 胡远满, 等. 尺度分析对景观格局指标的影响. 应用生态学报, 2003, 14(12): 2181-2186.
	[BU R C, LI X Z, HU Y M, et al.The influence of scale analysis on landscape pattern indicators. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(12): 2181-2186.]
[24]	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. 生态学报, 2014, 34(13): 3728-3734.
	[LIU S L, LIU Q, ZHANG Z L, et al.Landscape ecological risk and driving force analysis in Red River Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2014, 34(13): 3728-3734.]
[25]	陈永林, 谢炳庚, 李晓青. 长沙市土地利用格局变化的空间粒度效应. 地理科学, 2016, 36(4): 564-570.
	[CHEN Y L, XIE B G, LI X Q.Spatial grain size effect on land use pattern changes in Changsha city. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2016, 36(4): 564-570.]

年份	KMO	景观指数	公因子方差		成分	初始特征值			主成分
年份	KMO	景观指数	初始	提取	成分	特征值	方差贡献率/%	累计方差贡献率/%	1
1990	0.770	CONTAG	1.00	0.819	1	3.380	84.505	84.505	0.905
		MESH	1.00	0.937	2	0.445	11.133	95.637	0.968
		PD	1.00	0.682	3	0.134	3.342	98.980	-0.826
		SHDI	1.00	0.942	4	0.041	1.020	100.000	-0.971
2000	0.778	CONTAG	1.00	0.835	1	3.416	85.399	85.399	0.914
		MESH	1.00	0.938	2	0.411	10.286	95.685	0.969
		PD	1.00	0.699	3	0.135	3.370	99.055	-0.836
		SHDI	1.00	0.943	4	0.038	0.945	100.000	-0.971
2015	0.758	CONTAG	1.00	0.794	1	3.317	82.937	82.937	0.891
		MESH	1.00	0.935	2	0.483	12.082	95.019	0.967
		PD	1.00	0.655	3	0.156	3.912	98.931	-0.809
		SHDI	1.00	0.934	4	0.043	1.069	100.000	-0.966

自回归模型	R²	LIK	AIC	SC	驱动因子	回归系数	Z值	P值
空间滞后模型	0.763	-69708	139429	139491	高程	-0.000095	-6.003210	0.000
					坡度	0.017500	16.859500	0.000
					坡向	-0.000163	-1.473480	0.141
					距建设用地距离	0.000013	7.766020	0.000
					距水域距离	-0.000003	-3.569110	0.000
空间误差模型	0.784	-68458	136928	136980	高程	0.002065	18.539400	0.000
					坡度	0.058957	27.233100	0.000
					坡向	-0.000140	-1.060340	0.289
					距建设用地距离	0.004669	40.491100	0.000
					距水域距离	-0.000087	-6.252210	0.000