潮沟对黄河三角洲湿地典型景观格局的影响

doi:10.31497/zrzyxb.20191202

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为揭示潮沟发育对黄河三角洲典型湿地景观类型空间分布格局的影响,通过对1989-2016年黄河三角洲7期遥感影像进行目视解译,在获取潮沟及湿地景观类型空间分布基础上,通过冗余分析识别影响黄河三角洲典型湿地景观特征的主要潮沟指标。结果表明：光滩面积占比的变化趋势与芦苇（Phragmites australis）、碱蓬（Suaeda salsa）相反;黄河三角洲北部区域湿地景观的斑块密度整体上大于南部,景观破碎化程度相对较高;RDA结果显示前两个排序轴能够解释潮沟发育指标与景观格局指数关系的85.7%,较好地反映了两者的相关关系;潮沟长度、数量、网络连通度和曲率对区域景观格局的影响程度较大;潮沟分维值对景观格局影响程度最小;潮沟长度、数量、分维值与芦苇和碱蓬的面积占比及斑块密度呈负相关关系,与光滩面积占比呈正相关关系。

关键词: 潮沟发育, 景观格局, 冗余分析, 黄河三角洲

Abstract:

Tidal channels play important roles in governing landscape succession in the estuary areas. In the present work, tidal channels and landscapes types of the Yellow River Delta (YRD) were extracted by visual interpretation based on remote sensing images combined with field investigation during 1989-2016, aiming to decipher effects of tidal channel development on Phragmites australis, Suaeda salsa and mudflats in the last 20 years through Redundancy Analysis (RDA). Results indicated that area ratio of mudflats was in the fluctuation of increase and decrease during the past 20 years, and the change trend is opposite to that of Phragmites australis and Suaeda salsa. Patch density was larger in the Northern YRD than that in the Southern YRD, and fragmentation is relatively high. RDA analysis showed that the first two sequence axes could explain about 85.7% variations of landscape indexes, which better reflected the correlation between the two. Length, number, network connectivity and curvature had greater effects on landscape features; the effect of fractal dimension was the smallest. Length, number, and fractal dimension were negatively correlated with the area ratio and patch density of Phragmites australis and Suaeda salsa while they were positively correlated with the area ratio of mudflats.

Key words: tidal channels, landscapes, RDA, Yellow River Delta

于小娟, 薛振山, 张仲胜, 宋晓林, 张红日. 潮沟对黄河三角洲湿地典型景观格局的影响[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(12): 2504-2515.

YU Xiao-juan, XUE Zhen-shan, ZHANG Zhong-sheng, SONG Xiao-lin, ZHANG Hong-ri. Impacts of tidal channels on typical landscapes of wetland in the Yellow River Delta[J]. JOURNAL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 2019, 34(12): 2504-2515.

图/表 8

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

表3

表4

图4

参考文献 32

[1]	VANDENBRUWAENE W, MEIRE P, TEMMERMAN S.Formation and evolution of a tidal channel network within a constructed tidal marsh. Geomorphology, 2012, 151: 114-125.
[2]	吕亭豫, 龚政, 张长宽, 等. 粉砂淤泥质潮滩潮沟形态特征及发育演变过程研究现状. 河海大学学报: 自然科学版, 2016, 44(2): 178-188.
	[LYU T Y, GONG Z, ZHANG C K, et al.Reviews of morphological characteristics andevolution processes of silty mud tidal creeks. Journal of Hohai University: Natural Sciences, 2016, 44(2): 178-188.]
[3]	TEAL J M.Energy flow in the salt marsh ecosystem of Georgia. Ecology, 1962, 43(4): 614-624.
[4]	陈勇, 何中发, 黎兵, 等. 崇明东滩潮沟发育特征及其影响因素定量分析. 吉林大学学报: 地球科学版, 2013, 43(1): 212-219.
	[CHEN Y, HE Z F, LI B, et al.Spatial distribution of tidal creeks and quantitative analysis of its driving factors in Chongming Dongtan, Shanghai. Journal of Jilin University: Earth Science Edition, 2013, 43(1): 212-219.]
[5]	崔保山, 蔡燕子, 谢湉, 等. 湿地水文连通的生态效应研究进展及发展趋势. 北京师范大学学报: 自然科学版, 2016, 52(6): 738-746.
	[CUI B S, CAI Y Z, XIE T, et al.Ecological effects of wetland hydrological connectivity: Problems and prospects. Journal of Beijing Normal University: Natural Science, 2016, 52(6): 738-746.]
[6]	KEARNEY W S, FAGHERAZZI S.Salt marsh vegetation promotes efficient tidal channel networks. Nature Communications, 2016: 7.
[7]	陈秀芝, 郭水良, 朱莉莉, 等. 长江口九段沙不同等级潮沟附近主要植物种群的分布格局. 湿地科学, 2011, 9(1): 52-60.
	[CHEN X Z, GUO S L, ZHU L L, et al.Distribution pattern of main plant populations around tidal creeks in different grades in the Jiuduansha shoals in the Mouth of Yangtze River. Wetland Science, 2011, 9(1): 52-60.]
[8]	邵虚生. 潮沟成因类型及其影响因素的探讨. 地理学报, 1988, 43(1): 35-43.
	[SHAO X S.Genetics classification of tidal creek and factors affecting its development. Acta Geographica Sinica, 1988, 43(1): 35-43.]
[9]	郑宗生, 周云轩, 田波, 等. 植被对潮沟发育影响的遥感研究: 以崇明东滩为例. 国土资源遥感, 2014, 26(3): 117-124.
	[ZHENG Z S, ZHOU Y X, TIAN B, et al.Effects of vegetation on the dynamic of tidal creeks based on quantitative satellite remote sensing: A case study of Dongtan in Chongming. Remote Sensing for Land and Resources, 2014, 26(3): 117-124.]
[10]	宁立新, 周云凯, 白秀玲, 等. 鄱阳湖区景观格局季相变化及其优化调控研究. 自然资源学报, 2018, 33(3): 439-453.
	[NING L X, ZHOU Y K, BAI X L, et al.Research on the seasonal variations and optimization of landscape pattern in Poyang Lake region, China. Journal of Natural Resources, 2018, 33(3): 439-453.]
[11]	白军红, 欧阳华, 杨志锋, 等. 湿地景观格局变化研究进展. 地理科学进展, 2005, 24(4): 36-45.
	[BAI J H, OUYANG H, YANG Z F, et al.Changes in wetland landscape patterns: A review. Progress in Geography, 2005, 24(4): 36-45.]
[12]	徐晓龙, 王新军, 朱新萍, 等. 1996-2015年巴音布鲁克天鹅湖高寒湿地景观格局演变分析. 自然资源学报, 2018, 33(11): 1897-1911.
	[XU X L, WANG X J, ZHU X P, et al.Landscape pattern changes in alpine wetland of Bayanbulak Swan Lake during 1996-2015. Journal of Natural Resources, 2018, 33(11): 1897-1911.]
[13]	陈建, 王世岩, 毛战坡. 1976-2008年黄河三角洲湿地变化的遥感监测. 地理科学进展, 2011, 30(5): 585-592.
	[CHEN J, WANG S Y, MAO Z P.Monitoring wetland changes in Yellow River Delta by remote sensing during 1976-2008. Progress in Geography, 2011, 30(5): 585-592.]
[14]	王永丽, 于君宝, 董洪芳, 等. 黄河三角洲滨海湿地的景观格局空间演变分析. 地理科学, 2012, 32(6): 717-724.
	[WANG Y L, YU J B, DONG H F, et al.Spatial evolution of landscape pattern of coastal wetlands in Yellow River Delta. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2012, 32(6): 717-724.]
[15]	韩美, 张翠, 路广, 等. 黄河三角洲人类活动强度的湿地景观格局梯度响应. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(6): 265-274.
	[HAN M, ZHANG C, LU G, et al.Response of wetland landscape pattern gradient to human activity intensity in Yellow River Delta. Transactions of the CSAE, 2017, 33(6): 265-274.]
[16]	吴晶晶, 栗云召, 于良巨, 等. 黄河三角洲自然湿地景观连接度动态变化及其驱动因素分析. 生态环境学报, 2018, 27(1): 71-78.
	[WU J J, LI Y Z, YU L J, et al.Dynamic changes and driving factors of landscape connectivity for natural wetland in Yellow River Delta. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2018, 27(1): 71-78.]
[17]	MARANI M, BELLUCO E, D'ALPAOS A, et al. On the drainage density of tidal networks. Water Resources Research, 2003, 39(2): 5029-5035.
[18]	时海东, 沈永明, 康敏. 江苏中部海岸潮沟形态对滩涂围垦的响应. 海洋学报, 2016, 38(1): 106-115.
	[SHI H D, SHEN Y M, KANG M.Rapid response of tidal creek network patterns to the reclaimation on the central Jiangsu coast. Acta Oceanologica Sinica, 2016, 38(1): 106-115.]
[19]	HORTON R E.Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: Hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Journal of the Japanese Forestry Society, 1945, 56(3): 275-370.
[20]	吴德力, 沈永明, 方仁建. 江苏中部海岸潮沟的形态变化特征. 地理学报, 2013, 68(7): 955-965.
	[WU D L, SHEN Y M, FANG R J.A morphological analysis of tidal creek network patterns on the central Jiangsu coast. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2013, 68(7): 955-965.]
[21]	孙效功, 赵海虹, 崔承琦. 黄河三角洲潮滩潮沟体系的分维特征. 海洋与湖沼, 2001, 32(1): 74-80.
	[SUN X G, ZHAO H H, CUI C Q.The fractal characteristics of tidal flat and tidal creek system in the Huanghe River Delta. Oceanologia et Limnologia Sinica, 2001, 32(1): 74-80.]
[22]	ANGELES G R, PERILLO G M E, PICCOLO M C, et al. Fractal analysis of tidal channels in the Bahı́a Blanca estuary (Argentina). Geomorphology, 2004, 57(3): 263-274.
[23]	冯平, 冯焱. 河流形态特征的分维计算方法. 地理学报, 1997, 52(4): 324-330.
	[FENG P, FENG Y.Calculation on fractal dimension of river morphology. Acta Geographica Sinica, 1997, 52(4): 324-330.]
[24]	卢涛, 马克明, 傅伯杰, 等. 三江平原沟渠网络结构对区域景观格局的影响. 生态学报, 2008, 28(6): 2746-2752.
	[LU T, MA K M, FU B J, et al.Effects of ditch network structure on landscape pattern in the Sanjiang Plain, Northeast China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(6): 2746-2752.]
[25]	COOK E A.Landscape structure indices for assessing urban ecological networks. Landscape & Urban Planning, 2002, 58(2): 269-280.
[26]	王云才. 上海市城市景观生态网络连接度评价. 地理研究, 2009, 28(2): 284-292.
	[WANG Y C.The connectivity evaluation of Shanghai urban landscape eco-network. Geographical Research, 2009, 28(2): 284-292.]
[27]	谷源泽, 姜明星, 徐丛亮, 等. 黄河口清8出汊工程的作用及对河口演变的影响. 泥沙研究, 2000, (5): 57-61.
	[GU Y Z, JIANG M X, XU C L, et al.The impact on the project of the Yellow River estuary Qing8 and its infuence on estuary evolution. Journal of Sediment Research, 2000, (5): 57-61.]
[28]	杨俊芳, 马毅, 任广波, 等. 基于国产高分卫星遥感数据的现代黄河三角洲入侵植物互花米草监测方法. 海洋环境科学, 2017, 36(4): 596-602.
	[YANG J F, MA Y, REN G B, et al.Monitoring method of invasive vegetation Spartina alterniflora in modern Yellow River Delta based on remote sensing data. Marine Environmental Science, 2017, 36(4): 596-602.]
[29]	李敏, 刘帅帅, 徐飞. 黄河三角洲芦苇—碱蓬群落结构和功能对3种人为干扰的响应. 湿地科学, 2017, 15(1): 92-98.
	[LI M, LIU S S, XU F.Response of structure and functions of Comm. Phragmites australis+Suaeda salsa in Yellow River Delta to 3 kinds of human-caused disturbances. Wetland Science, 2017, 15(1): 92-98.]
[30]	黄海军, 刘艳霞, 樊辉, 等. 黄河清8出汊河口泥沙异重流特征及其时空分布. 海洋与湖沼, 2008, 39(1): 90-96.
	[HUANG H J, LIU Y X, FAN H, et al.Spatial-temporal change of density current at new outlet of the Huanghe (Yellow) River. Oceanologia et Limnologia Sinica, 2008, 39(1): 90-96.]
[31]	徐国宾, 张金良, 练继建. 黄河调水调沙对下游河道的影响分析. 水科学进展, 2005, 16(4): 518-523.
	[XU G B, ZHANG J L, LIAN J J.Effect of water-sediment regulation of the Yellow River on the lower reach. Advances in Water Science, 2005, 16(4): 518-523.]
[32]	李建国, 杨德明, 胡克, 等. 盘锦市红海滩碱蓬空间特征研究. 吉林大学学报: 地球科学版, 2006, 36(s1): 113-117.
	[LI J G, YANG D M, HU K, et al.Study onhetroptera kitag spatial characteristics in Honghai beach of Panjin city. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition), 2006, 36(s1): 113-117.]

		1989年	1992年	1998年	2003年	2009年	2012年	2016年
潮沟	类型	SPOT1	SPOT2	SPOT4	SPOT4	SPOT4	SPOT4	OLI
潮沟	时间	08-08	02-05	04-25	10-18	12-07	05-01	08-26
景观类型	类型	TM	TM	TM	ETM	ETM	ETM	OLI
景观类型	时间	10-03	08-24	09-10	08-31	09-31	08-23	08-26

景观格局指数	缩写	应用尺度	描述	单位
斑块面积比	PLAND	斑块	反映某一斑块类型面积占整个景观面积的百分比,其值越大,则表明该斑块类型越多,为优势斑块类型	%
斑块密度	PD	斑块/景观	反映景观破碎化程度,斑块密度越大,则斑块越小,斑块数量越多,景观破碎化程度越高	个/km²
周长—面积分维数	PAFRAC	景观	反映景观形状的复杂度（1~2）,值越接近于1,则表明该景观斑块形状越简单,而越接近于2,则表明景观的斑块形状越不规则,斑块周边越复杂	—

	年份	L	N	d	f	c	D	α	β	γ
YRD_N	1989	172.216	90	1.373	0.718	1.173	1.041	0.137	1.250	0.429
	1992	199.961	83	1.154	0.479	1.121	1.038	0.113	1.203	0.413
	1998	66.237	33	0.806	0.402	1.199	1.028	0.308	1.500	0.550
	2003	75.055	46	0.954	0.585	1.165	1.034	0.230	1.394	0.495
	2009	73.671	45	0.820	0.501	1.226	1.023	0.321	1.552	0.556
	2012	52.070	34	0.612	0.400	1.178	1.008	0.485	1.789	0.667
	2016	81.071	61	0.998	0.751	1.185	1.049	0.293	1.525	0.535
YRD_S	1989	328.365	186	1.381	0.782	1.126	1.053	0.044	1.081	0.365
	1992	332.911	166	1.409	0.703	1.179	1.044	0.032	1.057	0.357
	1998	361.911	200	0.880	0.486	1.119	1.040	0.107	1.205	0.407
	2003	549.334	381	1.408	0.977	1.124	1.085	0.009	1.016	0.340
	2009	337.553	2267	0.883	0.594	1.131	1.049	0.121	1.234	0.416
	2012	348.682	240	0.856	0.589	1.130	1.051	0.119	1.231	0.415
	2016	339.779	260	0.947	0.725	1.129	1.060	0.111	1.215	0.409

	SPX1	SPX2
特征值	0.527	0.097
物种—环境相关性	0.894	0.917
物种—环境变异累计百分比/%	72.3	85.7
前两轴相关性	0.0214