内蒙古黄河流域1990—2020年生境质量评估

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2024.04.13

干旱区研究 ›› 2024, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4): 674-683.doi: 10.13866/j.azr.2024.04.13 cstr: 32277.14.j.azr.2024.04.13

内蒙古黄河流域1990—2020年生境质量评估

刘如龙¹^,²(), 赵媛媛¹(), 陈国清², 迟文峰³, 刘正佳⁴

1.北京林业大学水土保持学院，北京 100083
2.内蒙古农业大学沙漠治理学院，内蒙古呼和浩特 010018
3.内蒙古财经大学资源与环境经济学院，内蒙古呼和浩特 010070
4.中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所，北京 100101

收稿日期:2023-11-04 修回日期:2024-01-16 出版日期:2024-04-15 发布日期:2024-04-26
通讯作者: 赵媛媛. E-mail: yuanyuan0402@bjfu.edu.cn
作者简介:刘如龙（2003-），男，硕士研究生，主要从事生态系统服务研究. E-mail: 1492904739@qq.com
基金资助:
中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(PTYX202324)

Assessment of habitat quality in the Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia from 1990 to 2020

LIU Rulong¹^,²(), ZHAO Yuanyuan¹(), CHEN Guoqing², CHI Wenfeng³, LIU Zhengjia⁴

1. College of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
2. College of Desert Science and Engineering, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010018, Inner Mongolia, China
3. College of Resources and Environmental Economics, Inner Mongolia University of Finance and Economics, Hohhot 010070, Inner Mongolia, China
4. Institute of Geographical Sciences and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China

Received:2023-11-04 Revised:2024-01-16 Published:2024-04-15 Online:2024-04-26

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

内蒙古黄河流域是中国重要的生态区域，探究其生境质量变化能够为区域生态环境保护提供重要基础信息。本研究基于1990—2020年土地利用/覆盖数据，采用InVEST模型和地理探测器分析方法，揭示内蒙古黄河流域生境质量时空格局及其驱动力。结果表明：（1）内蒙古黄河流域生境质量总体呈现北低南高的空间分布格局，具有显著的空间聚集性。生境质量等级为低的区域面积占比为23.50%，主要分布在库布齐沙漠以及研究区东南部；（2） 1990—2020年，研究区生境质量呈现先降低后小幅回升的变化趋势。生境质量退化的区域面积占比为11.97%，主要集中在研究区北部和黄河两岸附近，是耕地扩张和沙地分布区域；（3）地形、植被和土壤类型等自然因子是生境质量空间分异特征的主要驱动因子，任意两种进行交互探测的因子对生境质量空间分异的解释力都要大于其单一因子的解释力。建议未来生态治理和恢复工作应重点关注研究区北部生境质量发生退化的区域，研究结果可为区域生物多样性的保护和生态环境的恢复提供借鉴和参考。

关键词: InVEST模型, 生境质量, 空间自相关, 地理探测器, 黄河流域, 内蒙古

Abstract:

The Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia is an important ecological region in China. Exploring changes in habitat quality and their driving factors is important for regional desertification prevention and biodiversity conservation. Using land use/cover data from 1990 to 2020, GIS technology, and the InVEST model, the habitat quality of the region was assessed, and the driving factors of the spatial heterogeneity of habitat quality were analyzed using geographic detectors. The results indicated the following: (1) The overall spatial distribution pattern of habitat quality in the study area was low in the north and high in the south, with a positive spatial correlation and significant spatial clustering. Areas with low habitat quality, accounting for 23.50%, were mainly distributed in the Kubuqi Desert and the southeastern part of the study area. (2) From 1990 to 2020, the habitat quality in the Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia showed a trend of initial decrease and then a slight increase. Over the past 30 years, the area with degraded habitat quality, accounting for 11.97%, was mainly concentrated in the northern part of the study area and near the banks of the Yellow River. It is an area of cultivated land expansion and sandy land distribution, with significant human activity interference. Future research on ecological governance and restoration should focus on this area. (3) Natural factors such as DEM, NDVI, and soil type are the main driving factors for spatial differentiation of habitat quality. The interaction of any two determining factors has greater explanatory power for the spatial differentiation of habitat quality than the corresponding single factors. The study results provide reference and guidance for ecological environment protection and restoration research in the Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia.

Key words: InVEST model, habitat quality, spatial autocorrelation, geographic detectors, Yellow River Basin, Inner Mongolia

刘如龙, 赵媛媛, 陈国清, 迟文峰, 刘正佳. 内蒙古黄河流域1990—2020年生境质量评估[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(4): 674-683.

LIU Rulong, ZHAO Yuanyuan, CHEN Guoqing, CHI Wenfeng, LIU Zhengjia. Assessment of habitat quality in the Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia from 1990 to 2020[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2024, 41(4): 674-683.

图/表 10

图1

表1

表2

图2

图3

图4

图5

表3

表4

图6

参考文献 32

[1]	陆大道, 孙东琪. 黄河流域的综合治理与可持续发展[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(12): 2431-2436. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201912001
	[Lu Dadao, Sun Dongqi. Comprehensive management and sustainable development of the Yellow River Basin[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2019, 74(12): 2431-2436.] doi: 10.11821/dlxb201912001
[2]	冯琰玮, 甄江红. 黄河流域内蒙古段生态安全格局优化研究[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2022, 43(10): 129-138.
	[Feng Yanwei, Zhen Jianghong. Research on optimization of ecological security pattern in Inner Mongolia Section of the Yellow River Basin[J]. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 2022, 43(10): 129-138.]
[3]	Hall L S, Krausman P R, Morrison M L. The habitat concept and a plea for standard technology[J]. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 1997, 25(1). DOI: 10.230713783301.
[4]	杜峯屹, 陈松林, 蒲佳豪. 2000—2020年闽东南地区土地利用变化及生境质量时空演变[J]. 水土保持研究, 2023, 30(6): 345-356.
	[Du Fengyi, Chen Songlin, Pu Jiahao. Spatio-temporal evolution of land use change and habitat quality in southeastern Fujian from 2000 to 2020[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2023, 30(6): 345-356.]
[5]	Erik N, Heather S, Peter H, et al. Projecting global land-use change and its effect on ecosystem service provision and biodiversity with simple models[J]. Plos One, 2010, 5(12): e14327. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014327
[6]	Dai L, Li S, Lewis B J, et al. The influence of land use change on the spatial-temporal variability of habitat quality between 1990 and 2010 in Northeast China[J]. Journal of Forestry Research, 2019, 30(6): 251-260.
[7]	王志强, 陈志超, 郝成元. 基于HSI模型的扎龙国家级自然保护区丹顶鹤繁殖生境适宜性评价[J]. 湿地科学, 2009, 7(3): 197-201.
	[Wang Zhiqiang, Chen Zhichao, Hao Chengyuan. Habitat suitability evaluation of red-crowned crane breeding in Zhalong National Nature Reserve based on HSI model[J]. Wetland Science, 2009, 7(3): 197-201.]
[8]	白晓娟, 陈海, 刘迪, 等. 基于MaxEnt模型的生态系统服务需求及其簇的空间分异——以陕西省米脂县为例[J]. 生态学报, 2023, 43(7): 2745-2755.
	[Bai Xiaojuan, Chen Hai, Liu Di, et al. Ecosystem service demand and spatial differentiation of its clusters based on MaxEnt model: A case study of Mizhi County, Shaanxi Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2023, 43(7): 2745-2755.]
[9]	李亚楠, 多玲花, 张明. 基于CA-Markov和InVEST模型的土地利用格局与生境质量时空演变及预测——以江西省南昌市为例[J]. 水土保持研究, 2022, 29(2): 345-354.
	[Li Yanan, Duolinghua, Zhang Ming. The spatiotemporal evolution and prediction of land use pattern and habitat quality based on CA-Markov and InVEST models: A case study of Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province[J]. Research on Soil and Water Conservation, 2022, 29(2): 345-354.]
[10]	陈妍, 乔飞, 江磊. 基于InVEST模型的土地利用格局变化对区域尺度生境质量的影响研究——以北京为例[J]. 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 52(3): 553-562.
	[Chen Yan, Qiao Fei, Jiang Lei. Effects of land use pattern change on regional scale habitat quality based on invest model:A case study in Beijing[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2016, 52(3): 553-562.]
[11]	王琦琨, 武玮, 杨雪琪, 等. 陕西省生境质量时空演变及驱动机制分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(5): 1684-1694.
	[Wang Qikun, Wu Wei, Yang Xueqi, et al. Analysis of spatiotemporal evolution and driving mechanisms of habitat quality in Shaanxi Province[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(5): 1684-1694.]
[12]	Sallustio L, De Toni A, Strollo A, et al. Assessing habitat quality in relation to the spatial distribution of protected areas in Italy[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 201: 129. doi: S0301-4797(17)30613-8 pmid: 28651222
[13]	王鹏, 秦思彤, 胡慧蓉. 近30 a拉萨河流域土地利用变化和生境质量的时空演变特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(3): 492-503.
	[Wang Peng, Qin Sitong, Hu Huirong. The spatiotemporal evolution characteristics of land use change and habitat quality in the Lhasa River Basin over the past 30 years[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(3): 492-503.]
[14]	包玉斌, 刘康, 李婷, 等. 基于InVEST模型的土地利用变化对生境的影响——以陕西省黄河湿地自然保护区为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2015, 32(3): 622-629.
	[Bao Yubin, Liu Kang, Li Ting, et al. The impact of land use change on habitat based on the InVEST model: Taking the Yellow River Wetland Nature Reserve in Shaanxi Province as an example[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2015, 32(3): 622-629.]
[15]	李静, 李帅, 张英, 等. 2000—2020年黄河流域生物多样性维护功能时空变化及驱动分析[J]. 中国环境科学, 2023, 43(9): 4780-4790.
	[Li Jing, Li Shuai, Zhang Ying, et al. Analysis of spatiotemporal changes and driving forces of biodiversity maintenance function in the Yellow River Basin from 2000 to 2020[J]. China Environmental Science, 2023, 43(9): 4780-4790.]
[16]	陈实, 黄银兰, 金云翔. 退耕还林(草)工程实施前后黄河中游生境质量时空变化分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2023, 40(3): 456-468.
	[Chen Shi, Huang Yinlan, Jin Yunxiang. Analysis of spatiotemporal changes in habitat quality in the middle reaches of the Yellow River before and after the implementation of the Grain for Green (Grassland) Project[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2023, 40(3): 456-468.]
[17]	齐松, 董春, 卫东, 等. 基于InVEST模型的黄河干流沿岸生境质量时空变化研究[J]. 测绘科学, 2022, 47(8): 114-122.
	[Qi Song, Dong Chun, Wei Dong, et al. Study on the spatiotemporal changes of habitat quality along the Yellow River mainstream based on the InVEST model[J]. Science of Surveying and Mapping, 2022, 47(8): 114-122.]
[18]	徐新良, 刘纪远, 张树文, 等. 中国多时期土地利用土地覆被遥感监测数据集(CNLUCC)[DB/OL]. http://www.resdc.cn. [2023-3-25].
	[Xu Xinliang, Liu Jiyuan, Zhang Shuwen, et al. China multi-period land use land cover remote sensing monitoring data set[DB/OL]. http://www.resdc.cn. [2023-3-25]. ]
[19]	陈乐, 卫伟. 西北旱区典型流域土地利用与生境质量的时空演变特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(9): 1909-1918. doi: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2022.09.022
	[Chen Le, Wei Wei. The spatiotemporal evolution characteristics of land use and habitat quality in typical arid watersheds in Northwest China[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(9): 1909-1918.]
[20]	奥勇, 蒋嶺峰, 白召弟, 等. 基于格网GIS的黄河流域土地生态质量综合评价[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(1): 164-175.
	[Ao Yong, Jiang Lingfeng, Bai Zhaodi, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of land ecological quality in the Yellow River Basin based on grid GIS[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(1): 164-175.]
[21]	李亚娇, 沈昞昕, 李家科, 等. 丹汉江流域生境质量对景观格局变化响应[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2022, 45(5): 206-216.
	[Li Yajiao, Shen Bingxin, Li Jiake, et al. The response of habitat quality to landscape pattern changes in the Danhan River Basin[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2022, 45(5): 206-216.]
[22]	Wang J F, Li X H, Christakos G, et al. Geographical detectors- based health risk assessment and its application in the neural tube defects study of the Heshun Region, China[J]. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 2010, 24(1): 107-127. doi: 10.1080/13658810802443457
[23]	王劲峰, 徐成东. 地理探测器:原理与展望[J]. 地理学报, 2017, 72(1): 116-134. doi: 10.11821/dlxb201701010
	[Wang Jinfeng, Xu Chengdong. Geographic detectors: Principles and prospects[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2017, 72(1): 116-134.] doi: 10.11821/dlxb201701010
[24]	John J, Chithra N R, Thampi S G. Prediction of land use/cover change in the Bharathapuzha river basin, India using geospatial techniques[J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2019, 191(6): 1-15. doi: 10.1007/s10661-018-7122-4
[25]	雷金睿, 陈毅青, 陈宗铸, 等. 基于InVEST模型的海南岛三大流域生境质量时空演变[J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(9): 2511-2520. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202209.019
	[Lei Jinrui, Chen Yiqing, Chen Zongzhu, et al. Spatio-temporal evolution of habitat quality in three major watersheds of Hainan Island based on InVEST model[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2022, 33(9): 2511-2520.] doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202209.019
[26]	Ma Libang, Bo Jie, Li Xiaoyang, et al. Identifying key landscape pattern indices influencing the ecological security of inland river basin: The middle and lower reaches of Shule River Basin as an example[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 674: 424-438. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.107
[27]	田雅楠, 马龙, 吴全. 黄河流域内蒙古段土地利用演变与景观生态风险评价[J]. 生态科学, 2023, 42(5): 103-113.
	[Tian Yanan, Ma Long, Wu Quan. Land use evolution and landscape ecological risk assessment in Inner Mongolia section of the Yellow River Basin[J]. Ecological Science, 2023, 42(5): 103-113.]
[28]	Terrado M, Sabater S, Chaplin-Kramer B, et al. Model development for the assessment of terrestrial and aquatic habitat quality in conservation planning[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2016, 540: 63-70. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.064
[29]	Song S, Liu Z, He C, et al. Evaluating the effects of urban expansion on natural habitat quality by coupling localized shared socioeconomic pathways and the land use scenario dynamics-urban model[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2020, 112: 106071. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106071
[30]	杨永, 李瑞红, 刘航, 等. 东北农林交错区生境质量时空演变及归因分析[J/OL]. 生态学杂志, 2023-11-24.
	[Yang Yong, Li Ruihong, Liu Hang, et al. The spatiotemporal evolution and attribution analysis of habitat quality in the agricultural and forestry transitional zone of Northeast China[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2023-11-24. ]
[31]	施智勇, 谢慧黎, 王圳峰, 等. 基于参数最优地理探测器的福州市生境质量时空格局与驱动力分析[J]. 环境工程技术学报, 2023, 13(5): 1921-1930.
	[Shi Zhiyong, Xie Huili, Wang Zhenfeng, et al. Analysis of spatiotemporal patterns and driving forces of habitat quality in Fuzhou city based on parameter optimal geographic detectors[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology, 2023, 13(5): 1921-1930.]
[32]	苏军德, 赵晓冏, 李国霞, 等. 祁连山国家自然保护区生境质量时空特征及驱动因素分析[J/OL]. 中国环境科学, 2023-12-12.
	[Su Junde, Zhao Xiaojiong, Li Guoxia, et al. Analysis of spatiotemporal characteristics and driving factors of habitat quality in Qilian Mountain National Nature Reserve[J/OL]. China Environmental Science, 2023-12-12. ]

威胁因子	影响范围	权重
工矿用地	9	0.9
旱地	5	0.6
城镇用地	10	1
农村居民点	7	0.7

土地利用/ 覆盖类型	生境适宜度	旱地	城镇用地	农村居民点	工矿用地
水田	0.4	0.3	0.5	0.4	0.5
旱地	0.3	0	0.5	0.4	0.5
有林地	1	0.8	0.9	0.8	0.8
灌木林地	0.9	0.4	0.8	0.7	0.7
疏林地	0.8	0.85	0.9	0.8	0.8
其他林地	0.7	0.9	0.9	0.8	0.8
高覆盖度草地	0.9	0.4	0.6	0.5	0.6
中覆盖度草地	0.8	0.45	0.65	0.55	0.65
低覆盖度草地	0.7	0.5	0.7	0.6	0.7
河渠	0.9	0.65	0.85	0.75	0.8
湖泊	1	0.7	0.9	0.8	0.7
水库坑塘	0.8	0.7	0.9	0.8	0.7
永久性冰川雪地	1	0.7	0.85	0.75	0.7
滩涂	0.6	0.75	0.95	0.8	0.7
滩地	0.6	0.75	0.95	0.8	0.7
盐碱地	0.2	0.1	0.3	0.2	0.3
沼泽地	0.6	0.7	0.8	0.75	0.6

生境变化	面积/占比	1990—2000年	2000—2010年	2010—2020年	1990—2020年
改善	面积/km²	11195.46	5921.04	4730.17	15036.66
改善	占比/%	7.49	3.96	3.16	10.06
不变	面积/km²	127369.62	134776.40	140207.41	116595.53
不变	占比/%	85.17	90.03	93.68	77.97
退化	面积/km²	10983.78	9005.57	4730.53	17905.67
退化	占比/%	7.34	6.02	3.16	11.97

内蒙古黄河流域1990—2020年生境质量评估

Assessment of habitat quality in the Yellow River Basin in Inner Mongolia from 1990 to 2020

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 32

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	袁征, 张志高, 闫瑾, 刘嘉毅, 胡柱钰, 王赟, 蔡茂堂. 1960—2020年黄河流域不同等级降水时空特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(8): 1259-1271.
[2]	吴思源, 郝利娜. 2001—2021年黄河流域植被覆盖变化及其驱动因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(8): 1373-1384.
[3]	张宏伟, 别强, 石莹, 苏晓杰, 李欣璋. 黄河流域上游植被覆盖变化特征及其影响因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(8): 1385-1394.
[4]	吴朝巧, 林菲, 牛俊杰, 耿甜伟. 山西中部城市群生态系统服务对土地利用格局变化的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(7): 1153-1166.
[5]	刘鑫, 王利群, 李昊然, 李永红, 乔文光, 李丽娟, 王晨旭. 基于“服务重要性-生态敏感性-生物多样性”的内蒙古生态网络识别及优化[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(7): 1207-1216.
[6]	李冰洁, 范志韬, 曲芷程, 姚顺予, 宿夏姝, 刘东伟, 王立新. 基于InVEST-PLUS模型的黄河流域内蒙古段生态系统碳储量评价及预测[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(7): 1217-1227.
[7]	张顺鑫, 吴子豪, 闫庆武, 李桂娥, 牟守国. 基于PLUS-InVEST模型的天山北坡生态系统碳储量时空变化与预测[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(7): 1228-1237.
[8]	侯嘉烨, 李建华, 王佳蓉, 马海涛, 强泽楷, 樊新刚. 基于SA-RSEI模型的盐池县生态质量演变研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(6): 1045-1058.
[9]	唐可欣, 郭建斌, 何亮, 陈林, 万龙. 中国旱区GPP时空演变特征及影响因素研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(6): 964-973.
[10]	叶虎, 裴浩, 姜艳丰, 那庆, 张立伟. 内蒙古半干旱区气溶胶散射特性及影响因素[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(5): 730-741.
[11]	赵立超, 张成福, 贺帅, 苗林, 冯霜, 潘思涵. 复杂山区地表温度模拟及影响——以内蒙古大青山为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(5): 765-775.
[12]	高雅玉, 宋玉, 赵廷红, 高金芳, 何文博, 李泽霞. 马莲河下游产水量时空演变特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(5): 776-787.
[13]	李文秀, 燕振刚. 基于地理探测器的甘肃农牧交错带土地利用时空演化及其驱动机制[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(4): 590-602.
[14]	裴志林, 曹晓娟, 王冬, 李迪, 王鑫, 白艾原. 内蒙古植被覆盖时空变化特征及其对人类活动的响应[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(4): 629-638.
[15]	王鑫, 海山. 基于能值分析的典型农牧交错带可持续发展规模研究——以内蒙古乌兰察布市为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2024, 41(4): 706-715.