喀斯特山区不同岩性分区下的景观生态质量差异——以罗甸县为例 

苏琪娇; 安裕伦; 马士彬; 赵 勇; 安家堃; 安宏锋

doi:10.11932/karst20170405

喀斯特山区不同岩性分区下的景观生态质量差异——以罗甸县为例 

doi: 10.11932/karst20170405

1.
清镇市大数据发展管理中心/贵州师范大学地理与环境科学学院/贵州省山地资源与环境遥感应用重点实验室
2.
贵州师范大学地理与环境科学学院/贵州省山地资源与环境遥感应用重点实验室
3.
贵州师范大学地理与环境科学学院/贵州省山地资源与环境遥感应用重点实验室/六盘水师范学院旅游与历史文化学院
4.
贵州省第二测绘院
5.
贵阳市第九中学
6.
贵州省环境监测中心站

基金项目: 黔科合计Z字[2015]4007;国家自然科学基金项目(41161002)；贵州省省长基金项目（黔省专合字(2011)46号）贵州省教育厅自然科学研究重点项目(黔教合KY字[2013]173号)；贵州省教育厅高校人文社会科学研究规划项目(14GH007)

计量
- 文章访问数: 1767
- HTML浏览量: 253
- PDF下载量: 1105
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 发布日期: 2017-08-25

Landscape ecological quality of different lithological regions in karst mountains:A case study in the Luodian county of Guizhou Province

1.
Qingzhen Big Data Development Management Center/School of Geographic and Environmental Science/Guizhou Mountain Resources and Environmental Remote Sensing Application Laboratory
2.
School of Geographic and Environmental Science/Guizhou Mountain Resources and Environmental Remote Sensing Application Laboratory
3.
School of Geographic and Environmental Science/Guizhou Mountain Resources and Environmental Remote Sensing Application Laboratory/Department of Journey and Historic Culture, Liupanshui Normal College
4.
The Second Surveying and Mapping Institute of Guizhou Province
5.
Guiyang City, the ninth Middle School
6.
Environmental Monitoring Center of Guizhou Province

摘要

摘要: 以贵州省罗甸县为例，获取岩性及2000、2005、2010和2015年4期景观格局分布等数据，从景观稳定程度和干扰程度视角对比分析了不同岩性分区的人为活动对景观生态质量变化的影响模式。研究表明：（1）利用景观稳定程度和干扰程度进行评价，能较好地反映不同岩性分区的景观生态质量差异；（2）非喀斯特区域的景观稳定程度高于亚喀斯特区域，典型喀斯特区域的景观稳定程度最低；（3）亚喀斯特区域的景观干扰程度高于非喀斯特区域，典型喀斯特区域受到的干扰最小；（4）非喀斯特区域的景观生态质量最好，亚喀斯特区域次之，典型喀斯特区域的景观生态质量较差；（5）2000—2015年，不同岩性分区下的景观生态质量变化呈现出不同趋势。典型喀斯特区域4期的景观生态质量分别为0.30、0.18、-0.24、-0.18，2000—2010年景观生态质量有所下降，但2010—2015年景观生态质量处于上升状态；亚喀斯特区域4期的景观生态质量分别0.55、0.17、0.32、-0.51，2000-2005年景观生态质量下降，而2005—2010年景观生态质量上升，2010-2015年景观生态质量又处于下降状态；非喀斯特区域4期的景观生态质量分别为0.66、0.38、0.27、-0.30，2000-2015年景观生态质量一直处于下降状态。受岩性及人类活动影响的亚喀斯特区域景观生态质量更为敏感。因此，在生态环境治理措施中应根据岩性的差异进行分区对待，更需关注亚喀斯特区域的景观生态质量。
- 景观生态质量 /
- 典型喀斯特区域 /
- 亚喀斯特区域 /
- 非喀斯特区域 /
- 罗甸县
Abstract: In order to reveal the characteristics of landscape patterns and landscape ecological quality of different lithological partitions in karst mountainous area, this paper takes Luodian county of Guizhou Province as a case through analysing the data of lithologies, landscape patterns and landscape distribution, obtained from the periods of 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015, respectively, with the intention of understanding the influence of human activities on landscape ecological quality. In the meantime, change of the landscape ecological quality was comparatively analyzed for different lithological partitions from the perspective of landscape stability and anthropogenic interference degree, which can be used to reflect the difference of landscape ecological quality in different lithological regions. The study shows that in general the landscape stability of non-karst region is higher than that of semi-karst region, while landscape stability of typical karst region is the lowest. Moreover, artificial disturbance on the landscape in semi-karst region is higher than that of non-karst region, while the disturbance degree in typical karst region is the lowest. As a result, landscape ecological quality of non-karst region is better than that of semi-karst region, whereas this quality in typical karst region is the worst. From 2000 to 2015, the landscape ecological quality tended to declines in different lithological areas. In typical karst region, this 4-period landscape ecological qualities were 0.30, 0.18, -0.24, and -0.18, respectively, which had an obvious decline between 2000 and 2010, but rose from 2010 to 2015. In semi-karst region, these ecological qualities were 0.55, 0.17, 0.32, and -0.51, respectively; they declined during this period except for years from 2005 to 2010 when they slightly rose. In non-karst region, however, the 4period values were 0.66, 0.38, 0.27, and -0.30, respectively, had been declining in the entire period since 2000. The landscape ecological qualities of semi-karst region are more susceptible to the influence of both lithology and human activity. Therefore, for ecological environment governance, measures should be taken as the basis of the differences of lithological regions where more attentions should be paid on the landscape ecological quality of semi-karst.
- landscape ecological quality /
- typical karst region /
- semi-karst region /
- non-karst region /
- Luodian county

HTML

参考文献(27)

[1]	伍光和,王乃昂,胡双熙,等.自然地理学(第四版)［M］.北京:高等教育出版社,2008:275-279.
[2]	杨明德.贵州喀斯特发育的一些特点.见:喀斯特研究-杨明德论文选集［C］.贵阳：贵州民族出版社,2003:1-20.
[3]	杨明德.贵州高原喀斯特地貌结构及演化规律.见:喀斯特研究-杨明德论文选集［C］.贵阳：贵州民族出版社, 2003:20-33.
[4]	安裕伦.喀斯特人地关系地域系统的结构与功能刍议［J］.中国岩溶,1994,13(2):153-159.
[5]	An Hongfeng, An Yulun, Yuan Shicong, et al. Change and simulation and prediction of the karst rocky desertification sensitivity in Guizhou province［J］. Agricultural Science & Technology, 2010, 11(1112): 155-161.
[6]	郭晓娜,苏维词,李强,等.基于GIS和RS的黔南喀斯特地区人居环境自然适应性评价［J］.中国岩溶，2016,35(2):218-225.
[7]	马士彬,张勇荣,安裕伦,等.山区城市土地利用动态空间分布特征：以贵州省六盘水为例［J］.自然资源学报,2012,27(3):489-496.
[8]	王培彬,安裕伦.2000-2010年贵州喀斯特地区石漠化时空特征分析［J］.贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版),2013,32(3):10-15.
[9]	马士彬,张勇荣,安裕伦.基于Logistic-CA-Markov模型的石漠化空间变化规律［J］.中国岩溶,2015,34(6):591-598.
[10]	胡锋,安裕伦,许璟.“亚喀斯特”概念与景观特征的初步探讨：以贵州为例［J］.地理研究,2015,34(8):1560-1580.
[11]	许璟,安裕伦,胡锋,等. 基于植被覆盖与生产力视角的亚喀斯特区域生态环境特征研究：以黔中部分地区为例［J］.地理研究,2015,34(4):644-654.
[12]	殷正宙.编制1∶400万喀斯特分区图的几点意见［J］.水文地质工质,1959, 8(6):15-16.
[13]	朱学稳.西藏高原喀斯特的性质及“残余峰林”质疑［J］.中国岩溶,1994,13(3): 220-228.
[14]	安裕伦,吕涛,熊康宁,等.“3S”在贵州喀斯特石漠化现状研究中的应用探讨.见:学术研讨会论文集［C］.北京:中国水利水电出版社,2001:144-152.
[15]	贺中华,杨胜天,梁虹,等.基于GIS和RS的喀斯特流域枯水资源影响因素识别：以贵州省为例［J］.中国岩溶，2004,23(1):48-55.
[16]	傅伯杰,陈利顶,马克明,等.景观生态学原理及应用(第二版)［M］.北京:科学出版社,2011:211-212.
[17]	朱永恒,濮励杰,赵春雨.景观生态质量评价研究：以吴江市为例［J］.地理科学,2007,27(2):182-187.
[18]	李猷,王仰麟,彭建,等.基于景观生态的城市土地利用适宜性评价：以丹东市为例［J］.生态学报,2010,30(8):2141-2150.
[19]	吴见,张艳,侯兰功.安徽省2000-2010年景观生态质量变化研究［J］.南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）,2015,39(2):84-90.
[20]	李大通.碳酸盐岩层的分类原则和确定类型的BASIC程序［J］.中国岩溶,1985,4(4):308-314.
[21]	Nusser M. Understanding cultural landscape transformation are photographic surveys in Chitral eastern Hindukush, Pakistan［J］.Landscape and Urban Planning,2001,57(3/4):241-255.
[22]	Marull J, Mallarach J M. A new GIS methodology for assessing and predicting landscape and ecological connectivity: applications to the metropolitan area of Barcelona (Catalonia Spain)［J］.Landscape and Urban Planning,2005,71: 243-262.
[23]	许洛源,黄义雄,叶功福,等.基于土地利用的景观生态质量评价：以福建省海坛岛为例［J］.水土保持研究，2011,18(2):208-212.
[24]	张菊梅.重庆北部绿地系统景观动态分析与格局优化［D］.重庆:西南大学,2009:1-57.
[25]	邬建国.景观生态学:格局、过程、尺度与等级(第二版)［M］.北京:高等教育出版社,2007:106-116.
[26]	谷晓坤,陈百明.土地整理景观生态评价方法及应用：以江汉平原土地整理项目为例［J］.中国土地科学,2008,22(12):58-62.
[27]	邵景安,李阳兵,王世杰,等.岩溶山区不同岩性和地貌类型下的景观斑块分布与多样性分析［J］.自然资源学报,2007,22(3):477-486.