基于多时相遥感数据的乌鲁木齐市生态安全格局构建

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2022.473

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

构建生态安全格局可促进区域生态发展，对于生态脆弱区的环境改善显得尤为重要。以乌鲁木齐市2000、2010年和2020年3期土地利用数据为基础，通过生态系统服务重要性和生态敏感性评价识别了生态源地，借助最小累积阻力（MCR）模型提取了生态廊道，利用电路理论确定了生态夹点，最终采用阻力阈值法构建了生态安全空间并明确了高警戒修复区。结果表明：（1）近20 a，生态源地面积呈增加趋势，共计445.63 km²，占比增加3.19%，新增生态源地主要分布于研究区西南和东部的乌鲁木齐县和达坂城区。（2）识别3期生态廊道总数分别为27条、30条和40条，总长度分别为870.42 km、1115.83 km和1277.12 km。（3）近20 a，研究区5个等级生态安全空间分布具有不均衡性。高生态安全空间集中分布于研究区东北部和西南部，较高生态安全空间集中分布于高生态安全空间外围，且相对集中于中部，二者空间分布呈持续扩张趋势。中等生态安全的空间分布呈西北—东南走向条带状，较低态安全空间集中分布于研究区西北部及东南部，低生态安全空间则主要集中分布于北部，且在南部有较少分布，三者空间分布皆呈不断减少趋势。（4）研究区生态夹点7个，高警戒修复区188.17 km²，修复后最大累积电流由值4.75 A降至3.82 A。

关键词: 多时相遥感数据, 最小累积阻力模型, 电路理论, 生态安全格局, 乌鲁木齐市

Abstract:

An ecological security pattern can promote regional ecological development and be highly beneficial for preserving ecologically fragile areas. Urumqi of Xinjiang, China, is a typical oasis city in an arid area. In an era of rapid development of industrialization and urbanization, because of the topographical and geological limitations and uneven spatial distribution of water and soil resources, the trade-off between regional agricultural development, ecological protection, and urbanization development is a concern. Therefore, the development of an effective method for the analysis of the temporal and spatial evolution of ecological security patterns is critical. In this study, the principle of “ecological source identification-resistance surface construction-ecological corridor extraction” was used. Based on these factors and the evaluation of the importance of ecosystem services and ecological sensitivity, the land use data of Urumqi in 2000, 2010, and 2020 were used to identify the ecological source. Next, the ecological corridors were extracted using the minimum cumulative resistance model. Furthermore, ecological pinch points were determined using the circuit theory. Finally, the resistance threshold method was used to develop the ecological security space and define the high alert restoration area. The results revealed the following: (1) In recent 20 years, the area of ecological source areas has increased considerably, and its area of 445.63 km² was more than 3.19% of the study area. The newly increased ecological source areas were distributed in Urumqi County and Dabancheng District in the southwest and east of the study area. (2) In the three periods, 27, 30, and 40 ecological corridors with a total length of 870.42 km, 1115.83 km, and 1277.12 km, respectively, were identified. (3) The spatial distribution of the five levels of ecological security in the study area was uneven. The northeast, southwest, and periphery regions of the study area had a concentration of high ecological security spaces, whereas the middle region had a moderate concentration. The two spatial distributions revealed a continuous expansion trend. The medium ecological security space showed zonal distribution from northwest to southeast in the study area, whereas low ecological security space was concentrated in the north and sparse in the south. The spatial distribution of the three space types exhibited a decreasing trend. (4) Seven ecological pinch points were observed in the study area. The areas of high alert repaired were 188.17 km². The maximum accumulated current was reduced from 4.75 A to 3.82 A after restoration. The results can effectively coordinate the contradictory relationship between economic development and ecological protection in the study area. The results of the study can provide a scientific foundation and support the territory development plan for optimizing ecological civilization construction.

Key words: multi-temporal remote sensing data, minimum cumulative resistance model, circuit theory, ecological security pattern, Urumqi City

田柳兰, 王珊珊, 毋兆鹏. 基于多时相遥感数据的乌鲁木齐市生态安全格局构建[J]. 干旱区地理, 2023, 46(7): 1155-1165.

TIAN Liulan, WANG Shanshan, WU Zhaopeng. Construction of ecological security pattern in Urumqi based on multi-temporal remote sensing data[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2023, 46(7): 1155-1165.

图/表 10

图1

表1

图2

表2

表3

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 28

[1]	李航鹤, 马腾辉, 王坤, 等. 基于最小累积阻力模型(MCR)和空间主成分分析法(SPCA)的沛县北部生态安全格局构建研究[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2020, 36(8): 1036-1045.
	[Li Hanghe, Ma Tenghui, Wang Kun, et al. Construction of ecological security pattern in northern Peixian based on MCR and SPCA[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 2020, 36(8): 1036-1045.]
[2]	王根绪, 程国栋, 钱鞠. 生态安全评价研究中的若干问题[J]. 应用生态学报, 2003, 14(9): 1551-1556. pmid: 14733019
	[Wang Genxu, Cheng Guodong, Qian Ju. Several problems in ecological security assessment research[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(9): 1551-1556.] pmid: 14733019
[3]	朱强, 俞孔坚, 李迪华. 景观规划中的生态廊道宽度[J]. 生态学报, 2005, 35(9): 2406-2412.
	[Zhu Qiang, Yu Kongjian, Li Dihua. The width of ecological corridor in landscape planning[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2005, 35(9): 2406-2412.]
[4]	何子张, 施艳琦, 林云萍, 等. 面向规划统筹的厦门国土空间生态修复规划探索[J]. 规划师, 2020, 36(17): 13-19.
	[He Zizhang, Shi Yanqi, Lin Yunping, et al. Planning integration oriented Xiamen land and space ecological restoration planning[J]. Planners, 2020, 36(17): 13-19.]
[5]	Yu K J. Security patterns and surface model in landscape ecological planning[J]. Landscape & Urban Planning, 1996, 36(1): 1-17.
[6]	蒙吉军, 燕群, 向芸芸. 鄂尔多斯土地利用生态安全格局优化及方案评价[J]. 中国沙漠, 2014, 34(2): 590-596. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00352
	[Meng Jijun, Yan Qun, Xiang Yunyun. The optimization of ecological security pattern based on land use and assessment of schemes in Ordos, Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2014, 34(2): 590-596.] doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2013.00352
[7]	薛强, 路路, 牛韧, 等. 基于地质灾害敏感性的生态安全格局关键区识别与修复——以济南市为例[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(22): 9050-9063.
	[Xue Qiang, Niu Ren, et al. Identification and restoration of key areas of ecological security pattern based on sensitivity to geological disasters: A case study of Jinan City[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(22): 9050-9063.]
[8]	付凤杰, 刘珍环, 刘海. 基于生态安全格局的国土空间生态修复关键区域识别——以贺州市为例[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(9): 3406-3414.
	[Fu Fengjie, Liu Zhenhuan, Liu Hai. Identifying key areas of ecosystem restoration for territorial space based on ecological security pattern: A case study in Hezhou City[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(9): 3406-3414.]
[9]	刘顺鑫, 黄云. “三生空间”视角下万州区景观生态安全评价及其耦合特征分析[J]. 水土保持研究, 2020, 27(6): 308-316.
	[Liu Shunxin, Huang Yun. Valuation and coupling coordination analysis of landscape ecological security of Wanzhou district from the perspective of production-life-ecological space[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 27(6): 308-316.]
[10]	刘晓阳, 曾坚, 贾梦圆, 等. 闽三角城市群生态安全格局构建及城镇扩展模拟[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(21): 7873-7885.
	[Liu Xiaoyang, Zeng Jian, Jia Mengyuan, et al. Construction of ecological security pattern and simulation of urban sprawl in the urban agglomeration of Min Delta[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(21): 7873-7885.]
[11]	吴金华, 刘思雨, 白帅. 基于景观生态安全的神木市生态廊道识别与优化[J]. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(4): 1120-1127.
	[Wu Jinhua, Liu Siyu, Bai Shuai. Identification and optimization of ecological corridors in Shenmu City based on landscape ecological security[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2021, 38(4): 1120-1127.]
[12]	张学渊, 魏伟, 颉斌斌, 等. 西北干旱区生态承载力监测及安全格局构建[J]. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(11): 2389-2402. doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20191111
	[Zhang Xueyuan, Xie Binbin, et al. Ecological carrying capacity monitoring and security pattern construction in arid areas of northwest China[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019, 34(11): 2389-2402.] doi: 10.31497/zrzyxb.20191111
[13]	马才学, 杨蓉萱, 柯新利, 等. 基于生态压力视角的长三角地区生态安全格局构建与优化[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2022, 31(1): 135-147.
	[Ma Caixue, Yang Rongxuan, Ke Xinli, et al. Construction and optimization of ecological security pattern in Yangtze River Delta based on the perspective of ecological pressure[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2022, 31(1): 135-147.]
[14]	李鹏辉, 徐丽萍, 刘笑, 等. 基于三维生态足迹模型的天山北麓绿洲生态安全评价[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(5): 1337-1345.
	[Li Penghui, Xu Liping, Liu Xiao, et al. Ecological security evaluation of an oasis in the north of the Tianshan Mountains based on three-dimensional ecological footprint model[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2020, 37(5): 1337-1345.]
[15]	杨雪荻, 白永平, 车磊, 等. 甘肃省生态安全时空演变特征及影响因素解析[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(14): 4785-4793.
	[Yang Xuedi, Bai Yongping, Che Lei, et al. Spatio-temporal evolution and influencing factors of ecological security pattern in Gansu Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(14): 4785-4793.]
[16]	董媛媛. 基于“生态要素-DPSIRM”生态安全评价体系的构建[J]. 水土保持研究, 2020, 27(5): 333-339.
	[Dong Yuanyuan. Construction of ecological safety evaluation system based on ‘ecological elements: DPSIRM’[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2020, 27(5): 333-339.]
[17]	雷金睿, 陈宗铸, 陈毅青, 等. 1990—2018年海南岛湿地景观生态安全格局演变[J]. 生态环境学报, 2020, 29(2): 293-302. doi: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2020.02.010
	[Lei Jinrui, Chen Zongzhu, Chen Yiqing, et al. Dynamic analysis of wetland landscape ecological security pattern of Hainan Island in 1990—2018[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2020, 29(2): 293-302.] doi: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2020.02.010
[18]	张瑾青, 罗涛, 徐敏, 等. 闽三角地区城镇空间扩张对区域生态安全格局的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(15): 5113-5123.
	[Zhang Jinqing, Luo Tao, Xu Min, et al. Influence of urban spatial expansion on the regionally ecological security pattern in Min-Delta region[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(15): 5113-5123.]
[19]	哈力木拉提·阿布来提, 阿里木江·卡斯木, 祖拜旦·阿克木. 基于形态学空间格局分析法和MCR模型的乌鲁木齐市生态网络构建[J]. 中国水土保持科学, 2021, 19(5): 106-114.
	[Abulaiti Halimulati, Kasimu Alimujiang, Akemu Zubaidan. Construction and optimization of Urumqi ecological network based on the morphological spatial pattern analysis and MCR model[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2021, 19(5): 106-114.]
[20]	王珊珊, 毋兆鹏. 基于生态安全的乌鲁木齐市土地利用冲突识别[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2022, 61(1): 46-53.
	[Wang Shanshan, Wu Zhaopeng. Identification of land use conflicts based on ecological security in Urumqi City[J]. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 61(1): 46-53.]
[21]	林晋大, 多玲花, 邹自力. 城市扩张背景下景观破碎化动态演变及空间自相关分析——以南昌市为例[J]. 水土保持研究, 2022, 29(4): 362-369.
	[Lin Jinda, Duo Linghua, Zou Zili. Dynamic evolution and spatial autocorrelation analysis of landscape fragmentation under the background of urban expansion: A case study of Nanchang City[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022, 29(4): 362-369.]
[22]	Knaapen J P, Scheffer M, Harms B. Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1992, 23(1): 1-16. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(92)90060-D
[23]	McRae B H, Dickson B G, Keitt T H, et al. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation[J]. Ecology, 2008, 10: 2712-2724.
[24]	郑群明, 申明智, 钟林生. 普达措国家公园生态安全格局构建[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(3): 874-885.
	[Zheng Qunming, Shen Mingzhi, Zhong Linsheng. Construction of ecological security pattern in Pudacuo National Park[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2021, 41(3): 874-885.]
[25]	张萌, 刘吉平, 赵丹丹. 吉林省西部生态安全格局构建[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6): 1676-1685.
	[Zhang Meng, Liu Jiping, Zhao Dandan. Construction of ecological security pattern in western Jilin Province[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(6): 1676-1685.]
[26]	Wang G, Cheng G, Ju Q. Several problems in ecological security assessment research[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(9): 1551-1556.
[27]	王晓峰, 吕一河, 傅伯杰. 生态系统服务与生态安全[J]. 自然杂志, 2012, 34(5): 273-276, 298.
	[Wang Xiaofeng, Lü Yihe, Fu Bojie. Ecosystem services and ecological security[J]. Chinese Journal of Nature, 2012, 34(5): 273-276, 298.]
[28]	付万年, 蒲春玲, 刘金芝, 等. 乌鲁木齐市耕地占补平衡生态安全评价[J]. 西南农业学报, 2018, 31(12): 2624-2629.
	[Fu Wannian, Pu Chunling, Liu Jinzhi, et al. Evaluation of eco-security of cultivated land requisition-compensation balance in Urumqi[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 31(12): 2624-2629.]

决策目标	评价因素层	指标层	参评因子	全局权重
生态用地评价	生态系统服务重要性评价	生物多样性保护	植被覆盖度	0.0149
			降雨量与气温	0.0238
			净初级生产力	0.0425
			高程	0.0112
		水资源	距水库、湖泊距离	0.1039
		水资源	距五级河流距离	0.1039
		地形	地形位指数	0.0975
		地形	坡向	0.0488
		人类活动干扰	距建设用地距离	0.0357
		人类活动干扰	人口聚集度	0.0178
	生态敏感性评价	水土流失	土地利用	0.0282
			降雨量	0.0445
			地形起伏度	0.1735
			土壤质地	0.0184
			植被覆盖度	0.1103
		土壤侵蚀	坡长坡度	0.0061
			水土保持措施	0.0368
			降雨侵蚀力	0.0094
			土壤可蚀性	0.0148
			植被覆盖与管理	0.0578

年份	面积/km²	占比/%
2000	2640.35	18.94
2010	2882.54	20.67
2020	3085.98	22.13

阻力因子	相对阻力系数						权重
阻力因子	1	2	3	4	5	6	权重
坡度/(°)	≤2	(2, 6]	(6, 15]	(15, 20]	(20, 25]	>25	0.14
土地利用类型	林地	草地	耕地	水体	建设用地	未利用地	0.52
植被覆盖度	>0.79	(0.67, 0.79]	(0.56, 0.67]	(0.47, 0.56]	(0.41, 0.47]	≤0.41	0.18
高程/m	>4000	(3000, 4000]	(2000, 3000]	(1000, 2000]	(500, 1000]	≤500	0.16