长江流域资源与环境 >> 2020, Vol. 29 >> Issue (11): 2541-2550.doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj202011021

• 自然灾害 • 上一篇    下一篇

“5.12”汶川地震极重灾区灾后 十年生态恢复状况评估

杨渺1,2,江腊海1,侯鹏3* ,翟俊3,祝汉收3,谭婷1,李波1   

  1. (1.四川省生态环境科学研究院,四川 成都 610041; 2.中科院生态环境研究中心,北京 100085;
    3.生态环境部卫星环境应用中心,北京 100090)
  • 出版日期:2020-11-20 发布日期:2020-12-17

Evaluation of Ecological Restoration 10 Years After the “5.12” Wenchuan Earthquake

YANG Miao 1,2, JIANG La-hai 1,HOU Peng 3, ZHAI Jun 3, ZHU Han-shou 3, TAN Ting 1, LI Bo 1   

  1. (1.Sichuan Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Chengdu 610041, China; 2.Research Center for
    Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing 100085,China;3.Ministry of
    Ecology and Environment Center for Statelite Application on Ecologyand Environment, Beijing 100090,China)
  • Online:2020-11-20 Published:2020-12-17

摘要: 汶川地震发生10年后,通过对极重灾区生态系统类型解译和地面植被样方调查, GPP、LAI反演,以及对土壤有机质、全氮、全磷、全钾和速效氮、速效磷、速效钾含量的测定与分析,综合评估了极重灾区植被和土壤恢复情况。结果表明:区域生态系统总体趋于稳定向好的恢复态势。2017年的裸露地表面积虽高于震前(2007年),但相对于震后(2008年后)已有所减少。从生态系统质量上来看:GPP、LAI均值在2014年以后呈持续缓慢上升状态,反映了区域生态系统总体良好的恢复力。但是部分在地震中损坏的森林生态系统,仍未恢复到原来状态。成都平原区域部分农田转变为城镇建设用地。至2017年,地震破坏迹地植物种类明显增加。但仍以蔷薇科、菊科和禾本科等先锋物种为主,与2009年的调查结果相似。地震破坏迹地的群落结构已得到了较好的恢复。垂直分层方面,除干旱河谷区域群落结构仅草本或灌草结合1个层次外,其余区域的群落结构已经形成乔木-灌木-草本3个层次;土壤肥力状况总体上对照点优于受损点,受损点土壤肥力状况仍呈恶化状态。地震造成的土壤裸露,加速了矿化过程,短期内受损点速效营养元素含量的增加,长期来看将导致营养元素的流失,土壤肥力下降。在加强地质灾害监管,预防次生灾害的基础上,龙门山前华西雨屏一带,自然植被应坚持自然恢复为主。干旱河谷区域可以按照“因地制宜,适地适树”原则,采取适当人工恢复措施,同时注意改善土壤养分条件,促进植被恢复;城镇建设过程中应加强国土空间管控,保护基本农田。同时,应加强对生态保护红线,以及包括基本农田在内的各级各类保护地的监管。

Abstract: Ten years after the Wenchuan earthquake, the types and qualities of ecosystem, community structures,pland biodiversity and soil nutrient recovery conditions were comprehensively assessed at the most severely affected areas. Through the Remote interpretation of ecosystem types, the sample survey of ground vegetation, the inversion of GPP and LAI, as well as the determination of the soil organic matter, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, total potassium, available nitrogen, available phosphorus, and available potassium in the soil. The results exhibited that the regional ecological system generally tends to incline towards stability and positive recovery according to the remote sensing interpretations. Although the bare surface area assessed in 2017 was higher compared to the one before the earthquake in 2007, the decrease in number is relative to the post-earthquake one in 2008. In terms of ecosystem quality, the average values received from GPP and LAI continuously rose after 2014 though quite slowly. It reflected the overall resilience of the regional ecosystem. However, some of the forest ecosystems damaged by the earthquake still have not returned to the original state. A part of the farmland in the Chengdu Plain has been converted into an urban construction land. By 2017 in the earthquake-damaged area, there was a significant increase in the number of plant species, dominated by pioneer species, such as Rosaceae, Compositae, and Gramineae, similar results as to those in 2009. The community structure found at the earthquake-damaged area has been well restored. In terms of vertical stratification, the community structure of the remaining areas has formed three layers of trees-shrub-herb, noting that there is only one layer of herb or shrub and herb combination in the arid valley area. Generally, the soil fertility condition at the control spot was proved healthier compared to the impaired areas where the situation continued to deteriorate. The bare soil area that was caused by the earthquake has shown an acceleration in the mineralization process, increasing content of available nutritional elements in the impaired sites achieved short-term yet the loss of nutrients and soil fertility proved to be taxing long-term. Hence, there have been formulations of numerous suggestions: Based on strengthening the supervision of geological hazards and preventing secondary disasters, the natural vegetation must be dominated by natural restoration in the high precipitation areas of Western China, in front of Longmen Mountain. The arid valley area is able to adapt the appropriate artificial restoration measures which follow the principle of "adaptation to local conditions and matching trees with the site", Meanwhile, the improvement of soil nutrient conditions and the promotion of vegetation restoration must be given more emphasis and attention. In the process of urban construction, on the other hand, the land and space management and essential farmland protection must be strengthened, so as the red line of ecological protection, as well as all kinds of protected areas, including basic farmland.

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 杜涛|熊立华|易放辉|肖义|宋求明. 基于MODIS数据的洞庭湖水体面积与多站点水位相关关系研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2012, 21(06): 756 .
[2] 袁喜, 黄应平, 蒋清, 靖锦杰, 高勇, 涂志英. 中华鲟幼鱼生理生态行为研究进展[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(03): 429 -438 .
[3] 牛潜 周旭. 喀斯特山地城市生态系统弹性变化分析 ——以贵阳市区为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 0, (): 0 .
[4] 毕学成, 谷人旭, 苏 勤.  

制造业区域产业专业化、竞合关系与分工——基于江苏省市域面板数据的计量分析 [J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(10): 2201 -2213 .

[5] 王权, 李阳兵, 刘亚香 . 岩溶槽谷区山坡-槽坝土地利用变化的对比研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(01): 122 -133 .
[6] 杨高升, 谢秋皓. 长江经济带绿色水资源效率时空分异研究——基于SE-SBM与ML指数法[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(02): 349 -358 .
[7] 闫东升, 王 晖, 孙 伟. 长江三角洲区域发展差距时空演变驱动因素研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(03): 517 -529 .
[8] 杨子江, 韩伟超, 杨恩秀. 昆明市水资源承载力系统动力学模拟[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(03): 594 -602 .
[9] 袁华锡, 刘耀彬, 胡森林, 封亦代. 产业集聚加剧了环境污染吗?——基于外商直接投资视角[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(04): 794 -804 .
[10] 臧漫丹, 娄子孟, 孔嘉婧. 中国省际水资源福利绩效时空分异分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(04): 805 -816 .