长江流域资源与环境 >> 2004, Vol. 13 >> Issue (4): 380-383.

• 生态环境 • 上一篇    下一篇

岷江上游生态脆弱性评价

姚 建,丁 晶,艾南山   

  • 收稿日期:1900-01-01 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2004-07-20
  • 通讯作者: 姚 建

ASSESSMENT OF ECOLOGICAL VULNERABILITY IN UPPER REACHES OF MINGJIANG RIVER

YAO Jian, DING Jing, AI Nan-shan   

  • Received:1900-01-01 Revised:1900-01-01 Online:2004-07-20
  • Contact: YAO Jian

摘要: 岷江上游流域是我国典型的生态脆弱区之一,由于地质变化频繁、高差显著、气候干旱,加上人为活动影响,生态脆弱性的表现十分明显。通过对其生态环境脆弱性因素及成因机制的分析,构建了由土地生产力、地表起伏度、干燥度指数、土壤侵蚀强度、草场退化荒漠化率、物种消失率等14个指标组成的岷江上游生态脆弱性的评价指标体系;根据本地区生态环境现状、全国和四川省情况及奋斗目标,建立了Ⅰ到Ⅲ级的评价标准体系;利用模糊数学聚类方法对评价指标进行分析计算,得出了岷江上游生态环境为第Ⅲ级,即生态环境非常脆弱的结论。评价结果符合岷江上游地区的生态环境状况。

关键词: 生态脆弱性, 岷江上游, 模糊数学, 评价

Abstract: This paper was mainly delt with the assessment on ecologyical vulnerability in the upper reaches of Mingjiang River. The upper reaches of the Mingjiang River is one of the typical vulnerable ecotones in our country. Its vulnerability is quite evident on account of the variable geography remarkably differentin height and dry climate, added up by the effect of human actions. In the light of the analysis which involves the factors and mechanisms of the ecological vulnerability,14 indexes including productivity of land, dryness index, soil errosion rate and grassland degeneration rate, etc, were chosen in order to set up an assessment index system. The system consists of three grades:1st ,2nd and 3rd grades. According to the analysis and calculations by the fuzzy mathematics method, we have drawn a conclusion that the ecological vulnerability of the upper reaches of the Mingjing River belongs to the 3rd grade of the system, namely the most vulnerable grade among the three grades. The conclusion conformed to the present condition of this regional ecological environment. At the same time, it is important to guide the river basin's economical development and ecological environment construction.

Key words: ecological vulnerability, the upper reaches of the Minjiang River, Fuzzy Mathmatics, assessment

[1] 潘超, 周驰, 苗滕, 刘林峰, 高健, 焦一滢, 李祝, 张佳敏, 王卉君, 徐德雄. 长江流域鄂西四河流大型底栖动物群落结构特征及水质生物学评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(11): 2529-2539.
[2] 杨洋, 张玮, 潘宏博, 顾琬雯, 郝瑞娟, 熊春晖, 王丽卿. 滆湖轮虫群落结构及其与水环境因子的关系[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2017, 26(06): 832-840.
[3] 李智, 范琳芸, 张小林. 基于村域的乡村多功能类型划分及评价研究——以江苏省金坛市为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2017, 26(03): 359-367.
[4] 向龙, 刘平辉, 杨迎亚. 华东某铀矿区稻米中放射性核素铀污染特征及健康风险评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2017, 26(03): 419-427.
[5] 陈金月, 王石英. 岷江上游生态环境脆弱性评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2017, 26(03): 471-479.
[6] 王秀, 王振祥, 潘宝, 周春财, 刘桂建. 南淝河表层水中重金属空间分布、污染评价及来源[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2017, 26(02): 297-303.
[7] 陈诚, 林晨. 苏南地区耕地质量评价与分区保护研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(12): 1860-1869.
[8] 樊敏, 郭亚琳, 李富程, 王青. 岷江上游山区聚落生态位地理特征与驱动因子间关系研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(11): 1687-1696.
[9] 冷龙龙, 张海萍, 张敏, 李天科, 刘晓波, 渠晓东. 大型底栖动物快速评价指数BMWP在太子河流域的应用[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(11): 1781-1788.
[10] 姜海, 白璐, 雷昊, 赵海燕, 吴昊. 基于效果-效率-适应性的养殖废弃物资源化利用管理模式评价框架构建及初步应用[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(10): 1501-1508.
[11] 任俊霖, 李浩, 伍新木, 李雪松. 基于主成分分析法的长江经济带省会城市水生态文明评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(10): 1537-1544.
[12] 李文浩, 张萌, 门吉帅, 敖雪夫, 胡新艳, 欧阳珊, 吴小平. 江西仙女湖流域大型底栖动物群落结构及水质评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(08): 1218-1227.
[13] 闫思宇, 王景燕, 龚伟, 罗建跃, 苏黎明, 舒正悦, 赵昌平, 蔡煜. 川南山地林分变化对土壤物理性质和抗蚀性的影响[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(07): 1112-1120.
[14] 周天舒, 张亚, 唐文乔, 王丽卿. 基于鱼类完整性指数的黄浦江水生态系统评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(06): 895-903.
[15] 陆张维, 徐丽华, 吴亚琪. 基于适宜性评价的中心城区建设用地布局——以杭州市为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2016, 25(06): 904-912.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!