欢迎访问《生态学杂志》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

生态学杂志 ›› 2023, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (9): 2204-2211.doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202309.009

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

四川大熊猫保护地生境质量时空演变特征

胡露1,冯彬1,白文科1,2,3*,董鑫1,肖强1,3,张晋东1,黄尤优1,周材权1,3*


  

  1. 1西南野生动植物资源保护教育部重点实验室, 四川南充 637009; 2成都大熊猫繁育研究基地, 成都 610081; 3西华师范大学生态研究院, 四川南充 637002)

  • 出版日期:2023-09-10 发布日期:2023-09-05

Spatiotemporal variations of habitat quality in protected area of giant panda in Sichuan Province.

HU Lu1, FENG Bin1, BAI Wenke1,2,3*, DONG Xin1, XIAO Qiang1,3, ZHANG Jindong1, HUANG Youyou1, ZHOU Caiquan1,3*#br#

#br#
  

  1. (1Key Laboratory of Southwest Wildlife Resources Protection, Ministry of Education, Nanchong 637009, Sichuan, China; 2Chengdu Research Base of Giant Panda Breeding, Chengdu 610081, China; 3Institute of Ecology, China West Normal University, Nanchong 637002, Sichuan, China).

  • Online:2023-09-10 Published:2023-09-05

摘要: 为了解大熊猫保护地土地利用变化及其对生境质量的影响,本文以四川大熊猫栖息地所属的37个县(市、区)为研究区域,基于2000—2020年的土地利用数据和生境威胁因子数据,运用土地利用转移矩阵、土地利用动态度、景观格局指数及InVEST模型等研究方法,从土地利用变化视角对大熊猫保护地生境质量变化进行分析。结果表明:2000—2020年,研究区域土地利用变化主要为林地(+1.49%)、建设用地(+59.72%)和水域(+27.79%)面积增加,草地(-2.44%)和耕地(-2.14%)面积减少,变化类型以草地、林地相互转化以及耕地转为建设用地为主;研究区域生境质量变化与景观破碎度变化范围在空间上大致相同,景观破碎度高的地区,生境质量明显较低;生境质量空间上呈现“西高东低”的分布格局,生境质量改善(952.35 km2)的区域面积小于下降(1562.38 km2)的区域,但大熊猫栖息地范围内生境质量保持稳定;整体生境退化程度呈现上升的趋势,生境退化程度指数均值由2000年的0.018上升至2020年的0.022,且生境退化程度高和生境质量低的空间分布格局较为一致,主要分布在研究区域东部和南部地区。研究结果可以为大熊猫的栖息地保护与修复提供科学参考。


关键词: 大熊猫保护地, 土地利用变化, InVEST模型, 景观格局, 生境质量

Abstract: We examined land use changes in giant panda protected areas and their impacts on habitat quality for 37 counties (cities/districts) of giant panda habitats in Sichuan Province. Based on the data of land use and habitat threat factors from 2000 to 2020, the changes of habitat quality of giant panda protected areas was analyzed from the perspective of land use change, using land use transfer matrix, land use dynamic degree, landscape pattern index and InVEST model. The results showed that forest land (+1.49%), built-up land (+59.72%), and water area (+27.79%) increased from 2000 to 2020, while grassland (-2.44%) and cultivated land (-2.14%) area decreased. The main change types were the inter-conversion of grassland and forest land and the conversion of cultivated land into built-up land. The spatial variation range of habitat quality and landscape fragmentation in the study area was roughly the same. The habitat quality was lower in the area with higher landscape fragmentation. Spatially, habitat quality decreased from west to east, with the area of improving habitat quality (952.35 km2) being smaller than that of decreasing habitat quality (1562.38 km2). The habitat quality within the giant panda habitats remained stable. The degradation of the overall habitat quality showed an increasing trend, with the mean value of habitat degradation index being increased from 0.018 in 2000 to 0.022 in 2020. Moreover, the spatial distribution patterns of high degree of habitat degradation and low habitat quality were relatively consistent, mainly in the eastern and southern parts of the study area. Our results provide a scientific reference for the conservation and restoration of giant panda habitats.


Key words: giant panda reserve, land use change, InVEST model, landscape pattern, habitat quality.