欢迎访问《生态学杂志》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

生态学杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (9): 3106-3115.doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.202509.018

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

多尺度生态系统服务及其驱动机制:以山西省为例

陈小平1*,李萱1,徐若凡1,马航1,王犇1,黄春波2
  

  1. 1山西农业大学城乡建设学院, 山西太谷 030801; 2中国地质大学(武汉)地理与信息工程学院, 武汉 430074)
  • 出版日期:2025-09-10 发布日期:2025-09-10

Multi-scale ecosystem services and the driving mechanisms in multiple scales: A case study of Shanxi Province.

CHEN Xiaoping1*, LI Xuan1, XU Ruofan1, MA Hang1, WANG Ben1, HUANG Chunbo2   

  1. (1College of Urban and Rural Construction, Shanxi Agricultural University, Taigu 030801, Shanxi, China;  2School of Geography and Information Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China).

  • Online:2025-09-10 Published:2025-09-10

摘要: 明晰多尺度下生态系统服务及其驱动机制,对于提升区域的生态治理效果及促进可持续发展具有重要意义。本研究以山西省为研究区域,从1 km×1 km、5 km×5 km、10 km×10 km和15 km×15 km共4个空间尺度量化了4种典型生态系统服务(碳固存、土壤保持、粮食生产和休闲服务),通过相关性分析阐明了生态系统服务间的权衡/协同关系,并采用偏最小二乘法结构方程模型解析了各生态系统服务的驱动机制。结果表明:(1)4种生态系统服务的空间分布存在明显的空间分异性,且随着尺度的扩大,其分布格局更趋于均一化。碳固存、土壤保持和休闲服务存在相似的空间分布特征,高值区分布在植被覆盖度较大的山地区域,低值区分布于城镇区域;粮食生产服务高值区多数较为分散,低值区为山地、城镇等区域。(2)生态系统服务间权衡/协同关系对于空间尺度存在依赖性,随着尺度增大其方向未发生变化,但强度存在较大差异。(3)地形是影响4种生态系统服务的主导因素,生态系统服务与驱动因子间的关系也随着研究尺度而变化。本研究可为山西省生态系统分级管理和科学调控提供理论参考。


关键词: 生态系统服务, 空间分布, 权衡与协同, 驱动因子, 多尺度

Abstract: Clarifying the scale effects of ecosystem services and the driving mechanisms is of great importance for improving regional ecological governance and sustainable development. With Shanxi Province as the research area, we calculated the values of four typical ecosystem services (carbon sequestration, soil conservation, food production, and recreational services). We used correlation analysis to clarify the trade-off and synergy relationships among the four ecosystem services, and used PLS-SEM model to analyze the driving mechanisms of four ecosystem services at four different spatial scales (1 km×1 km, 5 km×5 km, 10 km×10 km, and 15 km×15 km). The results showed that: (1) The spatial distribution of the four ecosystem services exhibited obvious spatial differentiation, which tended to become more uniform with increasing scales. Carbon sequestration, soil conservation, and recreational services showed similar distributional patterns, with high values concentrated in mountainous areas with extensive vegetation coverage, while low values were observed in urban areas with intensive human activities. The high value areas of food production service were mostly distributed in cultivated areas, while the low value areas were located in mountainous and urban areas. (2) Trade-offs and synergies relationships among ecosystem services were significantly influenced by spatial scale, and the direction did not change with increasing scale, but the intensity varied greatly. (3) Terrain was the main factor influencing the four types of ecosystem services. The relationship among ecosystem services and drivers also changed with scales. This study can provide theoretical basis for hierarchical ecosystem management and landscape pattern regulation.


Key words: ecosystem services, spatial distribution, tradeoffs and synergies, driving factor, multiple scales