Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative ecological network pattern analysis: a case of Nanchang.
Ma, Binbin; Chen, Zhu-An; Wei, Xiaojian; Li, Xiuquan; Zhang, Liting.
Afiliação
  • Ma B; Key Laboratory for Digital Land and Resources in Jiangxi Province, Key Laboratory for Digital Land and Resources in Jiangxi Province, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, 30013, China.
  • Chen ZA; School of Geomatics, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, 30013, China.
  • Wei X; Key Laboratory for Digital Land and Resources in Jiangxi Province, Key Laboratory for Digital Land and Resources in Jiangxi Province, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, 30013, China. zachen@ecut.edu.cn.
  • Li X; School of Geomatics, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, 30013, China. zachen@ecut.edu.cn.
  • Zhang L; Key Laboratory for Digital Land and Resources in Jiangxi Province, Key Laboratory for Digital Land and Resources in Jiangxi Province, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, 30013, China.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ; 29(25): 37423-37434, 2022 May.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35066835
ABSTRACT
Urban-ecological landscape connectivity and pattern optimization can significantly enhance biodiversity and sustainable development capacity, which play an important role in continued ecosystem functioning. Previous studies identified ecological sources based on the area threshold method or combination with morphological spatial pattern analysis and the landscape connectivity index (CMSPACI) method, but few studies have compared the advantages, disadvantages, and applicability of the two methods. In this paper, taking Nanchang as the study area, we address the ecological sources via area threshold and the CMSPACI method. Then, the minimum cost distance method is used to generate potential corridors of different methods, and the differences in ecological networks are analyzed. Finally, the circuit theory is used to identify barriers, and we provide targeted recommendations for ecological network pattern optimization in the study area. The results show that (1) the ecological sources extracted by different methods are different. The ecological sources extracted by the area threshold are far away from the surrounding sources, and the landscape connectivity is low. The ecological sources identified by the CMSPACI method are closely related to the surrounding sources, and the landscape connectivity is high. (2) Compared with the area threshold method, the habitat quality of corridors under the CMSPACI method is better, and the interaction intensity between patches is larger. (3) There is little difference in the number of ecological barriers under different methods; all of them are located between patches or on the edge of patches, and most of them are roads or construction land. Overall, the area threshold method is simpler. Ecological sources can be effectively addressed through the CMSPACI method, and the landscape connectivity of the ecological network will be better. This study provides an important reference for the selection of ecological sources in the construction of ecological networks.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ecossistema / Conservação dos Recursos Naturais País/Região como assunto: Asia Idioma: En Revista: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Assunto da revista: SAUDE AMBIENTAL / TOXICOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: China

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ecossistema / Conservação dos Recursos Naturais País/Região como assunto: Asia Idioma: En Revista: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Assunto da revista: SAUDE AMBIENTAL / TOXICOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: China