地域研究与开发
地域研究與開髮
지역연구여개발
Areal Research and Development
2013年
1期
128~133
,共null页
李亦秋 鲁春霞 邓欧 焦有权
李亦鞦 魯春霞 鄧歐 焦有權
리역추 로춘하 산구 초유권
土地利用 景观格局 缓 中区分析 猫跳河流域
土地利用 景觀格跼 緩 中區分析 貓跳河流域
토지이용 경관격국 완 중구분석 묘도하류역
land use ; landscape pattern ; buffer analysis ; Maotiao River watershed
通过1973-2010年4期遥感影像土地利用变化信息提取和景观格局指数计算,分析水电梯级开发背景下以流域主要干支流为轴线的不同缓;中区内土地利用和景观格局的空间分异动态。结果表明:各缓冲区内不同时期的综合土地利用变化动态度在0.13-0.39之间变动,由内向外综合土地利用变化动态度有增大的趋势;各缓冲区内各时间段的土地利用均达到理论可利用程度的60%以上,内圈开发利用更加活跃,处于土地利用发展时期的时间也更长:内圈受到的人为干扰最大,形状指数最小,斑块的几何形状最简单,外圈相反;各圈层的景观破碎度指数呈先减小后增大的趋势;内外圈分别由于人为活动和自然景观本身的复杂性而使得景观多样性指数偏大;外圈聚集度指数呈先增大后减小的趋势,内圈和中圈聚集度指数变化不明显。
通過1973-2010年4期遙感影像土地利用變化信息提取和景觀格跼指數計算,分析水電梯級開髮揹景下以流域主要榦支流為軸線的不同緩;中區內土地利用和景觀格跼的空間分異動態。結果錶明:各緩遲區內不同時期的綜閤土地利用變化動態度在0.13-0.39之間變動,由內嚮外綜閤土地利用變化動態度有增大的趨勢;各緩遲區內各時間段的土地利用均達到理論可利用程度的60%以上,內圈開髮利用更加活躍,處于土地利用髮展時期的時間也更長:內圈受到的人為榦擾最大,形狀指數最小,斑塊的幾何形狀最簡單,外圈相反;各圈層的景觀破碎度指數呈先減小後增大的趨勢;內外圈分彆由于人為活動和自然景觀本身的複雜性而使得景觀多樣性指數偏大;外圈聚集度指數呈先增大後減小的趨勢,內圈和中圈聚集度指數變化不明顯。
통과1973-2010년4기요감영상토지이용변화신식제취화경관격국지수계산,분석수전제급개발배경하이류역주요간지류위축선적불동완;중구내토지이용화경관격국적공간분이동태。결과표명:각완충구내불동시기적종합토지이용변화동태도재0.13-0.39지간변동,유내향외종합토지이용변화동태도유증대적추세;각완충구내각시간단적토지이용균체도이론가이용정도적60%이상,내권개발이용경가활약,처우토지이용발전시기적시간야경장:내권수도적인위간우최대,형상지수최소,반괴적궤하형상최간단,외권상반;각권층적경관파쇄도지수정선감소후증대적추세;내외권분별유우인위활동화자연경관본신적복잡성이사득경관다양성지수편대;외권취집도지수정선증대후감소적추세,내권화중권취집도지수변화불명현。
In the hydropower cascade development background,4-stage information of land use change was ex- tracted from remote sensing image and landscape pattern indices were calculated in Maotiao River watershed from 1973 to 2010 to analyse the spatial-temporal differentiation of the main stream buffer zones ( 〈2 000 m, the inner buffer zone; 2 000 - 5 000 m, the middle buffer zone; 〉 5 000 m, the external buffer zone). The results show that : ( 1 ) Watershed area dynamic degree of integrated land-use change in different times in different buffer zones varied between 0.13 - 0.39, and showed an increasing trend from inner to external buffer zones. (2) Land use de- gree comprehensive index were all reached above 240, and more than 60 percent of the theoretical level have been used, and the development and utilization of land resources in the inner buffer zone were more active and its land increasing trend. The Shannon diversity index in the inner buffer zone was bigger because of the intense human ac- tivities, while the landscape structure composition of the external buffer zone was also complex because of the natu- ral landscape itself. The aggregation index was increased in the first and then decreased in the external buffer zone, while the index in the inner and the middle buffer zones did not change significantly.