海河流域河流大型底栖动物生物完整性指数健康评价

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2023.10.007

生态环境学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (10): 1785-1793.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2023.10.007

海河流域河流大型底栖动物生物完整性指数健康评价

赵燕楚¹(), 王菲², 吴丹², 黄鑫¹^,³, 陈佳林¹, 周琳普¹, 孔凡青¹^,^*()

1.生态环境部海河流域北海海域生态环境监督管理局生态环境监测与科学研究中心，天津 300170
2.河北省生态环境监测中心，河北石家庄 050037
3.天津农学院，天津 300392

收稿日期:2023-08-08 出版日期:2023-10-18 发布日期:2024-01-16
通讯作者: *孔凡青。E-mail: fanqingkong@163.com
作者简介:赵燕楚（1992年生），女，工程师，博士，从事水生态监测与评价工作。E-mail: z18306421151@163.com
基金资助:
国家生态环境监测网络与运行(144049002000190003)

Health Assessment of Haihe River Basin Based on Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity

ZHAO Yanchu¹(), WANG Fei², WU Dan², HUANG Xin¹^,³, CHEN Jialin¹, ZHOU Linpu¹, KONG Fanqing¹^,^*()

1. Ecological Environment Monitoring and Scientific Research Center of Haihe River Basin and Beihai Sea Area, Ministry of Ecological Environment, Tianjin 300170, P. R. China
2. Ecological Environment Monitoring Center of Hebei Province, Shijiazhuang 050037, P. R. China
3. Tianjin Agricultural University, Tianjin 300392, P. R. China

Received:2023-08-08 Online:2023-10-18 Published:2024-01-16

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

河流是重要的生态系统。随着经济发展，人类活动对河流生态系统的影响日益严重。为了解海河流域河流水生态健康状况，2020年在海河流域布设了39个点位（9个参照点，30个受损点）进行大型底栖动物调查，构建大型底栖动物生物完整性评价指数（Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity，B-IBI），对海河流域河流水生态健康状况进行评价。结果表明：海河流域河流共检测到大型底栖动物106种，隶属于4门8纲20目50科，其中扁形动物门1种，环节动物门6种，软体动物门12种，节肢动物门87种。中华齿米虾（Caridina denticulate sinensis）、逸仙丽翅蜉（Alainites yixiani）、摇蚊属一种（Chironomus sp.）、斑点小划蝽（Micronecta guttata）为海河流域内的优势种。通过对21个候选参数进行分布范围检验、判别能力分析和Pearson相关性分析，最终确定海河流域河流B-IBI指标体系由总分类单元数、每个分类单元的平均得分（ASPT指数）和Shannon-Wiener指数构成。采用比值法统一量纲计算得到B-IBI值。以参照位点25%分位数法建立了海河流域B-IBI评价标准。结果显示，海河流域河流整体健康状况呈现良好，39个采样点中有13个处于健康状态，12个处于良好状态，10个处于一般状态，3个处于较差状态，1个处于很差状态。整体来看，海河流域河流北部和西部山区健康状态优于南部平原地区，人类活动强度对河流健康影响较大。该研究构建的B-IBI评价体系为海河流域的河流健康监测和评价提供了重要方法，研究结果可为海河流域水生态系统的修复和保护提供基础数据支撑和科学依据。

关键词: 大型底栖动物, 生物完整性指数, 健康评价, 群落结构, 优势种, 海河流域

Abstract:

Rivers are important ecosystems and play an important role in economic and social development. However, as economic activities continue to grow, the negative impact of human activities on river ecosystems has become increasingly severe. In order to evaluate the health conditions of Haihe River Basin, macroinvertebrates communities were sampled at 39 sampling sites (9 reference sites and 30 impaired sites) in 2020. The Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (B-IBI) system was established for this purpose. The results showed that 106 macroinvertebrates taxa were identified, belonging to 4 phyla, 8 classes, 20 orders and 50 families. Among them, there were 1 taxa from Platyhelminthes, 6 from Annelida, 12 from Mollusca, and 87 from Arthropoda. Caridina denticulate sinensis, Alainites yixiani, Chironomus sp. and Micronecta guttata were the dominant species in the Haihe River Basin. A total of 21 potential biological indicators were selected to analyze the distribution range, discriminant ability, and Pearson’s correlation. Ultimately, three biological indicators were chosen for the B-IBI index, including the total number of taxon units, the average score per taxon (ASPT), and the Shannon-Wiener diversity index. Then, the ratio method was used to unify the dimensions of biological indicators, from which the value of B-IBI was obtained by summing up the scores of each biological indicator. The B-IBI evaluation standard of the Haihe River Basin was established by using the 25% quantile method based on the reference sites. The assessment results showed that the overall health status of river was good, with 13 sites classified as healthy, 12 sites as good, 10 sites as fair, 3 sites as poor and 1 site as very poor. In general, the health conditions were better in the northern and western mountainous areas compared to the southern plain areas in the Haihe River Basin. Human activities had great impacts on the river health. The B-IBI index developed provides an important tool for monitoring and evaluating river health. Moreover, the research results can serve as fundamental data support and a scientific basis for the restoration and protection of aquatic ecosystems in the Haihe River Basin.

Key words: macroinvertebrates, Index of Biotic Integrity, health assessment, community structure, dominant species, Haihe River Basin

中图分类号:

X52
X826

赵燕楚, 王菲, 吴丹, 黄鑫, 陈佳林, 周琳普, 孔凡青. 海河流域河流大型底栖动物生物完整性指数健康评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(10): 1785-1793.

ZHAO Yanchu, WANG Fei, WU Dan, HUANG Xin, CHEN Jialin, ZHOU Linpu, KONG Fanqing. Health Assessment of Haihe River Basin Based on Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2023, 32(10): 1785-1793.

图/表 8

参考文献 38

[1]	BARBOUR M T, GERRITSEN J, GRIFFITH G E, et al., 1996. A framework for biological criteria for Florida streams using benthic macroinvertebrates[J]. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 15(2): 185-211. DOI URL
[2]	BECK M W, HATCH L K, VONDRACEK B, et al., 2010. Development of a macrophyte-based index of biotic integrity for Minnesota lakes[J]. Ecological Indicators, 10(5): 968-979. DOI URL
[3]	CHI S Y, GONG Y T, WANG H J, et al., 2017. A pilot macroinvertebrate- based multimetric index (MMI-CS) for assessing the ecological status of the Chishui River basin, China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 83: 84-95. DOI URL
[4]	HUANG Q, GAO J F, CAI Y J, et al., 2014. Development and application of benthic macroinvertebrate-based multimetric indices for the assessment of streams and rivers in the Taihu Basin, China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 48: 649-659. DOI URL
[5]	HELSON J E, WILLIAMS D D, 2013. Development of a macroinvertebrate multimetric index for the assessment of low-land streams in the neotropics[J]. Ecological Indicators, 29: 167-178. DOI URL
[6]	KARR J R, 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities[J]. Fisheries, 6(6): 21-27. DOI URL
[7]	KERANS B L, KARR J R, 1994. A benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for rivers of the Tennessee Valley[J]. Ecological Applications, 4(4): 768-785. DOI URL
[8]	MAXTED J R, BARBOUR M T, GERRITSEN J, et al., 2000. Assessment framework for mid-Atlantic coastal plain streams using benthic macroinvertebrates[J]. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 19(1): 128-144. DOI URL
[9]	MCNAUGHTON S J, 1967. Relationships among functional properties of Californian grassland[J]. Nature, 216: 168-169.
[10]	MERETA S T, BOETS P, MEESTER L D, et al., 2013. Development of a multimetric index based on benthic macroinvertebrates for the assessment of natural wetlands in Southwest Ethiopia[J]. Ecological Indicators, 29: 510-521. DOI URL
[11]	MORSE J C, YANG L F, TIAN L X, 1994. Aquatic insects of China useful for monitoring water quality[M]. Nanjing: Hohai University Press: 1-570.
[12]	WEIGEL B M, HENNE L J, MARTÍNEZ-RIVERA L M, 2002. Macroinvertebrate-based index of biotic integrity for protection of streams in west-central Mexico[J]. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 21(4): 686-700. DOI URL
[13]	WHITTIER T R, STODDARD J L, LARSEN D P, et al., 2007. Selecting reference sites for stream biological assessments: best professional judgment or objective criteria[J]. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 26(2): 349-360. DOI URL
[14]	WU N C, SCHMALZ B, FOHRER N, 2012. Development and testing of a phytoplankton index of biotic integrity (P-IBI) for a German lowland river[J]. Ecological Indicators, 13(1): 158-167. DOI URL
[15]	崔文彦, 孟宪智, 张世禄, 等, 2019. 大型底栖动物完整性指数在漳河上游水生态评价中的应用[J]. 生物学杂志, 36(5): 73-77.
	CUI W Y, MENG X Z, ZHANG S L, et al., 2019. Application of benthic index of biotic integrity for aquatic ecological assessment in the upper reaches of Zhanghe River[J]. Journal of Biology, 36(5): 73-77.
[16]	邓明星, 黄亮亮, 莫苑敏, 等, 2018. 应用鱼类生物完整性指数评价荔浦河河流健康[J]. 生态毒理学报, 13(4): 111-119.
	DENG M X, HUANG L L, MO Y M, et al., 2018. River health assessment using biotic integrity index based on fish for Lipu River[J]. Asian Journal of Ecotoxicology, 13(4): 111-119.
[17]	付岚, 江源, 刘琦, 等, 2018. 基于大型底栖动物完整性指数B-IBI的东江流域水生态健康评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 27(8): 1502-1511. DOI
	FU L, JIANG Y, LIU Q, et al., 2018. Eco-health assessment of Dongjiang River Basin based on index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) of macroinvertebrates[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 27(8): 1502-1511.
[18]	国家环境保护总局, 国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 2002. 地表水环境质量标准: GB 3838—2002[S]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社: 2-3.
	State Environmental Protection Administration of China, State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of China, 2002. Environmental Quality Standard for Surface Water: GB 3838—2002[S]. Beijing: China Environmental Science Press: 2-3.
[19]	国家环境保护总局《水和废水监测分析方法》编委会, 2002. 水和废水监测分析方法[M]. 第4版. 北京: 中国环境科学出版集团: 1-830.
	Editorial board of State Environmental Protection Administration of China for Water and Wastewater Monitoring and Analysis Methods, 2002. Water and Wastewater Monitoring and Analysis Methods[M]. 4th edition. Beijing: China Environmental Publishing Group: 1-830.
[20]	郝利霞, 孙然好, 陈利顶, 2014. 海河流域河流生态系统健康评价[J]. 环境科学, 35(10): 3692-3701.
	HAO L X, SUN R H, CHEN L D, 2014. Health assessment of river ecosystem in Haihe River Basin, China[J]. Environmental Science, 35(10): 3692-3701.
[21]	黄彬彬, 李光锦, 丰茂成, 等, 2020. 基于底栖动物生物完整性指数的赣江干流健康评价[J]. 水资源与水工程学报, 31(5): 30-36.
	HUANG B B, LI G J, FENG M C, et al., 2020. Health assessment of Ganjiang River mainstream based on B-IBI[J]. Journal of Water Resources & Water Engineering, 31(5): 30-36.
[22]	孔凡青, 崔文彦, 周绪申, 2018. 基于大型底栖动物完整性指数 (B-IBI) 的永定河水系生态健康评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 27(3): 550-555. DOI
	KONG F Q, CUI W Y, ZHOU X S, 2018. Health assessment on Yongding River Watershed using benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI)[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 27(3): 550-555.
[23]	刘月英, 1979. 中国经济动物志-淡水软体动物[M]. 北京: 科学出版社: 1-134.
	LIU Y Y, 1979. Economic fauna of China-freshwater mollusca[M]. Beijing: Science Press: 1-134.
[24]	慕林青, 张海萍, 赵树旗, 等, 2018. 永定河底栖动物生物完整性指数构建与健康评价[J]. 环境科学研究, 31(4): 697-707.
	MU L Q, ZHANG H P, ZHAO S Q, et al., 2018. River health assessment of Yongding River based on benthic integrated biotic index[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 31(4): 697-707.
[25]	渠晓东, 刘志刚, 张远, 2012. 标准化方法筛选参照点构建大型底栖动物生物完整性指数[J]. 生态学报, 32(15): 4661-4672.
	QU X D, LIU Z G, ZHANG Y, 2012. Discussion on the standardized method of reference sites selection for establishing the Benthic-Index of Biotic Integrity[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 32(15): 4661-4672. DOI URL
[26]	苏瑶, 许育新, 安文浩, 等, 2019. 基于微生物生物完整性指数的城市河道生态系统健康评价[J]. 环境科学, 40(3): 1270-1279.
	SU Y, XU Y X, AN W H, et al., 2019. Assessment of ecosystem health of an urban river based on the microbe index of biotic integrity (M-IBI)[J]. Environmental Science, 40(3): 1270-1279. DOI URL
[27]	孙鹏程, 龚家国, 任政, 等, 2022. 海河流域河湖修复保护进展与展望[J]. 水利水电技术, 53(1): 135-152.
	SUN P C, GONG J G, REN Z, et al., 2022. Progress and prospect of river-lake restoration and protection in Haihe River Basin[J]. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, 53(1): 135-152.
[28]	田鹏, 钱昶, 林佳宁, 等, 2019. 滦河流域大型底栖动物生物完整性指数健康评价[J]. 中国环境监测, 35(4): 50-58.
	TIAN P, QIAN C, LIN J N, et al., 2019. Study of river health assessment based on the benthic index of biological integrity in the Luanhe River Basin[J]. Environmental Monitoring in China, 35(4): 50-58.
[29]	王备新, 杨莲芳, 刘正文, 2006. 生物完整性指数与水生态系统健康评价[J]. 生态学杂志, 25(6): 707-710.
	WANG B X, YANG L F, LIU Z W, 2006. Index of biological integrity and its application in health assessment of aquatic ecosystem[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 25(6): 707-710.
[30]	王俊才, 王新华, 2011. 中国北方摇蚊幼虫[M]. 北京: 中国言实出版社:1-291.
	WANG J C, WANG X H, 2011. Larvae of chironomid in northern China[M]. Beijing: China Yanshi Press:1-291.
[31]	许维, 梁舒汀, 黄艳凤, 等, 2020. 基于大型底栖动物的大清河水系水体健康状况评价[J]. 湿地科学, 18(5): 546-554.
	XU W, LIANG S T, HUANG Y F, et al., 2020. Assessment of water health status of Daqing River system base on macrobenthos[J]. Wetland Science, 18(5): 546-554.
[32]	殷旭旺, 张远, 渠晓东, 等, 2011. 浑河水系着生藻类的群落结构与生物完整性[J]. 应用生态学报, 22(10): 2732-2740.
	YIN X W, ZHANG Y, QU X D, et al., 2011. Community structure and biological integrity of periphyton in Hunhe River water system of Liaoning Province, Northeast China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 22(10): 2732-2740.
[33]	游清徽, 刘玲玲, 方娜, 等, 2019. 基于大型底栖无脊椎动物完整性指数的鄱阳湖湿地生态健康评价[J]. 生态学报, 39(18): 6631-6641.
	YOU Q H, LIU L L, FANG N, et al., 2019. Assessing ecological health of Poyang Lake wetland, using benthic macroinvertebrate-based index of biotic integrity (B-IBI)[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(18): 6631-6641.
[34]	张颖, 胡金, 万云, 等, 2014. 基于底栖动物完整性指数B-IBI的淮河流域水系生态健康评价[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 30(3): 300-305.
	ZHANG Y, HU J, WAN Y, et al., 2014. Eco-health assessment of Huaihe River System based on benthic-index of biotic integrity[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 30(3): 300-305.
[35]	张宇航, 渠晓东, 王少明, 等, 2020. 浑河流域底栖动物生物完整性指数构建与健康评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 20(6): 1374-1386.
	ZHANG Y H, QU X D, WANG S M, et al., 2020. River health assessment of Hun River Basin based on benthic index of biological integrity[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 20(6): 1374-1386.
[36]	张远, 徐成斌, 马溪平, 等, 2007. 辽河流域河流底栖动物完整性评价指标与标准[J]. 环境科学学报, 27(6): 919-927.
	ZHANG Y, XU C B, MA X P, et al., 2007. Biotic integrity index and criteria of benthic organizms in Liao River Basin[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 27(6): 919-927.
[37]	郑丙辉, 张远, 李英博, 2007. 辽河流域河流栖息地评价指标与评价方法研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 27(6): 928-936.
	ZHENG B H, ZHANG Y, LI Y B, 2007. Study of indicators and methods for river habitat assessment of Liao River Basin[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 27(6): 928-936.
[38]	周莹, 渠晓东, 赵瑞, 等, 2013. 河流健康评价中不同标准化方法的应用与比较[J]. 环境科学研究, 26(4): 410-417.
	ZHOU Y, QU X D, ZHAO R, et al., 2013. Standardized methods for selecting reference and impaired sites to evaluate river health[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 26(4): 410-417.

指标类型	序号	生物指标	对干扰的反应	平均值	标准差	最大值	最小值	25%分位值	中位数	75%分位值
群落丰富度	M1	总分类单元数	减小	14	3.65	21	9	11	13	15
	M2	密度/(ind∙m⁻²)	减小	418	368	1376	129	162	304	413
	M3	EPT分类单元数	减小	2.11	2.02	7	0	1	1	2
	M4	摇蚊科分类单元数	增大	4.33	1.41	6	2	3	4	6
	M5	端足目和软体动物的分类单元数	减小	1.44	1.71	5	0	0	1	1
	M6	双翅目分类单元数	减小	5.11	1.66	8	3	4	5	6
个体数量比例	M7	摇蚊科个体相对丰度	增大	0.31	0.24	0.77	0.03	0.12	0.27	0.46
	M8	优势分类单元个体相对丰度	增大	0.34	0.22	0.78	0.15	0.21	0.22	0.40
	M9	前三位优势分类单元个体相对丰度	增大	0.63	0.17	0.86	0.40	0.53	0.56	0.84
生物耐污能力	M10	敏感类群的分类单元数	减小	1.44	1.17	4	0	1	1	2
	M11	中间类群的个体相对丰度	变化	0.64	0.17	0.88	0.39	0.48	0.69	0.76
	M12	耐污类群的个体相对丰度	增大	0.29	0.19	0.59	0.01	0.14	0.31	0.34
	M13	BI值	增大	6.01	1.16	7.66	3.74	5.41	5.68	6.53
	M14	BMWP值	减小	55.6	24.9	112	32	38	48	58
	M15	ASPT	减小	5.29	0.79	6.59	4.45	4.70	4.80	6.00
营养级组成	M16	捕食者个体相对丰度	减小	0.15	0.12	0.45	0.02	0.06	0.13	0.21
营养级组成	M17	撕食者+刮食者个体相对丰度	减小	0.41	0.27	0.84	0	0.29	0.33	0.58
多样性	M18	Shannon-Wiener指数	减小	2.79	0.71	3.75	1.46	2.41	3.09	3.24
	M19	Margalef指数	减小	2.24	0.47	3.15	1.65	1.99	2.11	2.56
	M20	Pielou指数	减小	0.74	0.19	0.94	0.42	0.55	0.84	0.88
	M21	Simpson指数	减小	0.76	0.18	0.91	0.39	0.73	0.86	0.87

指标类型	序号	生物指标	对干扰的反应	平均值	标准差	最大值	最小值	25%分位值	中位数	75%分位值
群落丰富度	M1	总分类单元数	减小	14	3.65	21	9	11	13	15
	M2	密度/(ind∙m⁻²)	减小	418	368	1376	129	162	304	413
	M3	EPT分类单元数	减小	2.11	2.02	7	0	1	1	2
	M4	摇蚊科分类单元数	增大	4.33	1.41	6	2	3	4	6
	M5	端足目和软体动物的分类单元数	减小	1.44	1.71	5	0	0	1	1
	M6	双翅目分类单元数	减小	5.11	1.66	8	3	4	5	6
个体数量比例	M7	摇蚊科个体相对丰度	增大	0.31	0.24	0.77	0.03	0.12	0.27	0.46
	M8	优势分类单元个体相对丰度	增大	0.34	0.22	0.78	0.15	0.21	0.22	0.40
	M9	前三位优势分类单元个体相对丰度	增大	0.63	0.17	0.86	0.40	0.53	0.56	0.84
生物耐污能力	M10	敏感类群的分类单元数	减小	1.44	1.17	4	0	1	1	2
	M11	中间类群的个体相对丰度	变化	0.64	0.17	0.88	0.39	0.48	0.69	0.76
	M12	耐污类群的个体相对丰度	增大	0.29	0.19	0.59	0.01	0.14	0.31	0.34
	M13	BI值	增大	6.01	1.16	7.66	3.74	5.41	5.68	6.53
	M14	BMWP值	减小	55.6	24.9	112	32	38	48	58
	M15	ASPT	减小	5.29	0.79	6.59	4.45	4.70	4.80	6.00
营养级组成	M16	捕食者个体相对丰度	减小	0.15	0.12	0.45	0.02	0.06	0.13	0.21
营养级组成	M17	撕食者+刮食者个体相对丰度	减小	0.41	0.27	0.84	0	0.29	0.33	0.58
多样性	M18	Shannon-Wiener指数	减小	2.79	0.71	3.75	1.46	2.41	3.09	3.24
	M19	Margalef指数	减小	2.24	0.47	3.15	1.65	1.99	2.11	2.56
	M20	Pielou指数	减小	0.74	0.19	0.94	0.42	0.55	0.84	0.88
	M21	Simpson指数	减小	0.76	0.18	0.91	0.39	0.73	0.86	0.87

编号	M1	M8	M14	M15	M18	M21
M1	1
M8	−0.528	1
M14	0.873	−0.320	1
M15	0.522	−0.261	0.707	1
M18	0.743	−0.921	0.511	0.332	1
M21	0.589	−0.965	0.383	0.285	0.953	1

编号	M1	M8	M14	M15	M18	M21
M1	1
M8	−0.528	1
M14	0.873	−0.320	1
M15	0.522	−0.261	0.707	1
M18	0.743	−0.921	0.511	0.332	1
M21	0.589	−0.965	0.383	0.285	0.953	1

序号	计算公式
M1	M1/20.10
M15	M15/6.51
M18	M18/3.63

海河流域河流大型底栖动物生物完整性指数健康评价

Health Assessment of Haihe River Basin Based on Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 38

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

健康评价等级	评分标准
健康	>2.14
良好	1.61‒2.14
一般	1.08‒1.61
较差	0.55‒1.08
很差	0.55<

[1]	宋思梦, 林冬梅, 周恒宇, 罗宗志, 张丽丽, 易超, 林辉, 林兴生, 刘斌, 苏德伟, 郑丹, 余世葵, 林占熺. 种植巨菌草对乌兰布和沙漠植物物种多样性与土壤理化性质的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(9): 1595-1605.
[2]	姜懿珊, 孙迎韬, 张干, 罗春玲. 中国不同气候类型森林土壤微生物群落结构及其影响因素[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(8): 1355-1364.
[3]	梁舒汀, 王菲, 吴丹, 赵燕楚, 孔凡青. 基于大型底栖动物完整性指数的海河流域典型水库水生态健康评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(8): 1457-1464.
[4]	梁川, 杨艳芳, 俞姗姗, 周利, 张经纬, 张秀娟. 围网与围塘养鱼下沉积物微生物量和群落结构特征差异[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(8): 1487-1495.
[5]	侯晖, 颜培轩, 谢沁宓, 赵宏亮, 庞丹波, 陈林, 李学斌, 胡杨, 梁咏亮, 倪细炉. 贺兰山蒙古扁桃灌丛根际土壤AM真菌群落多样性特征研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 857-865.
[6]	姜永伟, 丁振军, 袁俊斌, 张峥, 李杨, 问青春, 王业耀, 金小伟. 辽宁省主要河流底栖动物群落结构及水质评价研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 969-979.
[7]	王云, 郑西来, 曹敏, 李磊, 宋晓冉, 林晓宇, 郭凯. 滨海含水层咸-淡水过渡带反硝化性能与控制因素研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 980-988.
[8]	寇祝, 卿纯, 袁昌果, 李平. 西藏东北部热泉水中硫氧化菌的多样性及分布特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(5): 989-1000.
[9]	胡芳, 刘聚涛, 温春云, 韩柳, 文慧. 抚河流域浮游植物群落结构特征及其水生态状况评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 744-755.
[10]	于菲, 曾海龙, 房怀阳, 付玲芳, 林澍, 董家豪. 典型感潮河网浮游藻类功能群时空变化特征及水质评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 756-765.
[11]	吴炜龙, 陈艺杰, 卫婷, 杨贵琼, 阳长洪, 甄珍, 蔺中. 蚯蚓驱动的滨海盐碱农田土壤中多环芳烃生物降解的机制研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(11): 1996-2006.
[12]	周佳诚, 宋志斌, 苗芃, 谭路, 唐涛. 柳江不同河网位置大型底栖动物群落特征及其影响因子差异比较研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(10): 1794-1801.
[13]	梁川, 杨艳芳, 俞姗姗, 周利, 张经纬, 张秀娟. 围网与围塘养鱼下沉积物微生物量和群落结构特征差异[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(10): 1802-1810.
[14]	李璇, 钱秀雯, 黄娟, 王鸣宇, 肖君. 纳米氧化镍暴露下人工湿地运行性能及微生物群落的响应[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(10): 1833-1841.
[15]	王礼霄, 刘晋仙, 柴宝峰. 华北亚高山土壤细菌群落及氮循环对退耕还草的响应[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(8): 1537-1546.