生态环境学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (9): 1393-1401.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2026.09.006

• 研究论文【生态学】 • 上一篇    下一篇

新疆景观生态风险评价及稳定性分析

马雪莹1,3,4(), 杜宏茹1,2,*(), 马红莲1, 赵雪纯1,2, 林涛3, 周耘天1,2   

  1. 1 中国科学院新疆生态与地理研究所， 新疆 乌鲁木齐 830011
    2 中国科学院大学， 北京 100049
    3 自然资源部荒漠-绿洲生态监测与修复工程技术创新中心， 新疆 乌鲁木齐 830002
    4 新疆师范大学地理科学与旅游学院， 新疆 乌鲁木齐 830054
  • 收稿日期:2025-12-24 修回日期:2026-07-16 接受日期:2026-08-17 出版日期:2026-09-18 发布日期:2026-09-16
  • 通讯作者: 杜宏茹, E-mail: duhr@ms.xjb.ac.cn
  • 作者简介:马雪莹（2001年生），女，硕士研究生，主要从事土地资源管理。E-mail: maxueyingxm@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    第三次新疆综合科学考察“吐哈盆地土地资源承载力与生态农业调查评估”项目(2022xjkk1100)

Landscape Ecological Risk Assessment and Stability Analysis in Xinjiang

Ma Xueying1,3,4(), Du Hongru1,2,*(), Ma Honglian1, Zhao Xuechun1,2, Lin Tao3, Zhou Yuntian1,2   

  1. 1 Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, P. R. China
    2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, P. R. China
    3 Technology Innovation Center for Ecological Monitoring and Restoration of Desert-Oasis, MNR, Urumqi 830002, P. R. China
    4 College of Geography Science and Tourism, Xinjiang Normal University, Urumqi 830054, P. R. China
  • Received:2025-12-24 Revised:2026-07-16 Accepted:2026-08-17 Online:2026-09-18 Published:2026-09-16

RichHTML

PDF

摘要：

【目的】开展长时序景观生态风险评价及稳定性分析，为干旱区生态风险精准防控与区域生态安全格局的构建提供科学依据。【方法】基于2000－2020年5期土地利用数据计算景观生态风险指数，开展景观生态风险评价；并结合Slope趋势分析与变异系数构建稳定性矩阵，揭示风险演变及稳定性特征。【结果】 1）研究区内景观生态风险以中风险区（约53%）和较低风险区（约25%）为主，高风险区占比最低，仅约2.5%，主要集聚于塔里木、准噶尔盆地边缘绿洲带。2）20年间，新疆生态风险总体呈稳定向好态势，风险稳定区与风险降低区合计占研究区面积的82.59%，其中风险降低区主要分布于中天山地区，风险稳定区广泛分布于新疆大部分区域。3）新疆景观生态风险变化类型以基本稳定区为主，占全疆面积的70.09%；稳中微升区和波动升高区合计占17.57%，主要分布于山地生态敏感区及环盆地绿洲带，表明局部区域仍存在风险升高和波动性较强的特征。【结论】新疆景观生态风险整体以中低风险为主，其空间分异与波动特征受人类活动强度及生态本底敏感性的共同影响；对于不同的风险变化类型，需制定差异化分区管控对策。

关键词: 景观生态风险评价, 景观格局指数, 稳定性分析, 趋势分析, 变异系数, 新疆

Abstract:

[Objective] This study conducted a long-term assessment of landscape ecological risk and its stability to provide a scientific basis for precise ecological risk prevention and control and for the construction of regional ecological security patterns in arid regions. [Methods] Based on five periods of land-use data from 2000 to 2020, the landscape ecological risk index was calculated to evaluate the regional landscape ecological risk status. A stability matrix was constructed by integrating slope trend analysis with the coefficient of variation to reveal the evolutionary patterns and stability characteristics of ecological risks. [Results] 1) Moderate-risk areas accounted for the largest proportion of the study area (approximately 53%), followed by low-risk areas (approximately 25%), whereas high-risk areas accounted for only about 2.5% and were largely confined to the oasis belts along the margins of the Tarim and Junggar Basins. 2) Landscape ecological risk exhibited a stable and improving trend during the study period, with stable-risk and decreasing-risk areas jointly accounting for 82.59% of the total area. Areas with decreasing risk were mainly located in the central Tianshan Mountains, whereas stable-risk areas were widespread across most of Xinjiang. 3) the stable risk-change type was dominant, covering 70.09% of the total area. Areas characterized by slight but persistent risk increases and fluctuating risk increases together accounted for 17.57% of the region and were mainly located in ecologically sensitive mountainous areas and the oasis belts surrounding the basins, indicating that localized areas remain vulnerable to increasing and unstable ecological risks. [Conclusion] Landscape ecological risk in Xinjiang is generally dominated by moderate and low levels. Its spatial differentiation and fluctuation characteristics are jointly influenced by the intensity of human activities and the sensitivity of the ecological background. Differentiated zonal management and control measures should be formulated for different types of risk change.

Key words: landscape ecological risk assessment, landscape pattern indices, stability analysis, trend analysis, coefficient of variation, Xinjiang

中图分类号: