基于生态功能定位的太湖流域水生态安全评估

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.03.010

生态环境学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 418-427.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.03.010

• 研究论文【环境科学】 • 上一篇下一篇

基于生态功能定位的太湖流域水生态安全评估

凌虹¹^,²^,³(), 朱晓晓¹^,²^,³^,^*(), 巫丹⁴, 苏小妹⁴, 郭西亚¹^,²^,³

1.江苏省环境工程技术有限公司，江苏南京210000
2.污染环境修复与生态健康工业和信息化部重点实验室，江苏南京 210000
3.江苏省环保集团有限公司，江苏南京 210036
4.江苏省环境科学研究院，江苏南京 210036

收稿日期:2023-11-19 出版日期:2024-03-18 发布日期:2024-05-08
通讯作者: *朱晓晓。E-mail: 1023192284@qq.com
作者简介:凌虹（1975年生），女，研究员级高级工程师，博士，主要从事环境规划及环境管理政策研究。E-mail: 503769747@qq.com
基金资助:
江苏省太湖治理科研课题(TH2018402);江苏省环保集团科技项目计划(JSEP-GJ2023-1005-RE-ZL)

Assessing Water Ecological Security in the Taihu Lake Basin through Ecological Function Localization

LING Hong¹^,²^,³(), ZHU Xiaoxiao¹^,²^,³^,^*(), WU Dan⁴, SU Xiaomei⁴, GUO Xiya¹^,²^,³

1. Jiangsu Provincial Environmental Engineering Technology Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210000, P. R. China
2. Key Laboratory of Environmental Remediation and Ecological Health, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Nanjing 210000, P. R. China
3. Jiangsu Environmental Protection Group Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210036, P. R. China
4. Jiangsu Academy of Environmental Science, Nanjing 210036, P. R. China

Received:2023-11-19 Online:2024-03-18 Published:2024-05-08

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

太湖流域水生态安全在维持长江流域生态安全格局中发挥重要作用。为阐明不同生态功能影响下太湖流域分区水生态安全状况，将太湖流域水生态功能分区与不同区域主导生态功能定位结合，构建基于主导生态功能定位的“压力-状态-服务”（PSS）模型并开展分区评估。结果表明，太湖流域整体生态安全形势为“较安全”和“基本安全”。太湖湖体生境状态因素最差，水质净化区、水源涵养区、水环境维持区和重要生境维持区的生境压力及生境状态为主要制约因素。太湖湖体II-08、II-10和III-20水生态功能分区处于“不安全”水平，入湖河流污染负荷汇入影响突出。水环境维持区和重要生境维持区均受人类活动扰动影响较大。根据湖体与入湖河道水体、底泥氮磷浓度相关性研究结果，II-03、III-11、III-12水生态功能分区水质与III-20区域氮磷浓度关系密切，与总氮、总磷相关性显著（P>0.05）的入湖河道占比分别为50%、66.7%，应兼顾氮磷输入影响。III-13和浙江省分别有100%、71.4%的入湖河道的TP浓度与湖体TP浓度相关性显著（P>0.05），应重点把控总磷输入风险，湖体总磷外源污染输入风险更大。入湖河道底泥中氮磷浓度较高，沉积物再悬浮导致N、P等污染物向上覆水释放并随之汇入太湖，影响太湖水生态安全。应重点关注II-03、III-11水生态功能分区入湖河道底泥N、P治理，重点强化III-12、III-13入湖河道TN去除。针对太湖湖体及环湖水生态功能分区生态安全异质性胁迫因素，因地制宜开展保护修复，推动太湖流域水生态安全有效提升。

关键词: 太湖, 水生态功能分区, PSS模型, 水生态安全, 评估, 对策建议

Abstract:

The aquatic ecological security of Taihu Lake Basin is crucial for maintaining the overall ecological balance in the Yangtze River Basin. This study aimed to assess the aquatic ecological security of Taihu Lake Basin by considering various ecological functions. This study combined the aquatic ecological function zones of Taihu Basin with the dominant ecological function positions in different regions. The assessment used the “Stress-Status-Service” (PSS) model based on dominant ecological function positioning. The results indicated the ecological security of the Taihu Lake Basin to be mainly “relatively safe” and “basically safe,” with the habitat state of the Taihu Lake being the most compromised. Habitat pressure and state have been identified as the main restrictive factors for aquatic purification, water source conservation, aquatic environmental maintenance, and important habitat maintenance areas. Specifically, zones II-08, II-10, and III-20 of Taihu Lake were deemed “unsafe,” largely attributed to the pollution loads from the inflow rivers. Human activities have significantly affected the maintenance of aquatic environments and important habitat maintenance areas. Correlations between nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) concentrations in the lake and water bodies as well as in the sediment of the inflow rivers were observed. Water quality in zones II-03, III-11, and III-12 was significantly related to N and P concentrations in the III-20 zone. In addition, the proportion of river channels significantly correlated with total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) concentrations of 50% and 66.7%, respectively (P>0.05). Therefore, the influence of N and P inputs must be considered. The rivers located in III-13 and Zhejiang Province had 100% and 71.4% inflows, respectively, and their TP concentrations were significantly correlated with the TP concentration of Taihu Lake (P>0.05). The risk of exogenous pollution caused by TP was significant, thus emphasizing the need for control. The concentrations of N and P in the sediments of the inflow rivers were higher. Sediment resuspension resulted in the release of pollutants, such as N and P, into the overlying water and then into Taihu Lake, affecting its aquatic ecological security. Attention should be paid to treating TN and TP in the sediments of inflow rivers located in the II-03 and III-11 aquatic ecological function zones. The removal of TN from the inflow rivers located in III-12 and III-13 should be emphasized. Considering the heterogeneity and stress factors, this study suggests protection and restoration measures tailored to local conditions to effectively improve the water ecological security of Taihu Lake Basin.

Key words: Taihu Lake, aquatic ecological function zoning, PSS model, aquatic ecological security, evaluate, countermeasures and suggestions

中图分类号:

X824
X826

凌虹, 朱晓晓, 巫丹, 苏小妹, 郭西亚. 基于生态功能定位的太湖流域水生态安全评估[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(3): 418-427.

LING Hong, ZHU Xiaoxiao, WU Dan, SU Xiaomei, GUO Xiya. Assessing Water Ecological Security in the Taihu Lake Basin through Ecological Function Localization[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2024, 33(3): 418-427.

图/表 10

参考文献 42

[1]	AUGUSTYNIAK R, NEUGEBAUER M, KOWALSKA J, et al., 2017. Bottom deposits of dtratified, seepage, urban lake (on the example of Tyrsko Lake, Poland) as a factor potentially shaping lake water quality[J]. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 18(5): 55-62. DOI URL
[2]	EGAN K J, HERRIGES J A, KLING C L, et al., 2009. Valuing water quality as a function of water quality measures[J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 91(1): 106-123. DOI URL
[3]	HUISMAN J, CODD G A, PAERL H W, et al., 2018. Cyanobacterial blooms[J]. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 16(8): 471-483. DOI PMID
[4]	KARR J R, 1991. Biological integrity: A long neglected aspect of water resource management[J]. Ecological Applications, 1(1): 66-84. DOI URL
[5]	LI H, SONG C L, YANG L, et al., 2021. Phosphorus supply pathways and mechanisms in shallow lakes with different regime[J]. Water Research, 193: 116886. DOI URL
[6]	LI Y, GAO L, NIU L H, et al., 2021. Developing a statistical-weighted index of biotic integrity for large-river ecological evaluations[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 277: 111382. DOI URL
[7]	PEI L, DU L M, YUE G J, 2010. Ecological security assessment of Beijing based on PSR Model[J]. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 2: 832-841. DOI URL
[8]	PENG J, WANG A, LUO L W, et al., 2019. Spatial identi-fication of conservation priority areas for urban ecological land: an approach based on water ecosystem services[J]. Land Degradation and Development, 30(6): 683-694. DOI URL
[9]	PACETTI T, CASTELLI G, BRESCI E, et al., 2020. Water values: participa tory water ecosystem services assessment in the Arno River Basin, ltaly[J]. Water Resources Management, 34(14): 4527-4544. DOI
[10]	WANG M Z, XU X W, WU Z, et al., 2019. Seasonal pattern of nutrient limitation in a eutrophic lake and quantitative analysis of the impacts from internal nutrient cycling[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(23): 13675-13686. DOI URL
[11]	WANG L Z, SONG H L, WU X Y, et al., 2022. Relationship between the coprecipitation of phosphorus-on-calcite by submerged macrophytes and the phosphorus cycle in water[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 314: 115110. DOI URL
[12]	ZHENG H, LI Y F, ROBINSON B E, et al., 2016. Using ecosystem service trade-offs to inform water conservation policies and management practices[J]. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(10): 527-532. DOI URL
[13]	安文超, 2008. 南四湖及主要入湖河口沉积物的污染特征及磷吸附释放研究[D]. 济南: 山东大学.
	AN W C, 2008. Polluted characteristics of sediments and phosphate adsorption and release characteristics at the sediment-water interface in Nansi Lake, China, and its main estuaries[D]. Ji’nan: Shandong University.
[14]	柴丽娜, 张磊, 孙兆海, 等, 2021. 平原河网区浅水湖泊生态安全评估与时空差异性分析: 以江苏省白马湖为例[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 37(12): 1559-1567.
	CHAI L N, ZHANG L, SUN Z H, et al., 2021. Ecological security evaluation and spatio-temporal difference analysis of shallow lakes in plain river network area: A case study of Baima Lake[J]. Journal of Ecology and Rural Environment, 37(12): 1559-1567.
[15]	董殿波, 孙学凯, 魏亚伟, 等, 2017. 基于DPSIR模型的水丰湖生态安全评估[J]. 河北大学学报(自然科学版), 37(6): 630-639. DOI
	DONG D B, SUN X K, WEI Y W, et al., 2017. Assessment of ecological security for Shuifeng Lake based on the DPSIR model[J]. Journal of Hebei University (Natural Science Edition), 37(6): 630-639.
[16]	段文秀, 朱广伟, 刘俊杰, 等, 2020. 水源地型水库水生态安全评价方法探索[J]. 中国环境科学, 40(9): 4135-4145.
	DUAN W X, ZHU G W, LIU J J, et al., 2020. An evaluation method for ecological security of water resource reservoirs[J]. China Environmental Science, 40(9): 4135-4145.
[17]	范献方, 高帅帅, 丁士明, 等, 2023. 太湖梅梁湾沉积物中氮铁硫转化细菌的毫米级垂向分布及对氮磷迁移转化的潜在影响[J]. 湖泊科学, 35(3): 854-862.
	FAN X F, GAO S S, DING S M, et al., 2023. Millimeter-scale vertical distribution of bacterial groups involved in nitrogen, iron and sulfur cycling and its potential influence on the migration and transformation of nitrogen and phosphorus in sediments of Meiliang Bay, Lake Taihu[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 35(3): 854-862. DOI URL
[18]	金相灿, 王圣瑞, 席海燕, 2012. 湖泊生态安全及其评估方法框架[J]. 环境科学研究, 25(4): 357-362.
	JIN X C, WANG S R, XI H Y, 2012. Lake ecological security and assessment methodology framework[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 25(4): 357-362.
[19]	凌虹, 巫丹, 谭东烜, 等, 2018. 近年太湖总磷升高成因及对策建议[J]. 环境科技, 31(6): 81-86.
	LING H, WU D, TAN D X, et al., 2018. Causes and countermeasures of total phosphorus rise in Taihu Lake during recent years[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 31(6): 81-86.
[20]	林佳宁, 高欣, 贾晓波, 等, 2016. 基于PSFR评估框架的太子河流域水生态安全评估[J]. 环境科学研究, 29(10): 1440-1450.
	LIN J N, GAO X, JIA X B, et al., 2016. Assessment of riverine ecological security for Taizi River Basin based on PSFR evaluation framework[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 29(10): 1440-1450.
[21]	李梦娣, 范俊韬, 孔维静, 等, 2018. 河流山区段水生态安全评估:以太子河为例[J]. 应用生态学报, 29(8): 2685-2694.
	LI M D, FAN J T, KONG W J, et al., 2018. Assessment of aquatic ecological security for mountainous rivers: A case study in the Taizi River Basin, northeast China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 29(8): 2685-2694. DOI
[22]	李琼芳, 许树洪, 陈启慧, 等, 2022. 环太湖各水资源分区入出湖河流总磷浓度与负荷变化分析[J]. 湖泊科学, 34(1): 74-89.
	LI Q F, XU S H, CHEN Q H, et al., 2022. Analysis on the variation of total phosphorus concentrations and loads of inflow and outflow rivers from different water resources zones around Lake Taihu[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 34(1): 74-89. DOI URL
[23]	李娣, 李旭文, 吕学研, 等, 2023. 太湖流域水生生物群落结构与水生态质量状况分析[J]. 生态毒理学报, 18(1): 271-279.
	LI D, LI X W, LÜ X Y, et al., 2023. Analysis of aquatic community structure and water ecological quality in Tai Lake Basin[J]. Asian Journal of Ecotoxicology, 18(1): 271-279.
[24]	李兆碧, 陶宇, 欧维新, 等, 2023. 基于水量与水质的太湖流域水生态服务供需关系及多情景评估[J]. 生态学报, 43(5): 2088-2100.
	LI Z B, TAO Y, OU W X, et al., 2023. Supply and demand relationship and multi-scenario assessment of water ecological services related water quantity and quality in Taihu Lake Basin[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica., 43(5): 2088-2100.
[25]	刘丽娜, 马春子, 张靖天, 等, 2023. 东北湖区典型流域生态安全评估[J]. 环境科学研究, 32(7): 1108-1116.
	LIU L N, MA C Z, ZHANG J T, et al., 2023. Ecological security assessment of typical watershed in northeast, China[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 32(7): 1108-1116.
[26]	刘倩倩, 徐昔宝, 2023. 湖泊生态服务生产函数构建研究——以博斯腾湖为例[J]. 湖泊科学, 35(1): 279-288.
	LIU Q Q, XU X B, 2023. Construction of lake ecosystem service production function: A case study of Lake Bosten, China[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 35(1): 279-288.
[27]	吕文, 杨惠, 杨金艳, 等, 2020. 环太湖江苏段入湖河道污染物通量与湖区水质的响应关系[J]. 湖泊科学, 32(5): 1454-1462.
	LÜ W, YANG H, YANG J Y, et al., 2020. Relationship between water quality in Lake Taihu and pollutant fluxes of the rivers surrounding Lake Taihu in Jiangsu Province[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 32(5): 1454-1462. DOI URL
[28]	刘维淦, 林琪, 张科, 等, 2022. 太湖流域长荡湖近百年生态环境演变过程[J]. 湖泊科学, 34(2): 675-683.
	LIU W G, LIN Q, ZHANG K, et al., 2022. Eco-environmental evolutionprocess during the past century in Lake Changdang, Lake Taihu Basin[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 34(2): 675-683. DOI URL
[29]	南箔, 杨子寒, 毕旭, 等, 2018. 生态系统服务价值与人类活动的时空关联分析——以长江中游华阳河湖群地区为例[J]. 中国环境科学, 38(9): 3531-3541.
	NAN B, YANG Z H, BI X, et al., 2018. Spatial-temporal correlation analysis of ecosystem services value and human activities: A case study of Huayang LakesArea in the middle reaches of Yangtze River[J]. China Environmental Science, 38(9): 3531-3541.
[30]	王冼民, 翟淑华, 张红举, 等, 2017. 基于水质改善目标的太湖适宜换水周期分析[J]. 湖泊科学, 29(1): 9-21.
	WANG X M, ZHAI S H, ZHANG H J, et al., 2017. Research on appropriate hydraulic retention time on basis of water quality improvement of Lake Taihu[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 29(1): 9-21. DOI URL
[31]	王怡然, 张大红, 吴宇伦, 2020. 基于DPSIR模型的森林生态安全时空间变化研究:以浙江省79个县区为例[J]. 生态学报, 40(8): 2793-2801.
	WANG Y R, ZHANG D H, WU Y L, 2020. The spatio-temporal changes of forest ecological security based on DPSIR model: Cases study in Zhejiang Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40(8): 2793-2801.
[32]	吴攀, 秦伯强, 于革, 等, 2015. 太湖上游流域经济发展对废水排放及入湖总磷的影响[J]. 湖泊科学, 27(6): 1107-1114.
	WU P, QIN B Q, YU G, et al., 2015. Effects of economic development on wastewater discharge and influent total phosphorus load in the upstream of Lake Taihu Basin[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 27(6): 1107-1114. DOI URL
[33]	尤本胜, 刘伟京, 操庆, 等, 2023. 建立促进太湖水生态健康的流域现代化治理体系的建议[J]. 环境监测管理与技术, 35(3): 1-10.
	YOU B S, LIU W J, CAO Q, et al., 2023. Suggestions on establishing a modern watershed management system to promote the water ecological health of Taihu Lake[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 35(3): 1-10.
[34]	张建华, 殷鹏, 张雷, 等, 2023. 底泥疏浚对太湖内源及底栖生物恢复的影响[J]. 环境科学, 44(2): 828-838.
	ZHANG J H, YIN P, ZHANG L, et al., 2023. Effects of sediment dredging on the reduction in sediment internal loading of Lake Taihu and the self-recovery ability of benthic organism[J]. Environmental Science, 44(2): 828-838.
[35]	张磊, 2015. 洪泽湖生态安全评估研究[D]. 南京: 南京林业大学.
	ZHANG L, 2015. Ecological security assessment of Hongze Lake[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Forestry University.
[36]	张曼, 殷鹏, 支鸣强, 等, 2023. 太湖藻型及草型湖区底泥内源污染及释放机制研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 43(6): 247-257.
	ZHANG M, YIN P, ZHI M Q, et al., 2023. Characteristics and release mechanism of endogenous pollution in algae- and grass-dominated zones in Lake Taihu[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 43(6): 247-257.
[37]	赵凯, 周彦锋, 蒋兆林, 等, 2017. 1960年以来太湖水生植被演变[J]. 湖泊科学, 29(2): 351-362.
	ZHAO K, ZHOU Y F, JIANG Z L, et al., 2017. Changes of aquatic vegetation in Lake Taihu since 1960s[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 29(2): 351-362. DOI URL
[38]	钟振宇, 柴立元, 刘益贵, 等, 2010. 基于层次分析法的洞庭湖生态安全评估[J]. 中国环境科学, 30(增刊1): 41-45.
	ZHONG Z Y, CHAI L Y, LIU Y G, et al., 2010. Ecological security evaluation based on AHP of Lake Dongting[J]. China Environmental Science, 30(Supp l): 41-45.
[39]	朱广伟, 邹伟, 国超旋, 等, 2020a. 太湖水体磷浓度与赋存量长期变化 (2005-2018年) 及其对未来磷控制目标管理的启示[J]. 湖泊科学, 32(1): 21-35.
	ZHU G W, ZOU W, GUO C X, et al., 2020a. Long-term variations of phosphorus concentration and capacity in Lake Taihu, 2005-2018: Implications for future phosphorus reduction target management[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 32(1): 21-35. DOI URL
[40]	朱广伟, 施坤, 李未, 等, 2020b. 太湖蓝藻水华的年度情势预测方法探讨[J]. 湖泊科学, 32(5): 1421-1431.
	ZHU G W, SHI K, LI W, et al., 2020b. Seasonal forecast method of cyanobacterial bloom intensity in eutrophic Lake Taihu, China[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 32(5): 1421-1431. DOI URL
[41]	朱金格, 刘鑫, 邓建才, 等, 2018. 太湖西部环湖河道污染物输移速率变化特征[J]. 湖泊科学, 30(6): 1509-1517.
	ZHU J G, LIU X, DENG J C, et al., 2018. Pollutant transport rates in the rivers around western Lake Taihu[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 30(6): 1509-1517. DOI URL
[42]	朱伟, 胡思远, 冯甘雨, 等, 2020. 特大洪水对浅水湖泊磷的影响: 以2016年太湖为例[J]. 湖泊科学, 32(2): 325-336.
	ZHU W, HU S Y, FENG G Y, et al., 2020. Effects of great floods on phosphorus in shallow lakes: A case study of Lake Taihu in 2016[J]. Journal of Lake Sciences, 32(2): 325-336. DOI URL

指标体系			单位	参照标准					权重
目标层	因素层	指标层	单位	A ¹⁾	B ²⁾	C ³⁾	D ⁴⁾	E ⁵⁾	A	B	C	D	E
太湖生态安全综合指数 (ESI)	生境压力 A₁	污染负荷指数B₁₁	－ ⁶⁾	× ⁷⁾	1	1	1	1	×	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5
		人类活动强度指数B₁₂	－	×	0.13	0.08	0.16	0.17	×	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5
		入湖河流污染负荷指数B₁₃	－	1	×	×	×	×	0.4	×	×	×	×
		换水周期B₁₄	d	192 ⁸⁾	×	×	×	×	0.3	×	×	×	×
		水生生境干扰指数B₁₅	－	100	×	×	×	×	0.3	×	×	×	×
	生境状态 A₂	水质综合达标率B₂₁	%	100	100	100	100	100	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2
		底栖动物多样性指数B₂₂	－	3	3	3	3	3	0.1	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2
		沉积物营养物质污染指数B₂₃	－	1	1	1	1	1	0.1	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2
		浮游植物多样性指数B₂₄	－	3	×	3	×	×	0.1	×	0.2	×	×
		沉积物重金属生态风险指数B₂₅	－	150	150	×	150	150	0.1	0.2		0.2	0.2
		综合营养状态指数B₂₆	－	50	×	50	×	×	0.1	×	0.2	×	×
		河流水质指数B₂₇	－	×	1	×	1	1	×	0.2	×	0.2	0.2
		年平均水位B₂₈	m	3.31	×	×	×	×	0.1	×	×	×	×
		蓝藻水华发生面积B₂₉	km²	62	×	×	×	×	0.1	×	×	×	×
		浮游动物多样性指数B₂₁₀	－	3	×	×	×	×	0.1	×	×	×	×
	服务功能 A₃	自然保护区级别B₃₁	分	×	×	5	×	5	×	×	0.25	×	0.5
		区域水面率B₃₂	%	×	×	×	8.6	×	×	×	×	0.5	×
		湿地面积的比例B₃₃	%	×	11.6	2.68	×	×	×	0.5	0.25	×	×
		年引水量与供水量之比B₃₄	－	0.63	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		微囊藻毒素浓度达标率B₃₅	%	100	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		集中饮用水水质综合达标率B₃₆	%	100	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		水生植被覆盖率B₃₇	%	30	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		林草覆盖率B₃₈	%	×	13.3	48.6	1.62	×	×	0.5	0.25	0.5	×
		水源涵养指数B₃₉	－	×	×	54.2	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×
		保护区面积的比例B₃₁₀	－	×	×	×	×	0.38	×	×	×	×	0.5

指标体系			单位	参照标准					权重
目标层	因素层	指标层	单位	A ¹⁾	B ²⁾	C ³⁾	D ⁴⁾	E ⁵⁾	A	B	C	D	E
太湖生态安全综合指数 (ESI)	生境压力 A₁	污染负荷指数B₁₁	－ ⁶⁾	× ⁷⁾	1	1	1	1	×	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5
		人类活动强度指数B₁₂	－	×	0.13	0.08	0.16	0.17	×	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5
		入湖河流污染负荷指数B₁₃	－	1	×	×	×	×	0.4	×	×	×	×
		换水周期B₁₄	d	192 ⁸⁾	×	×	×	×	0.3	×	×	×	×
		水生生境干扰指数B₁₅	－	100	×	×	×	×	0.3	×	×	×	×
	生境状态 A₂	水质综合达标率B₂₁	%	100	100	100	100	100	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2
		底栖动物多样性指数B₂₂	－	3	3	3	3	3	0.1	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2
		沉积物营养物质污染指数B₂₃	－	1	1	1	1	1	0.1	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2
		浮游植物多样性指数B₂₄	－	3	×	3	×	×	0.1	×	0.2	×	×
		沉积物重金属生态风险指数B₂₅	－	150	150	×	150	150	0.1	0.2		0.2	0.2
		综合营养状态指数B₂₆	－	50	×	50	×	×	0.1	×	0.2	×	×
		河流水质指数B₂₇	－	×	1	×	1	1	×	0.2	×	0.2	0.2
		年平均水位B₂₈	m	3.31	×	×	×	×	0.1	×	×	×	×
		蓝藻水华发生面积B₂₉	km²	62	×	×	×	×	0.1	×	×	×	×
		浮游动物多样性指数B₂₁₀	－	3	×	×	×	×	0.1	×	×	×	×
	服务功能 A₃	自然保护区级别B₃₁	分	×	×	5	×	5	×	×	0.25	×	0.5
		区域水面率B₃₂	%	×	×	×	8.6	×	×	×	×	0.5	×
		湿地面积的比例B₃₃	%	×	11.6	2.68	×	×	×	0.5	0.25	×	×
		年引水量与供水量之比B₃₄	－	0.63	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		微囊藻毒素浓度达标率B₃₅	%	100	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		集中饮用水水质综合达标率B₃₆	%	100	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		水生植被覆盖率B₃₇	%	30	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×	×	×
		林草覆盖率B₃₈	%	×	13.3	48.6	1.62	×	×	0.5	0.25	0.5	×
		水源涵养指数B₃₉	－	×	×	54.2	×	×	×	×	0.25	×	×
		保护区面积的比例B₃₁₀	－	×	×	×	×	0.38	×	×	×	×	0.5

分区	建设用地与农用地比例		增幅/%
分区	1990年	2018年	增幅/%
水质净化区	0.13	0.59	354
水环境维持区	0.16	0.84	425
水源涵养区	0.08	0.28	250
重要生境维持区	0.17	1.53	800

分区	建设用地与农用地比例		增幅/%
分区	1990年	2018年	增幅/%
水质净化区	0.13	0.59	354
水环境维持区	0.16	0.84	425
水源涵养区	0.08	0.28	250
重要生境维持区	0.17	1.53	800

区域	因素层	指标	ESI
区域	因素层	指标	Pearson 相关性	显著性 (双侧)
太湖湖体	生境压力	入湖河流污染负荷指数	0.931*¹⁾	0.022
	生境状态	水质综合达标率	0.748	0.146
		综合营养状态指数	0.858	0.063
		沉积物营养物质污染指数	0.481	0.413
		沉积物重金属生态风险指数	−0.054	0.931
		浮游植物多样性指数	0.347	0.567
		浮游动物多样性指数	0.379	0.530
		底栖动物多样性指数	0.205	0.740
水环境维持区	生境压力	人类活动强度指数	0.793** ²⁾	0.006
	生境压力	污染负荷指数	−0.225	0.533
	生境状态	水质综合达标率	0.060	0.869
		河流水质指数	0.015	0.966
		沉积物营养物质污染指数	0.153	0.672
		沉积物重金属生态风险指数	0.171	0.636
		底栖动物多样性指数	0.335	0.343
	服务功能	区域水面率	0.600	0.067
	服务功能	林草覆盖率	0.479	0.161

基于生态功能定位的太湖流域水生态安全评估

Assessing Water Ecological Security in the Taihu Lake Basin through Ecological Function Localization

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 42

相关文章 14

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

分区	COD_Mn/ (mg∙L⁻¹)	COD_Cr/ (mg∙L⁻¹)	TN/ (mg∙L⁻¹)	NH₃-N/ (mg∙L⁻¹)	TP/ (mg∙L⁻¹)
Ⅰ-05	3.58	10.9	1.16	0.062	0.067
Ⅱ-08	4.97	15.6	2.01	0.083	0.133
Ⅱ-09	4.52	14.5	1.72	0.058	0.125
Ⅱ-10	4.73	15.2	1.97	0.098	0.139
Ⅲ-20	6.56	20.0	3.40	0.305	0.280

入湖河道所在功能区	入湖河道	太湖湖体Ⅱ-08		入湖河道所在功能区	入湖河道	太湖湖体Ⅱ-10		入湖河道所在功能区	入湖河道	太湖湖体Ⅲ-20
入湖河道所在功能区	入湖河道	Pearson 相关性	显著性 (双侧)	入湖河道所在功能区	入湖河道	Pearson 相关性	显著性 (双侧)	入湖河道所在功能区	入湖河道	Pearson 相关性	显著性 (双侧)
III-13	望虞河	−0.256	0.423	浙江省	夹浦港	0.224	0.483	III-12	太滆运河	0.513	0.088
	望虞河	−0.256	0.423		夹浦港	0.224	0.483		武进港	0.198	0.537
	梁溪河	0.711**²⁾	0.01		合溪新港	0.569	0.054		直湖港	0.446	0.146
	梁溪河	0.711**²⁾	0.01		合溪新港	0.569	0.054		陈东港	0.700*¹⁾	0.011
	小溪港	0.199	0.535		长兴港	0.756**	0.004	III-11	漕桥河	0.673*	0.016
III-12	太滆运河	0.429	0.164		杨家浦港	0.249	0.436		殷村港	0.477	0.117
	太滆运河	0.429	0.164		杨家浦港	0.249	0.436		大浦港	0.798**	0.002
	武进港	0.216	0.5		旄儿港	0.602*	0.038		官渎港	0.700*	0.011
	武进港	0.216	0.5		旄儿港	0.602*	0.038		洪巷港	0.608*	0.036
	直湖港	0.385	0.216		东苕溪	0.376	0.228		社渎港	0.447	0.145
	直湖港	0.385	0.216		东苕溪	0.376	0.228	II-03	乌溪港	0.759**	0.004
	陈东港	0.480	0.114		大钱港	0.408	0.187	II-03	大港河	0.128	0.691

[1]	王金明, 秦晓波, 万运帆, 周盛, 张志伟. 中国水稻食物系统碳足迹结构组成和地区差异[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(8): 1405-1418.
[2]	方云皓, 赵丽元, 窦碧莹, 王书贤. 基于MSPA-CIRCUIT的长江中游城市群热环境网络识别与评价研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(7): 1237-1248.
[3]	陈敏毅, 朱航海, 佘伟铎, 尹光彩, 黄祖照, 杨巧玲. 珠三角某遗留造船厂场地土壤重金属人体健康风险评估及源解析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(4): 794-804.
[4]	李文菁, 黄月群, 黄亮亮, 李向通, 苏琼源, 孙扬言. 北部湾海洋鱼类微塑料污染特征及其风险评估[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(11): 1913-1921.
[5]	李秀华, 赵玲, 滕应, 骆永明, 黄标, 刘冲, 刘本乐, 赵其国. 贵州汞矿区周边农田土壤汞镉复合污染特征空间分布及风险评估[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(8): 1629-1636.
[6]	朱立安, 张会化, 程炯, 李婷, 林梓, 李俊杰. 珠江三角洲林业用地土壤重金属潜在生态风险格局分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(6): 1253-1262.
[7]	李美娇, 何凡能, 赵彩杉, 杨帆. 全球历史LUCC数据集新疆地区耕地数据可靠性评估[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(6): 1215-1224.
[8]	潘丹琳, 王飞飞, 曹文志, 陈一悦. 22种药品与个人护理产品在河流中的污染特征研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(6): 1200-1207.
[9]	张楷悦, 刘增辉, 王颜昊, 王敬宽, 崔德杰, 柳新伟. 黄河三角洲自然保护区土壤PAHs的风险评估和空间特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(11): 2198-2205.
[10]	齐静, 邓伟, 周渝, 刘婷, 罗旭. 重庆市生态保护红线成效评估方法与应用[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(7): 1532-1540.
[11]	梁永春, 尹芳, 赵英芬, 刘磊. 基于Landsat 8影像的太湖生化需氧量遥感反演[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(7): 1492-1502.
[12]	解旭东, 侯智昊, 李楠, 岳翠霞, 李雅, 杨方社. 中国胡焕庸线下方四区域沉积物和土壤中抗生素污染特征及生态风险评价[J]. 生态环境学报, 2021, 30(5): 1023-1033.
[13]	赵其国, 沈仁芳, 滕应, 李秀华. 中国重金属污染区耕地轮作休耕制度试点进展、问题及对策建议[J]. 生态环境学报, 2017, 26(12): 2003-2007.
[14]	赵其国. 当前我国农业发展中存在的深层次问题及对策[J]. 生态环境学报, 2013, 22(6): 911-915.