Establishment of Evaluation Index System for Ecological Status of Forest Fires in Genhe Based on Correlation and Principal Component Analysis

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2017.05.016

Abstract

Abstract:

The occurrence of forest fires is unavoidable in many cases,but the understanding of ecological status after forest fires is of great significance for post-disaster ecological restoration and related forestry activities.Therefore,it is very important to construct an ecological status evaluation index system of forest fire.After analyzing the construction methods of the evaluation index system of ecosystems at home and abroad,this paper has chosen the forest ecosystem disturbedby forest fire disturbance as the research object.Through the index selection,frequency statistics,feasibility analysis and sensitivity,the evaluation of ecological status of forest ecosystems after forest fires was preliminarily established,which was constructed by productivity,regeneration capacity,soil conditions,microbial factors,site conditions and biodiversity,and 23 indicators of post-forest fire ecosystem assessment system.We use the entropy method to determine the indicators of the weight of the indicators.This method,which combines qualitative analysis with quantitative analysis,can achieve the goal of using the least indexes to reflect the maximum amount of original information.The application of this research idea and method should enrich the theory and method system of forest ecosystem evaluation research to a certain extent.

Key words: index system, forest fire, index screening

CLC Number:

S718.557

SHI Liang, ZHOU Mei, FENG Qianqian, WANG Zixuan, HE Min, ZHAO Pengwu. Establishment of Evaluation Index System for Ecological Status of Forest Fires in Genhe Based on Correlation and Principal Component Analysis[J]. FOREST RESOURCES WANAGEMENT, 2017, 0(5): 93-100.

Figures/Tables 7

Fig.1

Fig.2

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

The principal component selection results with the cumulative contribution rate reaching more than 80%

要素层	指标层	主成分1	主成分2	主成分3	主成分4	主成分5	主成分6	筛选结果
生产力	平均树高	0.5745	0.2066	0.2533				保留
	平均胸径	0.5614	0.1796	0.3077				保留
	灌木生物量	0.4310	-0.4173	-0.0526				删除
	草本生物量	-0.3279	0.5667	0.3006				删除
	植被盖度	-0.1545	-0.1438	0.8059				保留
	单位面积株数	0.1939	0.6397	-0.3072				保留
更新能力	幼苗数量	0.4502	0.8923					保留
	幼苗基径	0.6347	-0.2946					保留
	幼苗高度	0.6280	-0.3419					保留
土壤条件	土壤有机质	0.4986	-0.1544	0.1209	0.2086	-0.1330	0.1727	删除
	土壤含水量	-0.2856	0.0849	0.4345	0.2626	-0.0983	0.6579	保留
	土壤pH值	0.1227	0.1822	-0.4949	0.3256	0.6043	0.4314	保留
	土壤全N含量	0.5397	-0.0090	0.0154	0.0409	-0.1578	-0.0392	保留
	土壤碱解氮含量	0.4456	-0.1888	-0.0451	-0.1701	0.2169	0.0576	删除
	土壤全P含量	0.3080	0.5182	0.1504	0.0469	0.0045	-0.1625	保留
	土壤速效P含量	0.0283	-0.1216	0.4434	0.6864	0.2594	-0.3870	保留
	土壤全K含量	-0.1550	0.5675	-0.0076	-0.0433	0.2669	-0.3154	保留
	土壤速效K含量	0.0271	-0.2136	0.4912	-0.4845	0.6123	0.0527	保留
	腐殖质厚度	-0.2112	-0.4990	-0.2982	0.2021	0.1487	-0.2607	保留
微生物因子	脲酶	0.2888	0.5309	-0.2450	0.0483	0.5929		保留
	转化酶	0.3124	0.2650	-0.0154	-0.7935	0.0127		保留
	细菌数量	-0.0302	0.5751	-0.4690	0.2467	-0.5935		保留
	真菌数量	0.6070	0.0519	0.2940	0.3597	-0.1676		保留
	放线菌数量	0.5444	-0.1042	0.1496	0.2375	0.0411		删除
	微生物碳含量	-0.1097	0.4084	0.7249	-0.1606	-0.2948		保留
	微生物氮含量	-0.3758	0.3698	0.2925	0.3093	0.4236		删除
气象与立地条件	坡向	-0.0146	-0.4848	0.75184				保留
	坡度	0.6724	0.11172	0.21373				保留
	坡位	0.6440	0.20115	0.13664				保留
	海拔	0.3485	-0.3749	-0.5970				保留
	道路距离	-0.1078	0.75593	0.11815				保留
生物多样性	草本物种多样性	0.5502	-0.4284	-0.0839				保留
	草本均匀度	0.3973	-0.4392	0.3310				删除
	草本丰富度	0.3778	-0.2766	0.1336				删除
	灌木物种多样性	0.4648	0.4551	-0.0775				保留
	灌木均匀度	0.3279	0.4519	0.5832				保留
	灌木丰富度	0.4152	0.1932	-0.7207				保留

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

References 17

[1]	刘世荣, 代力民, 温远光, 等. 面向生态系统服务的森林生态系统经营:现状、挑战与展望[J].生态学报, 2015(1):1-9.
[2]	刘晓光. 城市绿地系统规划评价指标体系的构建与优化[D]. 南京:南京林业大学, 2015.
[3]	周晓蔚. 河口生态系统健康与水环境风险评价理论方法研究[D]. 北京:华北电力大学, 2008.
[4]	祁帆, 李晴新, 朱琳. 海洋生态系统健康评价研究进展[J].海洋通报, 2007(3):97-104.
[5]	Cairns J, Pratt J R. The Relationship Between Ecosystem Health and Delivery of Ecosystem Services[J]. Evaluating and Monitoring the Health of Large-Scale Ecosustems, 1995,28:63-76
[6]	张丽谦. 北京山地森林生态脆弱性评价的研究[D]. 北京:北京林业大学, 2011.
[7]	严密, 张启翔, 刘雁琪, 等. 福州国家森林公园生态环境质量评测研究[J].河北林业技术, 2005(2):4-6.
[8]	战金艳, 闫海明, 邓祥征, 等. 森林生态系统恢复力评价——以江西省莲花县为例[J].自然资源学报, 2012(8):1304-1315. doi: 10.11849/zrzyxb.2012.08.005
[9]	Rapport D J, Costanza R, McMichael A J.Assessing ecosystem health[J]. Trends in ecology & evolution, 1998,13(10):397-402. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(98)01449-9 pmid: 21238359
[10]	石亮, 周梅, 王鼎, 等. 林火干扰对兴安落叶松林下植被多样性和生物量的影响[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2016,44(1):44-47.
[11]	范柏乃, 单世涛, 陆长生. 城市技术创新能力评价指标筛选方法研究[J]. 科学研究, 2002,20(6):663-668
[12]	周勇, 田有国, 任意, 等. 定量化土地评价指标体系及评价方法探讨[J]. 生态环境, 2003,12(1):37-41.
[13]	吕怀珍, 统计学原理与实务[M]. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2015.
[14]	Lal R. Forest soils and carbon sequestration[J]. Forest ecology and management, 2005,220(1):242-258. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.08.015
[15]	Hyodo F, Kusaka S, Wardle D A, et al. Changes in stable nitrogen and carbon isotope ratios of plants and soil across a boreal forest fire chronosequence[J]. Plant and soil, 2013,367(1-2):111-119. doi: 10.1007/s11104-013-1667-3
[16]	Guénon R, Gros R. Increasing the maturity of compost used affects the soil chemical properties and the stability of microbial activity along a mediterranean post-fire chronosequence[J]. European Journal of Soil Biology, 2015,66:1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2014.11.002
[17]	袁菲, 张星耀, 梁军. 基于干扰的汪清林区森林生态系统健康评价[J].生态学报, 2013(12):3722-373. doi: 10.5846/stxb201205100690