Ecological security assessment of Poyang Lake by using ecological niche model and its key influencing factors

doi:10.13466/j.cnki.lczyyj.2025.06.005

Abstract

Abstract:

Wetlands serve as vital natural resources for humanity and fulfill indispensable ecological functions within terrestrial ecosystems.To promote the harmonious development of the human and nature in the wetland system,the ecological security evaluation index system is constructed from three dimensions,involving water quality safety,gross primary productivity level,and geographical endowment.Using the ecological niche theory,the ecological security level of Poyang Lake from 2013 to 2018 was calculated,and the Ordinary Least Squares(OLS)Model was constructed to identify the key influencing factors of Poyang Lake's ecological security.The performance of water quality safety in different years and the impact of key indicators on the primary productivity of the lake area were analyzed.The results showed that:1)From 2013 to 2018,the ecological niche width of both the dry and wet seasons exhibited an overall ascending tendency,with the ecological security of the wet season being superior to that of the dry season.2)From 2013 to 2018,the ecological niche overlap during the dry season demonstrated a general downward trend,while the wet season initially declined and then stabilized,with the ecological niche overlap in the wet season being significantly lower than that in the dry season.3)From the regression analysis,the ecological security levels of both the dry season and the wet season showed a significant improvement trend.The ecological security of the Poyang Lake area was generally stable and showed a steady growth trend,but the ecological level in some areas declined due to the interference of industrial and agricultural activities.The lakeside industrial park and the low embankment were the core disturbance factors of Poyang Lake's ecological security,which posed a threat to the harmonious coexistence of human and nature in the region.

Key words: ecological security, water quality, primary productivity, geographical endowment, ecological niche model, Poyang Lake

CLC Number:

X826

SONG Zhenjiang, LENG Mingni, WU Baoshu, KANG Xiaolan. Ecological security assessment of Poyang Lake by using ecological niche model and its key influencing factors[J]. Forest and Grassland Resources Research, 2025, (6): 48-59.

Figures/Tables 8

Tab.1

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Tab.2

Tab.3

References 21

[1]	蒋卫国, 张泽, 凌子燕, 等. 中国湿地保护修复管理经验与未来研究趋势[J]. 地理学报, 2023, 78(9):2223-2240. doi: 10.11821/dlxb202309007
[2]	SONG Z, LENG M, GAO S, et al. Exploring the effect of energy utilization transition on biodiversity:Evidence from the poyang lake migratory bird nature reserve[J]. Natural Resource Modeling, 2025, 38(4):e70010. doi: 10.1111/nrm.v38.4
[3]	SONG Z, GAO S, Leng M, et al. Quantifying the ecological performance of migratory bird conservation:Evidence from poyang lake wetlands in China[J]. Biology, 2024, 13(10):786. doi: 10.3390/biology13100786
[4]	宋子豪, 邹伟, 桂智凡, 等. 我国常用湖泊营养状态指数研究进展与展望[J]. 湖泊科学, 2024, 36(4):987-1001.
[5]	中央生态环境保护督察协调局. 江西省鄱阳湖保护修复不力生态环境问题多发[EB/OL].(2024-05-17)[2025-08-12]. https://www.mee.gov.cn/ywgz/zysthjbhdc/dcjl/202405/t20240517_1073473.shtml.
[6]	吴京泽. 中央生态环保督察组: 一些地方生态环境保护责任落实不够有力[EB/OL].(2024-08-22)[2025-08-11]. https://www.xinhuanet.com/20240822/036262211b81477b806f3ffe490277c3/c.html#.
[7]	龚道宏, 黄敏, 朱艳军. 2000-2020年鄱阳湖环湖区生态安全格局研究数据集[J]. 中国科学数据(中英文网络版), 2024, 9(2): 341-353.
[8]	夏军, 刁艺璇, 佘敦先, 等. 鄱阳湖流域水资源生态安全状况及承载力分析[J]. 水资源保护, 2022, 38(3):1-8.
[9]	祁兰兰, 王敏, 王卿, 等. 基于SDR模型的抚仙湖流域生态安全空间分异特征研究[J]. 生态学报, 2023, 43(22):9527-9538.
[10]	何雄伟, 盛方富. 国家级自然保护区生态预警指标体系构建与生态安全评价:以江西鄱阳湖国家级自然保护区为例[J]. 生态经济, 2021, 37(12):190-195.
[11]	孙芳蒂. 2000—2020年鄱阳湖干湿季边界数据集[DS/OL]. Science Data Bank, 2022. https://www.sciengine.com/CSD/doi/10.11922/11-6035.csd.2022.0076.zh.
[12]	刘贺, 张奇, 牛媛媛, 等. 2013—2018年鄱阳湖水环境监测数据集[DS/OL]. Science Data Bank, 2019. https://www.sciengine.com/CSD/doi/10.11922/csdata.2019.0062.zh.
[13]	范仁雪, 朱先进, 陈智, 等. 2000—2020年中国陆地生态系统年总初级生产力数据集[DS/OL]. Science Data Bank, 2023. https://www.sciengine.com/CSD/doi/10.11922/11-6035.csd.2023.0037.zh.
[14]	张志坚, 王学渊, 洪芙蓉. 项目制下的道德风险与逆向选择:来自地表水环境治理的证据[J]. 数量经济技术经济研究, 2023, 40(7):201-224.
[15]	于维洋, 张颂嘉, 沈会涛, 等. 基于模糊物元法地表水质量评价[J]. 统计与决策, 2019, 35(1):72-74.
[16]	解鑫, 尤佳艺, 李文攀, 等. 2011—2021年全国地表水环境质量评价与变化分析[J]. 中国环境监测, 2023, 39(4):23-32.
[17]	国家环境保护总局. 地表水环境质量标准(GB 3838-2002)[S]. 2002.
[18]	杨梨萍, 解秦米佳, 李谦维, 等. 近20年间鄱阳湖湿地春秋季植被生物量时空动态[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2024, 41(8):47-54. doi: 10.11988/ckyyb20230271
[19]	陆瑶, 黄良波, 贾珺杰, 等. 内陆水体初级生产力评估方法研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 2023, 38(1):57-69. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2022.055
[20]	杨浩, 卢新海. 长江中游粮食生产力与植被初级生产力的动态演进及协同关系[J]. 经济地理, 2022, 42(3):103-112. doi: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2022.03.011
[21]	冉凤维, 罗志军, 吴佳平, 等. 鄱阳湖地区生态系统服务权衡与协同关系的时空格局[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(3):995-1004. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201903.005

维度	变量	符号	变量测度
水质安全	酸碱度	pH	2=一类[6,9],1=二类[0,6)∪(9,12]
	化学需氧量	COD	5=一类(≤15),4=二类(15,20],3=三类(20,30],2=四类(30,40],1=五类(≥40)
	氨氮	${NH}_{4}^{-}$N	5=一类(≤0.15),4=二类(0.15,0.50],3=三类(0.50,1],2=四类(1,1.50],1=五类(≥1.50)
	总氮	TN	5=一类(≤0.20),4=二类(0.20,0.50],3=三类(0.50,1],2=四类(1,1.5],1=五类(≥1.5)
	总磷	TP	5=一类(≤0.010),4=二类(0.010,0.025],3=三类(0.025,0.050],2=四类(0.050,0.100],1=五类(≥0.100)
总初级生产力水平		GPP	1=(≤0),2=(0,1 000],3=(1 000,2 000],4=(2 000,3 000],5=(3 000,3 500]
地理禀赋	数字高程	DEM	[8,69]
	坡度	Slope	1=[0,0.494 057],2=(0.494 057,2.140 912],3=(2.140 912,4.940 567],4=(4.940 567,11.527 99],5=(11.527 99,41.994 82]
	坡向	Aspect	1=平面,2=北[0°,22.5°],3=东北(22.5°,67.5°],4=东(67.5°,112.5°],5=东南(112.5°,157.5°],6=南(157.5°,202.5°],7=西南(202.5°,247.5°],8=西(247.5°,292.5°],9=西北(292.5°,337.5],10=北(337.5°,360°]

年份	水文时期	模型	操作	变量
年份	水文时期	模型	操作	pH	COD	${NH}_{4}^{-} N$	TN	TP	常数	Pseudo R²
2013年	枯水期	1	控制变量未控制	0.215^* (0.112)	0.036^** (0.016)	0.021^* (0.011)	0.031^*** (0.008)	0.009 (0.014)	1.289^*** (0.011)	0.120
	枯水期	2	控制变量已控制	0.211^* (0.112)	0.041^** (0.017)	0.013^*** (0.003)	0.026^*** (0.005)	0.006 (0.014)	1.196^*** (0.044)	0.130
	丰水期	3	控制变量未控制	0.331^*** (0.064)	0.217^*** (0.043)	0.090^*** (0.027)	0.161 (0.240)	0.076 (0.089)	1.665^*** (0.022)	0.123
	丰水期	4	控制变量已控制	0.328^*** (0.063)	0.221^*** (0.043)	0.094^*** (0.027)	0.157 (0.124)	0.078 (0.079)	1.579^*** (0.046)	0.124
2016年	枯水期	5	控制变量未控制	0.050^* (0.029)	0.159^*** (0.060)	0.161^** (0.073)	0.030 (0.028)	0.003 (0.031)	1.245^*** (0.010)	0.110
	枯水期	6	控制变量已控制	0.048^** (0.023)	0.159^*** (0.060)	0.164^** (0.073)	0.027 (0.021)	0.004 (0.032)	1.179^*** (0.038)	0.130
	丰水期	7	控制变量未控制	0.369^*** (0.050)	0.180^*** (0.030)	0.175 (0.128)	0.043 (0.039)	0.008 (0.014)	1.667^*** (0.033)	0.190
	丰水期	8	控制变量已控制	0.369^*** (0.050)	0.190^*** (0.030)	0.170 (0.128)	0.042 (0.039)	0.008 (0.013)	1.663^*** (0.049)	0.189
2018年	枯水期	9	控制变量未控制	0.017^** (0.008)	0.028^*** (0.008)	0.017^*** (0.002)	0.006^** (0.003)	0.035^*** (0.005)	1.314^*** (0.012)	0.130
	枯水期	10	控制变量已控制	0.016^*** (0.003)	0.028^*** (0.008)	0.017^*** (0.003)	0.006^*** (0.001)	0.033^** (0.003)	1.240^*** (0.046)	0.150
	丰水期	11	控制变量未控制	0.186^*** (0.024)	0.071^** (0.035)	0.084^** (0.041)	0.021^*** (0.002)	0.193 (0.170)	1.711^*** (0.024)	0.192
	丰水期	12	控制变量已控制	0.185^*** (0.024)	0.072^** (0.035)	0.084^** (0.041)	0.021^*** (0.001)	0.197 (0.150)	1.680^*** (0.049)	0.190

年份	水文时期	模型	操作	变量
年份	水文时期	模型	操作	pH	COD	${NH}_{4}^{-} N$	TN	TP	控制变量	常数	样本量	Pseudo R²
2013年	枯水期	1	更换测度方法	0.101^*** (0.012)	0.052^** (0.025)	0.046^** (0.018)	0.043^*** (0.013)	0.061 (0.087)	已控制	1.206^*** (0.010)	3558	0.183
	枯水期	2	限制样本	0.043^*** (0.016)	0.018^*** (0.006)	0.042^*** (0.013)	0.022^*** (0.007)	0.005 (0.020)	已控制	1.168^*** (0.024)	1779	0.160
	丰水期	3	更换测度方法	0.211^*** (0.016)	0.148^*** (0.036)	0.165^*** (0.052)	0.091 (0.086)	0.035 (0.025)	已控制	1.757^*** (0.032)	3558	0.183
	丰水期	4	限制样本	0.148^*** (0.012)	0.220^*** (0.062)	0.083^** (0.039)	0.135 (0.134)	0.077 (0.062)	已控制	1.875^*** (0.098)	1779	0.112
2016年	枯水期	5	更换测度方法	0.143^*** (0.042)	0.106^* (0.064)	0.065^*** (0.019)	0.098 (0.122)	0.075 (0.118)	已控制	1.357^*** (0.011)	3558	0.184
	枯水期	6	限制样本	0.055^*** (0.005)	0.152^* (0.083)	0.179^* (0.101)	0.021 (0.108)	0.005 (0.012)	已控制	1.253^*** (0.018)	1779	0.140
	丰水期	7	更换测度方法	0.355^*** (0.093)	0.084^*** (0.022)	0.145 (0.150)	0.042 (0.039)	0.009 (0.014)	已控制	1.656^*** (0.025)	3558	0.116
	丰水期	8	限制样本	0.377^*** (0.070)	0.021^*** (0.004)	0.002 (0.011)	0.039 (0.033)	0.010 (0.011)	已控制	1.678^*** (0.096)	1779	0.181
2018年	枯水期	9	更换测度方法	0.025^*** (0.006)	0.037^*** (0.005)	0.150^*** (0.001)	0.079^*** (0.019)	0.029^** (0.013)	已控制	1.446^*** (0.015)	3558	0.186
	枯水期	10	限制样本	0.022^** (0.010)	0.028^*** (0.005)	0.017^*** (0.003)	0.006^*** (0.002)	0.022^** (0.011)	已控制	1.857^*** (0.023)	1779	0.190
	丰水期	11	更换测度方法	0.180^** (0.089)	0.156^** (0.078)	0.079^*** (0.016)	0.071^** (0.035)	0.181 (0.172)	已控制	1.345^*** (0.037)	3558	0.186
	丰水期	12	限制样本	0.211^*** (0.035)	0.010^** (0.005)	0.012^** (0.006)	0.030^** (0.014)	0.067 (0.070)	已控制	1.879^*** (0.035)	1779	0.110