枣庄市生态足迹动态研究

应用生态足迹模型对山东省枣庄市1995-2008年生态足迹进行了计算,分析该市14年来各类土地生态足迹消费和供给的动态变化趋势,研究了该市土地资源利用的可持续性发展状况。结果表明,枣庄市生态足迹消费从1995年的2.926 4 hm2/人增加到2008年的6.880 1 hm2/人,增加了2.25倍;生态足迹消费大于土地生态系统的承载力表现为生态赤字,赤字水平由1995年的2.630 4hm2/人上升到2008年的6.529 0 hm2/人,增加了2.48倍,区域内的土地利用处于不可持续发展状态。计算表明该市的资源利用方式仍处于消耗型、粗放型阶段,发展模式是不可持续的,其生态环境具有不安全性,社会经济发展与生态环境的协调性很差。     

江苏省淮河流域重点地区协同推进生态文明建设研究

江苏省徐州、淮安、盐城、扬州同处于淮河流域和工业发展中期阶段,区域水环境敏感,经济增长与资源环境矛盾较为突出.文章研究从流域层面协同推进该地区生态文明建设,探索区域协同推进的原则、目标和创新机制,建立统筹协调上下联动的共建机制、流域生态补偿机制、分类差异化管理机制、生态绩效考核和监督机制、市场化创新机制等五大机制,为中国东中部同类地区生态文明建设探索出一条可借鉴的富有流域区域特色的生态文明建设路径.     

张家界旅游可持续发展能力的生态足迹评价

应用Wackernagel等提出的生态足迹评价方法对张家界2004年旅游生态足迹和旅游生态承载力进行分析和计算,以测度张家界旅游可持续能力。结果表明:张家界旅游可持续发展面临较大困难,人均旅游生态赤字0.0594 hm2,必须采取措施,合理使用生态资源,才能保证旅游业持续发展。     

鸭绿江口及毗邻浅海沉积物重金属富集特征与潜在生态风险比较

为研究鸭绿江河口及毗邻浅海沉积物中重金属的污染状况,比较了鸭绿江口及毗邻浅海表层沉积物重金属的富集系数、多金属污染度的沿程变化,分析了重金属的分布富集规律;讨论了采用不同的背景值在潜在生态风险指数、地累积指数、生物效应浓度3种评价方法中的差异及其对生态风险评价结果的影响. 结果表明:鸭绿江口及毗邻浅海的潜在生态风险总体属于低风险等级,其中毗邻浅海和潮滩的重金属污染较轻,西汊道的污染相对较重. 重金属的高值分布区与混浊带具有一定的对应关系,但受人类活动的影响更大,对鸭绿江口及毗邻浅海表层沉积物重金属污染生态风险评价贡献率较高的重金属污染因子是Cu,Hg和Cd.      

罗红霉素对大型溞生殖生长及抗氧化系统的影响

罗红霉素(ROX)在水环境中广泛赋存,并产生一定的生态毒理效应.为了进一步认知ROX对水生生物的负面影响,以大型潘为模式生物研究了ROX在生殖、生长及抗氧化系统方面的急慢性毒理效应.结果 发现ROX对大型潘的急性毒性等级为Ⅲ级(48h-LC50为60.26 mg· L-,96h-LC50为39.81 mg·L-1).0...     

生态渔业养殖模式下汤逊湖鱼产力估算及对内源污染的影响

通过汤逊湖天然饵料生物量的调查,评估在不投肥、不投饵条件下汤逊湖的鱼产力情况;根据主要鱼产力生长代谢参数评估生态渔业养殖模式下由鱼的排泄和排粪作用产生的污染负荷量及由生长增重存储在鱼体内的营养盐量。结果表明:汤逊湖天然鱼产力约为2 975.49 t/a,生态渔业养殖模式下养殖密度可控制在29 g/m³左右;排泄和排粪产生的营养盐氮、磷量分别为309.28、13.06 t/a,其中氮量高于鱼类生长增重存储的营养盐量(73.10 t/a),磷量低于鱼类生长增重存储的营养盐量(15.90 t/a)。生态渔业养殖产生一定量的内源污染物氮,但能削减水体中内源污染物磷,可作为控制湖泊富营养化的措施之一。     

基于生态系统服务理论内涵的山水林田湖草生态保护修复实践——以河南省南太行地区试点工程为例

科学实施山水林田湖草生态保护修复是生态文明建设的重要内容。将提升生态系统服务功能与山水林田湖草生态保护修复工程相结合,以国家第三批山水林田湖草生态保护修复试点项目——河南省南太行地区试点工程为例,探索以提高生态产品供给能力、维护生态安全为目标的南太行地区山水林田湖草生态保护与修复工程实践。地区区位特征及生态环境问题分析表明,南太行地区近年来生态系统服务价值整体呈下降趋势且生态环境破坏严重,许多矿山生态破坏和环境污染历史遗留问题亟待解决,生物多样性保护现状堪忧。以区域突出生态环境问题与主要生态功能定位为依据,按照“格局优化、系统稳定、功能提升”的目标,明确了南太行地区生态保护修复“一山一渠两流域”的总体布局与绩效目标,将其划分为5个生态功能区和7个工程治理区,根据不同功能区和治理区分别提出修复方案和工程治理措施。工程试点方案实施1年多,各项绩效目标完成进度较好,实现了生态效益、经济效益和社会效益的良好结合。     

Empirical Trials of Plant Field Guides

We designed 3 image‐based field guides to tropical forest plant species in Ghana, Grenada, and Cameroon and tested them with 1095 local residents and 20 botanists in the United Kingdom. We compared users’ identification accuracy with different image formats, including drawings, specimen photos, living plant photos, and paintings. We compared users’ accuracy with the guides to their accuracy with only their prior knowledge of the flora. We asked respondents to score each format for usability, beauty, and how much they would pay for it. Prior knowledge of plant names was generally low (<22%). With a few exceptions, identification accuracy did not differ significantly among image formats. In Cameroon, users identifying sterile Cola species achieved 46–56% accuracy across formats; identification was most accurate with living plant photos. Botanists in the United Kingdom accurately identified 82–93% of the same Cameroonian species; identification was most accurate with specimens. In Grenada, users accurately identified 74–82% of plants; drawings yielded significantly less accurate identifications than paintings and photos of living plants. In Ghana, users accurately identified 85% of plants. Digital color photos of living plants ranked high for beauty, usability, and what users would pay. Black and white drawings ranked low. Our results show the potential and limitations of the use of field guides and nonspecialists to identify plants, for example, in conservation applications. We recommend authors of plant field guides use the cheapest or easiest illustration format because image type had limited bearing on accuracy; match the type of illustration to the most likely use of the guide for slight improvements in accuracy; avoid black and white formats unless the audience is experienced at interpreting illustrations or keeping costs low is imperative; discourage false‐positive identifications, which were common; and encourage users to ask an expert or use a herbarium for groups that are difficult to identify. Pruebas Empíricas de Guías de Campo de Plantas Hawthorne, Cable & Marshall     

Using empirical models of species colonization under multiple threatening processes to identify complementary threat‐mitigation strategies

Approaches to prioritize conservation actions are gaining popularity. However, limited empirical evidence exists on which species might benefit most from threat mitigation and on what combination of threats, if mitigated simultaneously, would result in the best outcomes for biodiversity. We devised a way to prioritize threat mitigation at a regional scale with empirical evidence based on predicted changes to population dynamics—information that is lacking in most threat‐management prioritization frameworks that rely on expert elicitation. We used dynamic occupancy models to investigate the effects of multiple threats (tree cover, grazing, and presence of an hyperaggressive competitor, the Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala) on bird‐population dynamics in an endangered woodland community in southeastern Australia. The 3 threatening processes had different effects on different species. We used predicted patch‐colonization probabilities to estimate the benefit to each species of removing one or more threats. We then determined the complementary set of threat‐mitigation strategies that maximized colonization of all species while ensuring that redundant actions with little benefit were avoided. The single action that resulted in the highest colonization was increasing tree cover, which increased patch colonization by 5% and 11% on average across all species and for declining species, respectively. Combining Noisy Miner control with increasing tree cover increased species colonization by 10% and 19% on average for all species and for declining species respectively, and was a higher priority than changing grazing regimes. Guidance for prioritizing threat mitigation is critical in the face of cumulative threatening processes. By incorporating population dynamics in prioritization of threat management, our approach helps ensure funding is not wasted on ineffective management programs that target the wrong threats or species.     

Cost‐effectiveness of conservation payment schemes for species with different range sizes

Payments to compensate landowners for carrying out costly land‐use measures that benefit endangered biodiversity have become an important policy instrument. When designing such payments, it is important to take into account that spatially connected habitats are more valuable for many species than isolated ones. One way to incentivize provision of connected habitats is to offer landowners an agglomeration bonus, that is, a bonus on top of payments they are receiving to conserve land if the land is spatially connected. Researchers have compared the cost‐effectiveness of the agglomeration bonus with 2 alternatives: an all‐or‐nothing, agglomeration payment, where landowners receive a payment only if the conserved land parcels have a certain level of spatial connectivity, and a spatially homogeneous payment, where landowners receive a payment for conserved land parcels irrespective of their location. Their results show the agglomeration bonus is rarely the most cost‐effective option, and when it is, it is only slightly better than one of the alternatives. This suggests that the agglomeration bonus should not be given priority as a policy design option. However, this finding is based on consideration of only 1 species. We examined whether the same applied to 2 species, one for which the homogeneous payment is best and the other for which the agglomeration payment is most cost‐effective. We modified a published conceptual model so that we were able to assess the cost‐effectiveness of payment schemes for 2 species and applied it to a grassland bird and a grassland butterfly in Germany that require the same habitat but have different spatial‐connectivity needs. When conserving both species, the agglomeration bonus was more cost‐effective than the agglomeration and the homogeneous payment; thus, we showed that as a policy the agglomeration bonus is a useful conservation‐payment option.