自然生态小区建设指导原则及其建设内容探讨--以筠连县大雪山自然生态小区为例

自然生态小区是构建优美生态环境区域的生态“细胞工程”。它根据当地的自然状况和社会经济状况,以较小的经济和社会代价实现一定区域生态环境优美、生态文明有序、生态系统良性循环的社会经济生态综合体。由于自然生态小区的建设是新兴事物,其建设途径还有很多问题值得探讨。在自然生态小区建设投资方面,应当明确生态环境建设投资和生产赢利建设投资,对于前者应当以政府和政策性投资为主,而后者应当是在政策法规规范下的企业投资为主;在发展模式方面,应当促进环境友好的规模化高效益产业,包括有机绿色产业、地方特色产业、民族文化产业等;在效益分配方面,必须要充分考虑整个社区居民资源共享和利益合理分配,实现整个社区生态文明建设和经济发展目标的一致。     

塔里木河中游输水堤防外的地下水质变化分析

针对塔里木河中游输水堤防修建与生态保育的问题,结合对沙子河和阿其河两个断面地下水质的监测资料的分析,对输水堤防修建后堤防外地下水质的时空变化进行了探讨,揭示了在输水堤防影响下堤防外地下水质变化的初步规律.结果表明：沙子河断面和阿其河断面洪枯期地下水矿化度的变化规律由于堤防的修建而被改变,同样在堤防外侧,由于无地表水经过,沙子河断面地下水矿化度远高于在有生态闸定期放水的阿其河断面,因此,生态闸建设对抑制由于输水堤防影响而导致的水质修建具有积极作用.     

Knowledge, values, uses and management of the Araucaria araucana forest by the indigenous Mapuche Pewenche people: A basis for collaborative natural resource management in southern Chile

One of the most important endemic tree species of Chile and at the same time one of the most endangered ones is Araucaria araucana (Mol.) C. Koch, the monkey‐puzzle tree. It grows in the Andes Mountains, homeland of the indigenous Mapuche Pewenche people who depend on this tree. This paper is based on field research that investigated the ecological knowledge, uses and management of the Araucaria araucana forest by indigenous Mapuche Pewenche people based on the socio‐cultural, spiritual and ecological relationships they have with the Araucaria forest, to find out how indigenous people and their knowledge could contribute to sustainable Araucaria forest management. A Mapuche Pewenche community located in the IX region of Chile contributed to this study. Based on the analyses this paper illustrates the nature of indigenous ecological knowledge of Araucaria araucana on the one hand, and its utility in native forest management on the other. The research shows that the Mapuche Pewenche hold ecological knowledge and conduct practices to manage their Araucaria forest in a balanced way. They conserve and use forest biodiversity at one and the same time. This paper provides recommendations for sustainable Araucaria forest management and conservation strategies ex‐situ and in‐situ incorporating indigenous knowledge and scientific knowledge and for promoting a collaborative natural resources management.     

ACCURACY OF LAKE AND STREAM TEMPERATURES ESTIMATED FROM THERMAL INFRARED IMAGES1

Emitted thermal infrared radiation (TIR, λ= 8 to 14 μm) can be used to measure surface water temperatures (top approximately 100 μm). This study evaluates the accuracy of stream (50 to 500 m wide) and lake (300 to 5,000 m wide) radiant temperatures (15 to 22°C) derived from airborne (MASTER, 5 to 15 m) and satellite (ASTER 90 m, Landsat ETM+ 60 m) TIR images. Applied atmospheric compensations changed water temperatures by ?0.2 to +2.0°C. Atmospheric compensation depended primarily on atmospheric water vapor and temperature, sensor viewing geometry, and water temperature. Agreement between multiple TIR bands (MASTER ‐ 10 bands, ASTER ‐ 5 bands) provided an independent check on recovered temperatures. Compensations improved agreement between image and in situ surface temperatures (from 2.0 to 1.1°C average deviation); however, compensations did not improve agreement between river image temperatures and loggers installed at the stream bed (from 0.6 to 1.6°C average deviation). Analysis of field temperatures suggests that vertical thermal stratification may have caused a systematic difference between instream gage temperatures and corrected image temperatures. As a result, agreement between image temperatures and instream temperatures did not imply that accurate TIR temperatures were recovered. Based on these analyses, practical accuracies for corrected TIR lake and stream surface temperatures are around 1°C.     

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     

Developing an interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral community of practice in the domain of forests and livelihoods

Although significant resources are being spent researching and fostering the relationship between forests and livelihoods to promote mutually beneficial outcomes, critical gaps in understanding persist. A core reason for such gaps is that researchers, practitioners, and policy makers lack the structured space to interact and collaborate, which is essential for effective, interdisciplinary research, practice, and evaluation. Thus, scientific findings, policy recommendations, and measured outcomes have not always been synthesized into deep, systemic understanding; learning from practice and implementation does not easily find its way into scientific analyses, and science often fails to influence policy. Communities of practice (CofPs) are dynamic sociocultural systems that bring people together to share and create knowledge around a common topic of interest. They offer participants a space and structure within which to develop new, systemic approaches to multidimensional problems on a common theme. Uniquely informed by a systems‐thinking perspective and drawing from the scientific and gray literatures and in‐depth interviews with representatives of established CofPs in the natural resource management and development domain, we argue that a well‐designed and adequately funded CofP can facilitate interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral relationships and knowledge exchange. Well‐designed CofPs integrate a set of core features and processes to enhance individual, collective, and domain outcomes; they set out an initial but evolving purpose, encourage diverse leadership, and promote collective‐identity development. Funding facilitates effective communication strategies (e.g., in person meetings). We urge our colleagues across sectors and disciplines to take advantage of CofPs to advance the domain of forests and livelihoods.     

Landscape consequences of aggregation rules for functional equivalence in compensatory mitigation programs

Mitigation and offset programs designed to compensate for ecosystem function losses due to development must balance losses from affected ecosystems with gains in restored ecosystems. Aggregation rules applied to ecosystem functions to assess site equivalence are based on implicit assumptions about the substitutability of functions among sites and can profoundly influence the distribution of restored ecosystem functions on the landscape. We investigated the consequences of rules applied to the aggregation of ecosystem functions for wetland offsets in the Beaverhill watershed in Alberta, Canada. We considered the fate of 3 ecosystem functions: hydrology, water purification, and biodiversity. We set up an affect‐and‐offset algorithm to simulate the effect of aggregation rules on ecosystem function for wetland offsets. Cobenefits and trade‐offs among functions and the constraints posed by the quantity and quality of restorable sites resulted in a redistribution of functions between affected and offset wetlands. Hydrology and water purification functions were positively correlated with one another and negatively correlated with biodiversity function. Weighted‐average rules did not replace functions in proportion to their weights. Rules prioritizing biodiversity function led to more monofunctional wetlands and landscapes. The minimum rule, for which the wetland score was equal to the worst performing function, promoted multifunctional wetlands and landscapes. The maximum rule, for which the wetland score was equal to the best performing function, promoted monofunctional wetlands and multifunctional landscapes. Because of implicit trade‐offs among ecosystem functions, no‐net‐loss objectives for multiple functions should be constructed within a landscape context. Based on our results, we suggest criteria for the design of aggregation rules for no net loss of ecosystem functions within a landscape context include the concepts of substitutability, cobenefits and trade‐offs, landscape constraints, heterogeneity, and the precautionary principle.     

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.     

Defining the Impact of Non‐Native Species

Non‐native species cause changes in the ecosystems to which they are introduced. These changes, or some of them, are usually termed impacts; they can be manifold and potentially damaging to ecosystems and biodiversity. However, the impacts of most non‐native species are poorly understood, and a synthesis of available information is being hindered because authors often do not clearly define impact. We argue that explicitly defining the impact of non‐native species will promote progress toward a better understanding of the implications of changes to biodiversity and ecosystems caused by non‐native species; help disentangle which aspects of scientific debates about non‐native species are due to disparate definitions and which represent true scientific discord; and improve communication between scientists from different research disciplines and between scientists, managers, and policy makers. For these reasons and based on examples from the literature, we devised seven key questions that fall into 4 categories: directionality, classification and measurement, ecological or socio‐economic changes, and scale. These questions should help in formulating clear and practical definitions of impact to suit specific scientific, stakeholder, or legislative contexts. Definiendo el Impacto de las Especies No‐Nativas