延怀盆地景观格局动态过程研究
|
摘要
景观生态学作为新兴学科,处于快速发展阶段,理论和方法不断完善。景观格局作为景观生态学的重要研究内容,在景观生态学的研究工作中具有重要地位。本文以延怀盆地及其周边区域为研究区,该区域作为北京市西北部的重要生态屏障,存在干旱缺水、植被稀少等较为严重的生态环境问题,因此,对该区域的景观格局动态进行研究具有重要的实际意义。
本文以6期landsat系列影像为基础数据,采用目视解译与决策树解译相结合的方法解译研究区的景观分布图,对研究区的景观格局动态进行研究。本文的研究主要包括4方面内容：(1)景观类型的面积和结构动态研究,重点分析各种景观类型的比例关系,以及他们之间的相互转化；(2)景观类型的空间结构动态变化分析,重点分析各种景观类型空间分布均匀性的变化；(3)景观格局动态过程中关键景观类型的识别研究,该部分将景观类型之间的转移矩阵作为一种网络来处理,采用复杂网络的方法识别景观格局动态过程中的关键景观类型；(4)农田景观的空间扩张过程研究,针对第三部分研究中识别的关键景观类型,本文对农田景观的空间扩张过程进行研究,本文在前人研究的基础上提出了种新的景观扩张指数,该指数以斑块扩张面积和原斑块面积为基础,不仅能够定量表达斑块的空间扩张规模,还能准确识别斑块的空间扩张模式。
本文的研究结果如下：
1、景观类型的面积和结构动态研究
在近30年的时间尺度上,森林景观、农田景观和草地景观是研究区景观的主要组成成分。森林景观面积占整体景观面积的平均比例为39.00%,农田景观面积占整体景观面积的平均比例为37.43%,草地景观面积占整体景观面积的平均比例为9.61%。森林景观所占比例呈现先增后减的趋势,果园景观、建筑景观、农田景观和交通景观所占比例呈现增加的趋势,草地景观、水体景观和其他景观所占比例呈现减小的趋势。
在斑块结构方面,森林景观和其他景观的斑块数量整体上呈现减小的趋势,最大斑块面积和平均斑块面积呈现增加的趋势,斑块形状也趋于规则。草地景观和水体景观的斑块数量增加,最大斑块面积和平均斑块面积呈现减小的趋势,呈现破碎化,斑块形状也趋于不规则。果园景观、农田景观、建筑景观和交通景观作为人工景观,基本都呈现出扩张的过程,斑块数、最大斑块面积和平均斑块面积都呈现增加趋势,且斑块形状区域规则。
2、景观类型的空间结构动态变化研究
该部分应用经济学中的洛伦兹曲线和基尼系数对景观类型空间分布的均匀性动态进行研究。结果表明,在近30年的时间里,农田景观的基尼系数始终是最小的,说明农田景观在研究区的分布始终是最均匀的。在1978年、1987年、1993年和1998年这四个时期中,果园景观的基尼系数始终大于其他几种景观的基尼系数,说明这三个时期果园景观是分布最不均匀的景观类型,2004年和2009年这两个时期,草地景观的基尼系数超过了果园景观,是研究区中基尼系数最大的景观类型,成为这两个时期分布最不均匀的景观类型。在近30年的时间里,农田景观、建筑景观、果园景观和森林景观的基尼系数整体上呈现减小的趋势,说明这4种景观类型在空间的分布向均匀化方向发展,草地景观和其他景观的基尼系数整体上呈现增加的趋势,说明这两种景观在研究区内的分布越来越不均匀。
3、景观格局动态过程中关键景观类型的识别研究
本文将将转移矩阵作为一种网络进行处理,利用社会学中的复杂网络方法识别景观格局动态过程中的关键变化地类。结果表明,早期(1978-1987和1987-1993)景观动态过程中的关键景观类型是草地景观和农田景观；由于草地景观的持续退化和被破坏,草地景观在景观系统整体动态过程中的作用不断减小,中期(1993-1998和1998-2004)草地景观已不是景观动态过程中的关键景观类型,农田景观成为景观动态过程中的关键景观类型；晚期(2004-2009)森林景观成为景观动态过程中的关键景观类型。
4、农田景观的空间扩张过程研究
针对第3部分研究中识别的关键景观类型,本文对其的空间扩张过程进行研究。在前人研究的基础上,以斑块扩张面积和原斑块面积为基础提出了一种新的景观扩张指数,该指数不仅能够识别斑块的空间扩张模式,还能定量表达斑块的空间扩张规模。结果表明,该景观扩张指数可以对景观的空间扩张过程进行表达,并识别其空间扩张模式(邻接扩张式和外部扩张式)。在30年的时间尺度上,景观扩张指数的分布范围主要集中在(-1,-0.8)区间内,表明农田斑块的扩张模式以大量小规模的邻接扩张式为主,景观扩张指数整体上呈现减小的趋势,表明扩张规模不断减小。
Landscape ecology as an emerging discipline, is in a stage of rapid development, and the theory and methods constantly perfect. Landscape pattern, as an important research field of landscape ecology, plays an important role in landscape ecology study. In this paper, Yanhuai Basin and its surrounding areas is the study area, as important ecological barrier in northwest of Beijing, there has serious ecological and environmental problems, such as drought, lack of vegetation. So, study on landscape pattern dynamics of this region has important practical significance.
In this paper, six landsat images were selected as basic data to interpret landscape maps of study area with combining method of visual interpretation and decision tree, and to study landscape pattern dynamics of study area. This study mainly includes four aspects:(1) Dynamic study of landscape types' size and structure, which focuse on analysis of the proportional relationship between various landscape types, as well as their mutual conversion during dynamic changes;(2) Dynamic study of landscape types' spatial structure, which focuse on spatial distribution uniformity changes of landscape types;(3) Identification of key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process, in which, transfer matrix is regard as a network to handle, and complex network method is used to identify key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process;(4) Study on spatial expansion process of agricultural landscape, the key landscape types were identified in the third part, this study studied the spatial expansion process of farmland landscape. A new landscape expansion index is proposed on the basis of previous studies, and the original and expansion patch area are the parameters of this index. This index can not only quantitatively indicate spatial expansion size of patches, but can also accurately identify the spatial expansion pattern of patches.
Results of this study are as follows:
1. The dynamics of landscape types' area and structural
On the time scale of proximity30years, forest landscape, farmland landscape and grassland landscape are the major componentes of study area landscape. Average proportion of forest landscape area cover the overall landscape area is39.00%, and average proportion of farmland landscape area cover the overall landscape area is37.43%, and average proportion of grassland landscape area cover the overall landscape area is9.61%. The trend of forest landscape proportion decreased after increased, and the trend of orchard landscape, building landscape, farmland landscape and traffic landscape proportion increased, and grassland landscape, water landscape and other landscape proportion presents a decreasing trend.
In patch structure aspect, forest landscape and other landscape present a decreasing trend in overall patches number, and the largest patch area and mean patch area have an increased thend, patch shape also tends to be regular. The increase of patches number, and the decrease of the largest patch area and mean patch area of grassland landscape and water landscape, presents a fragmentation trend, and the patch shape tends to be irregular. Orchard landscape, farmland landscape, building landscape and traffic landscape as artificial landscapes are roughly have an expansion process, and patch numbe, the largest patch area and mean patch area are showing an increasing trend, and patch shape tend to be regular.
2. Dynamic change of landscape types'spatial structure
Lorenz Curve and Gini coefficient in economics are applied to the study of spatial distribution uniformity dynamic of landscape types in this part. The results show that, in nearly30years, Gini coefficient of farmland landscape is always the smallest, which indicate that the distribution of farmland landscape is always the most uniform in study area. Four times in1978,1987,1993and1998, Gini coefficient of orchard landscape is always greater than that of other landscapes, which indicate that orchard landscape is the most uneven distribution landscape type during these three periods. In2004and2009, Gini coefficient of grassland landscape is bigger than that of orchard landscape, and its Gini coefficient is the largest among landscape types, which is the most uneven distribution landscape type during2004and2009. In nearly30years, Gini coefficientthe of farmland landscape, building landscape, orchard landscape and forest landscapes whole show decreasing trend, which indicate that their spatial distribution have a trend to uniform. Gini coefficient of grassland landscape and other landscape have a trend to increase, which indicate that their spatial distribution have a trend to uneven in study area.
3. Identification of key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process
In this study, transition matrix is regard as a network for processing, so as to identificate the key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process with complex network method in sociology. The results showed that, grass landscape and farmland landscape are the key landscape types in landscape pattern dynamic process in early time (1978-1987and1987-1993); the role of grassland landscape in overall landscape system is constantly decreases because of continuing degradation, so grassland landscape is not the key landscape type and farmland landscape is the key landscape type during landscape pattern dynamic process in medium-term (1993-1998and1998-2004); forest landscape is the key landscape type during landscape pattern dynamic process in late time (2004-2009).
4. Study on spatial expansion process of farmland landscape
Its spatial expansion process is studied in this study that is the key landscape type identified in the third part of this study. A new landscape expansion index was proposes on the basis of previous studies, and the original and expansion patch area were the parameters of this index. This index can not only quantitatively indicate spatial expansion size of patches, but can also accurately identify the spatial expansion pattern of patches (adjacent expansion pattern and external expansion pattern). During nearly30years, the values of landscape expansion index are mainly concentrated in the interval of (-1,-0.8), which indicates that expansion pattern of farmland patches are mainly large number and small-scale adjacent expansion pattern. And the values of landscape expansion index have a decreasing trend, indicating that the expansion scale decreased.
本文以6期landsat系列影像为基础数据,采用目视解译与决策树解译相结合的方法解译研究区的景观分布图,对研究区的景观格局动态进行研究。本文的研究主要包括4方面内容：(1)景观类型的面积和结构动态研究,重点分析各种景观类型的比例关系,以及他们之间的相互转化；(2)景观类型的空间结构动态变化分析,重点分析各种景观类型空间分布均匀性的变化；(3)景观格局动态过程中关键景观类型的识别研究,该部分将景观类型之间的转移矩阵作为一种网络来处理,采用复杂网络的方法识别景观格局动态过程中的关键景观类型；(4)农田景观的空间扩张过程研究,针对第三部分研究中识别的关键景观类型,本文对农田景观的空间扩张过程进行研究,本文在前人研究的基础上提出了种新的景观扩张指数,该指数以斑块扩张面积和原斑块面积为基础,不仅能够定量表达斑块的空间扩张规模,还能准确识别斑块的空间扩张模式。
本文的研究结果如下：
1、景观类型的面积和结构动态研究
在近30年的时间尺度上,森林景观、农田景观和草地景观是研究区景观的主要组成成分。森林景观面积占整体景观面积的平均比例为39.00%,农田景观面积占整体景观面积的平均比例为37.43%,草地景观面积占整体景观面积的平均比例为9.61%。森林景观所占比例呈现先增后减的趋势,果园景观、建筑景观、农田景观和交通景观所占比例呈现增加的趋势,草地景观、水体景观和其他景观所占比例呈现减小的趋势。
在斑块结构方面,森林景观和其他景观的斑块数量整体上呈现减小的趋势,最大斑块面积和平均斑块面积呈现增加的趋势,斑块形状也趋于规则。草地景观和水体景观的斑块数量增加,最大斑块面积和平均斑块面积呈现减小的趋势,呈现破碎化,斑块形状也趋于不规则。果园景观、农田景观、建筑景观和交通景观作为人工景观,基本都呈现出扩张的过程,斑块数、最大斑块面积和平均斑块面积都呈现增加趋势,且斑块形状区域规则。
2、景观类型的空间结构动态变化研究
该部分应用经济学中的洛伦兹曲线和基尼系数对景观类型空间分布的均匀性动态进行研究。结果表明,在近30年的时间里,农田景观的基尼系数始终是最小的,说明农田景观在研究区的分布始终是最均匀的。在1978年、1987年、1993年和1998年这四个时期中,果园景观的基尼系数始终大于其他几种景观的基尼系数,说明这三个时期果园景观是分布最不均匀的景观类型,2004年和2009年这两个时期,草地景观的基尼系数超过了果园景观,是研究区中基尼系数最大的景观类型,成为这两个时期分布最不均匀的景观类型。在近30年的时间里,农田景观、建筑景观、果园景观和森林景观的基尼系数整体上呈现减小的趋势,说明这4种景观类型在空间的分布向均匀化方向发展,草地景观和其他景观的基尼系数整体上呈现增加的趋势,说明这两种景观在研究区内的分布越来越不均匀。
3、景观格局动态过程中关键景观类型的识别研究
本文将将转移矩阵作为一种网络进行处理,利用社会学中的复杂网络方法识别景观格局动态过程中的关键变化地类。结果表明,早期(1978-1987和1987-1993)景观动态过程中的关键景观类型是草地景观和农田景观；由于草地景观的持续退化和被破坏,草地景观在景观系统整体动态过程中的作用不断减小,中期(1993-1998和1998-2004)草地景观已不是景观动态过程中的关键景观类型,农田景观成为景观动态过程中的关键景观类型；晚期(2004-2009)森林景观成为景观动态过程中的关键景观类型。
4、农田景观的空间扩张过程研究
针对第3部分研究中识别的关键景观类型,本文对其的空间扩张过程进行研究。在前人研究的基础上,以斑块扩张面积和原斑块面积为基础提出了一种新的景观扩张指数,该指数不仅能够识别斑块的空间扩张模式,还能定量表达斑块的空间扩张规模。结果表明,该景观扩张指数可以对景观的空间扩张过程进行表达,并识别其空间扩张模式(邻接扩张式和外部扩张式)。在30年的时间尺度上,景观扩张指数的分布范围主要集中在(-1,-0.8)区间内,表明农田斑块的扩张模式以大量小规模的邻接扩张式为主,景观扩张指数整体上呈现减小的趋势,表明扩张规模不断减小。
Landscape ecology as an emerging discipline, is in a stage of rapid development, and the theory and methods constantly perfect. Landscape pattern, as an important research field of landscape ecology, plays an important role in landscape ecology study. In this paper, Yanhuai Basin and its surrounding areas is the study area, as important ecological barrier in northwest of Beijing, there has serious ecological and environmental problems, such as drought, lack of vegetation. So, study on landscape pattern dynamics of this region has important practical significance.
In this paper, six landsat images were selected as basic data to interpret landscape maps of study area with combining method of visual interpretation and decision tree, and to study landscape pattern dynamics of study area. This study mainly includes four aspects:(1) Dynamic study of landscape types' size and structure, which focuse on analysis of the proportional relationship between various landscape types, as well as their mutual conversion during dynamic changes;(2) Dynamic study of landscape types' spatial structure, which focuse on spatial distribution uniformity changes of landscape types;(3) Identification of key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process, in which, transfer matrix is regard as a network to handle, and complex network method is used to identify key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process;(4) Study on spatial expansion process of agricultural landscape, the key landscape types were identified in the third part, this study studied the spatial expansion process of farmland landscape. A new landscape expansion index is proposed on the basis of previous studies, and the original and expansion patch area are the parameters of this index. This index can not only quantitatively indicate spatial expansion size of patches, but can also accurately identify the spatial expansion pattern of patches.
Results of this study are as follows:
1. The dynamics of landscape types' area and structural
On the time scale of proximity30years, forest landscape, farmland landscape and grassland landscape are the major componentes of study area landscape. Average proportion of forest landscape area cover the overall landscape area is39.00%, and average proportion of farmland landscape area cover the overall landscape area is37.43%, and average proportion of grassland landscape area cover the overall landscape area is9.61%. The trend of forest landscape proportion decreased after increased, and the trend of orchard landscape, building landscape, farmland landscape and traffic landscape proportion increased, and grassland landscape, water landscape and other landscape proportion presents a decreasing trend.
In patch structure aspect, forest landscape and other landscape present a decreasing trend in overall patches number, and the largest patch area and mean patch area have an increased thend, patch shape also tends to be regular. The increase of patches number, and the decrease of the largest patch area and mean patch area of grassland landscape and water landscape, presents a fragmentation trend, and the patch shape tends to be irregular. Orchard landscape, farmland landscape, building landscape and traffic landscape as artificial landscapes are roughly have an expansion process, and patch numbe, the largest patch area and mean patch area are showing an increasing trend, and patch shape tend to be regular.
2. Dynamic change of landscape types'spatial structure
Lorenz Curve and Gini coefficient in economics are applied to the study of spatial distribution uniformity dynamic of landscape types in this part. The results show that, in nearly30years, Gini coefficient of farmland landscape is always the smallest, which indicate that the distribution of farmland landscape is always the most uniform in study area. Four times in1978,1987,1993and1998, Gini coefficient of orchard landscape is always greater than that of other landscapes, which indicate that orchard landscape is the most uneven distribution landscape type during these three periods. In2004and2009, Gini coefficient of grassland landscape is bigger than that of orchard landscape, and its Gini coefficient is the largest among landscape types, which is the most uneven distribution landscape type during2004and2009. In nearly30years, Gini coefficientthe of farmland landscape, building landscape, orchard landscape and forest landscapes whole show decreasing trend, which indicate that their spatial distribution have a trend to uniform. Gini coefficient of grassland landscape and other landscape have a trend to increase, which indicate that their spatial distribution have a trend to uneven in study area.
3. Identification of key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process
In this study, transition matrix is regard as a network for processing, so as to identificate the key landscape types during landscape pattern dynamic process with complex network method in sociology. The results showed that, grass landscape and farmland landscape are the key landscape types in landscape pattern dynamic process in early time (1978-1987and1987-1993); the role of grassland landscape in overall landscape system is constantly decreases because of continuing degradation, so grassland landscape is not the key landscape type and farmland landscape is the key landscape type during landscape pattern dynamic process in medium-term (1993-1998and1998-2004); forest landscape is the key landscape type during landscape pattern dynamic process in late time (2004-2009).
4. Study on spatial expansion process of farmland landscape
Its spatial expansion process is studied in this study that is the key landscape type identified in the third part of this study. A new landscape expansion index was proposes on the basis of previous studies, and the original and expansion patch area were the parameters of this index. This index can not only quantitatively indicate spatial expansion size of patches, but can also accurately identify the spatial expansion pattern of patches (adjacent expansion pattern and external expansion pattern). During nearly30years, the values of landscape expansion index are mainly concentrated in the interval of (-1,-0.8), which indicates that expansion pattern of farmland patches are mainly large number and small-scale adjacent expansion pattern. And the values of landscape expansion index have a decreasing trend, indicating that the expansion scale decreased.
引文
[1]Anderson J C, Hakansson H, Johanson J. Dyadic business relationships within a business network context[J]. Journal of Marketing,1994,58(4):1-15.
[2]Bone C, Dragicevic S, RobertsA. A fuzzy-constrained cellular automata model of forest insect in festations[J]. Ecological Modelling,2006,192:107-125.
[3]Bugri M, Hersperger A M, Schneeberger N. Driving forces of landscape change-current and new directions[J]. Landscape Ecology,2004,19:857-868.
[4]Costanza R. The value of the world's Ecosystem Services and Nature Capital[J]. Nature,1997,387: 253-260.
[5]Chen L D, Tian H Y, Fu B J, et al. Development of a new index for integrating landscape patterns with ecological processes at watershed scale[J]. Chinese Geographical Science,2009,19:37-45.
[6]Dale M R T, Brown S, Haeuber R A, et al. Ecological principles and guidelines for managing the use of land[J].Ecological Applications,2000,10:639-670.
[7]Deng J S, Wang K, Hong Y, et al. Spatio-temporal dynamics and evolut ion of landuse change and landscape pattern in response to rapid urbanization[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2009, (3):187-198.
[8]Forman R T T. Some general principles of landscape and regional ecology[J]. Landscape Ecology, 1995,10(3):133-142.
[9]Fortin M J, Agrawa A A. Landscape ecology comes of age[J]. Ecology,2005,86:1965-1966.
[10]Gardner R H, Milne B T, Turnner M G, et al. Neutral models for testing landscape hypotheses[J]. Landscape Ecology,2007,22:15-29.
[11]Geary R C. The contiguity ratio and statistical mapping[J]. The Incorporated Statistician,1954, 5(3):115-145.
[12]Gong H L, Pan Y, Xu Y X. Spatio-temporal variation of groundwater recharge in response to variability in a) precipitation, land use and soil in Yanqing Basin, Beijing, China[J]. Hydrogeology Journal,2012, (12):1331-1340.
[13]Guan DJ, Gao WJ, Watari K, et al. Land use change of Kitakyushu based on landscape ecology and Markov model[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences,2010,20:310-320.
[14]http://finance.stockstar.com/JL2007071200093780.shtml
[15]http://www.geodata.cn/Portal/?isCookieChecked=true.
[16]http://baike.baidu.com/view/4648263.htm#4.
[17]Johanna A A B, Frederike V, Stefan E, Philippe C. The influence of environmental changes on local and regional vegetation patterns at Rieme (NW Belgium):implications for Final Palaeolithic habitation[J]. Veget Hist Archaeobot,22:17-38.
[18]John A W. Landscape ecology as a foundation for sustainable conservation[J]. Landscape Ecology,2009, (8):1053-1065.
[19]Kent M. Biogeography and landscape ecology[J]. Progress in Physical Geography,2007,31(3):345-355.
[20]Koscielny B E, Kantelhardt J W, Braun P, e t al. Long-term persistence and multifractality of river runoff records:Detrended fluctuation studies[J] Journal of Hydrology,2006,322:120-137.
[21]Ladson A R,White L J, Doolan J A, et al. Development and testing of an index of stream condition for waterway management in Australia[J].Freshwater Biol,1999,41:453-468.
[22]LI X, LU L,CHENG G,et al. Quantifying landscape structure of t he Heihe River Basin, NorthWest China using FRAGSTATS[J] Journal of Arid Environments,2001,48(4):521-535.
[23]Li H B, Wu J G. Use and misuse of landscape indices[J]. Landscape Ecology,2004,19:389-399.
[24]Liu X P, Li X, Chen Y M, et al. A new landscape index for quantifying urban expansion using multi-temporal remotely sensed data[J].Landscape Ecology,2010,25:671-682.
[25]Matthew L, Jianguo W. A gradient analysis of urban landscape pattern:a case study from the Phoenix metropolitan region, Arizona, USA[J]. Landscape Ecology,2002,17(4):327-339.
[26]Mcgarigal K, Cushman S, Neel M, et al. FRAGSTATS:spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps[M]. Amherst:University of Massachusetts, 2002.
[27]Mcgarigal K, Tagil S, Cushman S A. Surface metrics:an alternative to patch metrics for the quantification of landscape structure[J]. Landscape Ecology,2009,24(3):433-450.
[28]Merriam G. Landscape dynamics in farmland[J]. Tree,1988,3:16-20.
[29]Moran P. The interpretation of statistical maps[J]Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,1948,10: 243-251.
[30]Nassauer J I. Culture and changing landscape structure[J]. Landscape Ecology,1995,10:229-237.
[31]Naveh Z. Some remarks on recent developments in landscape functions and land use patterns[J].Landscape Ecology,1987,1:75-83.
[32]Oliver M A, Shine J A, Slocum K R. Using the variogram to explore imagery of two different spatial resolutions[J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing,2005,26(15):3225-3240.
[33]Rossi R E, Mulla D J, Joumel A G,et al. Geostatistical tools for modleling and interpreting ecological spatial dependence[J].Ecological Monographs,1992,62:277-314.
[34]Saura S., Martinez-Millan J. Sensitivity of landscape pattern metrics to map spatial extent[J]. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing,2001,67:1027-1036.
[35]Shi W Z and Liu k F. Modeling Fuzzy Topological Relations between Uncertain Objects in GIS [J]. Photogrammetry Engineering and Remote Sensing.2004,70 (8):921-930
[36]Song S J, Zhou W C. Effects of land use structure on surface water quality in Minjiang River Basin[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtza Basin,2008,17(5):712-715.
[37]Tang J, Wang X G, Analysis of the land use structure changes based on Lorenz curves [J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment,2009,151:175-180.
[38]Tobler W. A.. A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region[J]. Economic Geography,1970,46(2):234-240.
[39]Turner M G.. Spatial simulation of landscape ecology changes in Georgia:A comparison of 3 transition modles[J]. Landscape Ecology,1987,1:29-36.
[40]Turner M. G. Spatial and temporal analysis of landscape patterns[J]. Landscape Ecology, 1990,4(1):21-30.
[41]Turner M G, Romme W H, Gardner R H, et al. A revised concept of landscape equilibrium:disturbance and stability on scaled landscapes[J].Iandscape ecology,1993,8:213-227.
[42]Tyre A J, Tenhumberg B, Bull C M. Identifying landscape scale patterns from individual scale processes[J]. Ecological Modelling,2006,199:442-450.
[43]Weng Y C. Spatiotemporal changes of landscape pattern in response to urbanization [J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2007,81:341-353.
[44]Wu J., Shen W. Sun W. and Tueller P.T.. Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics[J]. Landscape Ecology,2002,17:761-782.
[45]Wu J G, Levin S A. A spatial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in an annual grassland[J].Ecology Monographs,1994,64(4):447-464.
[46]Xu X J, Peng H O, Wang X M, et al. Epidemic spreading with time delay in complex networks[J]. Physica A,2006(367):525-530.
[47]Zhang S, Zhang J, Li F, et al. Vector analysis theory on landscape pattern(VATLP)[J]. Ecological Modelling,2006,193:492-502.
[48]阿如旱,杨持,同丽嘎.基于分形理论的沙漠化土地空间结构—以内蒙古多伦县为例[J].地理研究,2010,29(2)：283-290.
[49]蔡博峰,卞有生.北京市妫水河流域景观生态学分析[J].环境污染与防治,2006,28(5)：373-376.
[50]陈爱莲,朱博勤,陈利顶,等.双台河口湿地景观及生态干扰度的动态变化[J].应用生态学报,2010,21(5)：1120-1128.
[51]陈保瑜,宋悦,咎启杰,谭凤仪,李喻春,岳钥,田莉,余世孝.深圳湾近30年主要景观类型之演变[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2012,51(5)：86-92.
[52]陈利顶,刘洋,吕一河,等.景观生态学中的格局分析：现状、困境与未来[J].生态学报,2008,28(11)：5521-5531.
[53]陈建军,张树文,郑冬梅.景观格局定量分析中的不确定性[J].干旱区研究,2005,22(1)：63-67.
[54]陈铭,王宗明,张树清,等.向海自然保护区景观格局变化及湿地梯度分布特征研究[J].干旱区地理,2006,29(5)：694-699.
[55]陈文波,肖笃宁,李秀珍.景观空间分析的特征和主要内容[J].生态学报,2002,22(7)：1135-1142.
[56]陈月平.官厅水库水资源现状分析[J].北京水务,2007,6：7-11.
[57]成遣,王铁良.辽河三角洲湿地景观动态变化及其驱动力研究[J].人民黄河,2010,32(2)：8-9.
[58]程兰,吴志峰,魏建兵,等.城镇建设用地扩展类型的空间识别及其意义[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(12)：2593-2599.
[59]程卫华.官厅水库水文特性统计分析[J].北京水务,2012,5：29-32.
[60]杜林芳,冯仲科,刘东云,等.天津滨海新区湿地景观格局变化研究[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(10)：5439-5442,5460.
[61]樊敏,刘耀林,杨啸灏.城镇土地利用时间变化的趋势面分析[J].测绘通报,2008,(8)：25-27.
[62]付春雷,宋国利,鄂勇.马尔科夫模型下的乐清湾湿地景观变化分析[J].东北林业大学学报,2009,(9)：117-119.
[63]傅伯杰,吕一河,陈利顶,等.国际景观生态学研究新进展[J].生态学报,2008,28(2)：799-804.
[64]傅伯杰,刘世梁.长期生态研究中的若干问题与趋势[J].应用生态学报,2002,13(4)：476-480.
[65]傅伯杰,陈利顶,马克明,等.景观生态学原理及其应用[M].北京：科学出版社,2001.
[66]高常军,周德民,栾兆擎,等.湿地景观格局演变研究评述[J].长江流域资源与环境,2010,19(4)：460-464.
[67]高义,苏奋振,孙晓宇,等.珠江口滨海湿地景观格局变化分析[J].热带地理,2010,30(3)：215-220,226.
[68]宫兆宁,宫辉力,赵文吉.北京湿地生态演变研究—以野鸭湖湿地自然保护区为例[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2007.
[69]郭丽娟.中国景观生态学研究进展[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(27)：15280-15281,15295.
[70]关沫,李波,赵海Internet的复杂网络统计规律研究与分析.计算机工程,2008,34(21)：92-94,97.
[71]何池全,赵魁义,余国营,等.湿地生态过程研究进展[J].地球科学进展,2000,15(2)：165-171.
[72]何桐,谢健,徐映雪,等.鸭绿江口滨海湿地景观格局动态演变分析[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2009,48(2)：113-118.
[73]滑永春,彭道黎.延庆县土地利用景观格局的变化[J].东北林业大学学报,2010,38(2)：50-52.
[74]扈传荣,姜栋,唐旭,等.基于洛伦兹曲线的全国城市土地利用现状抽样分析[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(12)：44-50.
[75]匡纬.景观设计的非线性思维观建构[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(20)：12368-12370.
[76]贾科利,张俊华,常庆瑞.基于信息熵与分形理论的土地利用景观格局变化研究-以陕北农牧交错带为例[J].干旱地区农业研究,2009,27(5)：235-239,250.
[77]蒋卫国,李京,李加洪,等.辽河三角洲湿地生态系统健康评价[J].生态学报,2005,25(3)：409-141.
[78]李斌,张金屯.黄土高原草原景观斑块形状的指数和分形分析[J].草地学报,2010,18(2)：143-147.
[79]李哈滨,王政权,王庆成.空间异质性定量研究理论与方法[J].应用生态学报,1998,9(6)：651-657.
[80]李晖,白杨,李国彦.集成灰色分析和元胞自动机用于景观动态模拟[J].生态学报,2009,29(11)：6227-6238.
[81]李胜男,王根绪,邓伟.湿地景观格局与水文过程研究进展[J].生态学杂志,2008,27(6)：1012-1020.
[82]李书娟,增辉,夏洁,等.景观空间动态模型研究现状和应重点解决的问题[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(4)：701-706.
[83]李团胜,石玉琼.景观生态学[M].北京：化学工业出版社,2009.
[84]李秀珍,布仁仓,常禹,等.景观格局指标对不同景观格局的反应[J].生态学报2004,24(1)：123-134.
[85]李玉凤,刘红玉,朱丽娟.挠力河流域平原区湿地景观完整性评价[J].生态学报,2009,29(9)：4857-4864.
[86]林孟龙,曹宇,王鑫.基于景观指数的景观格局分析方法的局限性：以台湾宜兰利泽简湿地为例[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(1)：139-143.
[87]刘宝勤,姚治君,高迎春.北京市用水结构变化趋势及驱动力分析[J].资源科学,2003,25(2)：38-43.
[88]刘春悦,张树清,江红星,等.江苏盐城滨海湿地景观格局时空动态研究[J].国土资源遥感,2009,81(3)：78-83.
[89]刘宏鲲,周涛.中国城市航空网络的实证研究与分析.物理学报.2007.56(1)：106-112.
[90]刘红玉,张世奎,吕宪国.三江平原湿地景观结构的时空变化[J].地理学报,2004,9(3)：393-399.
[91]刘军会,高吉喜,耿斌,等.北方农牧交错带土地利用及景观格局变化特征[J].环境科学研究,2007,20(5)：148-154.
[92]刘小平,黎夏,陈逸敏,等.景观扩张指数及其在城市扩展分析中的应用[J].地理学报,2009,64(12)：1430-1438.
[93]吕静渭,马孝义,高文强,等.近70年来泾河年径流量周期变化的小波分析[J].人民黄河,2010,32(2)：49-50,67.
[94]吕一河,陈利顶,傅伯杰.景观格局与生态过程的耦合途径分析[J].地理科学进展,2007,26(3)：1-10.
[95]吕一河,傅伯杰.生态学中的尺度及尺度转换方法[J].生态学报,2001,21(12)：2096-2105.
[96]罗盛,张锦,陈景武.关于结合应用因子分析和多元逐步回归完善趋势面分析的探讨[J].数理医药学杂志2010,23(5)：613-614.
[97]罗盛,马峻岭,陈景武.恶性肿瘤死亡率地域分布的趋势面分析[J].中国卫生统计,2008,25(04)：357-359,362.
[98]马克明,傅伯杰,周华峰.景观多样性测度：格局多样性的亲和度分析[J].生态学报,1998,18(1)：76-81.
[99]马燕飞,沙占江,郭丽红,等.基于NDVI及DEM的青海湖北岸景观格局空间自相关分析[J].遥感应用,2010,(6)：95-100,109.
[100]孟伟庆,李洪远,郝翠,等.近30年天津滨海新区湿地景观格局遥感监测分析[J].地球信息科学学报,2010,12(3)：436-443.
[101]宁龙梅,王学雷,胡望斌.利用马尔科夫过程模拟和预测武汉市湿地景观的动态演变[J].华中师范大学学报：自然科学版,2004,38(2)：255-258.
[102]潘竟虎,苏有才,黄永生,刘晓.疏勒河中游土地利用与景观格局动态[J].2012,23(4)：1090—1096.
[103]邱炳文,王钦敏,陈崇成,等.福建省土地利用多尺度空间自相关分析[J].自然资源学报,2007,22(2)：311-320.
[104]渠晓毅,刘小鹏,邵宁平.银川市湖泊湿地景观空间格局动态演化分析[J].干旱区研究,2009,26(3)：333-339.
[105]权佳,欧阳志云,徐卫华.中国自然保护区管理有效性的现状评价与对策[J].应用生态学报,2009,20(7)：1739-1746.
[106]孙丹峰.IKONOS影像景观格局特征尺度的小波与半方差分析[J].生态学报,2003,23(3)：405-413.
[107]孙贵艳,王传胜,肖磊.近20年来北京延庆县土地利用及景观格局变化研究[J].安徽农业科学,2011, 39(5)：3024-3027,3029.
[108]孙贤斌,刘红玉.土地利用变化对湿地景观连通性的影响及连通性优化效应-以江苏盐城海滨湿地为例[J].自然资源学报2010,19(4)：892-903.
[109]童庆喜,周上益.遥感应用的实践与创新[M].北京：测绘出版社,1990.
[110]万育生,靳顶.北京及上游周边地区水资源问题对策研究[J].水资源保护,2002,(1)：11-15.
[111]王根绪,刘进其,陈玲.黑河流域典型区土地利用格局变化及影响比较[J].地理学报,2006,61(4)：339-348.
[112]王军,傅伯杰,邱扬.黄土丘陵小流域土壤水分的时空变异特征-半变异函数[J].地理学报,2000,55(4)：428-438.
[113]汪小帆,李翔,陈关荣.复杂网络理论及其应用.北京：清华大学出版社,2006.
[114]汪雪格,汤洁,李昭阳.基于洛伦茨曲线的吉林西部土地利用结构变化分析[J].农业现代化研究,2007,28(3)：310-313.
[115]王彦辉,于澎涛,郭浩.北京官厅库区森林植被生态用水及其恢复[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2009.
[116]工颖,宫辉力,赵文吉,等.北京野鸭湖湿地资源变化特征[J].地理学报,2005,60(4)：656-664.
[117]工云才.基于景观破碎度分析的传统地域文化景观保护模式——以浙江诸暨市直埠镇为例[J].地理研究,2011,30(1)：10-22.
[118]温兆飞,张树清,白静,丁长虹,张策.农田景观空间异质性分析及遥感监测最优尺度选择——以三江平原为例[J].地理学报,2012,67(3)：346-356.
[119]邬建国.景观生态学-格局、过程、尺度与等级(第二版)[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2009.
[120]肖汉,李志鹏.基于分形理论的北京城市形态结构遥感分析[J].科技导报2010,28(16)：57-62.
[121]谢花林,刘黎明,李波,等.土地利用变化的多尺度空间自相关分析-以内蒙古翁牛特旗为例[J].地理学报,2006,61(4)：389-400.
[122]邢晨,耿瑞丹,李厚君.论环境教育对全球环境问题的响应[J].黑龙江环境通报,2012,36(1)：7-9.
[123]杨帆,赵冬至,索安宁.双台子河口湿地景观时空变化研究[J].遥感技术与应用,2008,23(1)：51-56.
[124]于欢,何政伟,张树清.丛于元胞自动机的三江平原湿地景观时空演化模拟研究[J].地理与地理信息科学,2010,26(4)：90-94.
[125]余世孝,郭泺.山东泰山地区景观结构变化及其分形分析[J].生态学报,2005,25(1)：129-135.
[126]余新晓,牛健植,关文斌,等.景观生态学[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2006.
[127]约翰·斯科特.社会网络分析法.重庆：重庆大学出版社,2007.
[128]岳书平,张树文,闫业超.吉林西部沼泽湿地景观变化及其驱动机制分析[J].中国环境科 学,2008,28(2)：163-167.
[129]张金兰,欧阳婷萍,朱照宇,等.基于景观生态学的广州城镇建设用地扩张模式分析[J].生态环境学报,2010,19(2)：410-414.
[130]张兰影,李成六,陈建平,等.基于RS-GIS古浪河流域土地利用变化.兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2010,46：54-58.
[131]张秋菊,傅伯杰,陈利顶.关于景观格局演变研究的几个问题[J].地理科学,2003,23(3)：264-270.
[132]张翔,邓冰,张铭.海洋波动的波谱分析和尺度划分[J].海洋通报,2008,27(1)：22-27.
[133]张绪良,张朝晖,徐宗军,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地的景观格局变化及累积环境效应[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(12)：2437-2443.
[134]赵薇,宫辉力,赵文吉,李小娟,张志峰.基于RS与GIS的野鸭湖湿地土地利用土地覆盖动态变化研究[J].地理学报,2004,19(3)：177-181.
[135]甄姿,宫兆宁,赵文吉.官厅水库库区水生植物演变格局时空变化特征分析[J].农业环境科学学报,2012,31(8)：1586-1595.
[136]郑建蕊,蒋卫国,周廷刚,等.洞庭湖区湿地景观指数选取与格局分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2010,19(3)：305-310.
[137]周德民,宫辉力,胡金明.中国湿地卫星遥感的应用研究[J].遥感技术与应用,2006,21(6)：577-581.
[138]宗秀影,刘高焕,乔玉良.黄河三角洲湿地景观格局动态变化分析[J].地理信息科学学报,2009,11(1)：91-97.
[2]Bone C, Dragicevic S, RobertsA. A fuzzy-constrained cellular automata model of forest insect in festations[J]. Ecological Modelling,2006,192:107-125.
[3]Bugri M, Hersperger A M, Schneeberger N. Driving forces of landscape change-current and new directions[J]. Landscape Ecology,2004,19:857-868.
[4]Costanza R. The value of the world's Ecosystem Services and Nature Capital[J]. Nature,1997,387: 253-260.
[5]Chen L D, Tian H Y, Fu B J, et al. Development of a new index for integrating landscape patterns with ecological processes at watershed scale[J]. Chinese Geographical Science,2009,19:37-45.
[6]Dale M R T, Brown S, Haeuber R A, et al. Ecological principles and guidelines for managing the use of land[J].Ecological Applications,2000,10:639-670.
[7]Deng J S, Wang K, Hong Y, et al. Spatio-temporal dynamics and evolut ion of landuse change and landscape pattern in response to rapid urbanization[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2009, (3):187-198.
[8]Forman R T T. Some general principles of landscape and regional ecology[J]. Landscape Ecology, 1995,10(3):133-142.
[9]Fortin M J, Agrawa A A. Landscape ecology comes of age[J]. Ecology,2005,86:1965-1966.
[10]Gardner R H, Milne B T, Turnner M G, et al. Neutral models for testing landscape hypotheses[J]. Landscape Ecology,2007,22:15-29.
[11]Geary R C. The contiguity ratio and statistical mapping[J]. The Incorporated Statistician,1954, 5(3):115-145.
[12]Gong H L, Pan Y, Xu Y X. Spatio-temporal variation of groundwater recharge in response to variability in a) precipitation, land use and soil in Yanqing Basin, Beijing, China[J]. Hydrogeology Journal,2012, (12):1331-1340.
[13]Guan DJ, Gao WJ, Watari K, et al. Land use change of Kitakyushu based on landscape ecology and Markov model[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences,2010,20:310-320.
[14]http://finance.stockstar.com/JL2007071200093780.shtml
[15]http://www.geodata.cn/Portal/?isCookieChecked=true.
[16]http://baike.baidu.com/view/4648263.htm#4.
[17]Johanna A A B, Frederike V, Stefan E, Philippe C. The influence of environmental changes on local and regional vegetation patterns at Rieme (NW Belgium):implications for Final Palaeolithic habitation[J]. Veget Hist Archaeobot,22:17-38.
[18]John A W. Landscape ecology as a foundation for sustainable conservation[J]. Landscape Ecology,2009, (8):1053-1065.
[19]Kent M. Biogeography and landscape ecology[J]. Progress in Physical Geography,2007,31(3):345-355.
[20]Koscielny B E, Kantelhardt J W, Braun P, e t al. Long-term persistence and multifractality of river runoff records:Detrended fluctuation studies[J] Journal of Hydrology,2006,322:120-137.
[21]Ladson A R,White L J, Doolan J A, et al. Development and testing of an index of stream condition for waterway management in Australia[J].Freshwater Biol,1999,41:453-468.
[22]LI X, LU L,CHENG G,et al. Quantifying landscape structure of t he Heihe River Basin, NorthWest China using FRAGSTATS[J] Journal of Arid Environments,2001,48(4):521-535.
[23]Li H B, Wu J G. Use and misuse of landscape indices[J]. Landscape Ecology,2004,19:389-399.
[24]Liu X P, Li X, Chen Y M, et al. A new landscape index for quantifying urban expansion using multi-temporal remotely sensed data[J].Landscape Ecology,2010,25:671-682.
[25]Matthew L, Jianguo W. A gradient analysis of urban landscape pattern:a case study from the Phoenix metropolitan region, Arizona, USA[J]. Landscape Ecology,2002,17(4):327-339.
[26]Mcgarigal K, Cushman S, Neel M, et al. FRAGSTATS:spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps[M]. Amherst:University of Massachusetts, 2002.
[27]Mcgarigal K, Tagil S, Cushman S A. Surface metrics:an alternative to patch metrics for the quantification of landscape structure[J]. Landscape Ecology,2009,24(3):433-450.
[28]Merriam G. Landscape dynamics in farmland[J]. Tree,1988,3:16-20.
[29]Moran P. The interpretation of statistical maps[J]Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,1948,10: 243-251.
[30]Nassauer J I. Culture and changing landscape structure[J]. Landscape Ecology,1995,10:229-237.
[31]Naveh Z. Some remarks on recent developments in landscape functions and land use patterns[J].Landscape Ecology,1987,1:75-83.
[32]Oliver M A, Shine J A, Slocum K R. Using the variogram to explore imagery of two different spatial resolutions[J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing,2005,26(15):3225-3240.
[33]Rossi R E, Mulla D J, Joumel A G,et al. Geostatistical tools for modleling and interpreting ecological spatial dependence[J].Ecological Monographs,1992,62:277-314.
[34]Saura S., Martinez-Millan J. Sensitivity of landscape pattern metrics to map spatial extent[J]. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing,2001,67:1027-1036.
[35]Shi W Z and Liu k F. Modeling Fuzzy Topological Relations between Uncertain Objects in GIS [J]. Photogrammetry Engineering and Remote Sensing.2004,70 (8):921-930
[36]Song S J, Zhou W C. Effects of land use structure on surface water quality in Minjiang River Basin[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtza Basin,2008,17(5):712-715.
[37]Tang J, Wang X G, Analysis of the land use structure changes based on Lorenz curves [J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment,2009,151:175-180.
[38]Tobler W. A.. A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region[J]. Economic Geography,1970,46(2):234-240.
[39]Turner M G.. Spatial simulation of landscape ecology changes in Georgia:A comparison of 3 transition modles[J]. Landscape Ecology,1987,1:29-36.
[40]Turner M. G. Spatial and temporal analysis of landscape patterns[J]. Landscape Ecology, 1990,4(1):21-30.
[41]Turner M G, Romme W H, Gardner R H, et al. A revised concept of landscape equilibrium:disturbance and stability on scaled landscapes[J].Iandscape ecology,1993,8:213-227.
[42]Tyre A J, Tenhumberg B, Bull C M. Identifying landscape scale patterns from individual scale processes[J]. Ecological Modelling,2006,199:442-450.
[43]Weng Y C. Spatiotemporal changes of landscape pattern in response to urbanization [J].Landscape and Urban Planning,2007,81:341-353.
[44]Wu J., Shen W. Sun W. and Tueller P.T.. Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics[J]. Landscape Ecology,2002,17:761-782.
[45]Wu J G, Levin S A. A spatial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in an annual grassland[J].Ecology Monographs,1994,64(4):447-464.
[46]Xu X J, Peng H O, Wang X M, et al. Epidemic spreading with time delay in complex networks[J]. Physica A,2006(367):525-530.
[47]Zhang S, Zhang J, Li F, et al. Vector analysis theory on landscape pattern(VATLP)[J]. Ecological Modelling,2006,193:492-502.
[48]阿如旱,杨持,同丽嘎.基于分形理论的沙漠化土地空间结构—以内蒙古多伦县为例[J].地理研究,2010,29(2)：283-290.
[49]蔡博峰,卞有生.北京市妫水河流域景观生态学分析[J].环境污染与防治,2006,28(5)：373-376.
[50]陈爱莲,朱博勤,陈利顶,等.双台河口湿地景观及生态干扰度的动态变化[J].应用生态学报,2010,21(5)：1120-1128.
[51]陈保瑜,宋悦,咎启杰,谭凤仪,李喻春,岳钥,田莉,余世孝.深圳湾近30年主要景观类型之演变[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2012,51(5)：86-92.
[52]陈利顶,刘洋,吕一河,等.景观生态学中的格局分析：现状、困境与未来[J].生态学报,2008,28(11)：5521-5531.
[53]陈建军,张树文,郑冬梅.景观格局定量分析中的不确定性[J].干旱区研究,2005,22(1)：63-67.
[54]陈铭,王宗明,张树清,等.向海自然保护区景观格局变化及湿地梯度分布特征研究[J].干旱区地理,2006,29(5)：694-699.
[55]陈文波,肖笃宁,李秀珍.景观空间分析的特征和主要内容[J].生态学报,2002,22(7)：1135-1142.
[56]陈月平.官厅水库水资源现状分析[J].北京水务,2007,6：7-11.
[57]成遣,王铁良.辽河三角洲湿地景观动态变化及其驱动力研究[J].人民黄河,2010,32(2)：8-9.
[58]程兰,吴志峰,魏建兵,等.城镇建设用地扩展类型的空间识别及其意义[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(12)：2593-2599.
[59]程卫华.官厅水库水文特性统计分析[J].北京水务,2012,5：29-32.
[60]杜林芳,冯仲科,刘东云,等.天津滨海新区湿地景观格局变化研究[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(10)：5439-5442,5460.
[61]樊敏,刘耀林,杨啸灏.城镇土地利用时间变化的趋势面分析[J].测绘通报,2008,(8)：25-27.
[62]付春雷,宋国利,鄂勇.马尔科夫模型下的乐清湾湿地景观变化分析[J].东北林业大学学报,2009,(9)：117-119.
[63]傅伯杰,吕一河,陈利顶,等.国际景观生态学研究新进展[J].生态学报,2008,28(2)：799-804.
[64]傅伯杰,刘世梁.长期生态研究中的若干问题与趋势[J].应用生态学报,2002,13(4)：476-480.
[65]傅伯杰,陈利顶,马克明,等.景观生态学原理及其应用[M].北京：科学出版社,2001.
[66]高常军,周德民,栾兆擎,等.湿地景观格局演变研究评述[J].长江流域资源与环境,2010,19(4)：460-464.
[67]高义,苏奋振,孙晓宇,等.珠江口滨海湿地景观格局变化分析[J].热带地理,2010,30(3)：215-220,226.
[68]宫兆宁,宫辉力,赵文吉.北京湿地生态演变研究—以野鸭湖湿地自然保护区为例[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社,2007.
[69]郭丽娟.中国景观生态学研究进展[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(27)：15280-15281,15295.
[70]关沫,李波,赵海Internet的复杂网络统计规律研究与分析.计算机工程,2008,34(21)：92-94,97.
[71]何池全,赵魁义,余国营,等.湿地生态过程研究进展[J].地球科学进展,2000,15(2)：165-171.
[72]何桐,谢健,徐映雪,等.鸭绿江口滨海湿地景观格局动态演变分析[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2009,48(2)：113-118.
[73]滑永春,彭道黎.延庆县土地利用景观格局的变化[J].东北林业大学学报,2010,38(2)：50-52.
[74]扈传荣,姜栋,唐旭,等.基于洛伦兹曲线的全国城市土地利用现状抽样分析[J].中国土地科学,2009,23(12)：44-50.
[75]匡纬.景观设计的非线性思维观建构[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(20)：12368-12370.
[76]贾科利,张俊华,常庆瑞.基于信息熵与分形理论的土地利用景观格局变化研究-以陕北农牧交错带为例[J].干旱地区农业研究,2009,27(5)：235-239,250.
[77]蒋卫国,李京,李加洪,等.辽河三角洲湿地生态系统健康评价[J].生态学报,2005,25(3)：409-141.
[78]李斌,张金屯.黄土高原草原景观斑块形状的指数和分形分析[J].草地学报,2010,18(2)：143-147.
[79]李哈滨,王政权,王庆成.空间异质性定量研究理论与方法[J].应用生态学报,1998,9(6)：651-657.
[80]李晖,白杨,李国彦.集成灰色分析和元胞自动机用于景观动态模拟[J].生态学报,2009,29(11)：6227-6238.
[81]李胜男,王根绪,邓伟.湿地景观格局与水文过程研究进展[J].生态学杂志,2008,27(6)：1012-1020.
[82]李书娟,增辉,夏洁,等.景观空间动态模型研究现状和应重点解决的问题[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(4)：701-706.
[83]李团胜,石玉琼.景观生态学[M].北京：化学工业出版社,2009.
[84]李秀珍,布仁仓,常禹,等.景观格局指标对不同景观格局的反应[J].生态学报2004,24(1)：123-134.
[85]李玉凤,刘红玉,朱丽娟.挠力河流域平原区湿地景观完整性评价[J].生态学报,2009,29(9)：4857-4864.
[86]林孟龙,曹宇,王鑫.基于景观指数的景观格局分析方法的局限性：以台湾宜兰利泽简湿地为例[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(1)：139-143.
[87]刘宝勤,姚治君,高迎春.北京市用水结构变化趋势及驱动力分析[J].资源科学,2003,25(2)：38-43.
[88]刘春悦,张树清,江红星,等.江苏盐城滨海湿地景观格局时空动态研究[J].国土资源遥感,2009,81(3)：78-83.
[89]刘宏鲲,周涛.中国城市航空网络的实证研究与分析.物理学报.2007.56(1)：106-112.
[90]刘红玉,张世奎,吕宪国.三江平原湿地景观结构的时空变化[J].地理学报,2004,9(3)：393-399.
[91]刘军会,高吉喜,耿斌,等.北方农牧交错带土地利用及景观格局变化特征[J].环境科学研究,2007,20(5)：148-154.
[92]刘小平,黎夏,陈逸敏,等.景观扩张指数及其在城市扩展分析中的应用[J].地理学报,2009,64(12)：1430-1438.
[93]吕静渭,马孝义,高文强,等.近70年来泾河年径流量周期变化的小波分析[J].人民黄河,2010,32(2)：49-50,67.
[94]吕一河,陈利顶,傅伯杰.景观格局与生态过程的耦合途径分析[J].地理科学进展,2007,26(3)：1-10.
[95]吕一河,傅伯杰.生态学中的尺度及尺度转换方法[J].生态学报,2001,21(12)：2096-2105.
[96]罗盛,张锦,陈景武.关于结合应用因子分析和多元逐步回归完善趋势面分析的探讨[J].数理医药学杂志2010,23(5)：613-614.
[97]罗盛,马峻岭,陈景武.恶性肿瘤死亡率地域分布的趋势面分析[J].中国卫生统计,2008,25(04)：357-359,362.
[98]马克明,傅伯杰,周华峰.景观多样性测度：格局多样性的亲和度分析[J].生态学报,1998,18(1)：76-81.
[99]马燕飞,沙占江,郭丽红,等.基于NDVI及DEM的青海湖北岸景观格局空间自相关分析[J].遥感应用,2010,(6)：95-100,109.
[100]孟伟庆,李洪远,郝翠,等.近30年天津滨海新区湿地景观格局遥感监测分析[J].地球信息科学学报,2010,12(3)：436-443.
[101]宁龙梅,王学雷,胡望斌.利用马尔科夫过程模拟和预测武汉市湿地景观的动态演变[J].华中师范大学学报：自然科学版,2004,38(2)：255-258.
[102]潘竟虎,苏有才,黄永生,刘晓.疏勒河中游土地利用与景观格局动态[J].2012,23(4)：1090—1096.
[103]邱炳文,王钦敏,陈崇成,等.福建省土地利用多尺度空间自相关分析[J].自然资源学报,2007,22(2)：311-320.
[104]渠晓毅,刘小鹏,邵宁平.银川市湖泊湿地景观空间格局动态演化分析[J].干旱区研究,2009,26(3)：333-339.
[105]权佳,欧阳志云,徐卫华.中国自然保护区管理有效性的现状评价与对策[J].应用生态学报,2009,20(7)：1739-1746.
[106]孙丹峰.IKONOS影像景观格局特征尺度的小波与半方差分析[J].生态学报,2003,23(3)：405-413.
[107]孙贵艳,王传胜,肖磊.近20年来北京延庆县土地利用及景观格局变化研究[J].安徽农业科学,2011, 39(5)：3024-3027,3029.
[108]孙贤斌,刘红玉.土地利用变化对湿地景观连通性的影响及连通性优化效应-以江苏盐城海滨湿地为例[J].自然资源学报2010,19(4)：892-903.
[109]童庆喜,周上益.遥感应用的实践与创新[M].北京：测绘出版社,1990.
[110]万育生,靳顶.北京及上游周边地区水资源问题对策研究[J].水资源保护,2002,(1)：11-15.
[111]王根绪,刘进其,陈玲.黑河流域典型区土地利用格局变化及影响比较[J].地理学报,2006,61(4)：339-348.
[112]王军,傅伯杰,邱扬.黄土丘陵小流域土壤水分的时空变异特征-半变异函数[J].地理学报,2000,55(4)：428-438.
[113]汪小帆,李翔,陈关荣.复杂网络理论及其应用.北京：清华大学出版社,2006.
[114]汪雪格,汤洁,李昭阳.基于洛伦茨曲线的吉林西部土地利用结构变化分析[J].农业现代化研究,2007,28(3)：310-313.
[115]王彦辉,于澎涛,郭浩.北京官厅库区森林植被生态用水及其恢复[M].北京：中国林业出版社,2009.
[116]工颖,宫辉力,赵文吉,等.北京野鸭湖湿地资源变化特征[J].地理学报,2005,60(4)：656-664.
[117]工云才.基于景观破碎度分析的传统地域文化景观保护模式——以浙江诸暨市直埠镇为例[J].地理研究,2011,30(1)：10-22.
[118]温兆飞,张树清,白静,丁长虹,张策.农田景观空间异质性分析及遥感监测最优尺度选择——以三江平原为例[J].地理学报,2012,67(3)：346-356.
[119]邬建国.景观生态学-格局、过程、尺度与等级(第二版)[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2009.
[120]肖汉,李志鹏.基于分形理论的北京城市形态结构遥感分析[J].科技导报2010,28(16)：57-62.
[121]谢花林,刘黎明,李波,等.土地利用变化的多尺度空间自相关分析-以内蒙古翁牛特旗为例[J].地理学报,2006,61(4)：389-400.
[122]邢晨,耿瑞丹,李厚君.论环境教育对全球环境问题的响应[J].黑龙江环境通报,2012,36(1)：7-9.
[123]杨帆,赵冬至,索安宁.双台子河口湿地景观时空变化研究[J].遥感技术与应用,2008,23(1)：51-56.
[124]于欢,何政伟,张树清.丛于元胞自动机的三江平原湿地景观时空演化模拟研究[J].地理与地理信息科学,2010,26(4)：90-94.
[125]余世孝,郭泺.山东泰山地区景观结构变化及其分形分析[J].生态学报,2005,25(1)：129-135.
[126]余新晓,牛健植,关文斌,等.景观生态学[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2006.
[127]约翰·斯科特.社会网络分析法.重庆：重庆大学出版社,2007.
[128]岳书平,张树文,闫业超.吉林西部沼泽湿地景观变化及其驱动机制分析[J].中国环境科 学,2008,28(2)：163-167.
[129]张金兰,欧阳婷萍,朱照宇,等.基于景观生态学的广州城镇建设用地扩张模式分析[J].生态环境学报,2010,19(2)：410-414.
[130]张兰影,李成六,陈建平,等.基于RS-GIS古浪河流域土地利用变化.兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2010,46：54-58.
[131]张秋菊,傅伯杰,陈利顶.关于景观格局演变研究的几个问题[J].地理科学,2003,23(3)：264-270.
[132]张翔,邓冰,张铭.海洋波动的波谱分析和尺度划分[J].海洋通报,2008,27(1)：22-27.
[133]张绪良,张朝晖,徐宗军,等.莱州湾南岸滨海湿地的景观格局变化及累积环境效应[J].生态学杂志,2009,28(12)：2437-2443.
[134]赵薇,宫辉力,赵文吉,李小娟,张志峰.基于RS与GIS的野鸭湖湿地土地利用土地覆盖动态变化研究[J].地理学报,2004,19(3)：177-181.
[135]甄姿,宫兆宁,赵文吉.官厅水库库区水生植物演变格局时空变化特征分析[J].农业环境科学学报,2012,31(8)：1586-1595.
[136]郑建蕊,蒋卫国,周廷刚,等.洞庭湖区湿地景观指数选取与格局分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2010,19(3)：305-310.
[137]周德民,宫辉力,胡金明.中国湿地卫星遥感的应用研究[J].遥感技术与应用,2006,21(6)：577-581.
[138]宗秀影,刘高焕,乔玉良.黄河三角洲湿地景观格局动态变化分析[J].地理信息科学学报,2009,11(1)：91-97.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |