Developing Regional Ecological Networks along the Grand Canal based on an Integrated Analysis Framework

doi:10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2021.06.008

Abstract

Abstract:

As a complex social ecosystem network, the area along the Grand Canal has a prominent contradiction between the demand for economic development and the protection of natural resources, which means that there is an urgent need for ecological restoration and environmental protection. Using ArcGIS, Conefor, Linkage Mapper and other software platforms, this paper developed an integrated analysis framework, through loose coupling of the attribute-function-structure index system and a series of methods such as the least cost path, circuit theory and moving window search. Based on the framework, we resolve a series of scientific issues in developing regional ecological networks, such as the selection of ecological sources, the simulation of potential ecological corridors, the assessment of the importance of ecological sources and corridors, and the identification of key ecological nodes. Moreover, an overall conservation pattern of the regional ecological network is constructed. The results show that: 1) A total of 88 important ecological sources are identified in the study area. The patches with high centrality values are mainly concentrated in the southern mountainous area and the areas with abundant rivers and lakes. 2) A total of 138 important ecological corridors are identified, and they are not evenly distributed. Extremely important corridors mostly appear between important patches, and very important corridors are mainly distributed in the central area. 3) Fifteen ecological pinch points are extracted, and they are mainly concentrated in the northern part of the study area and eastern Zhejiang Province. The barriers are mostly concentrated in the southern and northern parts of the study area. 4) Combining the demands of ecological protection and socioeconomic development, we propose an overall ecological conservation pattern of “one axis, five sections, multiple cores and multiple nodes” to effectively guide future ecological restoration work. These results can provide a useful reference and spatial guidance for decision makers in terms of ecological restoration and cooperation on cross-regional ecological protection along the Grand Canal.

Key words: ecological network, integrated analysis framework, ecological conservation pattern, the Grand Canal

XU Chuangsheng, CHENG Long, SU Jie, YIN Haiwei, GUO Yiqiang. Developing Regional Ecological Networks along the Grand Canal based on an Integrated Analysis Framework[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2021, 12(6): 801-813.

Figures/Tables 10

Table 1 Land use type statistics

Land use type	Area (km²)	Proportion of area (%)
Farmlands	189454.14	61.42
Forests	48827.56	15.83
Shrubs	6000.32	1.95
Grasslands	1501.59	0.49
Wetlands	427.03	0.14
Water	17492.50	5.67
Impervious surfaces	44043.02	14.28
Bare land	691.94	0.22
Total	308438.10	100.00

Fig. 1 Map of the study area (a) and land use and land cover (b) Note: City code:1. Beijing; 2. Tianjn; 3. Langfang; 4. Xiong’an New District; 5. Cangzhou; 6. Hengshui; 7. Dezhou; 8. Xingtai; 9. Handan; 10. Liaocheng; 11. Tai’an; 12. Anyang; 13. Puyang; 14. Hebi; 15. Jining; 16. Xinxiang; 17. Jiaozuo; 18. Zaozhuang; 19. Zhengzhou; 20. Kaifeng; 21. Luoyang; 22. Xuzhou; 23. Shangqiu; 24. Suzhou (Anhui); 25. Suqian; 26. Huaibei; 27. Huai’an; 28. Yangzhou; 29. Zhenjiang; 30. Changzhou; 31. Wuxi; 32. Suzhou (Jiangsu); 33. Huzhou; 34. Jiaxing; 35. Hangzhou; 36. Ningbo; 37. Shaoxing.

Fig. 2 SCSAI ecological network research framework Note: AFS = “Attribution-function-structure” index system; LCP = Least cost path method; MWS = Moving windows search method; NLD = Night-time light data; DEM = Digital elevation model.

Fig. 3 Spatial distributions of ecological sources (a) and landscape resistance (b) Major water source code:. Miyun Reservoir;. Yuqiao Miyun Reservoir;. Guangang Wetland Park;. Nandagang Wetland Park;. Dushan Lake;. Weihan Lake;. Luhun Reservoir;. Luoma Lake;. Baima Lake;. Baoying Lake;. Nvshan Lake;. Hongze Lake;. Qili Lake;. Gaoyou Lake;. Changdang Lake;. Ge Lake;. Yangchenghu Lake;. Yangchenghu West Lake;. Jilin Lake;. Chenghu Lake;. Taihu Lake;. Duihekou Reservoir;. Didang Lake;. The mouth of Jiaxing;. Qiandao Lake;. Qiantang River. Same below.

Table 2 Habitat suitability and landscape resistance assignment scheme in the study area

Land use types	Factor	Classification	Resistance value
Farmlands	-	-	150
Forests	Area	<10 ha	20
Forests	Area	≥10 ha	1
Grasslands	-	-	50
Shrubs	-	-	40
Wetlands	-	-	1
Water	Area	<10 ha	20
		10-100 ha	200
		≥100 ha	1000
Construction land	-	-	600
Bare land	-	-	500

Fig. 4 Spatial distributions of the importance of ecological sources (a) and corridors (b)

Fig. 5 Spatial distribution of ecological pinch points (a) and ecological barriers (b) in the study area

Fig. 6 The overall ecological network pattern of the region along the Grand Canal

Table 3 The number of ecological sources in each city

City	Number of ecological sources	City	Number of ecological sources
Ningbo	19	Luoyang	3
Hangzhou	15	Xuzhou	3
Shaoxing	11	Jining	2
Suzhou (Jiangsu)	11	Jiaxing	2
Huai’an	10	Suqian	2
Huzhou	8	Zhenjiang	2
Wuxi	8	Anyang	1
Changzhou	7	Cangzhou	1
Beijing	6	Hebi	1
Tianjin	4	Xinxiang	1
Yangzhou	4	Zaozhuang	1

Table 4 Statistics on the importance levels of the urban ecological corridors by city

City	Important	Very important	Extremely important	Subtotal	City	Important	Very important	Extremely important	Subtotal
Anyang	2	1	0	3	Ningbo	3	1	11	15
Beijing	3	4	0	7	Puyang	1	0	0	1
Cangzhou	8	3	0	11	Shangqiu	2	0	0	2
Changzhou	6	13	11	30	Shaoxing	0	6	3	9
Dezhou	3	0	0	3	Suzhou (Jiangsu)	45	3	14	62
Handan	1	1	0	2	Tai’an	6	0	0	6
Hangzhou	5	8	8	21	Tianjin	4	3	0	7
Hebi	1	0	0	1	Wuxi	9	3	13	25
Hengshui	1	1	0	2	Xinxiang	0	1	0	1
Huzhou	0	1	6	7	Xingtai	2	2	0	4
Huai’an	4	6	4	14	Xiong’an New District	0	2	0	2
Huaibei	1	0	0	1	Suqian	2	2	0	4
Jining	7	2	0	9	Suzhou (Anhui)	5	3	0	8
Jiaxing	2	1	2	5	Xuzhou	4	4	0	8
Jiaozuo	0	1	0	1	Yangzhou	0	2	0	2
Kaifeng	2	0	0	2	Zaozhuang	6	3	0	9
Langfang	1	1	0	2	Zhenjiang	0	5	0	5
Liaocheng	4	0	0	4	Zhengzhou	5	3	0	8
Luoyang	2	1	2	5	Total	147	87	74	308

References 39

[1]	Ayram C A C, Mendoza M E, Salicrup D R P, et al. 2014. Identifying potential conservation areas in the Cuitzeo Lake basin, Mexico by multitemporal analysis of landscape connectivity. Journal for Nature Conservation, 22(5): 424-435. DOI URL
[2]	Bennett A F. 1990. Habitat corridors and the conservation of small mammals in a fragmented forest environment. Landscape Ecology, 4(2-3): 109-122.
[3]	Braaker S, Moretti M, Boesch R, et al. 2014. Assessing habitat connectivity for ground-dwelling animals in an urban environment. Ecological Applications, 24(7): 1583-1595.
[4]	Carroll C, McRae B H, Brookes A. 2012. Use of linkage mapping and centrality analysis across habitat gradients to conserve connectivity of gray wolf populations in western North America. Conservation Biology, 26(1): 78-87. DOI PMID
[5]	Chetkiewicz C L B, St Clair C C, Boyce M S. 2006. Corridors for conservation: Integrating pattern and process. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 37(1): 317-342.
[6]	Correa Ayram C A, Mendoza M E, Etter A, et al. 2016. Habitat connectivity in biodiversity conservation: A review of recent studies and applications. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 40(1): 7-37.
[7]	Damschen E I, Haddad N M, Orrock J L, et al. 2006. Corridors increase plant species richness at large scales. Science, 313(5791): 1284-1286. PMID
[8]	Dan L, Qing C. 2015. Ecological security research progress in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(5): 111-121.
[9]	Dennis P, Fahrig L, Hobbs R, et al. 2004. Ecological networks and greenways:Concept, design, implementation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[10]	Fei F, Yin H W, Kong F H, et al. 2020. Comparative analysis of ecological network pattern using 2d and 3d information in main urban area of nanjing, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 40(16): 5534-5545. (in Chinese)
[11]	Foltête J C, Clauzel C, Vuidel G. 2012. A software tool dedicated to the modelling of landscape networks. Environmental Modelling & Software, 38: 316-327.
[12]	Fox A D, Corne D W, Adame C G M, et al. 2019. An efficient multi-objective optimization method for use in the design of marine protected area networks. Frontiers in Marine Science, 6: 17. DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00017. DOI URL
[13]	Klar N, Herrmann M, Henning-Hahn M, et al. 2012. Between ecological theory and planning practice: (Re-) Connecting forest patches for the wildcat in Lower Saxony, Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 105(4): 376-384.
[14]	Koen E L, Bowman J, Walpole A A. 2012. The effect of cost surface parameterization on landscape resistance estimates. Molecular Ecology Resources, 12(4): 686-696.
[15]	Kong F H, Yin H W, Nakagoshi N, et al. 2010. Urban green space network development for biodiversity conservation: Identification based on graph theory and gravity modeling. Landscape and Urban Planning, 95(1-2): 16-27. DOI URL
[16]	Kong F H, Yin H W. 2008. Developing green space ecological networks in Jinan City. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 28(4): 1711-1719. (in Chinese)
[17]	Liu J, Yin H W, Kong F H, et al. 2018. Structure optimization of circuit theory-based green infrastructure in Nanjing, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 38(12): 4363-4372. (in Chinese)
[18]	Matthews M J, O’Connor S, Cole R S. 1988. Database for the New York State urban wildlife habitat inventory. Landscape and Urban Planning, 15(1-2): 23-37.
[19]	McRae B H. 2006. Isolation by resistance. Evolution, 60(8): 1551-1561. PMID
[20]	McRae B H, Beier P. 2007. Circuit theory predicts gene flow in plant and animal populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 104(50): 19885-19890.
[21]	McRae B H, Dickson B G, Keitt T H, et al. 2008. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology, 89(10): 2712-2724. PMID
[22]	McRae B H, Hall S A, Beier P, et al. 2012. Where to restore ecological connectivity? Detecting barriers and quantifying restoration benefits. Plos One, 7(12): e52604. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052604. DOI URL
[23]	McRae B H, Kavanagh D M. 2011. Linkage mapper connectivity analysis software. Seattle, Washington, USA: The Nature Conservancy. Available at: http://www.circuitscape.org/linkagemapper.
[24]	Peng J, Zhao H J, Liu Y X, et al. 2017. Research progress and prospect on regional ecological security pattern construction. Geographical Research, 36(3): 407-419. (in Chinese)
[25]	Pullinger M G, Johnson C J. 2010. Maintaining or restoring connectivity of modified landscapes: Evaluating the least-cost path model with multiple sources of ecological information. Landscape Ecology, 25(10): 1547-1560.
[26]	Shan N, Zhou K X, Pan Y, et al. 2019. Research advances in design methods of biodiversity conservation corridors. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(2): 411-420. (in Chinese) DOI URL
[27]	Song L L, Qin M Z. 2016. Identification of ecological corridors and its importance by integrating circuit theory. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 27(10): 3344-3352. (in Chinese) DOI PMID
[28]	Sutton-Grier A E, Wowk K, Bamford H. 2015. Future of our coasts: The potential for natural and hybrid infrastructure to enhance the resilience of our coastal communities, economies and ecosystems. Environmental Science & Policy, 51: 137-148.
[29]	Urban D, Keitt T. 2001. Landscape connectivity: A graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology, 82(5): 1205-1218.
[30]	Vallecillo S, Polce C, Barbosa A, et al. 2018. Spatial alternatives for Green Infrastructure planning across the EU: An ecosystem service perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 174: 41-54.
[31]	Vogt P, Ferrari J R, Lookingbill T R, et al. 2009. Mapping functional connectivity. Ecological Indicators, 9(1): 64-71. DOI URL
[32]	Wei J X, Song Y, Wang Y C, et al. 2019. Urban green infrastructure building for sustainability in areas of rapid urbanization based on evaluating spatial priority: A case study of Pukou in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 39(4): 1178-1188. (in Chinese)
[33]	Xie G D, Zhang C X, Zhang L M, et al. 2015. Improvement of the evaluation method for ecosystem service value based on per unit area. Journal of Natural Resources, 30(8): 1243-1254. (in Chinese)
[34]	Xu F, Yin H W, Kong F H, et al. 2015. Developing ecological networks based on MSPA and the least-cost path method: A case study in Bazhong western new district. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(19): 6425-6434. (in Chinese)
[35]	Yang J, Zhang J C, Wu Y X, et al. 2014. Evolution of ecological environment in typical regions along the Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal. Beijing, China: Publishing House of Electronics Industry. (in Chinese)
[36]	Yin H W, Kong F H, Qi Y, et al. 2011. Developing and optimizing ecological networks in urban agglomeration of Hunan Province, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31(10): 2863-2874. (in Chinese)
[37]	Yu K J, Li D H, Li W. 2004. The Great Canal regional ecological infrastructure: Strategy and approaches. Progress in Geography, 23(1): 1-12. (in Chinese)
[38]	Yu K J. 1996. Security patterns and surface model in landscape ecological planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 36(1): 1-17.
[39]	Zhu J, Su J, Yin H W, et al. 2020. Construction of Xuzhou ecological network based on comprehensive sources identification and multi- scale nesting. Journal of Natural Resources, 35(8): 1986-2001. (in Chinese) DOI URL