龙栖山国家级自然保护区森林景观格局分析及其生态评价
|
摘要
龙栖山国家级自然保护区以生物种类的多样性,珍稀动、植物丰富性和中亚热带森林植被的典型性而著称,是一个理想的森林生态旅游环境。然而,由于保护区经济基础薄弱,当地政府财力有限,长期以来旅游基础设施落后,旅游景点破碎化较严重,无法真正实现保护区的生态效益、社会效益和经济效益的协调发展。
针对以往对于龙栖山国家级自然保护区的生态环境、景观格局等方面的研究相对薄弱的现状,本文研究分析了龙栖山国家级自然保护区景观空间格局、景观斑块特征分布规律以及外界干扰对保护区景观格局影响的关系,应用层次分析法、RBF网络、投影寻踪模型和支持向量机四种方法评价了森林景观生态质量,结合龙栖山国家级自然保护区生态旅游,分析环境容量和旅游容量,预测生态旅游规模,并给出若干建议。研究的结果有利于保护区管理者制定一个系统而有针对性的区域可持续发展战略,从而促进保护区的生态效益、社会效益和经济效益的协调发展。主要研究结果如下:
1、在ArcGIS环境下将矢量图转化成栅格格式,利用Fragstats软件在斑块类型、景观类型和景观水平上计算景观指数,对龙栖山国家级自然保护区森林景观格局进行分析。
1)景观格局分析结果表明,龙栖山国家级自然保护区9个景观要素的面积、周长、斑块数分布均极不均衡。阔叶林景观、松林景观和竹林景观是保护区的主要景观类型,三者的面积和周长之和分别占整个保护区面积和周长的95.3078%和85.6365%。但各景观要素斑块的面积、周长数值差异较大,同时由于自然保护区其特有的保护性质,超大斑块的数量也为数不少。
2)景观要素的斑块形状特征表明,阔叶林景观要素的斑块形状最为复杂、景观连通性较好,破碎化程度和斑块分离度水平都较低,而人类活动较多的非林地景观、经济林景观则破碎化程度较高,符合人为干扰导致景观破碎化程度变化的理论。龙栖山国家级自然保护区作为国家级森林生态系统的保护区,优势度较高,景观分布较不均匀,总体多样性水平不高。
2、运用正态分布、对数正态分布、Weibull分布、Gamma分布和Beta分布分别分析斑块大小、斑块面积和分维数的分布规律。结果表明景观斑块特征分布规律存在着等级相关性。研究结果表明,针对龙栖山国家级自然保护区,正态分布在分析景观斑块大小、斑块面积和分维数分布规律中的拟合效果最佳,Gama分布在面积分布规律和分维数分布规律的拟合中效果较好,而Weibull分布无论在哪个斑块特征上分布拟合效果是都是较差的。也说明了研究地的景观斑块大小、景观斑块面积和分维数大部分服从正态分布,部分服从Gama分布。
3、运用现代统计学中的非线性建模方法,分析自然干扰和人为干扰对景观格局的影响。
1)选择面积、蓄积、年龄、土层厚度、灌丛盖度、草本盖度、平均海拔、坡度、坡向和坡位10指标作为自然干扰因子,构建人工神经网络模型、多元自适应回归样条模型、支持向量机模型和投影寻踪回归模型分别模拟分析分维数。模拟分析结果表明当环境因子中指标值发生变化,斑块分维数也相应产生变化,从而证实并丰富了干扰对景观格局影响的论断。同时通过留一(LOO)交叉验证各模型性能,结果表明多元自适应回归样条模型用于揭示自然干扰对景观格局影响的关系,其效果较其他方法更为理想。
2)人类通过改变景观类型数量导致景观格局发生变化,是人类干扰活动对景观格局影响的表现之一。选择景观类型数量作为人类干扰因子,构建人工神经网络模型、多元自适应回归样条模型、支持向量机模型和投影寻踪回归模型,分别模拟分析人为干扰对景观多样性、优势度和均匀度的影响。模拟分析结果表明人为干扰引起斑块数的变化,导致景观多样性产生较为显著的影响,而对景观优势度和均与度影响效果较弱。这一结果也证实并丰富了干扰对景观格局影响的论断。同时通过比较留一交叉验证结果各模型性能,结果表明上述模型用于模拟分析景观斑块数量对景观多样性的影响时效果均较好,其中投影寻踪回归模型性能更优。而用于模拟分析景观斑块数量对景观优势度和均匀度的影响,上述模型均未能有效的揭示两者的关系。
4、从森林景观生态保护和开发利用层面出发,选择自然性、珍稀性、多样性、代表性、适宜性、稳定性、干扰性、利用性、观赏性、科研性、区位性和文化价值作为评价景观生态质量指标,构建RBF网络、支持向量机、投影寻踪评价模型和层次分析法评价模型。
1)层次分析法的结果说明龙栖山国家自然保护区景观生态质量指数为0.79,其生态质量较好。
2)RBF网络、支持向量机和投影寻踪评价模型的评价结果均认为龙栖山国家级自然保护区景观生态质量处于生态质量较好状态。
3)在各等级范围内,随机生成10个样本数据,并用上述方法进行评价。通过Spearman等级相关性对评价结果的排序进行分析,在置信度为0.99的情况下,支持向量机、RBF网络和层次分析法高度相关,评价结果基本是一致的,而投影寻踪评价模型方法独立,评价结果差异较大。
4)结合序号总和理论分析,用于评价龙栖山国家级自然保护区森林景观生态质量,首选评价方法是支持向量机,其次依次为RBF网络、层次分析法和投影寻踪评价模型。
5、以景观生态学、生态经济学以及旅游经济学理论为指导,在一定规划目标驱动下,划分出不同功能区域,并适度开展生态旅游。进一步分析了环境容量和旅游容量,预测生态旅游规模,同时对自然保护区的管理提出若干建议。环境容量分析结果是全年可游天数合计约280天;近期日容量为883人次/日,远期环境日容量为1663人次/日;饱和环境容量是日环境容量的2.5倍;年环境容量近期为247240人次/年,远期为465640人次/年。旅游容量分析结果是近期生态旅游区域日游客容量为622人次/日,远期日游客容量为1159人次/日;近期生态旅游区域年游客容量为174160人次/年,远期年游客容量为324520人次/年;预测生态旅游规模近期年规模为10.11万人次,日规模360人次,而远期年规模为20.34万人次,日规模为726人次。提出应正确处理开发与保护的关系,加强领导广泛宣传,整体合作协力共建,强化内容管理,提高服务档次等若干建议。
National Nature Reserve of Longqishan (NNRL) is an ideal environment for the forest eco-tourism and it is famous for the diversity of species, the richness of rare animals and plants and the typical sub-tropical forest vegetation. However, the weakness of Reserve economic base and the limitation of government financial resources have no way to throw into sufficient funds to build and perfect the infrastructure construction and scenic spot touring. All leads to hardly realize the coordinated growth of ecological, social and economic benefits.
According to the weakness of studies on environment and landscape pattern of NNRL, this article focused on analyzing of Landscape pattern of NNRL, the distribution law of patch, and the relationship of outside interference pattern on the landscape impact of NNRL. Then, it also evaluated the eco-quality of forest landscape using AHP, BRF, PPE, and SVM. Last, the paper brought up and predicted the capacity of eco-tourism, and gave some advices. The results of the paper can develop a systematic and targeted regional sustainable development strategy for Reserve managers. Thus, it is useful for coordinated development of ecological, social and economic benefits.
The results listed below.
1. It analyzed of forest landscape pattern of NNRL with landscape indexes, which were computed under patch-type-level, class-type-level, and landscape-type-level using FRAGSTATS software with grid picture converted under ARCGIS environment.
1) The results of analysis of forest landscape pattern indicate that there are nine type forest landscape, and their areas, perimeters, and the number of patch distributes very unevenly. The results further present that broadleaf forest, pine forest, and bamboo forest are mainly landscape styles, and that the sum of their area is 95.3078 percent of the NNRL, while 85.6365 percent of the perimeter of NNRL. But, they also suggest that the numerical area and perimeter varies sharply discrimination. Besides, because the nature reserve has its unique protection character, the number of the bigger patches is not big enough.
2) The results of analysis of shape features landscape elements show that the patches shape of the broadleaf forest landscape is the most complicated, and that landscape connectivity is good. They further indicate the degree of fragmentation and patches separation degree are fairly low, while the degree of fragmentation in non-wood landscape and economic landscape are high which accords with the theory that landscapes with human interference suffer from high degree of fragmentation. But, as a reserve of national-level forest ecosystem, NNRL enjoys a high predominance, uneven landscape distribution and a low variety on the whole.
2. Normal, Lognormal, Weibull, Gamma and Beta distribution respectively are used to analyze the distribution law in the size, the area, and the fractal indices .The analysis results of Landscape patches characteristic distribution law proves a level relativity exists among landscapes patches. The results also show normal distribution fitness is the best, and that Gama distribution has a better effect on the area distribution and fractal distribution fitness, while the Weibull distribution fitness has the worst of all. They further present that the size, the area, and the fractal indices submit to normal distribution mostly, while the parties of indices submit to gamma distribution.
3. The article uses nonlinear modeling of modern statistical to simulate and analyze the effects of landscape pattern by Natural disturbance and human disturbance.
1). It chooses 10 indices as a natural disturbance factors such as size, volume, age, soil thickness, shrub cover, herbaceous cover, average altitude, slope, aspect and slope position to construct of artificial neural network model, multi-model adaptive regression splines, Support vector machine model and project pursuit regression model to analog analyze of fractal index separately. That the value of fractal index is changing when the value of one index changes, proves and riches the conclusion on interference affecting on landscape pattern. Through leave-one-out cross-validation for the simulation of natural disturbance on the impact of landscape pattern, multiple adaptive regression splines model has the most ability of revealing the relationship between interference and impression of landscape pattern.
2). Human beings cause changes in landscape pattern by changing the number of landscape types and it is one of the performances of human Interference activities on the landscape pattern affect. It chooses the number of landscape types as human interference factors to construct artificial neural network model, multi-model adaptive regression splines, support vector machine model and projection pursuit regression model to respectively analog analysis human disturbance on the impact of the landscape diversity, dominance and evenness. The results show that the change of the number of landscape types because of human beings interference is remarkable to diversity, but weak to dominance and evenness. It also proves and riches the conclusion on interference affecting on landscape pattern. By comparing the results of leave-one-out cross-validation for the simulation analysis of the number of landscape patches on the landscape diversity, the analytical capacity of the above-mentioned models are stronger than the generalization ability of each model. Among them, the projection pursuit regression model is the optimal performance. While according to the analysis used to simulate the number of landscape patches dominance on the landscape and the impact of uniformity, the above-mentioned models have not been able to obtain better performance.
4. From the landscape ecological protection and the development and utilization level,it chooses the characteristics of Nature, value, diversity, representativeness, suitability, stability, interference, and usability, and ornamental, research, and regional and cultural values as indicators to construct RBF networks, support vector machines, Projection Pursuit Evaluation Model and AHP Evaluation Model to evaluate the eco-quality of forest landscape.
1). The result of AHP shows the index of eco-quality of forest landscape of NNRL is 0.79, which means it lies in a better state of eco-quality.
2). The results of RBF model, SVM model, and PPE model also show the eco-quality of forest landscape of NNRL lies in a better state of eco-quality.
3). Within the scope of all levels, it randomly generated 10 samples data and used these methods to evaluate. In the case of 0.99 Credibility and highly concerning Support Vector Machine, RBF network and analytic hierarchy process, the results of evaluation are consistent. On the contrary, Projection Pursuit evaluation model is an independent method, so the results of evaluation are different.
4)Combined with the total numbers and theoretical analysis, it is used in evaluating the eco-quality of landscape. The methods which ranged from the best to the poor are Support Vector Machine, RBF network, the level analysis and projection pursuit evaluation model in turns.
5. We plan for ecotourism according to different function areas, estimate and predict the capacity of environment and the capacity of tourism based-on bionomics, eco economics, and the tourism economics theory driven by some planning aims. The results of estimation of the capacity of environment show that it is about 280 days for tourism in one year. They also present that the daily capacity is 883 persons each time per day for near future and is 1663 persons each time per day for long-date. They further indicate that the annual capacity is 247240 persons each time per year for near future and is 465640 persons each time per year for long-date. The results of estimation of the capacity of eco-tourism show that the daily capacity is 622 persons each time per day for near future and is 1159 persons each time per day for long-date. They also indicate that the annual capacity is 174160 persons each time per year for near future and is 324520 persons each time per year for long-date. The results of prediction on the size of eco-tourism show that the daily size is 360 persons each time per day for near future and is 726 persons each time per day for long-date. They also indicate that the annual size is 101.1 thousand persons each time per year for near future and is 203.4 thousand persons each time per year for long-date. While in the process of carrying on ecotourism, we should properly deal with the relationship between development and protection, strengthen and lead extensive propaganda, work together and intensify contents management to update the service level.
针对以往对于龙栖山国家级自然保护区的生态环境、景观格局等方面的研究相对薄弱的现状,本文研究分析了龙栖山国家级自然保护区景观空间格局、景观斑块特征分布规律以及外界干扰对保护区景观格局影响的关系,应用层次分析法、RBF网络、投影寻踪模型和支持向量机四种方法评价了森林景观生态质量,结合龙栖山国家级自然保护区生态旅游,分析环境容量和旅游容量,预测生态旅游规模,并给出若干建议。研究的结果有利于保护区管理者制定一个系统而有针对性的区域可持续发展战略,从而促进保护区的生态效益、社会效益和经济效益的协调发展。主要研究结果如下:
1、在ArcGIS环境下将矢量图转化成栅格格式,利用Fragstats软件在斑块类型、景观类型和景观水平上计算景观指数,对龙栖山国家级自然保护区森林景观格局进行分析。
1)景观格局分析结果表明,龙栖山国家级自然保护区9个景观要素的面积、周长、斑块数分布均极不均衡。阔叶林景观、松林景观和竹林景观是保护区的主要景观类型,三者的面积和周长之和分别占整个保护区面积和周长的95.3078%和85.6365%。但各景观要素斑块的面积、周长数值差异较大,同时由于自然保护区其特有的保护性质,超大斑块的数量也为数不少。
2)景观要素的斑块形状特征表明,阔叶林景观要素的斑块形状最为复杂、景观连通性较好,破碎化程度和斑块分离度水平都较低,而人类活动较多的非林地景观、经济林景观则破碎化程度较高,符合人为干扰导致景观破碎化程度变化的理论。龙栖山国家级自然保护区作为国家级森林生态系统的保护区,优势度较高,景观分布较不均匀,总体多样性水平不高。
2、运用正态分布、对数正态分布、Weibull分布、Gamma分布和Beta分布分别分析斑块大小、斑块面积和分维数的分布规律。结果表明景观斑块特征分布规律存在着等级相关性。研究结果表明,针对龙栖山国家级自然保护区,正态分布在分析景观斑块大小、斑块面积和分维数分布规律中的拟合效果最佳,Gama分布在面积分布规律和分维数分布规律的拟合中效果较好,而Weibull分布无论在哪个斑块特征上分布拟合效果是都是较差的。也说明了研究地的景观斑块大小、景观斑块面积和分维数大部分服从正态分布,部分服从Gama分布。
3、运用现代统计学中的非线性建模方法,分析自然干扰和人为干扰对景观格局的影响。
1)选择面积、蓄积、年龄、土层厚度、灌丛盖度、草本盖度、平均海拔、坡度、坡向和坡位10指标作为自然干扰因子,构建人工神经网络模型、多元自适应回归样条模型、支持向量机模型和投影寻踪回归模型分别模拟分析分维数。模拟分析结果表明当环境因子中指标值发生变化,斑块分维数也相应产生变化,从而证实并丰富了干扰对景观格局影响的论断。同时通过留一(LOO)交叉验证各模型性能,结果表明多元自适应回归样条模型用于揭示自然干扰对景观格局影响的关系,其效果较其他方法更为理想。
2)人类通过改变景观类型数量导致景观格局发生变化,是人类干扰活动对景观格局影响的表现之一。选择景观类型数量作为人类干扰因子,构建人工神经网络模型、多元自适应回归样条模型、支持向量机模型和投影寻踪回归模型,分别模拟分析人为干扰对景观多样性、优势度和均匀度的影响。模拟分析结果表明人为干扰引起斑块数的变化,导致景观多样性产生较为显著的影响,而对景观优势度和均与度影响效果较弱。这一结果也证实并丰富了干扰对景观格局影响的论断。同时通过比较留一交叉验证结果各模型性能,结果表明上述模型用于模拟分析景观斑块数量对景观多样性的影响时效果均较好,其中投影寻踪回归模型性能更优。而用于模拟分析景观斑块数量对景观优势度和均匀度的影响,上述模型均未能有效的揭示两者的关系。
4、从森林景观生态保护和开发利用层面出发,选择自然性、珍稀性、多样性、代表性、适宜性、稳定性、干扰性、利用性、观赏性、科研性、区位性和文化价值作为评价景观生态质量指标,构建RBF网络、支持向量机、投影寻踪评价模型和层次分析法评价模型。
1)层次分析法的结果说明龙栖山国家自然保护区景观生态质量指数为0.79,其生态质量较好。
2)RBF网络、支持向量机和投影寻踪评价模型的评价结果均认为龙栖山国家级自然保护区景观生态质量处于生态质量较好状态。
3)在各等级范围内,随机生成10个样本数据,并用上述方法进行评价。通过Spearman等级相关性对评价结果的排序进行分析,在置信度为0.99的情况下,支持向量机、RBF网络和层次分析法高度相关,评价结果基本是一致的,而投影寻踪评价模型方法独立,评价结果差异较大。
4)结合序号总和理论分析,用于评价龙栖山国家级自然保护区森林景观生态质量,首选评价方法是支持向量机,其次依次为RBF网络、层次分析法和投影寻踪评价模型。
5、以景观生态学、生态经济学以及旅游经济学理论为指导,在一定规划目标驱动下,划分出不同功能区域,并适度开展生态旅游。进一步分析了环境容量和旅游容量,预测生态旅游规模,同时对自然保护区的管理提出若干建议。环境容量分析结果是全年可游天数合计约280天;近期日容量为883人次/日,远期环境日容量为1663人次/日;饱和环境容量是日环境容量的2.5倍;年环境容量近期为247240人次/年,远期为465640人次/年。旅游容量分析结果是近期生态旅游区域日游客容量为622人次/日,远期日游客容量为1159人次/日;近期生态旅游区域年游客容量为174160人次/年,远期年游客容量为324520人次/年;预测生态旅游规模近期年规模为10.11万人次,日规模360人次,而远期年规模为20.34万人次,日规模为726人次。提出应正确处理开发与保护的关系,加强领导广泛宣传,整体合作协力共建,强化内容管理,提高服务档次等若干建议。
National Nature Reserve of Longqishan (NNRL) is an ideal environment for the forest eco-tourism and it is famous for the diversity of species, the richness of rare animals and plants and the typical sub-tropical forest vegetation. However, the weakness of Reserve economic base and the limitation of government financial resources have no way to throw into sufficient funds to build and perfect the infrastructure construction and scenic spot touring. All leads to hardly realize the coordinated growth of ecological, social and economic benefits.
According to the weakness of studies on environment and landscape pattern of NNRL, this article focused on analyzing of Landscape pattern of NNRL, the distribution law of patch, and the relationship of outside interference pattern on the landscape impact of NNRL. Then, it also evaluated the eco-quality of forest landscape using AHP, BRF, PPE, and SVM. Last, the paper brought up and predicted the capacity of eco-tourism, and gave some advices. The results of the paper can develop a systematic and targeted regional sustainable development strategy for Reserve managers. Thus, it is useful for coordinated development of ecological, social and economic benefits.
The results listed below.
1. It analyzed of forest landscape pattern of NNRL with landscape indexes, which were computed under patch-type-level, class-type-level, and landscape-type-level using FRAGSTATS software with grid picture converted under ARCGIS environment.
1) The results of analysis of forest landscape pattern indicate that there are nine type forest landscape, and their areas, perimeters, and the number of patch distributes very unevenly. The results further present that broadleaf forest, pine forest, and bamboo forest are mainly landscape styles, and that the sum of their area is 95.3078 percent of the NNRL, while 85.6365 percent of the perimeter of NNRL. But, they also suggest that the numerical area and perimeter varies sharply discrimination. Besides, because the nature reserve has its unique protection character, the number of the bigger patches is not big enough.
2) The results of analysis of shape features landscape elements show that the patches shape of the broadleaf forest landscape is the most complicated, and that landscape connectivity is good. They further indicate the degree of fragmentation and patches separation degree are fairly low, while the degree of fragmentation in non-wood landscape and economic landscape are high which accords with the theory that landscapes with human interference suffer from high degree of fragmentation. But, as a reserve of national-level forest ecosystem, NNRL enjoys a high predominance, uneven landscape distribution and a low variety on the whole.
2. Normal, Lognormal, Weibull, Gamma and Beta distribution respectively are used to analyze the distribution law in the size, the area, and the fractal indices .The analysis results of Landscape patches characteristic distribution law proves a level relativity exists among landscapes patches. The results also show normal distribution fitness is the best, and that Gama distribution has a better effect on the area distribution and fractal distribution fitness, while the Weibull distribution fitness has the worst of all. They further present that the size, the area, and the fractal indices submit to normal distribution mostly, while the parties of indices submit to gamma distribution.
3. The article uses nonlinear modeling of modern statistical to simulate and analyze the effects of landscape pattern by Natural disturbance and human disturbance.
1). It chooses 10 indices as a natural disturbance factors such as size, volume, age, soil thickness, shrub cover, herbaceous cover, average altitude, slope, aspect and slope position to construct of artificial neural network model, multi-model adaptive regression splines, Support vector machine model and project pursuit regression model to analog analyze of fractal index separately. That the value of fractal index is changing when the value of one index changes, proves and riches the conclusion on interference affecting on landscape pattern. Through leave-one-out cross-validation for the simulation of natural disturbance on the impact of landscape pattern, multiple adaptive regression splines model has the most ability of revealing the relationship between interference and impression of landscape pattern.
2). Human beings cause changes in landscape pattern by changing the number of landscape types and it is one of the performances of human Interference activities on the landscape pattern affect. It chooses the number of landscape types as human interference factors to construct artificial neural network model, multi-model adaptive regression splines, support vector machine model and projection pursuit regression model to respectively analog analysis human disturbance on the impact of the landscape diversity, dominance and evenness. The results show that the change of the number of landscape types because of human beings interference is remarkable to diversity, but weak to dominance and evenness. It also proves and riches the conclusion on interference affecting on landscape pattern. By comparing the results of leave-one-out cross-validation for the simulation analysis of the number of landscape patches on the landscape diversity, the analytical capacity of the above-mentioned models are stronger than the generalization ability of each model. Among them, the projection pursuit regression model is the optimal performance. While according to the analysis used to simulate the number of landscape patches dominance on the landscape and the impact of uniformity, the above-mentioned models have not been able to obtain better performance.
4. From the landscape ecological protection and the development and utilization level,it chooses the characteristics of Nature, value, diversity, representativeness, suitability, stability, interference, and usability, and ornamental, research, and regional and cultural values as indicators to construct RBF networks, support vector machines, Projection Pursuit Evaluation Model and AHP Evaluation Model to evaluate the eco-quality of forest landscape.
1). The result of AHP shows the index of eco-quality of forest landscape of NNRL is 0.79, which means it lies in a better state of eco-quality.
2). The results of RBF model, SVM model, and PPE model also show the eco-quality of forest landscape of NNRL lies in a better state of eco-quality.
3). Within the scope of all levels, it randomly generated 10 samples data and used these methods to evaluate. In the case of 0.99 Credibility and highly concerning Support Vector Machine, RBF network and analytic hierarchy process, the results of evaluation are consistent. On the contrary, Projection Pursuit evaluation model is an independent method, so the results of evaluation are different.
4)Combined with the total numbers and theoretical analysis, it is used in evaluating the eco-quality of landscape. The methods which ranged from the best to the poor are Support Vector Machine, RBF network, the level analysis and projection pursuit evaluation model in turns.
5. We plan for ecotourism according to different function areas, estimate and predict the capacity of environment and the capacity of tourism based-on bionomics, eco economics, and the tourism economics theory driven by some planning aims. The results of estimation of the capacity of environment show that it is about 280 days for tourism in one year. They also present that the daily capacity is 883 persons each time per day for near future and is 1663 persons each time per day for long-date. They further indicate that the annual capacity is 247240 persons each time per year for near future and is 465640 persons each time per year for long-date. The results of estimation of the capacity of eco-tourism show that the daily capacity is 622 persons each time per day for near future and is 1159 persons each time per day for long-date. They also indicate that the annual capacity is 174160 persons each time per year for near future and is 324520 persons each time per year for long-date. The results of prediction on the size of eco-tourism show that the daily size is 360 persons each time per day for near future and is 726 persons each time per day for long-date. They also indicate that the annual size is 101.1 thousand persons each time per year for near future and is 203.4 thousand persons each time per year for long-date. While in the process of carrying on ecotourism, we should properly deal with the relationship between development and protection, strengthen and lead extensive propaganda, work together and intensify contents management to update the service level.
引文
[1] Almo Farin. Principles and Methods in Landscape Ecology[M]. London: Springer, 1998,45-108.
[2] Arthur LM,Boster RS.Measuring scence beauty:A selected annotated bibliography.USDA For. Serv. Gen.Tech. Rep.RM -25.Rocky Mtn Forest and Range Exp Stn.Fort Collins,Colo l976.
[3] Baskent EZ,Jorden GA. Characterizing spatial structure of forest landscape.Canadian Journal of Forestry Research,1995,25:1830-1849.
[4] Baskent EZ.Controlling spatial structure of forest landscapes:acase study towards landscape management[J].Landscape Ecology,1999,14(1):83-97.
[5] Batchmann CM et al. Unsupervised BCMprojection pursuit algorithms for classification of simulate dradar presentation. Neural Networks, 1994, 7(4):709-728.
[6] Bergeron Y.The influence of island and mainland lakehoue landscapes on boreal forest fire regimes[J].Ecology,1991,(72):1980-1992.
[7] Carey PD,Short C,Morris C,et al.The multi-disciplinary evaluation of national agri-environment scheme. J Environ Man, 2003,69(1):71-91.
[8] Ceballos LH.The Future of Ecotourism.Mexico Journal,1987.
[9] Chen WB,Xiao DN.Classification application and creation of landscape indices.Chinese J. Of Applied Ecology,2002,13(1):121-125
[10] Clark DB,Clark DA.Landscape scale variation in forest structure and biamss in a tropical rain forest[J].Forest Eclogy and Management,2000,(137):185-198.
[11] Costanza R,Arge R.The value of the would's ecosystem services and nature capital.Nature, 1997,387(15): 253-260.
[12] Daniel TC,Boster RS.Measuring landdscape esthetics.The scence beauty estimation method.USDA forest Serv Res Pap RM-l67,66p.Rocky Mtn Forest and Range Exp Stn,Fort Collins,Colo l976.
[13] Dolors A,Guillermo R,Nelly R,et al.Patterns and causes of deforestation in the Colombian Amazon.Ecological Indicatirs,2006,(6):353-368.
[14] Elger FE.Pesticides in our ecostestem.American Science,1964,52:110-136.
[15] Elizabeth B.Planning for Ecotourism[J].Parks.1991,(3):4-8.
[16] Ercan S,Sasidharan V,Sonmez S.Redefining Ecotourism:The Need for A Supply-side View[J].Journal of Travel Research,1999,(11):168-180.
[17] Forman RTT,Godron M.Landscape Ecikigt Principleand Landscape Function.In:Methodology in Landscape Ecological Research and Planning,1984,Theme1.
[18] Forman RTT,Gordan M.Patches and structural components for a Landscapee cology.BioScience.1981,31:733-740.
[19] Forman RTT,Gordon M.Landscape Ecology.NewYork:Wiley&Sons,1986
[20] Forman RTT.Ecologically Sustainable Landscapes:The Roleof Spatial Configuration.In: I S Zonneveld and RTT Formand.Changing Landscape: An Ecological Perspective, Springer-Verlag, 1990,261-277.
[21] Forman RTT.Landscape Mosaics:The Ecology of Landscape and Regions. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1995.
[22] Forman RTT.The new jerseypine barrens,an ecological mosaic.In:Forman RTTed,PineBarrens:Ecosystem andLand scape.New York:Academic Press,1979,569-585.
[23] Friedman,JH,Stuetzle,W.Projection Pursuit Regression.J Amer Statist Assoc,1981,76:817.
[24] Friedman,JH.Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (with discussion).Annals of Statistics,1991,19:1.
[25] Gergel SE and Turner MG.Learning landscape eclogy:apractical guide to concepts and techniques.New York:Springer-Verlag,2002.
[26] Gittins R.Trend-surface analysis of ecological data.Journal of Ecology,1968,56:845-869.
[27] Green GM,Sussman RW.Deforestation history of the eastern rain forests of Madagascar from satellite images.Science,1990,24:212-215.
[28] Gretchen CD.Nature's Services,Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems.Washington DC:Island Press.1997:175-178.
[29] Gulinck H,Mugica M.A framework for comparative landscape analysis and evaluation based on land cover data,with an application in the Madrid region(Spain).Landscape Urban Plan,2001,55(4):257-270.
[30] Honey M.Ecotourism and Sustainable Development:Who Owns Paradise?[M].New York:Van Nostrart Renhole,1999.
[31] Hull.Measurement of scence beauty,the law of comparative judgmem and scenic beauty estinmtton procedures.For Sci,1984,30(4):1084-1096.
[32] Ims RA.Experimental landscapeecology.In:Weins JA,Moss MR.Issuesinl and scape ecology Snowmass Village:International Association for Landscape Ecology,1999.
[33] J.H. Friedman, W. Stuetzle, "Projection pursuit regression", Journal of the American Statistical Association 76(1981) pp,817-823.
[34] Jason TF,Stan B,Susan JH.The protean relationship between boreal forest landscape structure and red squirrel distribution at multiple spatial scales[J].Landscape Ecology,2005,(20):73-82.
[35] John AK,Amy LW,Scott BF.Forest fragmentation affects early sccessional patterns on shifting cultivation fields near Indian Church,Belize[J].Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2004,1(3):509-518.
[36] King A.Translating models across scalesinthel and scape.In:Turner MG,Gardner RH.Quantitative methods in landscape ecology.1991,479-517.
[37] Knappen JP,Scheffer M,Harms B.Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning.Landscape and Urban Palan,1992,23:1-16.
[38] Kotliar NB,Wiens JA.Multiple scales of pathless and patch structure:a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity.Oikos.1990,59:253-260.
[39] Legendrep,Fortin M.Spatial pattern and ecological analysis.Vegetatio,1989,80:107-138.
[40] Li BL.Developing alternative forest cutting patterns:assimilation approach.Landscape Ecology,1993,8(1).
[41] Litton RB.Visual vulnerability of Forest Landscapes.J For,1974(7):392-397.
[42] Makoto Y,Marco A.Nature in the city,city in the nature:case studies of the restoration of urban nature in Tokyo,Japan and Toronto,Canada[J].Landscape Ecol Eng,2005,(1):53-59.
[43] Martin AM,Juan JF,Jesus Z.Landscape based forest management ,a real would case study from Mexico[J].Forest Ecology and Management,2005,2(9):19-26.
[44] Mauno P,Mikko K,Jyrki K,et al.Assessing the priorities using A'WOT among resource management strategies at the finnish forest and park service.For Sci 2001,47(4):534-542.
[45] Mladenoff DJ,White MA,PastorJ,et al.Comparing spatial patern in unalteredold-growth and disturbed forest landscape.Ecological Applications,1993,3(2):294-369.
[46] Morberg UM,Balfors B,Knol WC.Landscape ecological assessment:A tool for integratingbiodiversity issues in strategic environmental assessment and planning[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2006,(21):63-72.
[47] Naveh Z,Lieberman AS.1nd.Landscape Ecology:Theoryand Application. NewYork: Springer-Verlag,1984.
[48] Naveh Z.Landscape ecology as a multidimensional science for global survival.Plenary Lecture,4th International Congress of Ecology(Intecol),Syracuse,NewYork,August,1986.
[49] Naveh Z.Landscape ecology as anemerging branch of human ecosystem science.Advance of Ecology Resesrch,1982,12:13-23.
[50] Noss RF,Harris LD.Nodes,networks and MUMS:Preserving diversity at all scales.Environmental Management,1986,10:299-309.
[51] O'Neill RV,Milne T,Turner MG,et al.Resource utilization scales and landscape pattern.Landscape Ecology,2001,23:63-69.
[52] O'Neill RV.Theory in landscape ecology.In:Wiens JA,Moss MR.Issuesin landscape ecology Snowmass Village:International Association for Landscape Ecology,1999:1-5.
[53] Pickett STA,Cadenasso ML.Landscape ecology:Spatial heterogeneity in ecological systems.Science,1995,269:294-306.
[54] Potter DR,Wagar JA.Techniques for inventorying manmade impact in roadway envirorments.USDA For.Serv. Res. Pap.PNW-121,12p.Pacific Northwest For. And Range Exp. Stn.Portland Ore,1971.
[55] Ranst EV.Application of fuzzy logic to land suitability for rubber production in peninsular Thailand.Geoderma,1996,70(1):1-19
[56] Risser PG,Karr JR,Forman RTT.Landscape Ecology:Directions and Approaches.Illinois Natrual Hisory Surey,Champaign,1984.
[57] Risser PG.Landscape ecology.In:Landscape Heterogeneity and Directions. NewYork, Springer-Verlag,1987:3-14.
[58] Rodriguez II.Ecohydrology a hydrologic perspective of climate-soil-vegetation dynamics[J]. Water Resource Research,2000,36(1):3-9.
[59] Rudis VA.Regional forest fragmentation effects on bottomland hardwood community types and resource values.Landscape Ecology,1995,10(5):291-301.
[60] Saaty TL.Modelingun structured decision problems:the theory of analytical hierarchies.First Int Conf On Math Modeling,Univ Of Missouri,Rolla,1997,1:59-77.
[61] Smith P,Theberge J.A review of criterion for evaluation natural aress.Environ Man 1986,10(6):715-734.
[62] Swanson FJ,Franklin JF ,Sedell JR.Landscape Patterns Distrubance and Management in the Pacific Northweset.In: Zonneveld ISandFormand RTT.Changing Landscape:An Ecological Perspective,Springer-Verlag,1990,191-211.
[63] Thomas AS ,William JR.Dynamics and pattern of amanaged coniferous forest landscape in Oregon.Landscape Ecology,1994,4(3):555-568.
[64] Troll C.Landscape ecology and Bio-Ecology:Aterminologystudy.Geoform.1971,8:43-46.
[65] Troll C.Luftbildplan und okologische Bodenforschung.Z. Ges. Erdkunde zu Berlin, 1939:241-298.
[66] Turner MG,Gardne RH.Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. NewYork: Springer-Verlag, 1991a.
[67] Turner MG,Gardner RH and O'Neill RV.Landscape ecology in theory and practice. NewYork: Springer-Verlag,2001.
[68] Turner MG,Gardner RH,Dale VH,et al.Predictiing the spread of disturbance acrossheterogeneous landscapes.Oikos,1989,55:121-129.
[69] Turner MG.Landscape ecology:Living in amosaic.In:Dodson SI,Allen TFH,Carpenter SR,et al.Ecology.NewYork:Oxford University Press,1998:72-122.
[70] Valentine PS.Ecotourism and Nature Conservation[J]. Tourism Management, 1993,14 (2)107-115.
[71] Vargas LG.Anover view of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications.Eur J OplRes, 1990, 48: 2-8.
[72] Volker CR,David JM,Eric JG,et al.Modeling forest harvesting effects on landscape pattern in the Northwest Wisconsin Pine Barrens[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2006,21 (2):21-28.
[73] Weaver DB.生态旅游[M].杨桂华,王跃华,肖朝霞,等译.天津:南开大学出版社,2004:1-92.
[74] Wiens JA,Milne BT.Scaling of landscape in landscape ecology or landscape ecology from a beetle's perspective.Landscape Ecology,1989,3:87-96.
[75] Wiens JA.The Analysis of Landscape Patterns.Colorado State University,Ft Collins,Colorado,1988.
[76] Wu J, Hobbs R. Key issue and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyncratic synthesis [J].Landscape Ecology,2002,17:355-365.
[77] Wu J,Levin SA.As patial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in anannual grassland.Ecological Monographs,1994,64(4):447-464.
[78] Xiao DN,Leng SY.National Natural Science Foundation and landscapes ecology in China.China Science Foundation,2001,6:346-349.
[79] Xiao DN,Li XZ. Core Concepts of landscape ecology. J. of Environmental Sciences, 1999,11(2):131-135.
[80] Zonneveld IS.Landecology: Anintroduction to landscape ecology as a base for land evaluation,land management and conservation.SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam. 1995:1-18.
[81]白降丽,彭道黎,庾晓红,等.森林景观生态研究现状与展望[J].生态学杂志,2005,24(8):943-947
[82]白梅玲,李培芬.福山实验林之景观分类[J].中华林学季刊,2002,33(3):291-312.
[83]包战雄.福建省森林景观质量评价与经营研究Ⅰ.春季景观[J].林业勘察设计,2004(1):16-19.
[84]包战雄.福建省森林景观质量评价与经营研究Ⅱ.夏季和秋季景观[J].林业勘察设计,2005(2):27-31.
[85]保继刚,楚义方,彭华.旅游地理学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1993:83-89.
[86]保继刚.颐和园旅游环境容量研究[J].中国环境科学,1987,(2):32-38.
[87]陈昌笃.景观生态学的理论发展和实际作用[A].见:马世骏主编,中国生态学发展战略研究[M].北京:中国经济出版社,1990:232-250.
[88]陈传明.福建省天宝岩自然保护区景观生态格局分析及评价[J].中国生态农业学报,2008,16(5):1213-1217.
[89]陈端吕,李际平,林辉.森林景观研究的3S技术应用[J].长江大学学报(自然版),2006,3(8)131-134.
[90]陈利顶,傅伯杰.景观连接度的生态学意义及其应用.生态学杂志,1996,15(4):37-42.
[91]陈文波,肖笃宁,郑蕉.大兴安岭地区森林景观沿主要河流两侧分布的变化[J].林业科学,2005,(2):160-163.
[92]陈鑫峰,沈国舫.森林游憩的几个重要概念辨析[J].世界林业研究,2000,13(1):69-76.
[93]陈鑫峰,王雁.国内外森林景观的定量评价和经营技术研究现状[J].世界林业研究,2000,(5):31-38.
[94]陈应发.美国的森林游憩[J].世界农业,1994(5):35-36.
[95]程占红,张金屯.生态旅游的兴起和研究进展[J].经济地理,2001,21(1):110-113.
[96]崔海鸥,侯仲娥,杨燕南.自然保护区可持续发展环境指标与生态旅游评价指标初探——以北京松山自然保护区为例[J].四川动物,2007,26(4):862-865.
[97]但新球,周光辉.对森林旅游及其特点的认识[J].中南林业调查规划,1994,13(2):57-60.
[98]但新球.森林景观资源美学价值评价指标体系的研究[J].中南林业调查规划,1995,14(3):44-48.
[99]邓乃扬,田英杰.数据挖掘中的新方法-支持向量机[M].北京:科学出版社,2006.
[100]邓小飞,黄金玲.广东江门红树林自然保护区生态评价[J].林业经济,2006(8):68-70.
[101]董长虹.神经网络与应用[M].北京:国防工业出版社,2005.
[102]付强,赵小勇.投影寻踪模型原理及其应用[M].北京:科学出版社,2006.
[103]傅伯杰,陈利顶,马克明,等.景观生态学原理及应用[M].北京:科学出版社,2001.
[104]傅伯杰,陈利顶.景观多样性的类型及其生态意义[J].地理学报,1996,(5):454-462.
[105]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):798-804.
[106]傅伯杰.景观生态学的对象和任务[A].肖笃宁主编.景观生态学:理论、方法及应用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1991.
[107]郭晋平,李志强.森林景观恢复过程中景观要素斑块规模的动态分析[J].生态学报,2000,(02):46-51.
[108]郭晋平,王俊田.关帝山林区景观要素沿环境梯度分布趋势的研究[J].植物生态学报,2000,(2):135-140.
[109]郭晋平,阳含熙.关帝山林区景观要素空间分布及其动态研究[J].生态学报,1999,(04):30-35.
[110]郭晋平,张芸香.中国森林景观生态研究的进展和展望[J].世界林业研究,2003,16(5):46-49.
[111]郭晋平.森林景观生态研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
[112]郭来喜.中国生态旅游—可持续旅游的基石[J].地理科学进展,1997,16(4):1-10.
[113]郭泺,夏北成,江学顶.基于GIS与人工神经网络的广州森林景观生态规划[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2005,(5):126-128.
[114]郭泺,薛达元,杜世宏,等.青海果洛藏族自治州景观空间变化与生态评价[J].生态科学,2008,27(4):248-253.
[115]国庆喜,王天明.丰林自然保护区景观生态评价:量化与解释[J].应用生态学报,2005,(5):825-832.
[116]韩微.对森林旅游与森林生态旅游的再认识[J].森林工程,2005,21(6):7-8.
[117]杭州商学院省自然科学基金课题组."序号总和理论"及其在综合经济效益排序中的应用[J].数量经济统计经济研究,1996,(1):59-62.
[118]何池全,崔保山,赵志春.吉林省典型湿地生态评价[J].应用生态学报,2001,(5):754-756.
[119]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观空间格局变化及其干扰效应模拟[J].生态学报,2004,24(8):1602-1610.
[120]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观空间格局研究[J].林业科学,2004,40(1):174-179.
[121]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观类型空间关系及其尺度效应初探[J].中国生态农业学报,2004,12(3):19-23.
[122]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观生态评价[J].应用与环境生物学报,2004,(06):729-734.
[123]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山景区主要景观类型斑块大小分布规律及其等级尺度效应分析[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(1):21-25.
[124]何东进.武夷山风景名胜区景观格局动态及其环境分析[D].东北林业大学,2004.
[125]洪滔,郭妍,吴承祯,等.杉木种源选择的投影寻踪法应用[J].林业科学,2008,43(3):56-61.
[126]胡欣欣,陈平留,王李进.基于投影寻踪模型的森林景观评价[J].江西农业大学学报,2009,31(2):306-310.
[127]胡欣欣,陈平留.RBF网络在森林景观评价中的应用[J].福建林学院学报,2009,29(1):62-64.
[128]胡欣欣,胡宗庆.福建省茫荡山自然保护区森林景观评价[J].林业经济问题,2006,(1):39-43。
[129]胡月明.土地信息系统[M].广州:华南理工大学出版社,2000.
[130]江波,袁位高,戚连忠,等.滩地植被景观斑块分布特征与生态潜力评价[J].生态科学,2005,24(2):107-112.
[131]蒋徳明,陈渭民,傅炳珊,等.基于径向基函数网络的云自动分类研究[J].南京气象学院学报,2003,26(1):89-95.
[132]解庆林.桂林七星公园旅游环境容量研究[J].广谣科学院学报,2000,(1):40-43.
[133]金鉴明,王礼嫱,薛达元.自然保护概论[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1991:231-271.
[134]雷瑞德,刘建军,尚廉斌,等.主伐对森林景观结构和空间分布格局影响的研究[J].西北林学院学报,1996,(S1):53-64.
[135]李伯德.数学建模方法[M].甘肃:甘肃出版社,2006.
[136]李冬林,王宝松,阮宏华,等.河南小秦岭自然保护区生态评价[J].安徽农业大学学报,2007,(1):97-102.
[137]李红,孙丹峰,张风荣,等.基于GIS和DEM的北京西部山区经济林果适宜性评价[J].农业工程学报,2002,18(5):250-255.
[138]李健.森林生态旅游对林业可持续发展贡献与影响[J].江西林业科技.2004(2):26-29.
[139]李明诗,彭世揆,钟宏宇.基于GIS的紫金山风景区景观格局及其动态分析[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2004,(5):70-73。
[140]李明阳,崔志华,申世广,等.紫金山风景林美学评价与森林游憩活动适宜度量化模型研究[J].北京林业大学学报:社会科学版,2008,7(3):6-11.
[141]李明阳,刘礼,吴翼,等.基于Geomatics可视化功能的风景林美学评价方法研究——以南京梅花山为例[J].西南林学院学报,2007,27(2):11-15.
[142]李明阳,熊显权,杨劲松,等.中山陵风景区的森林美学评价与风景林规划[J].北京林业大学学报:社会科学版,2006,5(2):15-19.
[143]李晓秀.北京山区生态系统稳定性评价模型初步研究[J].农村生态环境,2000,(1):353-363.
[144]梁美霞,刘怀如.福建戴云山自然保护区森林景观资源的美学价值评价[J].福建林业科技,2007,(4):151-154,175.
[145]廖邦洪,陈东立.北美地区森林景观可视化的研究与应用[J].世界林业研究,2005,18(5):57-64.
[146]刘灿然,陈灵芝.北京地区植被景观中斑块大小的分布特征[J].植物学报:英文版.1999,41(2):199-205.
[147]刘灿然.关于种群空间格局分析方法的研究[J].生物数学学报,1993,8(1):90-95.
[148]刘飞,高宛莉,杜瑞卿.标准差因子赋权法在生态评价综合指数中的应用[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(10):2855-2857.
[149]刘家明,杨新军.生态旅游地可持续旅游发展规划初探[J].自然资源学报,1999,14(1):79-83.
[150]刘建国.当代生态博论[M].北京:中国科学技术出版社,1992.
[151]刘金福,洪伟.福建三明格氏栲自然保护区的评价[J].吉林林学院学报,1999,(2):70-81.
[152]刘庆友,冯立梅,杨达源,等.庐山旅游可持续发展研究[J].北京第二外国语学院学报,2003,(4):78-82.
[153]刘先银,徐化成,郑均宝.河北省山海关林场景观格局与动态的研究[A].见:徐化成,郑均宝主编,封山育林研究,北京:中国林业出版社,1994:106-112.
[154]刘忠伟,王仰麟,陈忠晓.景观生态学与生态旅游规划管理[J].地理研究,2001,20(2):206-212.
[155]龙开元,谢炳庚,谢光辉.景观生态破坏评价指标体系的建立方法和应用[J].山地学报,2001,(1):64-68.
[156]卢景龙.森林景观组成结构动态模拟及预测方法研究[J].山西农业大学学报,2002,(3):234-238.
[157]卢云亭.生态旅游与可持续旅游发展[J].经济地理,1996,16(1):106-112.
[158]陆兆苏,余国宝,张治强,等.紫金山风景林的动态及其经营对策[J].南京林学院学报.1985,(3):l-11
[159]骆培聪.武夷山国家风景名胜区旅游环境容量探讨[J].福建师范大学学报(自然科学版),1997,(1):94-99.
[160]马建章.自然保护区学[M].哈尔滨:东北林业大学出版社,1992:107-109
[161]莫好容.梅花山国家级自然保护区的AHP方法生态评价[J].福建地理,2004,19(1):14-17.
[162]牛亚菲.可持续旅游,生态旅游及实施方案[J].地理研究,1999,18(2):179-184.
[163]欧阳勋志,廖为明,俞社保,等.婺源县森林景观空间格局及其与景观美学质量关系探析[J].江西农业大学学报,2005,27(6):880-884.
[164]欧阳志云,王如松.生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价[J].应用生态学报,1999,10(5):635-640.
[165]潘海波.基于3S技术对香格里拉县天然林景观的生态评价[J].内蒙古林业调查设计,2008(4):6-9,53.
[166]彭馥艳,丁辉,赵源.基于RBF网络的大气环境质量评价[J].水土保持研究,2006,13(5):154-155;159.
[167]彭建,王仰麟,景娟,等.海岸带土地持续利用景观生态评价[J].地理学报,2003,(3):363-371.
[168]邱林,聂相田,杜爱忠,等.模糊物元模型在自然保护区生态评价中的应用[J].人民黄河,2006,28(6):6-8.
[169]戎可,马建章,赵丹,等.中国自然保护区区域评价模型的建立与应用[J].生态学报,2008,(6):2738-2745.
[170]史作民,程瑞梅.区域生态系统多样性评价方法[J].农村生态环境,1996,12(2):1-5.
[171]宋景东,吴德东,舒展.牡丹峰国家级自然保护区现状评价及开发管理研究[J].森林工程,2007,23(4):12-15.
[172]宋力,何兴元,徐文铎,等.城市森林景观美景度的测定[J].生态学杂志,2006(6):621-624.
[173]宋力,何兴元,张洁.沈阳城市公园植物景观美学质量测定方法研究——美景度评估法、平均值法和成对比较法的比较[J].沈阳农业大学学报,2006,37(2):200-203.
[174]宋秀杰,赵彤润.松山自然保护区的生态评价[J].环境科学,1997,(04):58-59.
[175]孙凡,袁红叶,李天云,等.重庆雪宝山自然保护区AHP生态评价[J].西南农业大学学报,2006,28(4):569-572.
[176]孙根年.我国自然保护区生态旅游业开发模式研究[J].资源科学,1998,20(6):40-44.
[177]孙会国,徐建华.城市边缘区景观生态规划的人工神经网络模型[J].生态科学,2002,21(2):97-103.
[178]孙家柄,舒宁,关泽群,等.遥感原理、方法和应用[M].北京:测绘出版社,1996.
[179]田奇凡,李新彬.北京西山国家森林公园景观格局的初步研究[J].北京林业大学学报,1994,16(3):8-16.
[180]王保忠,王保明,何平.景观资源美学评价的理论与方法[J].应用生态学报,2006,17(9):1733-1739.
[181]王本洋,罗富和,余世孝.基于信息熵的自然保护区定量评价[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2006,(6):83-86.
[182]王斌,张硕新,雷瑞德,等.火地塘林区华山松景观格局的人工神经网络模型研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报,2006,34(8):87-92.
[183]王冰,宋力.景观美学评价中心理物理学方法的理论及其应用[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(12):3531-3532.
[184]王顺久,李跃清.投影寻踪模型在区域生态环境质量评价中的应用[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(7):869-872.
[185]王晓峰,任志远,谭克龙.黄河中上游地区生态环境综合评价[J].西北大学学报:自然科学版,2008,38(3):487-490.
[186]王永安.森林生态旅游新趋势[J].中南林业调查规划,2003,22(3):44-47.
[187]王治良,王国祥,常青.江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地自然保护区生态评价[J].南京师大学报:自然科学版,2006,29(2):115-119.
[188]文益君,周根苗,张晓蕾,等.基于粗糙集的风景林景观美学评价[J].林业科学,2009,45(1):1-7.
[189]邬建国.景观生态学——概念与理论[J].生态学杂志,2000a,19(1):42-52.
[190]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,2002.
[191]邬建国.景观生态学系统[A].见:李博主编,生态学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2000c:308-330.
[192]邬建国.景观生态学中的十大研究论题[J].生态学报,2004,24(9):2074-2076.
[193]毋河海,龚健雅.地理信息系统(GIS)空间、数据结构与处理技术[M].北京:测绘出版社,1997.
[194]吴楚材,吴章文,郑群明,等.生态旅游概念的研究[J].旅游学刊,2007,22(1):67-71.
[195]吴火和,黄晓玲.龙栖山自然保护区生态旅游资源开发探讨[J].林业经济问题,2006,26(2):185-188.
[196]伍业纲,李哈滨.景观生态学的理论发展[A].见:刘建国主编,当代生态学博论[M].北京:中国科学技术出版社,1992:30-39.
[197]肖笃宁,李秀珍.当代景观生态学的进展和展望[J].生态学报,2003,23(8):1615-1621.
[198]肖笃宁,钟林生.景观分类与评价的生态原则[J].应用生态学报,1998,(2):217-221.
[199]肖笃宁主编.景观生态学:理论、方法及应用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1991:92-93.
[200]徐化成,范兆飞.兴安落叶松原始林林木空间格局的研究[J].生态学报,1994,(2):155-160.
[201]徐化成.景观生态学[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1996.
[202]许慧,王家骥.景观生态学的理论与应用[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1993.
[203]严圣华,李兆华,周振兴.九宫山自然保护区功能模糊综合评价[J].长江流域资源与环境,2007,(4):446-449.
[204]严勇,李清泉,孙久远.投影寻踪学习网络的遥感影像分类[J].武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2007,32(10):876-879.
[205]阎传海.淮河下游地区景观生态评价[J].生态科学,1999,18(2):46-52.
[206]阎传海.山东省南部地区景观生态的分类与评价[J].农村生态环境,1998,(2):15-19.
[207]杨彪.景观生态学原理与自然保护区设计[J].林业调查规划,2001,26(2):51-53.
[208]杨国靖,肖笃宁.中祁连山浅山区山地森林景观空间格局分析[J].应用生态学报,2004,(2):94-97
[209]杨美霞.武陵源风景名胜区旅游环境容量管理研究[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2008,(01):42-47.
[210]伊萨钦科.王化群译.景观调查与景观图的编制[M].长春:吉林科学科技出版社,1987:1-22.
[211]俞孔坚.论景观概念及其研究发展[J].北京林业大学学报,1987(4):433-439.
[212]俞孔坚.自然风景质量评价研究[J].北京林业大学学报,1988,10(2):1-11.
[213]张昌贵,李景侠,强晓鸣.陕西牛背梁国家级自然保护区生态评价[J].西北农林科技大学学报,2009,37(2):73-80.
[214]张超.地理信息系统[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1995:30-35.
[215]张秋琴,周宝同,莫燕,等.区域土地可持续利用景观生态评价研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2008,16(3):741-746.
[216]张延毅,董观志.生态旅游及其可持续发展对策[J].经济地理,1997,17(2):108-112.
[217]张芸香,田双宝,任兆光,等.关帝山森林景观空间分布格局及动态研究[J].山西农业大学学报,1998,(2):121-124.
[218]张志,孙玉军.过伐林景观要素沿环境梯度分布趋势的研究[J].林业科学,2005,(1):14-18.
[219]章家恩,饶卫民,张超,等.3S技术在景观生态学中的应用研究概述[J].国土与自然资源研究,2006,(3):50-52.
[220]赵红红.苏州旅游环境容量初探[J].城市规划,1983,(3):46-53.
[221]赵晓翠,王来生.基于投影寻踪和支持向量机的模式识别方法[J].计算机应用研究,2007,24(2):86-88.
[222]郑允文,薛达元.我国自然保护区生态评价指标和评价标准[J].农村生态环境,1994,(3):22-25.
[223]钟全林,赵士洞,向宝慧.生态旅游规划原理与方法[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2003.
[224]周源,肖文发,范文义."3S"技术在景观生态学中的应用[J].世界林业研究,2007,(2):38-44.
[2] Arthur LM,Boster RS.Measuring scence beauty:A selected annotated bibliography.USDA For. Serv. Gen.Tech. Rep.RM -25.Rocky Mtn Forest and Range Exp Stn.Fort Collins,Colo l976.
[3] Baskent EZ,Jorden GA. Characterizing spatial structure of forest landscape.Canadian Journal of Forestry Research,1995,25:1830-1849.
[4] Baskent EZ.Controlling spatial structure of forest landscapes:acase study towards landscape management[J].Landscape Ecology,1999,14(1):83-97.
[5] Batchmann CM et al. Unsupervised BCMprojection pursuit algorithms for classification of simulate dradar presentation. Neural Networks, 1994, 7(4):709-728.
[6] Bergeron Y.The influence of island and mainland lakehoue landscapes on boreal forest fire regimes[J].Ecology,1991,(72):1980-1992.
[7] Carey PD,Short C,Morris C,et al.The multi-disciplinary evaluation of national agri-environment scheme. J Environ Man, 2003,69(1):71-91.
[8] Ceballos LH.The Future of Ecotourism.Mexico Journal,1987.
[9] Chen WB,Xiao DN.Classification application and creation of landscape indices.Chinese J. Of Applied Ecology,2002,13(1):121-125
[10] Clark DB,Clark DA.Landscape scale variation in forest structure and biamss in a tropical rain forest[J].Forest Eclogy and Management,2000,(137):185-198.
[11] Costanza R,Arge R.The value of the would's ecosystem services and nature capital.Nature, 1997,387(15): 253-260.
[12] Daniel TC,Boster RS.Measuring landdscape esthetics.The scence beauty estimation method.USDA forest Serv Res Pap RM-l67,66p.Rocky Mtn Forest and Range Exp Stn,Fort Collins,Colo l976.
[13] Dolors A,Guillermo R,Nelly R,et al.Patterns and causes of deforestation in the Colombian Amazon.Ecological Indicatirs,2006,(6):353-368.
[14] Elger FE.Pesticides in our ecostestem.American Science,1964,52:110-136.
[15] Elizabeth B.Planning for Ecotourism[J].Parks.1991,(3):4-8.
[16] Ercan S,Sasidharan V,Sonmez S.Redefining Ecotourism:The Need for A Supply-side View[J].Journal of Travel Research,1999,(11):168-180.
[17] Forman RTT,Godron M.Landscape Ecikigt Principleand Landscape Function.In:Methodology in Landscape Ecological Research and Planning,1984,Theme1.
[18] Forman RTT,Gordan M.Patches and structural components for a Landscapee cology.BioScience.1981,31:733-740.
[19] Forman RTT,Gordon M.Landscape Ecology.NewYork:Wiley&Sons,1986
[20] Forman RTT.Ecologically Sustainable Landscapes:The Roleof Spatial Configuration.In: I S Zonneveld and RTT Formand.Changing Landscape: An Ecological Perspective, Springer-Verlag, 1990,261-277.
[21] Forman RTT.Landscape Mosaics:The Ecology of Landscape and Regions. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1995.
[22] Forman RTT.The new jerseypine barrens,an ecological mosaic.In:Forman RTTed,PineBarrens:Ecosystem andLand scape.New York:Academic Press,1979,569-585.
[23] Friedman,JH,Stuetzle,W.Projection Pursuit Regression.J Amer Statist Assoc,1981,76:817.
[24] Friedman,JH.Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (with discussion).Annals of Statistics,1991,19:1.
[25] Gergel SE and Turner MG.Learning landscape eclogy:apractical guide to concepts and techniques.New York:Springer-Verlag,2002.
[26] Gittins R.Trend-surface analysis of ecological data.Journal of Ecology,1968,56:845-869.
[27] Green GM,Sussman RW.Deforestation history of the eastern rain forests of Madagascar from satellite images.Science,1990,24:212-215.
[28] Gretchen CD.Nature's Services,Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems.Washington DC:Island Press.1997:175-178.
[29] Gulinck H,Mugica M.A framework for comparative landscape analysis and evaluation based on land cover data,with an application in the Madrid region(Spain).Landscape Urban Plan,2001,55(4):257-270.
[30] Honey M.Ecotourism and Sustainable Development:Who Owns Paradise?[M].New York:Van Nostrart Renhole,1999.
[31] Hull.Measurement of scence beauty,the law of comparative judgmem and scenic beauty estinmtton procedures.For Sci,1984,30(4):1084-1096.
[32] Ims RA.Experimental landscapeecology.In:Weins JA,Moss MR.Issuesinl and scape ecology Snowmass Village:International Association for Landscape Ecology,1999.
[33] J.H. Friedman, W. Stuetzle, "Projection pursuit regression", Journal of the American Statistical Association 76(1981) pp,817-823.
[34] Jason TF,Stan B,Susan JH.The protean relationship between boreal forest landscape structure and red squirrel distribution at multiple spatial scales[J].Landscape Ecology,2005,(20):73-82.
[35] John AK,Amy LW,Scott BF.Forest fragmentation affects early sccessional patterns on shifting cultivation fields near Indian Church,Belize[J].Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2004,1(3):509-518.
[36] King A.Translating models across scalesinthel and scape.In:Turner MG,Gardner RH.Quantitative methods in landscape ecology.1991,479-517.
[37] Knappen JP,Scheffer M,Harms B.Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning.Landscape and Urban Palan,1992,23:1-16.
[38] Kotliar NB,Wiens JA.Multiple scales of pathless and patch structure:a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity.Oikos.1990,59:253-260.
[39] Legendrep,Fortin M.Spatial pattern and ecological analysis.Vegetatio,1989,80:107-138.
[40] Li BL.Developing alternative forest cutting patterns:assimilation approach.Landscape Ecology,1993,8(1).
[41] Litton RB.Visual vulnerability of Forest Landscapes.J For,1974(7):392-397.
[42] Makoto Y,Marco A.Nature in the city,city in the nature:case studies of the restoration of urban nature in Tokyo,Japan and Toronto,Canada[J].Landscape Ecol Eng,2005,(1):53-59.
[43] Martin AM,Juan JF,Jesus Z.Landscape based forest management ,a real would case study from Mexico[J].Forest Ecology and Management,2005,2(9):19-26.
[44] Mauno P,Mikko K,Jyrki K,et al.Assessing the priorities using A'WOT among resource management strategies at the finnish forest and park service.For Sci 2001,47(4):534-542.
[45] Mladenoff DJ,White MA,PastorJ,et al.Comparing spatial patern in unalteredold-growth and disturbed forest landscape.Ecological Applications,1993,3(2):294-369.
[46] Morberg UM,Balfors B,Knol WC.Landscape ecological assessment:A tool for integratingbiodiversity issues in strategic environmental assessment and planning[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2006,(21):63-72.
[47] Naveh Z,Lieberman AS.1nd.Landscape Ecology:Theoryand Application. NewYork: Springer-Verlag,1984.
[48] Naveh Z.Landscape ecology as a multidimensional science for global survival.Plenary Lecture,4th International Congress of Ecology(Intecol),Syracuse,NewYork,August,1986.
[49] Naveh Z.Landscape ecology as anemerging branch of human ecosystem science.Advance of Ecology Resesrch,1982,12:13-23.
[50] Noss RF,Harris LD.Nodes,networks and MUMS:Preserving diversity at all scales.Environmental Management,1986,10:299-309.
[51] O'Neill RV,Milne T,Turner MG,et al.Resource utilization scales and landscape pattern.Landscape Ecology,2001,23:63-69.
[52] O'Neill RV.Theory in landscape ecology.In:Wiens JA,Moss MR.Issuesin landscape ecology Snowmass Village:International Association for Landscape Ecology,1999:1-5.
[53] Pickett STA,Cadenasso ML.Landscape ecology:Spatial heterogeneity in ecological systems.Science,1995,269:294-306.
[54] Potter DR,Wagar JA.Techniques for inventorying manmade impact in roadway envirorments.USDA For.Serv. Res. Pap.PNW-121,12p.Pacific Northwest For. And Range Exp. Stn.Portland Ore,1971.
[55] Ranst EV.Application of fuzzy logic to land suitability for rubber production in peninsular Thailand.Geoderma,1996,70(1):1-19
[56] Risser PG,Karr JR,Forman RTT.Landscape Ecology:Directions and Approaches.Illinois Natrual Hisory Surey,Champaign,1984.
[57] Risser PG.Landscape ecology.In:Landscape Heterogeneity and Directions. NewYork, Springer-Verlag,1987:3-14.
[58] Rodriguez II.Ecohydrology a hydrologic perspective of climate-soil-vegetation dynamics[J]. Water Resource Research,2000,36(1):3-9.
[59] Rudis VA.Regional forest fragmentation effects on bottomland hardwood community types and resource values.Landscape Ecology,1995,10(5):291-301.
[60] Saaty TL.Modelingun structured decision problems:the theory of analytical hierarchies.First Int Conf On Math Modeling,Univ Of Missouri,Rolla,1997,1:59-77.
[61] Smith P,Theberge J.A review of criterion for evaluation natural aress.Environ Man 1986,10(6):715-734.
[62] Swanson FJ,Franklin JF ,Sedell JR.Landscape Patterns Distrubance and Management in the Pacific Northweset.In: Zonneveld ISandFormand RTT.Changing Landscape:An Ecological Perspective,Springer-Verlag,1990,191-211.
[63] Thomas AS ,William JR.Dynamics and pattern of amanaged coniferous forest landscape in Oregon.Landscape Ecology,1994,4(3):555-568.
[64] Troll C.Landscape ecology and Bio-Ecology:Aterminologystudy.Geoform.1971,8:43-46.
[65] Troll C.Luftbildplan und okologische Bodenforschung.Z. Ges. Erdkunde zu Berlin, 1939:241-298.
[66] Turner MG,Gardne RH.Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. NewYork: Springer-Verlag, 1991a.
[67] Turner MG,Gardner RH and O'Neill RV.Landscape ecology in theory and practice. NewYork: Springer-Verlag,2001.
[68] Turner MG,Gardner RH,Dale VH,et al.Predictiing the spread of disturbance acrossheterogeneous landscapes.Oikos,1989,55:121-129.
[69] Turner MG.Landscape ecology:Living in amosaic.In:Dodson SI,Allen TFH,Carpenter SR,et al.Ecology.NewYork:Oxford University Press,1998:72-122.
[70] Valentine PS.Ecotourism and Nature Conservation[J]. Tourism Management, 1993,14 (2)107-115.
[71] Vargas LG.Anover view of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications.Eur J OplRes, 1990, 48: 2-8.
[72] Volker CR,David JM,Eric JG,et al.Modeling forest harvesting effects on landscape pattern in the Northwest Wisconsin Pine Barrens[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2006,21 (2):21-28.
[73] Weaver DB.生态旅游[M].杨桂华,王跃华,肖朝霞,等译.天津:南开大学出版社,2004:1-92.
[74] Wiens JA,Milne BT.Scaling of landscape in landscape ecology or landscape ecology from a beetle's perspective.Landscape Ecology,1989,3:87-96.
[75] Wiens JA.The Analysis of Landscape Patterns.Colorado State University,Ft Collins,Colorado,1988.
[76] Wu J, Hobbs R. Key issue and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyncratic synthesis [J].Landscape Ecology,2002,17:355-365.
[77] Wu J,Levin SA.As patial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in anannual grassland.Ecological Monographs,1994,64(4):447-464.
[78] Xiao DN,Leng SY.National Natural Science Foundation and landscapes ecology in China.China Science Foundation,2001,6:346-349.
[79] Xiao DN,Li XZ. Core Concepts of landscape ecology. J. of Environmental Sciences, 1999,11(2):131-135.
[80] Zonneveld IS.Landecology: Anintroduction to landscape ecology as a base for land evaluation,land management and conservation.SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam. 1995:1-18.
[81]白降丽,彭道黎,庾晓红,等.森林景观生态研究现状与展望[J].生态学杂志,2005,24(8):943-947
[82]白梅玲,李培芬.福山实验林之景观分类[J].中华林学季刊,2002,33(3):291-312.
[83]包战雄.福建省森林景观质量评价与经营研究Ⅰ.春季景观[J].林业勘察设计,2004(1):16-19.
[84]包战雄.福建省森林景观质量评价与经营研究Ⅱ.夏季和秋季景观[J].林业勘察设计,2005(2):27-31.
[85]保继刚,楚义方,彭华.旅游地理学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1993:83-89.
[86]保继刚.颐和园旅游环境容量研究[J].中国环境科学,1987,(2):32-38.
[87]陈昌笃.景观生态学的理论发展和实际作用[A].见:马世骏主编,中国生态学发展战略研究[M].北京:中国经济出版社,1990:232-250.
[88]陈传明.福建省天宝岩自然保护区景观生态格局分析及评价[J].中国生态农业学报,2008,16(5):1213-1217.
[89]陈端吕,李际平,林辉.森林景观研究的3S技术应用[J].长江大学学报(自然版),2006,3(8)131-134.
[90]陈利顶,傅伯杰.景观连接度的生态学意义及其应用.生态学杂志,1996,15(4):37-42.
[91]陈文波,肖笃宁,郑蕉.大兴安岭地区森林景观沿主要河流两侧分布的变化[J].林业科学,2005,(2):160-163.
[92]陈鑫峰,沈国舫.森林游憩的几个重要概念辨析[J].世界林业研究,2000,13(1):69-76.
[93]陈鑫峰,王雁.国内外森林景观的定量评价和经营技术研究现状[J].世界林业研究,2000,(5):31-38.
[94]陈应发.美国的森林游憩[J].世界农业,1994(5):35-36.
[95]程占红,张金屯.生态旅游的兴起和研究进展[J].经济地理,2001,21(1):110-113.
[96]崔海鸥,侯仲娥,杨燕南.自然保护区可持续发展环境指标与生态旅游评价指标初探——以北京松山自然保护区为例[J].四川动物,2007,26(4):862-865.
[97]但新球,周光辉.对森林旅游及其特点的认识[J].中南林业调查规划,1994,13(2):57-60.
[98]但新球.森林景观资源美学价值评价指标体系的研究[J].中南林业调查规划,1995,14(3):44-48.
[99]邓乃扬,田英杰.数据挖掘中的新方法-支持向量机[M].北京:科学出版社,2006.
[100]邓小飞,黄金玲.广东江门红树林自然保护区生态评价[J].林业经济,2006(8):68-70.
[101]董长虹.神经网络与应用[M].北京:国防工业出版社,2005.
[102]付强,赵小勇.投影寻踪模型原理及其应用[M].北京:科学出版社,2006.
[103]傅伯杰,陈利顶,马克明,等.景观生态学原理及应用[M].北京:科学出版社,2001.
[104]傅伯杰,陈利顶.景观多样性的类型及其生态意义[J].地理学报,1996,(5):454-462.
[105]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):798-804.
[106]傅伯杰.景观生态学的对象和任务[A].肖笃宁主编.景观生态学:理论、方法及应用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1991.
[107]郭晋平,李志强.森林景观恢复过程中景观要素斑块规模的动态分析[J].生态学报,2000,(02):46-51.
[108]郭晋平,王俊田.关帝山林区景观要素沿环境梯度分布趋势的研究[J].植物生态学报,2000,(2):135-140.
[109]郭晋平,阳含熙.关帝山林区景观要素空间分布及其动态研究[J].生态学报,1999,(04):30-35.
[110]郭晋平,张芸香.中国森林景观生态研究的进展和展望[J].世界林业研究,2003,16(5):46-49.
[111]郭晋平.森林景观生态研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
[112]郭来喜.中国生态旅游—可持续旅游的基石[J].地理科学进展,1997,16(4):1-10.
[113]郭泺,夏北成,江学顶.基于GIS与人工神经网络的广州森林景观生态规划[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2005,(5):126-128.
[114]郭泺,薛达元,杜世宏,等.青海果洛藏族自治州景观空间变化与生态评价[J].生态科学,2008,27(4):248-253.
[115]国庆喜,王天明.丰林自然保护区景观生态评价:量化与解释[J].应用生态学报,2005,(5):825-832.
[116]韩微.对森林旅游与森林生态旅游的再认识[J].森林工程,2005,21(6):7-8.
[117]杭州商学院省自然科学基金课题组."序号总和理论"及其在综合经济效益排序中的应用[J].数量经济统计经济研究,1996,(1):59-62.
[118]何池全,崔保山,赵志春.吉林省典型湿地生态评价[J].应用生态学报,2001,(5):754-756.
[119]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观空间格局变化及其干扰效应模拟[J].生态学报,2004,24(8):1602-1610.
[120]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观空间格局研究[J].林业科学,2004,40(1):174-179.
[121]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观类型空间关系及其尺度效应初探[J].中国生态农业学报,2004,12(3):19-23.
[122]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山风景名胜区景观生态评价[J].应用与环境生物学报,2004,(06):729-734.
[123]何东进,洪伟,胡海清,等.武夷山景区主要景观类型斑块大小分布规律及其等级尺度效应分析[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(1):21-25.
[124]何东进.武夷山风景名胜区景观格局动态及其环境分析[D].东北林业大学,2004.
[125]洪滔,郭妍,吴承祯,等.杉木种源选择的投影寻踪法应用[J].林业科学,2008,43(3):56-61.
[126]胡欣欣,陈平留,王李进.基于投影寻踪模型的森林景观评价[J].江西农业大学学报,2009,31(2):306-310.
[127]胡欣欣,陈平留.RBF网络在森林景观评价中的应用[J].福建林学院学报,2009,29(1):62-64.
[128]胡欣欣,胡宗庆.福建省茫荡山自然保护区森林景观评价[J].林业经济问题,2006,(1):39-43。
[129]胡月明.土地信息系统[M].广州:华南理工大学出版社,2000.
[130]江波,袁位高,戚连忠,等.滩地植被景观斑块分布特征与生态潜力评价[J].生态科学,2005,24(2):107-112.
[131]蒋徳明,陈渭民,傅炳珊,等.基于径向基函数网络的云自动分类研究[J].南京气象学院学报,2003,26(1):89-95.
[132]解庆林.桂林七星公园旅游环境容量研究[J].广谣科学院学报,2000,(1):40-43.
[133]金鉴明,王礼嫱,薛达元.自然保护概论[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1991:231-271.
[134]雷瑞德,刘建军,尚廉斌,等.主伐对森林景观结构和空间分布格局影响的研究[J].西北林学院学报,1996,(S1):53-64.
[135]李伯德.数学建模方法[M].甘肃:甘肃出版社,2006.
[136]李冬林,王宝松,阮宏华,等.河南小秦岭自然保护区生态评价[J].安徽农业大学学报,2007,(1):97-102.
[137]李红,孙丹峰,张风荣,等.基于GIS和DEM的北京西部山区经济林果适宜性评价[J].农业工程学报,2002,18(5):250-255.
[138]李健.森林生态旅游对林业可持续发展贡献与影响[J].江西林业科技.2004(2):26-29.
[139]李明诗,彭世揆,钟宏宇.基于GIS的紫金山风景区景观格局及其动态分析[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2004,(5):70-73。
[140]李明阳,崔志华,申世广,等.紫金山风景林美学评价与森林游憩活动适宜度量化模型研究[J].北京林业大学学报:社会科学版,2008,7(3):6-11.
[141]李明阳,刘礼,吴翼,等.基于Geomatics可视化功能的风景林美学评价方法研究——以南京梅花山为例[J].西南林学院学报,2007,27(2):11-15.
[142]李明阳,熊显权,杨劲松,等.中山陵风景区的森林美学评价与风景林规划[J].北京林业大学学报:社会科学版,2006,5(2):15-19.
[143]李晓秀.北京山区生态系统稳定性评价模型初步研究[J].农村生态环境,2000,(1):353-363.
[144]梁美霞,刘怀如.福建戴云山自然保护区森林景观资源的美学价值评价[J].福建林业科技,2007,(4):151-154,175.
[145]廖邦洪,陈东立.北美地区森林景观可视化的研究与应用[J].世界林业研究,2005,18(5):57-64.
[146]刘灿然,陈灵芝.北京地区植被景观中斑块大小的分布特征[J].植物学报:英文版.1999,41(2):199-205.
[147]刘灿然.关于种群空间格局分析方法的研究[J].生物数学学报,1993,8(1):90-95.
[148]刘飞,高宛莉,杜瑞卿.标准差因子赋权法在生态评价综合指数中的应用[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(10):2855-2857.
[149]刘家明,杨新军.生态旅游地可持续旅游发展规划初探[J].自然资源学报,1999,14(1):79-83.
[150]刘建国.当代生态博论[M].北京:中国科学技术出版社,1992.
[151]刘金福,洪伟.福建三明格氏栲自然保护区的评价[J].吉林林学院学报,1999,(2):70-81.
[152]刘庆友,冯立梅,杨达源,等.庐山旅游可持续发展研究[J].北京第二外国语学院学报,2003,(4):78-82.
[153]刘先银,徐化成,郑均宝.河北省山海关林场景观格局与动态的研究[A].见:徐化成,郑均宝主编,封山育林研究,北京:中国林业出版社,1994:106-112.
[154]刘忠伟,王仰麟,陈忠晓.景观生态学与生态旅游规划管理[J].地理研究,2001,20(2):206-212.
[155]龙开元,谢炳庚,谢光辉.景观生态破坏评价指标体系的建立方法和应用[J].山地学报,2001,(1):64-68.
[156]卢景龙.森林景观组成结构动态模拟及预测方法研究[J].山西农业大学学报,2002,(3):234-238.
[157]卢云亭.生态旅游与可持续旅游发展[J].经济地理,1996,16(1):106-112.
[158]陆兆苏,余国宝,张治强,等.紫金山风景林的动态及其经营对策[J].南京林学院学报.1985,(3):l-11
[159]骆培聪.武夷山国家风景名胜区旅游环境容量探讨[J].福建师范大学学报(自然科学版),1997,(1):94-99.
[160]马建章.自然保护区学[M].哈尔滨:东北林业大学出版社,1992:107-109
[161]莫好容.梅花山国家级自然保护区的AHP方法生态评价[J].福建地理,2004,19(1):14-17.
[162]牛亚菲.可持续旅游,生态旅游及实施方案[J].地理研究,1999,18(2):179-184.
[163]欧阳勋志,廖为明,俞社保,等.婺源县森林景观空间格局及其与景观美学质量关系探析[J].江西农业大学学报,2005,27(6):880-884.
[164]欧阳志云,王如松.生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价[J].应用生态学报,1999,10(5):635-640.
[165]潘海波.基于3S技术对香格里拉县天然林景观的生态评价[J].内蒙古林业调查设计,2008(4):6-9,53.
[166]彭馥艳,丁辉,赵源.基于RBF网络的大气环境质量评价[J].水土保持研究,2006,13(5):154-155;159.
[167]彭建,王仰麟,景娟,等.海岸带土地持续利用景观生态评价[J].地理学报,2003,(3):363-371.
[168]邱林,聂相田,杜爱忠,等.模糊物元模型在自然保护区生态评价中的应用[J].人民黄河,2006,28(6):6-8.
[169]戎可,马建章,赵丹,等.中国自然保护区区域评价模型的建立与应用[J].生态学报,2008,(6):2738-2745.
[170]史作民,程瑞梅.区域生态系统多样性评价方法[J].农村生态环境,1996,12(2):1-5.
[171]宋景东,吴德东,舒展.牡丹峰国家级自然保护区现状评价及开发管理研究[J].森林工程,2007,23(4):12-15.
[172]宋力,何兴元,徐文铎,等.城市森林景观美景度的测定[J].生态学杂志,2006(6):621-624.
[173]宋力,何兴元,张洁.沈阳城市公园植物景观美学质量测定方法研究——美景度评估法、平均值法和成对比较法的比较[J].沈阳农业大学学报,2006,37(2):200-203.
[174]宋秀杰,赵彤润.松山自然保护区的生态评价[J].环境科学,1997,(04):58-59.
[175]孙凡,袁红叶,李天云,等.重庆雪宝山自然保护区AHP生态评价[J].西南农业大学学报,2006,28(4):569-572.
[176]孙根年.我国自然保护区生态旅游业开发模式研究[J].资源科学,1998,20(6):40-44.
[177]孙会国,徐建华.城市边缘区景观生态规划的人工神经网络模型[J].生态科学,2002,21(2):97-103.
[178]孙家柄,舒宁,关泽群,等.遥感原理、方法和应用[M].北京:测绘出版社,1996.
[179]田奇凡,李新彬.北京西山国家森林公园景观格局的初步研究[J].北京林业大学学报,1994,16(3):8-16.
[180]王保忠,王保明,何平.景观资源美学评价的理论与方法[J].应用生态学报,2006,17(9):1733-1739.
[181]王本洋,罗富和,余世孝.基于信息熵的自然保护区定量评价[J].中山大学学报(自然科学版),2006,(6):83-86.
[182]王斌,张硕新,雷瑞德,等.火地塘林区华山松景观格局的人工神经网络模型研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报,2006,34(8):87-92.
[183]王冰,宋力.景观美学评价中心理物理学方法的理论及其应用[J].安徽农业科学,2007,35(12):3531-3532.
[184]王顺久,李跃清.投影寻踪模型在区域生态环境质量评价中的应用[J].生态学杂志,2006,25(7):869-872.
[185]王晓峰,任志远,谭克龙.黄河中上游地区生态环境综合评价[J].西北大学学报:自然科学版,2008,38(3):487-490.
[186]王永安.森林生态旅游新趋势[J].中南林业调查规划,2003,22(3):44-47.
[187]王治良,王国祥,常青.江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地自然保护区生态评价[J].南京师大学报:自然科学版,2006,29(2):115-119.
[188]文益君,周根苗,张晓蕾,等.基于粗糙集的风景林景观美学评价[J].林业科学,2009,45(1):1-7.
[189]邬建国.景观生态学——概念与理论[J].生态学杂志,2000a,19(1):42-52.
[190]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,2002.
[191]邬建国.景观生态学系统[A].见:李博主编,生态学[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2000c:308-330.
[192]邬建国.景观生态学中的十大研究论题[J].生态学报,2004,24(9):2074-2076.
[193]毋河海,龚健雅.地理信息系统(GIS)空间、数据结构与处理技术[M].北京:测绘出版社,1997.
[194]吴楚材,吴章文,郑群明,等.生态旅游概念的研究[J].旅游学刊,2007,22(1):67-71.
[195]吴火和,黄晓玲.龙栖山自然保护区生态旅游资源开发探讨[J].林业经济问题,2006,26(2):185-188.
[196]伍业纲,李哈滨.景观生态学的理论发展[A].见:刘建国主编,当代生态学博论[M].北京:中国科学技术出版社,1992:30-39.
[197]肖笃宁,李秀珍.当代景观生态学的进展和展望[J].生态学报,2003,23(8):1615-1621.
[198]肖笃宁,钟林生.景观分类与评价的生态原则[J].应用生态学报,1998,(2):217-221.
[199]肖笃宁主编.景观生态学:理论、方法及应用[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1991:92-93.
[200]徐化成,范兆飞.兴安落叶松原始林林木空间格局的研究[J].生态学报,1994,(2):155-160.
[201]徐化成.景观生态学[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1996.
[202]许慧,王家骥.景观生态学的理论与应用[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1993.
[203]严圣华,李兆华,周振兴.九宫山自然保护区功能模糊综合评价[J].长江流域资源与环境,2007,(4):446-449.
[204]严勇,李清泉,孙久远.投影寻踪学习网络的遥感影像分类[J].武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2007,32(10):876-879.
[205]阎传海.淮河下游地区景观生态评价[J].生态科学,1999,18(2):46-52.
[206]阎传海.山东省南部地区景观生态的分类与评价[J].农村生态环境,1998,(2):15-19.
[207]杨彪.景观生态学原理与自然保护区设计[J].林业调查规划,2001,26(2):51-53.
[208]杨国靖,肖笃宁.中祁连山浅山区山地森林景观空间格局分析[J].应用生态学报,2004,(2):94-97
[209]杨美霞.武陵源风景名胜区旅游环境容量管理研究[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2008,(01):42-47.
[210]伊萨钦科.王化群译.景观调查与景观图的编制[M].长春:吉林科学科技出版社,1987:1-22.
[211]俞孔坚.论景观概念及其研究发展[J].北京林业大学学报,1987(4):433-439.
[212]俞孔坚.自然风景质量评价研究[J].北京林业大学学报,1988,10(2):1-11.
[213]张昌贵,李景侠,强晓鸣.陕西牛背梁国家级自然保护区生态评价[J].西北农林科技大学学报,2009,37(2):73-80.
[214]张超.地理信息系统[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1995:30-35.
[215]张秋琴,周宝同,莫燕,等.区域土地可持续利用景观生态评价研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2008,16(3):741-746.
[216]张延毅,董观志.生态旅游及其可持续发展对策[J].经济地理,1997,17(2):108-112.
[217]张芸香,田双宝,任兆光,等.关帝山森林景观空间分布格局及动态研究[J].山西农业大学学报,1998,(2):121-124.
[218]张志,孙玉军.过伐林景观要素沿环境梯度分布趋势的研究[J].林业科学,2005,(1):14-18.
[219]章家恩,饶卫民,张超,等.3S技术在景观生态学中的应用研究概述[J].国土与自然资源研究,2006,(3):50-52.
[220]赵红红.苏州旅游环境容量初探[J].城市规划,1983,(3):46-53.
[221]赵晓翠,王来生.基于投影寻踪和支持向量机的模式识别方法[J].计算机应用研究,2007,24(2):86-88.
[222]郑允文,薛达元.我国自然保护区生态评价指标和评价标准[J].农村生态环境,1994,(3):22-25.
[223]钟全林,赵士洞,向宝慧.生态旅游规划原理与方法[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2003.
[224]周源,肖文发,范文义."3S"技术在景观生态学中的应用[J].世界林业研究,2007,(2):38-44.
© 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 |