新疆艾比湖流域平原区景观生态安全研究
|
摘要
本文以干旱区典型内陆湖泊——艾比湖流域的平原区为研究对象,依据现代地学、生态学、景观生态学及生态安全等相关理论,综合运用“3S”技术、野外调查与验证、定位-半定位监测、预案分析、地统计学分析、生态安全评价/预测模型等技术手段,从景观尺度就新疆艾比湖流域平原区的生态安全问题进行探讨,定量分析并预测其生态安全演变趋势及时空分布特征,针对性地提出研究区生态安全调控措施。本文对丰富干旱区景观生态学及生态安全的研究内容、指导艾比湖流域及类似干旱区内陆湖泊流域的生态环境保护与恢复、促进区域社会经济与生态系统的可持续发展具有一定的理论价值和实践意义。主要研究工作和结论如下:
1.在对国内外生态安全研究进展进行综述的基础上,认为当前生态安全的研究已从理论探讨为主,发展为理论与方法相结合并用实例进行论证分析趋势,但总体上,生态安全研究尚处于初级探索阶段;生态安全评价是生态安全研究的基础和核心之一。景观生态安全评价是景观生态学及生态安全研究的一个热点和新的领域,有着极其广阔的理论与实践上的创新潜力。
2.通过对干旱区湿地景观的概念、意义和特征的分析,认为景观的现代含义是指具有时空异质性镶嵌结构的复杂系统,干旱区的湖泊湿地是干旱区独特而又重要的景观生态类型之一,它是干旱区景观生态安全格局的重要结点和关键区域,其与干旱区山地-绿洲-荒漠(MODS)三大系统共同构成了干旱区内陆湖泊流域的山地-绿洲-荒漠-湖泊(MODLS)耦合生态系统。在此基础上,论文提出了基于湖泊流域的干旱区流域景观格局变化的特征。
3.构建了基于遥感影像特征及“3S”技术的景观生态分类体系并对研究区进行了景观生态类型的划分,研究认为景观生态分类建立在尺度的基础之上,不同尺度上的分类单元在纵向上构成了自景观带至景观元的多等级景观生态分类系统;研究区的景观生态类型可划分为1个景观类(3个景观亚类),8个景观系,13个景观型,且该分类系统属于景观生态分类等级阶梯中的中尺度分类段。
4.从植物群落层次和土壤层次系统分析了研究区及各类景观的生态属性,得出如下结论:①植被是景观生态系统重要组成要素和最显著的特征标志,研究区主要植被类型为荒漠、草原和草甸,共有33个植物群落,其中小蓬荒漠、梭梭荒漠、刚毛柽柳荒漠、白梭梭荒漠等各类荒漠的面积较大,其总面积合计约占研究区总面积的74.10%,芦苇草甸、含胡杨的芦苇草甸、含半灌木的芦苇草甸、矮嵩草草甸等面积也较大;②土壤是植物赖以生存的物质基础,也是所有其他景观要素的综合反映,研究区主要土壤类型共有26种,其中以石膏灰棕漠土所占比例最大,占研究区面积的19.03%;棕钙土、荒漠风沙土、草甸盐土、盐化草甸土、栗钙土和灌耕灰漠土的面积也较大。
5.通过分析1990-2005年研究区景观格局和景观变化,包括景观多样性和均匀性、景观斑块形状、景观破碎化程度、景观结构变化和斑块类型的转化等,得出如下结论:1990-2005年间,研究区各景观格局指数在时空上均存在较大差异;各景观类型中以盐碱地、林地、草地和戈壁的转出率较高,而以农田、人居地的转入率较高,景观组分构成没有大的变化,戈壁依然是研究区景观的基质。景观格局变化对区域生态影响主要表现为:农田斑块数量和面积的增加,加大了区域水资源利用压力;林地、草地斑块面积减少,使得平原区绿洲遭受风沙危害的可能性增加;沙地、戈壁和盐碱地斑块面积减少,使绿洲区域的生态环境变化呈现不同特征;湿地斑块面积增加,则对减少艾比湖流域沙尘危害较为有利。
6.通过构建的基于景观尺度的生态安全的评价模型和CA-Markov景观格局预测模型,并采用预案分析的方法对研究区进行景观生态安全的静态评价、动态评价和预测评价,得出如下结论:①研究区景观生态安全状况大致可以分为3个层次,一是以河流、湖泊及沼泽为主的湿地景观所在区域,其生态安全程度相对较高;二是以农田及人居聚落景观为主的人工绿洲区域,其生态安全程度处于相对中等状态;三是人工绿洲外围的各种荒漠景观所在区域,其生态安全程度相对较低。②1990-2005年间,研究区生态安全状况呈现“V”字型变化趋势,其中生态安全评价指数相对较低的区域的面积所占比例呈现先增加后减少、总体上趋于增加的状态;而生态安全指数相对较高的区域的面积所占比例呈现先减少后增加、总体上趋于减少的状态。③对研究区2020年景观格局模拟结果显示,B方案模拟结果的景观生态安全状况要明显好于A方案的模拟结果;与2005年相比,A方案模拟结果的生态安全评价指数较低区域的面积所占的比例变化不大,而评价指数较高的区域的面积所占比例却有所减少,研究区生态安全程度总体有所降低;B方案模拟结果的生态安全评价指数较低区域的面积所占的比例有所减少,而生态安全评价指数较高区域的面积所占的比例相应增加,研究区生态安全程度总体有所提高。
7.结合景观生态学与生态功能区划的原理,利用“3S”技术,将研究区划分为3个景观生态功能区和7个景观生态功能亚区。最后在此基础上,从工程建设和环境管理两个方面提出了跨流域调水、干涸湖底盐漠治理及建立MODLS大系统综合平衡的景观生态保护战略等研究区生态安全的调控措施。
This study concerned the ecological security assessment and prediction in arid inner lake basin. Guiding by the theories of modern geography, ecology, landscape ecology and ecological security, and using "3S" technical, scenarios analysis methods, ecological security assessment/prediction methods, this paper discusses the ecological security in Ebinur lake plain regions in the arid inner lands form landscape scales, and quantitative analysis and predicts the evolution tendency of ecological security and spatial characteristics in research area. The research enriches the study content of landscape ecology and ecological security, and is of important theoretical value and practical significances to guild the ecological construction, ecological environmental protection and restoration on Ebinur lake basin and the similar arid inner lake basins, and to promote the sustainable development of society, economy and ecological environment. The clew of the study is narrated as following.
The first one is introduction. In this paper, we mainly introduce the study gist and significance, and then confirm the study area. Firstly, this paper pointed out that the Ebinur lake basin plain regions provided a significant, typical study object of arid inland lake basin in landscape pattern and ecological environmental changes, ecological security assessment and prediction, and so on. Secondly, this paper reviews the internal and domestic study about the ecological security, and considers that the current study on ecological security is generally at the primary stage, and the ecological security assessment is the foundation and the core of ecological security research fields. Based on the review, this paper put forward the study targets, main study contents, technical course and the academic measure of the research work.
The second one is about the characteristics of landscape and wetlands in arid land, and the survey analysis of the research area. Firstly, this paper elaborates the concepts of landscape and wetland, and has analyzed the characteristics of arid land landscape and arid land wetland, and points out that the modern meaning of the landscape refers to a complicated system which has mosaic spatial heterogeneity structure. Arid land lake wetland is the one of the unique and very important landscape ecology types. Together with mountainous-oasis-desert systems(MODS) in arid land lake basin, the arid land lake wetland and the above three large scale systems constitute a coupling ecosystem: mountainous-oasis-desert-lake wetland(MODLS). This paper also proposed the landscape pattern evolvement disciplines of the arid land inner lake basin. Secondly, this paper has extensively analysis characteristics of the natural environment and social-economy of the research area and its main ecological environmental problems.
The third one is to study the landscape ecological classification and the landscape ecological attributes, which is one of emphasis of this paper. First of all, this paper discuss the landscape ecological classification principles and methods based on remote sensing imaging features and "3S" technologies, and construct the landscape ecological classification system and has carried on the system to the research area. We consider that landscape classification is based on the scales. Near the global scales, the classification unit is the landscape zone, which is the most senior classification unit in the classification hierarchical systems. Landscape unit is the basic classification unit of the classification hierarchical systems. On the different classification scales, the different landscape units form landscape belt to landscape unit constitute a muti-hierarchical classification hierarchical systems. The landscape in the research area has been divided into 1 landscape categories, 3 landscape subcategories, 8 landscape classes and 13 landscape types. This classification system is regarded as the middle scale classification segments of landscape hierarchical classification system. Secondly, this paper analyze the each landscape's attributes form plant communities and soil types, so as to identify origins and properties of each landscape types, which laid the foundation for the paper's following study.
The forth one is to analysis the landscape patterns and the indexes changes in research area, and the influence of these changes to ecological environment form the three different time interval. The results show that the landscape diversity and evenness indices, the patch shape indexes and the fragmentation indexes are not only have difference in the different regions, but also have difference in different times. Next, this paper analyses the change characteristics of the landscape pattern and the results show that, during 1990a to 2005a, the higher transfer-out rate of the various kinds of landscape types are the saline and alkaline land, the forest land, the lawn land and the Gobi desert land, and the higher transfer-in rate landscape types are the farmland, habitat land. But the results also show that the structure of landscape components does not have big change, and the Gobi desert land is still the landscape matrix of research area. At last, this paper analyzes the influences of these landscape pattern changes to ecological environment.
The fifth one is to assessment and prediction of landscape ecological security in research area, which is the kernel part of this study. Firstly, this paper put forward indexes and formulas to measure the landscape ecological security degrees and analyze the landscape ecological security status of research area by static assessment and dynamic assessment. The results show that the conditions of ecological security can be divided into three layers. From 1990 to 2005 years, the proportions of regions with relatively lower indices is increased at first, then decreased, and present an increased trends overall. While, the proportions of regions with relatively high indices is decreased at first, then increased, and present a decreased trends overall. On the whole, the changes of ecological security conditions show a "V"-shaped trend. Secondly, combined with CA-Markov models and "3S"techinicals, this paper succeed simulated the landscape pattern of Ebinur lake basin plain areas in 2020a based on two different scenarios. Thirdly, we have analyzed the predicted results of landscape ecological security degree. It shows that in the A scenarios, the conditions of ecological security will be deteriorated in 2020a, the proposition of regions with high indices previously will be decreased, and which will be seriously constrained the development of society and economy. In the B scenarios, the proposition of regions with high indices previously will be increased, while the proposition of regions with lower indices previously will be decreased, and the ecological security conditions of research area will be improved.
In the last, according to the analysis of static assessment, dynamic assessment and model forecast assessment of landscape ecological security situation of research area, and combine with the theories of landscape ecological function regionalization, the research area are been divided into three landscape ecological functional regions and seven sub-regions. From the project and management aspects, this paper put forward some measures, such as inter basin water transfer project, treatment project of salt desert in dry lake bottom and forming an integrated balanced landscape ecological protection strategy of MODLS ecological system, so as to make the regional economy and ecological environment sustainable development.
1.在对国内外生态安全研究进展进行综述的基础上,认为当前生态安全的研究已从理论探讨为主,发展为理论与方法相结合并用实例进行论证分析趋势,但总体上,生态安全研究尚处于初级探索阶段;生态安全评价是生态安全研究的基础和核心之一。景观生态安全评价是景观生态学及生态安全研究的一个热点和新的领域,有着极其广阔的理论与实践上的创新潜力。
2.通过对干旱区湿地景观的概念、意义和特征的分析,认为景观的现代含义是指具有时空异质性镶嵌结构的复杂系统,干旱区的湖泊湿地是干旱区独特而又重要的景观生态类型之一,它是干旱区景观生态安全格局的重要结点和关键区域,其与干旱区山地-绿洲-荒漠(MODS)三大系统共同构成了干旱区内陆湖泊流域的山地-绿洲-荒漠-湖泊(MODLS)耦合生态系统。在此基础上,论文提出了基于湖泊流域的干旱区流域景观格局变化的特征。
3.构建了基于遥感影像特征及“3S”技术的景观生态分类体系并对研究区进行了景观生态类型的划分,研究认为景观生态分类建立在尺度的基础之上,不同尺度上的分类单元在纵向上构成了自景观带至景观元的多等级景观生态分类系统;研究区的景观生态类型可划分为1个景观类(3个景观亚类),8个景观系,13个景观型,且该分类系统属于景观生态分类等级阶梯中的中尺度分类段。
4.从植物群落层次和土壤层次系统分析了研究区及各类景观的生态属性,得出如下结论:①植被是景观生态系统重要组成要素和最显著的特征标志,研究区主要植被类型为荒漠、草原和草甸,共有33个植物群落,其中小蓬荒漠、梭梭荒漠、刚毛柽柳荒漠、白梭梭荒漠等各类荒漠的面积较大,其总面积合计约占研究区总面积的74.10%,芦苇草甸、含胡杨的芦苇草甸、含半灌木的芦苇草甸、矮嵩草草甸等面积也较大;②土壤是植物赖以生存的物质基础,也是所有其他景观要素的综合反映,研究区主要土壤类型共有26种,其中以石膏灰棕漠土所占比例最大,占研究区面积的19.03%;棕钙土、荒漠风沙土、草甸盐土、盐化草甸土、栗钙土和灌耕灰漠土的面积也较大。
5.通过分析1990-2005年研究区景观格局和景观变化,包括景观多样性和均匀性、景观斑块形状、景观破碎化程度、景观结构变化和斑块类型的转化等,得出如下结论:1990-2005年间,研究区各景观格局指数在时空上均存在较大差异;各景观类型中以盐碱地、林地、草地和戈壁的转出率较高,而以农田、人居地的转入率较高,景观组分构成没有大的变化,戈壁依然是研究区景观的基质。景观格局变化对区域生态影响主要表现为:农田斑块数量和面积的增加,加大了区域水资源利用压力;林地、草地斑块面积减少,使得平原区绿洲遭受风沙危害的可能性增加;沙地、戈壁和盐碱地斑块面积减少,使绿洲区域的生态环境变化呈现不同特征;湿地斑块面积增加,则对减少艾比湖流域沙尘危害较为有利。
6.通过构建的基于景观尺度的生态安全的评价模型和CA-Markov景观格局预测模型,并采用预案分析的方法对研究区进行景观生态安全的静态评价、动态评价和预测评价,得出如下结论:①研究区景观生态安全状况大致可以分为3个层次,一是以河流、湖泊及沼泽为主的湿地景观所在区域,其生态安全程度相对较高;二是以农田及人居聚落景观为主的人工绿洲区域,其生态安全程度处于相对中等状态;三是人工绿洲外围的各种荒漠景观所在区域,其生态安全程度相对较低。②1990-2005年间,研究区生态安全状况呈现“V”字型变化趋势,其中生态安全评价指数相对较低的区域的面积所占比例呈现先增加后减少、总体上趋于增加的状态;而生态安全指数相对较高的区域的面积所占比例呈现先减少后增加、总体上趋于减少的状态。③对研究区2020年景观格局模拟结果显示,B方案模拟结果的景观生态安全状况要明显好于A方案的模拟结果;与2005年相比,A方案模拟结果的生态安全评价指数较低区域的面积所占的比例变化不大,而评价指数较高的区域的面积所占比例却有所减少,研究区生态安全程度总体有所降低;B方案模拟结果的生态安全评价指数较低区域的面积所占的比例有所减少,而生态安全评价指数较高区域的面积所占的比例相应增加,研究区生态安全程度总体有所提高。
7.结合景观生态学与生态功能区划的原理,利用“3S”技术,将研究区划分为3个景观生态功能区和7个景观生态功能亚区。最后在此基础上,从工程建设和环境管理两个方面提出了跨流域调水、干涸湖底盐漠治理及建立MODLS大系统综合平衡的景观生态保护战略等研究区生态安全的调控措施。
This study concerned the ecological security assessment and prediction in arid inner lake basin. Guiding by the theories of modern geography, ecology, landscape ecology and ecological security, and using "3S" technical, scenarios analysis methods, ecological security assessment/prediction methods, this paper discusses the ecological security in Ebinur lake plain regions in the arid inner lands form landscape scales, and quantitative analysis and predicts the evolution tendency of ecological security and spatial characteristics in research area. The research enriches the study content of landscape ecology and ecological security, and is of important theoretical value and practical significances to guild the ecological construction, ecological environmental protection and restoration on Ebinur lake basin and the similar arid inner lake basins, and to promote the sustainable development of society, economy and ecological environment. The clew of the study is narrated as following.
The first one is introduction. In this paper, we mainly introduce the study gist and significance, and then confirm the study area. Firstly, this paper pointed out that the Ebinur lake basin plain regions provided a significant, typical study object of arid inland lake basin in landscape pattern and ecological environmental changes, ecological security assessment and prediction, and so on. Secondly, this paper reviews the internal and domestic study about the ecological security, and considers that the current study on ecological security is generally at the primary stage, and the ecological security assessment is the foundation and the core of ecological security research fields. Based on the review, this paper put forward the study targets, main study contents, technical course and the academic measure of the research work.
The second one is about the characteristics of landscape and wetlands in arid land, and the survey analysis of the research area. Firstly, this paper elaborates the concepts of landscape and wetland, and has analyzed the characteristics of arid land landscape and arid land wetland, and points out that the modern meaning of the landscape refers to a complicated system which has mosaic spatial heterogeneity structure. Arid land lake wetland is the one of the unique and very important landscape ecology types. Together with mountainous-oasis-desert systems(MODS) in arid land lake basin, the arid land lake wetland and the above three large scale systems constitute a coupling ecosystem: mountainous-oasis-desert-lake wetland(MODLS). This paper also proposed the landscape pattern evolvement disciplines of the arid land inner lake basin. Secondly, this paper has extensively analysis characteristics of the natural environment and social-economy of the research area and its main ecological environmental problems.
The third one is to study the landscape ecological classification and the landscape ecological attributes, which is one of emphasis of this paper. First of all, this paper discuss the landscape ecological classification principles and methods based on remote sensing imaging features and "3S" technologies, and construct the landscape ecological classification system and has carried on the system to the research area. We consider that landscape classification is based on the scales. Near the global scales, the classification unit is the landscape zone, which is the most senior classification unit in the classification hierarchical systems. Landscape unit is the basic classification unit of the classification hierarchical systems. On the different classification scales, the different landscape units form landscape belt to landscape unit constitute a muti-hierarchical classification hierarchical systems. The landscape in the research area has been divided into 1 landscape categories, 3 landscape subcategories, 8 landscape classes and 13 landscape types. This classification system is regarded as the middle scale classification segments of landscape hierarchical classification system. Secondly, this paper analyze the each landscape's attributes form plant communities and soil types, so as to identify origins and properties of each landscape types, which laid the foundation for the paper's following study.
The forth one is to analysis the landscape patterns and the indexes changes in research area, and the influence of these changes to ecological environment form the three different time interval. The results show that the landscape diversity and evenness indices, the patch shape indexes and the fragmentation indexes are not only have difference in the different regions, but also have difference in different times. Next, this paper analyses the change characteristics of the landscape pattern and the results show that, during 1990a to 2005a, the higher transfer-out rate of the various kinds of landscape types are the saline and alkaline land, the forest land, the lawn land and the Gobi desert land, and the higher transfer-in rate landscape types are the farmland, habitat land. But the results also show that the structure of landscape components does not have big change, and the Gobi desert land is still the landscape matrix of research area. At last, this paper analyzes the influences of these landscape pattern changes to ecological environment.
The fifth one is to assessment and prediction of landscape ecological security in research area, which is the kernel part of this study. Firstly, this paper put forward indexes and formulas to measure the landscape ecological security degrees and analyze the landscape ecological security status of research area by static assessment and dynamic assessment. The results show that the conditions of ecological security can be divided into three layers. From 1990 to 2005 years, the proportions of regions with relatively lower indices is increased at first, then decreased, and present an increased trends overall. While, the proportions of regions with relatively high indices is decreased at first, then increased, and present a decreased trends overall. On the whole, the changes of ecological security conditions show a "V"-shaped trend. Secondly, combined with CA-Markov models and "3S"techinicals, this paper succeed simulated the landscape pattern of Ebinur lake basin plain areas in 2020a based on two different scenarios. Thirdly, we have analyzed the predicted results of landscape ecological security degree. It shows that in the A scenarios, the conditions of ecological security will be deteriorated in 2020a, the proposition of regions with high indices previously will be decreased, and which will be seriously constrained the development of society and economy. In the B scenarios, the proposition of regions with high indices previously will be increased, while the proposition of regions with lower indices previously will be decreased, and the ecological security conditions of research area will be improved.
In the last, according to the analysis of static assessment, dynamic assessment and model forecast assessment of landscape ecological security situation of research area, and combine with the theories of landscape ecological function regionalization, the research area are been divided into three landscape ecological functional regions and seven sub-regions. From the project and management aspects, this paper put forward some measures, such as inter basin water transfer project, treatment project of salt desert in dry lake bottom and forming an integrated balanced landscape ecological protection strategy of MODLS ecological system, so as to make the regional economy and ecological environment sustainable development.
引文
[1]白跃华,魏绍成.草地资源评价方法与综合评价程序.中国草地,2001,23(3):12-16.
[2]毕小丽,洪伟.生态环境综合评价方法的研究进展.农业系统科学与综合研究,2001,17(2):122-126.
[3]曹洪法,沈英娃.生态风险评价研究概述.环境化学,1991,10(3):26-30.
[4]常学礼,邬建国.科尔沁沙地景观格局特征分析.生态学报,1998,18(3):225-232.
[5]陈昌笃.论地生态学.生态学报,1986,6(4):289-294.
[6]陈东景,徐中民.西北内陆河流域生态安全评价研究.干旱区地理,2002,25(3):219-224.
[7]陈国阶,何锦峰.生态环境预警的理论和方法探讨.重庆环境科学.1999,21(4):8-11.
[8]陈国阶.论生态安全.重庆环境科学.2002,24(3):1-4.
[9]陈国先,徐邓耀,李明东.土地资源承载力的概念与计算.四川师范学院学报(自然科学版),1996,17(2):66-70.
[10]陈浩,周金星,陆中臣等.荒漠化地区生态安全评价.水土保持学报,2003,17(1):58-62.
[11]陈利顶,傅伯杰.黄河三角洲地区人类活动对景观结构的影响分析.生态学报,1996,16(4):337-344.
[12]陈利顶,郭书海,姜昌亮.西气东输工程沿线地区生态系统评价与生态安全.北京:科学出版社,2006.
[13]陈鹏,潘晓玲.干旱区内陆流域区域景观生态风险分析.生态学杂志,2003,22(4):116-120.
[14]陈亚宁,李卫红,李向军等.新亚欧大陆桥新疆段风沙流活动特性及停积规律.自然灾害学报,2001,10(4):42-45.
[15]陈宜瑜.中国湿地研究.长春:吉林科学技术出版社.1995.
[16]陈仲新,谢海生.毛乌素沙地景观生态类型与灌丛生物多样性初步研究.生态学报,1994,14(4):345-353.
[17]陈仲新,张新时.毛乌素沙化草地景观生态分类与排序的研究.植物生态学报,1996,20(5):423-437.
[18]程国栋,肖笃宁,王根绪.论干旱区景观生态特征与景观生态建设.地球科学进展,1999,14(1):11-15.
[19]崔保山,刘兴土.湿地恢复研究综述.地球科学进展,1999,14(4):358-364.
[20]崔凤军,刘家明.旅游环境承载力理论及其实践意义.地理科学进展.1998,17(1):86-91.
[21]代全厚,刘明义.黑牛河流域土地资源承载力初探.水土保持科技情报.2000,(3):10-13.
[22]戴科伟.江苏盐城湿地珍禽国家级自然保护区生态安全研究.南京.南京师范大学,2007.
[23]邓文胜,王昌佐.将CA模型嵌入GIS中用于景观生态变化的研究.江汉大学学报.2004,32(1):88-91.
[24]丁丽霞,王人潮,周斌.基于遥感影像光谱特征的景观分区研究.科技通报,2005,21(3):266-271.
[25]董贵华,刘惠清.基于遥感和GIS的景观分类研究.以安徽省为例.长春师范学院学报.2003,22(1):63-66.
[26]柏春广,穆桂金.艾比湖的湖岸地貌及其反映的湖面变化.干旱地地理,1999,22(1):34-40.
[27]方创琳,鲍超,张传国.干旱地区生态-生产-生活承载力变化情势与演变情景分析.生态学报,2003,23(9):1915-1923.
[28]方创琳.西北干旱区生态安全系统结构与功能的监控思路初论.中国沙漠.2000,20(3):326-328.
[29]付在毅,许学工区域生态风险评价.地球科学进展.2001,16(2):267-271.
[30]傅伯杰,陈利顶,马克明等.景观生态学原理及应用.北京:科学出版社,2004,2-4.
[31]傅伯杰.渭北高原农业生态区划及农业生产合理结构的初步研究.生态学报,1985,5(3):194-199.
[32]高吉喜.可持续发展理论探索-生态系统理论、方法和应用.北京:中国环境科学出版社,2001.
[33]高兴.生态安全问题研究.边疆经济与文化.2004(8):17-18.
[34]郭中伟.建设国家生态安全预警系统与维护体系-面对严重的生态危机的对策.科技导报,2001,1:54-56.
[35]韩俊丽,段文阁.城市水资源承载力基本理论研究.中国水利.2004(7):12-14.
[36]韩玲玲,何政伟,唐菊兴等.基于CA的城市增长与土地增值动态模拟方法探讨.地理与地理信息科学,2003,19(2):32-35.
[37]何池全,赵魁义,余国营等.湿地生态过程研究进展.地球科学进展.2000,15(2):165-171.
[38]候西勇,常斌,于信芳.基于CA-Markov的河西走廊土地利用变化研究.农业工程学报.2004,20(5):286-291.
[39]胡汝骥,姜逢清,王亚俊等.论中国干旱区湖泊研究的重要意义.干旱区研究,2007,24(2):137-140.
[40]黄青,任志远.论生态承载力与生态安全.干旱区资源与环境,2004,18(2):11-17.
[41]黄青.基于生态足迹的区域生态安全动态变化研究.陕西师范大学,2004.
[42]季中淳.中国历史时期干旱区湿地及其人-地系统动力学的初步研究.干旱区地理,1999,19(4):1-9.
[43]贾宝全,慈龙骏,任一萍.绿洲景观动态变化分析.生态学报,2001,20(1):1947-1951.
[44]贾宝全,慈龙骏.绿洲景观生态研究.北京:科学出版社,2003.
[45]贾宝全.干旱区生态学研究中的若干问题的思考.干旱区地理.2007,30(1):1-6.
[46]贾宝全,慈龙骏,杨晓晖等.人工绿洲潜在格局及其与现实格局的潜在分析.应用生态学报,2000,11(6):912-916.
[47]贾良清,欧阳志云,赵同谦.城市生态安全评价研究.生态环境,2004,13(4):592-596.
[48]贾士荣.转基因作物的安全性争论及其对策.生物技术通报,1999,15(6):1-7.
[49]贾忠华,罗纨,王文焰等.对湿地定义和湿地水文特征的探讨.水土保持学报,2001,15(6):117-120.
[50]蒋信福.我国生态安全如何应对入世的挑战.探索.2000,5:67-69.
[51]角媛梅,肖笃宁.绿洲景观空间邻接特征生态安全分析.应用生态学报,2004,15(1):31-35.
[52]金相灿等.中国湖泊环境(第二册).北京:海洋出版社,1995.
[53]金小刚.基于Matlab的元胞自动机的仿真设计.计算机仿真,2002,19(4):27-30.
[54]黎夏,叶嘉安,刘小平.地理模拟系统:元胞自动机与多智能体.北京:科学出版社,2006.
[55]黎夏,叶嘉安.利用遥感监测和分析珠江三角洲的城市扩张过程-以东莞市为例.地理研究,1997,16(4):56-62.
[56]李德成,徐彬彬,石晓日.利用马氏过程模拟和预测土壤侵蚀的动态演变-以安徽省岳西县为例.遥感学报,1995,10(2):89-96.
[57]李国旗,安树青,陈兴龙.生态风险研究述评.生态学杂志.1999,18(4):57-64.
[58]李金海.区域生态承载力与可持续发展.中国人口·资源与环境,2001,11(3):76-78.
[59]李静,孙虎,刑东兴.西北干旱半干旱区湿地特征与保护.中国沙漠,2003,23(6):670-674.
[60]李康.西部大开发中的生态安全问题.环境科学研究,2001,14(1):1-8.
[61]李书娟,曾辉,夏洁等.景观空间动态模型研究现状和应重点解决的问题.应用生态学报,2004,15(4):701-706.
[62]李书娟,曾辉.遥感技术在景观生态学研究中的应用.遥感学报,2002,6(3):233-240.
[63]李薇.基于生态足迹判定的武汉科技新城景观生态安全格局分析.华中农业大学,2006.
[64]李遐龄.艾比湖生态环境综合治理和经济可持续发展的研究.干旱区资源与环境.1997,11(2):28-36.
[65]李遐龄.艾比湖生态演变趋势和综合治理的对策.边疆经济与文化,2004,(1):4-10.
[66]李晓燕.基于景观结构的吉林西部生态安全动态分析.干旱区研究,2005,22(1):57-62.
[67]李新琪,金海龙.基于CBERS-2遥感数据的艾比湖流域景观生态分类系统研究.干旱区地理,2007,30(5):736-74.
[68]李新琪,朱海涌,钟嘉亮.艾比湖流域核心区景观生态功能区划及生态调控措施研究.干旱环境监测,2008,22(1):16-21.
[69]李振鹏,刘黎明,张虹波等.景观生态分类的研究现状及其发展趋势.生态学杂志,2004,23(4):150-156.
[70]李正国,王仰麟,张小飞.景观生态区划的理论研究.地理科学进展,2006,25(5):10-20.
[71]刘红,王慧,张兴卫.生态安全评价研究综述.生态学杂志,2006,25(1):74-78.
[72]刘鸿雁.生态风险评估.科技日报.1995,1月27日,第七版.
[73]刘茂松,张明娟.景观生态学-原理与方法.北京:化学工业出版社,2004.
[74]刘彦随,查勇.陕北沙地景观生态类型与土地优化配置.干旱区资源与环境,1997,11(4):85-90.
[75]刘耀林,刘艳芳,张玉梅.基于灰色-马尔柯夫链预测模型的耕地需求量预测研究.武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2004,29(7):575-596.
[76]刘勇,刘友兆,徐萍.区域土地资源生态安全评价-以浙江嘉庆市为例.资源科学,2004,26(3):69-75.
[77]刘兆德,虞孝感.长江流域相对资源承载力与可持续发展研究.长江流域资源与环境,2002,11(1):10-15.
[78]卢昌义,叶勇.湿地生态与工程.福建:厦门大学出版社,2006.
[79]卢玲,李新,程国栋等.黑河流域景观结构分析.生态学报,2001,20(8):1217-1224.
[80]陆健健.中国湿地.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1990.
[81]吕光辉.中国西部干旱区生态安全评价、预警与调控研究-以新疆地区为例.新疆大学,2005.
[82]马克明,傅伯杰,黎晓亚等.区域生态安全格局:概念与理论基础.生态学报,2004,24(4):761-768.
[83]马柱国,符淙斌.1951～2004年中国北方干旱化的基本事实.科学通报,2001,51(20):2429-2439.
[84]买买提·阿不都拉.新疆湿地状况与保护.湿地通讯,2001,4(7):30-32.
[85]倪晋仁,殷康前,赵智杰.湿地综合分类研究:Ⅰ.分类.自然资源学报.1998,13(3):214-221.
[86]欧阳志云,王如松,赵景柱.生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价.应用生态学报,1999,10(5):635-640.
[87]潘晓玲,王学才,雷加强.关于中国西部干旱区生态环境演变与调控研究的思考.地球科学进展,2001.16(1):24-27.
[88]彭少麟,郝艳茹,陆宏芳等.生态安全的涵义与尺度.中山大学学报(自然科学版),2004,43(6):27-31.
[89]彭昱,文传浩.脆弱农业区域生态安全预警指标体系研究-以珠江上游流域为例.贵州财经学院学报,2004,(6):6-9.
[90]彭月,魏虹,朱韦.基于马尔科夫模型的土地景观动态模拟预测研究-以重庆永川市为例.安徽农业科学,2006,34(23):6172-6173.
[91]钱正英.西北地区水资源配置-生态环境建设和可持续发展战略研究.中国水利,2003,5:17-25.
[92]钱亦兵,吴兆宁,张立运等.新疆艾比湖地区沙尘天气的地表条件及土壤保持.资源科学.2006,28(5):185-189.
[93]曲格平.关注生态安全之一:生态环境问题已经成为国家安全的热门话题.环境保护,2002(5):3-5.
[94]曲格平.关注生态安全之二:影响中国生态安全的若干问题.环境保护,2002(7):3-6.
[95]曲格平.关注生态安全之三:中国生态安全的战略重点和措施.环境保护,2002(8):3-5.
[96]热·阿迪拉.巴音布鲁克高寒草地生态系统的结构和生产力的特点.新疆植物学研究文集.北京:科学出版社,1991.
[97]任志远,黄青,李晶.陕西省生态安全及空间差异分析.地理学报,2005,60(4):597-606.
[98]任志远,张艳芳.土地利用变化与生态安全评价.北京:科学出版社,2003,12-15.
[99]施雅风等.中国西北气候由暖干向暖湿转型问题评估.北京:气象出版社,2003.
[100]宋冬梅.石羊河下游民勤绿洲景观变化与生态安全研究.沈阳:中科院沈阳应用生态研究所,2003.
[101]宋冬梅,肖笃宁,张志城等.石羊河下游民勤绿洲生态安全时空变化分析.中国沙漠,2004,24(3):335-342.
[102]苏维词,李久林.乌江流域生态环境预警评价初探.贵州科学.1997,15(3):207-214.
[103]苏颖君,张振海,包安明.艾比湖生态环境恶化及防治对策.干旱区地理,2002,25(2):143-148.
[104]苏志勇,徐中民,张志强.黑河流域水资源承载力的生态经济研究.冰川冻土.2002,24(4):400-406.
[105]孙志高,刘景双,李彬.中国湿地资源的现状、问题与可持续对策.干旱区资源与环境,2006,20(2):83-88.
[106]王朝科.建立生态安全评价指标体系的几个理论问题.统计研究.2003,(9):17-20.
[107]王根绪,陈国栋,钱鞠.生态安全评价研究中的若干问题.应用生态学报,2003,14(9):1551-1556.
[108]王根绪,陈国栋.荒漠绿洲生态系统的景观格局分析.干旱区研究,1999,16(3):6-11.
[109]王韩民.生态安全系统评价与预警研究.环境保护,2003,(11):30-34.
[110]王家骥,姚小红,李京荣等.黑河流域生态承载力估测.环境科学研究,2000,13(2):44-48.
[111]王丽霞,任志远.黄土高原边缘地区生态安全评价与分析-以山西省大同市为例.干旱区研究,2005,22(2):251-255.
[112]王强,杨京平.我国草地退化及其生态安全评价指标体系的探索.水土保持学报,2003,17(6):27-31.
[113]王让会,于谦龙,李凤英等.干旱区景观生态研究的方法与案例分析.干旱区资源与环境,2006,20(3):16-20.
[114]王让会,张慧芝,游先祥等.塔里木河流域生态景观格局的遥感信息提取与分析.北京林业大学学报,2003,25(2):43-47.
[115]王如松.西部开发应取生态安全第一.2000.中国环境报,2000.10-20.
[116]王瑞山,王毅勇,杨青等.我国湿地资源现状、问题及对策.资源科学,2000,22(1):9-13.
[117]王兮之,王刚.SPOT4遥感数据在荒漠.绿洲景观分类研究中的初步应用.应用生态学报,2002,13(9):1113-1116.
[118]王宪礼等.辽河三角洲湿地的景观变化分析.地理科学,1996,16(3):260-265.
[119]王宪礼,肖笃宁,布仁仓等.辽河三角洲湿地的景观格局分析.见:景观生态学研究进展,肖笃宁主编,长沙:湖南科学技术出版社,1999:238-244.
[120]王小丹,钟祥浩.生态环境脆弱性概念的若干问题探讨.山地学报,2003,21(增刊):21-25.
[121]王效科,欧阳志云,苗鸿.中国西北干旱地区湿地生态系统的形成、演变和保护对策.国土与自然资源研究,2003,(4):52-54.
[122]王学雷,吴宜进.马尔柯夫模型在四湖地区湿地景观变化研究中的应用.华中农业大学学报,2002,21(3):288-291.
[123]王岩松,沈波.松辽流域景观分类研究.水土保持科技情报,2001,(6):36-38.
[124]闻大中.农业景观生态刍议.肖笃宁.景观生态学-理论、方法及应用.北京:中国林业出版社,1991,43-46.
[125]邬建国.景观生态学-格局、过程、尺度与等级.北京:高等教育出版社,2000.
[126]吴国庆.区域农业可持续发展的生态安全及其评价探析.生态经济,2001,16(3):227-233.
[127]吴豪,许刚,虞孝感.关于建立长江流域生态安全体系的初步探讨.地域研究与开发,2001,20(2):34-37.
[128]吴敬禄,林琳.新疆艾比湖湖面波动特征及其原因.海洋地质与第四纪地质,2004,24(1):57-60.
[129]吴敬禄.新疆艾比湖全新世沉积特征及古环境演化.地理科学,1995,15(1):39-44.
[130]吴静和.浙江省森林资源的承载能力.浙江林学院学报,1990,7(3):195-202.
[131]吴开亚,何琼,孙世群.区域生态安全的主成分投影评价模型及应用.中国管理科学,2004,12(1):106-109.
[132]伍业刚,李哈滨.景观生态学的理论发展.见:刘建国.当代生态学博论.北京:中国科学技术出版社,1992.
[133]解修平,周杰.土地利用变化预测研究.干旱区研究,2008,25(1):125-130.
[134]肖笃宁,布仁仓,李秀珍.生态空间理论与景观异质性.1997,17(5):453-461.
[135]肖笃宁,陈文波,郭福良.论生态安全的基本概念和研究内容.应用生态学报,2002,13(3):354-358.
[136]肖笃宁,陈文波,郭福良.论生态安全的基本概念和研究内容.应用生态学报.2002,13(3):354-358.
[137]肖笃宁,胡远满,李秀珍.环渤海三角洲湿地的景观生态学研究.北京:科学出版社,2001.
[138]肖笃宁,李秀珍.当代景观生态学的进展及展望.1997,17(4):356-364.
[139]肖笃宁.干旱区生态安全研究的意义与方法.李文华,王如松.生态安全与生态建设.北京:气象出版社.2002:23-27.
[140]肖笃宁.景观生态学-理论、方法及应用.北京:中国林业出版社,1991.
[141]肖洪波,欧阳志云,韩艺师等.海南岛生态安全评价.自然资源学报,2004,19(6):769-775.
[142]谢花林,张新时.城市生态安全水平的物元评判模型研究.地理与地理信息科学,2004,20(2):87-90.
[143]谢季坚.模糊数学方法及其应用.武汉:华中理工人学出版社,2000.
[144]徐德成.森林资源环境人口承载能力初探.林业经济,1993,(4):21-35.
[145]徐海根,包浩生.自然保护区生态安全设计的方法研究.应用生态学报,2004,15(7):1266-1270.
[146]徐建华.现代地理学中的数学方法(第二版).北京:高等教育出版社,2002.
[147]徐岚,赵羿.利用马尔柯夫过程预测东陵区土地利用格局的变化应用生态学报,1993,4(3):272-277.
[148]徐中民,陈国栋,张志强.生态足迹方法:可持续性定量研究的新方法-以张掖地区1995年的生态足迹计算为例.生态学报,2001,21(9):1484-1493.
[149]许学工,林辉平,付在毅等.黄河三角洲湿地区域生态风险评价.北京大学学报(自然科学版),2001,37(1):111-120.
[150]许英勤,徐曼.塔里木河下游垦区绿洲景观格局变化分析.干旱区地理,2004,27(2):193-198.
[151]阎顺,穆桂金,远腾邦彦等.2500年来艾比湖的环境演变信息.干旱区地理,2003,26(3):227-232.
[152]阎顺.艾比湖及周边地区环境演变与对策.干旱区资源与环境,1996,10(1):30-37.
[153]阎伍玖.区域农业生态环境质量综合评价方法及模型研究.环境科学研究,1999,12(3):49-52.
[154]燕乃玲,虞孝感.我国生态功能区划的目标、原则与体系.长江流域资源与环境,2003,12(6):579-585.
[155]杨川德.艾比湖流域水资源利用的环境效益.干旱区地理,1990,13(4):45-50.
[156]杨帆.景观的概念与效应.中南林业调查规划,2000,19(2):40-43.
[157]杨国清,刘耀林,吴志峰.基于CA-Markov模型的土地利用格局变化研究.武汉大学学报,2007,32(5):414-418.
[158]杨京平,卢剑波.生态安全的系统分析.北京:化学工业出版社,2002.
[159]杨利普等.新疆艾比湖流域水资源利用与艾比湖演变.干旱区地理,1990,13(4):1-14.
[160]杨平.长岭县生态足迹分析与生态安全初步研究.吉林大学,2005.
[161]杨永兴.国际湿地科学研究主要特点、进展与展望.地理科学进展,2002,21(2):111-120.
[162]杨云良,阎顺,贾宝全.艾比湖流域生态环境演变与人类活动关系初探.生态学杂志,1996,15(6):43-49.
[163]殷康前,倪晋仁.湿地研究综述.生态学报,1998,18(5):539-546.
[164]殷康前,倪晋仁.湿地综合分类研究:Ⅱ.模型.自然资源学报,1998,13(4):312-319.
[165]余谋昌.论生态安全的概念及其主要特点.清华大学学报,2004,19(2):29-35.
[166]俞孔坚,李迪华,段铁武.敏感地段的景观安全格局设计及地理信息系统应用-以北京香山滑雪场为例.中国园林,2001,1:11-16.
[167]俞孔坚.生物保护的景观生态安全格局.生态学报,1999,19(1):8-15.
[168]俞穆清,田卫等.湿地资源开发环境影响评价探析.东北师大学报,2000,32(1):84-89.
[169]袁国映,张莉.拟建呼斯台西里水库工程对巴音布鲁克天鹅保护区生态环境影响探讨.环境科学,1991,12(2):92-93.
[170]袁国映.艾比湖退缩及其对环境的影响.干旱区地理,1990,13(4):62-67.
[171]曾辉,刘国军.基于景观结构的区域生态风险分析.中国环境科学,1999,19(5):454-457.
[172]张金屯,丘扬,郑凤英.景观格局的数量研究方法.山地学报,2000,18(4):346-352.
[173]张明详,严承高.中国湿地效益研究.林业资源管理,1999,3:43-47.
[174]张显峰,崔伟宏.集成GIS和元胞自动机模型进行地理时空过程模拟与预测的新方法.测绘学报,2001,30(2):148-155.
[175]张小飞等.景观功能网络的等级与结构探讨.地理科学进展,2005,25(1):10-20.
[176]张艳芳.景观尺度上的生态安全研究.西安:陕西师范大学,2005.
[177]张诤,张建文,李寅年等.湿地生态评价指标体系.农业环境保护,1999,18(6):283-285.
[178]中国科学院长春地理研究所.中国沼泽研究.北京:科学出版社,1988.
[179]钟政林.环境风险评价研究进展.环境科学进展,1996,4(6):17-21.
[180]周长海,雷加强.艾比湖地区风沙危害趋势及对欧亚大陆桥的影响.干旱区地理,2005,28(1):98-102.
[181]周成虎,孙战利,谢一春.地理元胞自动机研究.北京:科学出版社,2001.
[182]周国富.生态安全与生态安全研究.贵州师范大学学报,2003,21(3):105-108.
[183]周华荣,肖笃宁.塔里木河中下游河流廊道景观生态功能分区研究.干旱区研究,2006,23(1):16-20.
[184]周华荣.干旱区河流廊道景观生态学研究.北京:科学出版社,2007.
[185]周华荣.干旱区湿地多功能景观研究的意义与前景分析.干旱区地理,2005,22(1):16-20.
[186]周华荣.新疆北疆地区景观生态类型分类初探.生态学杂志,1999,18(4):69-72.
[187]周可法,吴世新,李静.新疆湿地资源时空变异研究.干旱区地理,2004,27(3):405-408.
[188]周旭.我国生态安全评价研究综述.西华师范大学学报,2007,28(3):200-206.
[189]周亚萍,安树青.生态质量与生态系统服务功能.生态科学,2001,20(1-2):85-90.
[190]邹长新,沈渭寿.生态安全研究进展.农村生态环境,2003,19(1):56-59.
[191]左伟,王桥,王文杰等.区域生态安全综合评价模型分析.地理科学,2005,25(2):209-214.
[192]左伟.基于RS、GIS的区域生态安全综合评价研究.北京:测绘出版社,2004.
[193]A.l.伊萨钦科.景观调查与景观图的编制.长春:吉林科学技术出版社,1987.
[194]I.S.宗纳维尔.地生态学.北京:科学出版社,2003,29-45.
[195]Allen EB,et al.Restoration ecology:limits and possibilities in arid and semi-arid land,INT-GTR-315,1995:7-15.
[196]Antrop M.Changing patterns in the urbanized countryside of Western Europe.Landscape Ecology,2000,15:257-270.
[197]Balzter H,Braun PW,Koehler W.Cellular automata models for vegetation dynamics.Ecological Modelling,1998,107:113-125.
[198]Barnthouse LW.The role of models in ecological risk assessment.Environ.Toxicol.Chem.,1992,11:1751-1760.
[199]Batty M,Xie Yichun,Sun Zhanli.Modeling urban dynamics through GIS-based cellular automata.Computers,Environment and Urban Systems,1999,23(3):205-233.
[200]Boothby J.Landscape Research.Farming a strategy for pond landscape conservation:Aims,objectives and issues.1992,24(1):67-83.
[201]Briggs MK.Riparian ecosystem recovery in arid lands:Strategies and references.Tucson,University of Arizona Press,1996.
[202]Cairns J.Protecting the delivery of ecosystem services.EcosysHealth,1997,3(3):185-194.
[203]Campbell KR,Bartell SM.Ecological models and ecological risk assessment.In:Newman MC and Strojan CL,eds.Risk Assessment:Logic and Measurement.Michigan:Ann Arbor Press.1998.
[204]Cannas SA et al.Modeling plant spread in forest ecology using cellular automata.Computer Physics Communications,1999,121-122.
[205]Clark CW.Dynamic models of behavior:An extension of life history theory.Trends Ecol.Evol.2001,8:205-209.
[206]Costanza R et al.The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature.1997,387:253-260.
[207]Costanza R.Toward an operational definition of health.In:Costanza R,Norton B,Haskell B(eds)Ecosystem Health:New Goals for Environmental management,IslandPress.Washington,DC,1992:239-256.
[208]Cynil O.Environmental conflict and national security in Nigeria:ramifications of the ecology-security nexus for sub-regional peace.ACDIS Occasional Paper,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
[209]Forman R,Godron M.Landscape ecology.New York,John Wiley & Sons,1996.
[210]G Wilkinson,I Shephed.Testing the Water:monitoring and modeling wetland using integrated GIS and RS techniques,GIS Europe,1995,4(7):38-40.
[211]Gerald B et al.Saving failed states,foreign policy No.89 Winter,1992.
[212] Godron M. Some aspects of heterogeneity in grasslands of Cantal. Statistical Ecology. 1972, (3):397-415.
[213] Gomezsal A et al. Patterns of change in the landscape in an area of the Cantabrian Mountains (Spain)-Assessment by Transition Probabilities. IN landscape Ecology and agro-ecisystems. Edited by GH Bunce et al. Lewis Publishers, 1993.
[214] Hammer DA. Designing constructed wetlands systems to treat agricultural nonpoint source pollution, Ecological Engineering, 1992.1(1-2):49-87.
[215] Hanratty MP, Stay FS. Field evaluation of the littoral ecosystem risk assessment model's predictions of the effects of chlorpyrifos. J . Ecol. 1994,31 :439-453.
[216] Haworth L et al. A dual-perspective model of agro ecosystem health: system functions and system goals.Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 1997,10(2):127-152.
[217] Itami. Simulating spatial dynamics: cellar automate theory. Landscape Urban Planing, 1994,30:27-47.
[218] Johnson LB, Gage SH. Landscape approaches to the analysis of aquatic ecosystems, Freshwater Biology, 1997,37(1 ):113-132.
[219] Karafyllidis I, Theanailakis A. A model for predicting forest fire spreading using cellular automata, Ecological Modeling, 1997, 99(1):87-97.
[220] Karr JR et al. Assessing biological integrity in running waters: a method and its rational. Champaign: Illinois Natural History Survey. Illinois: Special Publication, 1986.
[221] Lewis HG et al. Incorporating Uncertainty in land cover classification from remote sensing minagery. Adv.Space Res.,2000,26(7): 1123-1126.
[222] Lioubimtseva E, Defourny P. Gis-based landscape classification and mapping of European Russia. Landscape. Urban plan.1999,44:63-75.
[223] Luijten JC. A systematic method for generating land use patterns using stochastic rules and basic landscape characteristics: results for a Colombian hillside watershed. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2003, 95 :427-441.
[224] Mark H. State of the art review of environment, security and development co-operation Working paper of conducted on behalf of the OECD DAC Working Party on Development and Environment,2000,43.
[225] MOSS MR. Fostering academic and institutional activities in landscape ecology. WIENSJ A, MOSS MR eds. Issues in landscape Ecology. International Association for Landscape Ecology 5~(th) world Congress. Colorado: Snowmass Village.1999,138-144.
[226] Myers N. Ultimate security: the environmental basis of political stability. New York: W. Norton & Co. 1993.
[227] NM Jarman et al. Evaluation of created freshwater wetland in Massachusetts. Restoration & Management Notes. 1991, 9(1):26-29.
[228] Naveh Z, Lieberman AS. Landscape ecology: theory and application.New York: Springer-Verlag. 1984.
[229] O'Neill et al. Indices of landscape pattern, landscape ecology, 1998,1:153-162.
[230] Obeysekera J, Rutchey K. Selection of Everglades landscape models. Landscape Ecology, 1997, 12(1):7-18.
[231] Olaf Bastian. Landscape classification in Saxony ( Germany)- a tool for holistic regional planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2000,50:145-155.
[232] Olsen ER et al. A modified factual dimension as a measure of landscape diversity. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote sensing,1993,59:1517-1520.
[233] P. Denny. Biodiversity and Wetlands, Wetlands Ecology & Management, 1994, 3(1):55-61.
[234] Pickett TA, Gadansso ML. Landscape ecology: spatial heterogeneity in ecological systems. Science, 1995,35-39.
[235] Riitters KH et al. Assessing habitat suitability at multiple scales: a landscape-level approach. Biological Conservation.1996,81(1-2):191-202.
[236] Rogers KS. Ecological security and multinational corporations. In: Environmental change and security project report. Issue,1997, 3: 29-36.
[237] Rogers KS. Ecological security and multinational corporation, http://www.ecsp.si.edu/ ecsplib.nsf, 1999,11-13.
[238] Roy Haines-Young and Mark Chopping. Quantifying landscape structure: A review of landscape indices and their application to forested landscape. Progress in phusical Geography, 1996,20(4):418-445.
[239] Samersov V, Trepashko L. Power consumption of systems of Plant Protection as criterion of their ecological safety. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 1998, 31: 4, 335-340.
[240] Schaeffer DJ et al. Establishing ecosystem threshold criteria.Ecosystem Health —New Goods for Environmental Management.Washington DC:Island Press, 1992.
[241] Shrestha DP, Zinck A. Land use of image knowledge classification in mountainous areas: integration processing, digital elevation data and field(application to Nepal).Int.J.Appl. Earth Obser. Geoinfor.2001,3(1):78-85.
[242] Sprott JC, Bolliger J, David JM. Self-organized criticality in forest-landscape evolution. Physics Letters A,2002,297:267-271.
[243] Sui DZ. Zeng H. Modeling the dynamics landscape structure in Asia's emerging desakota regions: a case study in Shenzhen. Landscape and Urban Planing,2001,53:37-52.
[244] Sutter GW. Ecological risk assessment. Michigan: Lewis Publisher, 1993.
[245] Tobias P, Fernando J. Effects of land-use and landscape structure on holm oak recruitment and regeneration at farm level in quercus ilex L. dehesas. Journal of Arid Environments,2004,57(3):345-364.
[246] Toner M, Keddy P. River hydrology and riparian wetlands: a predictive model for ecological assembly, Ecological Applications, 1997, 7(1):236-246.
[247] Tran LT et al. Fuzzy decision analysis for integrated environmental vulnerability assessment of the Mid-Atlantic region. Environ Manage, 2002,29:845-859.
[248] Travis C et al. Interspecific scaling of toxicity data. Risk Anal. 1988, 8(3): 119 - 125.
[249] Travis C et al. The emergence of ecological risks assessment. Risk Anal, 1992. 12(2): 167-168.
[250] Turner MG, Arthaud GJ, Engstrom RT, et al. Usefulness of spatially explicit population models in land management. Ecol. Appl. 1995,5:12-16.
[251] Turner MG, Gardner RH. Quantitative methods in landscape ecology: The analysis and interpretation of landscape heterogeneity. New York: Springer-Verlag,1990.
[252] Victor Wagner. Analysis of a Russian landscape map and landscape classification for use in computer-aided forestry research. IR-97-54, International institute for Applied Systems Analysis. Laxenburg, Austria, 1997.
[253] WJ Mitsch. Combining ecosystem and landscape approaches to Great Lakes wetlands. Journal of Great Lakes Research. 1992, 18(4):552-570.
[254] Waekernagel M, Rees WE. Our Eologieal Footprint: Redueing Hurnan Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island: New Soeiety Publishers, 1996.
[255] Ward DP, Murray AT, Phinn SR. A stochastically constrained cellular model of urban growth. Computer, Environment and Urban System, 2000:24:539-558.
[256] WCED. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.
[257] Whisment SG et al. Landscape dynamics and arid land restoration, INT-GTR-315, 1995: 26-34.
[258] Wiens JA, Milne BT. Scaling of landscape"in landscape ecology, or, landscape ecology from a beetlep's perspective. L andscap ecology, 1989, 3: 87-96.
[259] Wiens JA. The science and practice of landscape ecology. Pages 371-383 in Kiopateck JM and Gardner RH (eds.) Landscape Ecological Analyses: Issues and Applications in Landscape Ecology. Springer, New York, 1999.
[260] William H et al. Agrochemical use on banana plantations in Latin American perspective on ecological risk. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 1997,16(1):91- 99.
[261] Wu JG, Levin SA. A spatial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in an annual grassland. Ecological Monographs, 1994.64:447-464.
[2]毕小丽,洪伟.生态环境综合评价方法的研究进展.农业系统科学与综合研究,2001,17(2):122-126.
[3]曹洪法,沈英娃.生态风险评价研究概述.环境化学,1991,10(3):26-30.
[4]常学礼,邬建国.科尔沁沙地景观格局特征分析.生态学报,1998,18(3):225-232.
[5]陈昌笃.论地生态学.生态学报,1986,6(4):289-294.
[6]陈东景,徐中民.西北内陆河流域生态安全评价研究.干旱区地理,2002,25(3):219-224.
[7]陈国阶,何锦峰.生态环境预警的理论和方法探讨.重庆环境科学.1999,21(4):8-11.
[8]陈国阶.论生态安全.重庆环境科学.2002,24(3):1-4.
[9]陈国先,徐邓耀,李明东.土地资源承载力的概念与计算.四川师范学院学报(自然科学版),1996,17(2):66-70.
[10]陈浩,周金星,陆中臣等.荒漠化地区生态安全评价.水土保持学报,2003,17(1):58-62.
[11]陈利顶,傅伯杰.黄河三角洲地区人类活动对景观结构的影响分析.生态学报,1996,16(4):337-344.
[12]陈利顶,郭书海,姜昌亮.西气东输工程沿线地区生态系统评价与生态安全.北京:科学出版社,2006.
[13]陈鹏,潘晓玲.干旱区内陆流域区域景观生态风险分析.生态学杂志,2003,22(4):116-120.
[14]陈亚宁,李卫红,李向军等.新亚欧大陆桥新疆段风沙流活动特性及停积规律.自然灾害学报,2001,10(4):42-45.
[15]陈宜瑜.中国湿地研究.长春:吉林科学技术出版社.1995.
[16]陈仲新,谢海生.毛乌素沙地景观生态类型与灌丛生物多样性初步研究.生态学报,1994,14(4):345-353.
[17]陈仲新,张新时.毛乌素沙化草地景观生态分类与排序的研究.植物生态学报,1996,20(5):423-437.
[18]程国栋,肖笃宁,王根绪.论干旱区景观生态特征与景观生态建设.地球科学进展,1999,14(1):11-15.
[19]崔保山,刘兴土.湿地恢复研究综述.地球科学进展,1999,14(4):358-364.
[20]崔凤军,刘家明.旅游环境承载力理论及其实践意义.地理科学进展.1998,17(1):86-91.
[21]代全厚,刘明义.黑牛河流域土地资源承载力初探.水土保持科技情报.2000,(3):10-13.
[22]戴科伟.江苏盐城湿地珍禽国家级自然保护区生态安全研究.南京.南京师范大学,2007.
[23]邓文胜,王昌佐.将CA模型嵌入GIS中用于景观生态变化的研究.江汉大学学报.2004,32(1):88-91.
[24]丁丽霞,王人潮,周斌.基于遥感影像光谱特征的景观分区研究.科技通报,2005,21(3):266-271.
[25]董贵华,刘惠清.基于遥感和GIS的景观分类研究.以安徽省为例.长春师范学院学报.2003,22(1):63-66.
[26]柏春广,穆桂金.艾比湖的湖岸地貌及其反映的湖面变化.干旱地地理,1999,22(1):34-40.
[27]方创琳,鲍超,张传国.干旱地区生态-生产-生活承载力变化情势与演变情景分析.生态学报,2003,23(9):1915-1923.
[28]方创琳.西北干旱区生态安全系统结构与功能的监控思路初论.中国沙漠.2000,20(3):326-328.
[29]付在毅,许学工区域生态风险评价.地球科学进展.2001,16(2):267-271.
[30]傅伯杰,陈利顶,马克明等.景观生态学原理及应用.北京:科学出版社,2004,2-4.
[31]傅伯杰.渭北高原农业生态区划及农业生产合理结构的初步研究.生态学报,1985,5(3):194-199.
[32]高吉喜.可持续发展理论探索-生态系统理论、方法和应用.北京:中国环境科学出版社,2001.
[33]高兴.生态安全问题研究.边疆经济与文化.2004(8):17-18.
[34]郭中伟.建设国家生态安全预警系统与维护体系-面对严重的生态危机的对策.科技导报,2001,1:54-56.
[35]韩俊丽,段文阁.城市水资源承载力基本理论研究.中国水利.2004(7):12-14.
[36]韩玲玲,何政伟,唐菊兴等.基于CA的城市增长与土地增值动态模拟方法探讨.地理与地理信息科学,2003,19(2):32-35.
[37]何池全,赵魁义,余国营等.湿地生态过程研究进展.地球科学进展.2000,15(2):165-171.
[38]候西勇,常斌,于信芳.基于CA-Markov的河西走廊土地利用变化研究.农业工程学报.2004,20(5):286-291.
[39]胡汝骥,姜逢清,王亚俊等.论中国干旱区湖泊研究的重要意义.干旱区研究,2007,24(2):137-140.
[40]黄青,任志远.论生态承载力与生态安全.干旱区资源与环境,2004,18(2):11-17.
[41]黄青.基于生态足迹的区域生态安全动态变化研究.陕西师范大学,2004.
[42]季中淳.中国历史时期干旱区湿地及其人-地系统动力学的初步研究.干旱区地理,1999,19(4):1-9.
[43]贾宝全,慈龙骏,任一萍.绿洲景观动态变化分析.生态学报,2001,20(1):1947-1951.
[44]贾宝全,慈龙骏.绿洲景观生态研究.北京:科学出版社,2003.
[45]贾宝全.干旱区生态学研究中的若干问题的思考.干旱区地理.2007,30(1):1-6.
[46]贾宝全,慈龙骏,杨晓晖等.人工绿洲潜在格局及其与现实格局的潜在分析.应用生态学报,2000,11(6):912-916.
[47]贾良清,欧阳志云,赵同谦.城市生态安全评价研究.生态环境,2004,13(4):592-596.
[48]贾士荣.转基因作物的安全性争论及其对策.生物技术通报,1999,15(6):1-7.
[49]贾忠华,罗纨,王文焰等.对湿地定义和湿地水文特征的探讨.水土保持学报,2001,15(6):117-120.
[50]蒋信福.我国生态安全如何应对入世的挑战.探索.2000,5:67-69.
[51]角媛梅,肖笃宁.绿洲景观空间邻接特征生态安全分析.应用生态学报,2004,15(1):31-35.
[52]金相灿等.中国湖泊环境(第二册).北京:海洋出版社,1995.
[53]金小刚.基于Matlab的元胞自动机的仿真设计.计算机仿真,2002,19(4):27-30.
[54]黎夏,叶嘉安,刘小平.地理模拟系统:元胞自动机与多智能体.北京:科学出版社,2006.
[55]黎夏,叶嘉安.利用遥感监测和分析珠江三角洲的城市扩张过程-以东莞市为例.地理研究,1997,16(4):56-62.
[56]李德成,徐彬彬,石晓日.利用马氏过程模拟和预测土壤侵蚀的动态演变-以安徽省岳西县为例.遥感学报,1995,10(2):89-96.
[57]李国旗,安树青,陈兴龙.生态风险研究述评.生态学杂志.1999,18(4):57-64.
[58]李金海.区域生态承载力与可持续发展.中国人口·资源与环境,2001,11(3):76-78.
[59]李静,孙虎,刑东兴.西北干旱半干旱区湿地特征与保护.中国沙漠,2003,23(6):670-674.
[60]李康.西部大开发中的生态安全问题.环境科学研究,2001,14(1):1-8.
[61]李书娟,曾辉,夏洁等.景观空间动态模型研究现状和应重点解决的问题.应用生态学报,2004,15(4):701-706.
[62]李书娟,曾辉.遥感技术在景观生态学研究中的应用.遥感学报,2002,6(3):233-240.
[63]李薇.基于生态足迹判定的武汉科技新城景观生态安全格局分析.华中农业大学,2006.
[64]李遐龄.艾比湖生态环境综合治理和经济可持续发展的研究.干旱区资源与环境.1997,11(2):28-36.
[65]李遐龄.艾比湖生态演变趋势和综合治理的对策.边疆经济与文化,2004,(1):4-10.
[66]李晓燕.基于景观结构的吉林西部生态安全动态分析.干旱区研究,2005,22(1):57-62.
[67]李新琪,金海龙.基于CBERS-2遥感数据的艾比湖流域景观生态分类系统研究.干旱区地理,2007,30(5):736-74.
[68]李新琪,朱海涌,钟嘉亮.艾比湖流域核心区景观生态功能区划及生态调控措施研究.干旱环境监测,2008,22(1):16-21.
[69]李振鹏,刘黎明,张虹波等.景观生态分类的研究现状及其发展趋势.生态学杂志,2004,23(4):150-156.
[70]李正国,王仰麟,张小飞.景观生态区划的理论研究.地理科学进展,2006,25(5):10-20.
[71]刘红,王慧,张兴卫.生态安全评价研究综述.生态学杂志,2006,25(1):74-78.
[72]刘鸿雁.生态风险评估.科技日报.1995,1月27日,第七版.
[73]刘茂松,张明娟.景观生态学-原理与方法.北京:化学工业出版社,2004.
[74]刘彦随,查勇.陕北沙地景观生态类型与土地优化配置.干旱区资源与环境,1997,11(4):85-90.
[75]刘耀林,刘艳芳,张玉梅.基于灰色-马尔柯夫链预测模型的耕地需求量预测研究.武汉大学学报(信息科学版),2004,29(7):575-596.
[76]刘勇,刘友兆,徐萍.区域土地资源生态安全评价-以浙江嘉庆市为例.资源科学,2004,26(3):69-75.
[77]刘兆德,虞孝感.长江流域相对资源承载力与可持续发展研究.长江流域资源与环境,2002,11(1):10-15.
[78]卢昌义,叶勇.湿地生态与工程.福建:厦门大学出版社,2006.
[79]卢玲,李新,程国栋等.黑河流域景观结构分析.生态学报,2001,20(8):1217-1224.
[80]陆健健.中国湿地.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1990.
[81]吕光辉.中国西部干旱区生态安全评价、预警与调控研究-以新疆地区为例.新疆大学,2005.
[82]马克明,傅伯杰,黎晓亚等.区域生态安全格局:概念与理论基础.生态学报,2004,24(4):761-768.
[83]马柱国,符淙斌.1951～2004年中国北方干旱化的基本事实.科学通报,2001,51(20):2429-2439.
[84]买买提·阿不都拉.新疆湿地状况与保护.湿地通讯,2001,4(7):30-32.
[85]倪晋仁,殷康前,赵智杰.湿地综合分类研究:Ⅰ.分类.自然资源学报.1998,13(3):214-221.
[86]欧阳志云,王如松,赵景柱.生态系统服务功能及其生态经济价值评价.应用生态学报,1999,10(5):635-640.
[87]潘晓玲,王学才,雷加强.关于中国西部干旱区生态环境演变与调控研究的思考.地球科学进展,2001.16(1):24-27.
[88]彭少麟,郝艳茹,陆宏芳等.生态安全的涵义与尺度.中山大学学报(自然科学版),2004,43(6):27-31.
[89]彭昱,文传浩.脆弱农业区域生态安全预警指标体系研究-以珠江上游流域为例.贵州财经学院学报,2004,(6):6-9.
[90]彭月,魏虹,朱韦.基于马尔科夫模型的土地景观动态模拟预测研究-以重庆永川市为例.安徽农业科学,2006,34(23):6172-6173.
[91]钱正英.西北地区水资源配置-生态环境建设和可持续发展战略研究.中国水利,2003,5:17-25.
[92]钱亦兵,吴兆宁,张立运等.新疆艾比湖地区沙尘天气的地表条件及土壤保持.资源科学.2006,28(5):185-189.
[93]曲格平.关注生态安全之一:生态环境问题已经成为国家安全的热门话题.环境保护,2002(5):3-5.
[94]曲格平.关注生态安全之二:影响中国生态安全的若干问题.环境保护,2002(7):3-6.
[95]曲格平.关注生态安全之三:中国生态安全的战略重点和措施.环境保护,2002(8):3-5.
[96]热·阿迪拉.巴音布鲁克高寒草地生态系统的结构和生产力的特点.新疆植物学研究文集.北京:科学出版社,1991.
[97]任志远,黄青,李晶.陕西省生态安全及空间差异分析.地理学报,2005,60(4):597-606.
[98]任志远,张艳芳.土地利用变化与生态安全评价.北京:科学出版社,2003,12-15.
[99]施雅风等.中国西北气候由暖干向暖湿转型问题评估.北京:气象出版社,2003.
[100]宋冬梅.石羊河下游民勤绿洲景观变化与生态安全研究.沈阳:中科院沈阳应用生态研究所,2003.
[101]宋冬梅,肖笃宁,张志城等.石羊河下游民勤绿洲生态安全时空变化分析.中国沙漠,2004,24(3):335-342.
[102]苏维词,李久林.乌江流域生态环境预警评价初探.贵州科学.1997,15(3):207-214.
[103]苏颖君,张振海,包安明.艾比湖生态环境恶化及防治对策.干旱区地理,2002,25(2):143-148.
[104]苏志勇,徐中民,张志强.黑河流域水资源承载力的生态经济研究.冰川冻土.2002,24(4):400-406.
[105]孙志高,刘景双,李彬.中国湿地资源的现状、问题与可持续对策.干旱区资源与环境,2006,20(2):83-88.
[106]王朝科.建立生态安全评价指标体系的几个理论问题.统计研究.2003,(9):17-20.
[107]王根绪,陈国栋,钱鞠.生态安全评价研究中的若干问题.应用生态学报,2003,14(9):1551-1556.
[108]王根绪,陈国栋.荒漠绿洲生态系统的景观格局分析.干旱区研究,1999,16(3):6-11.
[109]王韩民.生态安全系统评价与预警研究.环境保护,2003,(11):30-34.
[110]王家骥,姚小红,李京荣等.黑河流域生态承载力估测.环境科学研究,2000,13(2):44-48.
[111]王丽霞,任志远.黄土高原边缘地区生态安全评价与分析-以山西省大同市为例.干旱区研究,2005,22(2):251-255.
[112]王强,杨京平.我国草地退化及其生态安全评价指标体系的探索.水土保持学报,2003,17(6):27-31.
[113]王让会,于谦龙,李凤英等.干旱区景观生态研究的方法与案例分析.干旱区资源与环境,2006,20(3):16-20.
[114]王让会,张慧芝,游先祥等.塔里木河流域生态景观格局的遥感信息提取与分析.北京林业大学学报,2003,25(2):43-47.
[115]王如松.西部开发应取生态安全第一.2000.中国环境报,2000.10-20.
[116]王瑞山,王毅勇,杨青等.我国湿地资源现状、问题及对策.资源科学,2000,22(1):9-13.
[117]王兮之,王刚.SPOT4遥感数据在荒漠.绿洲景观分类研究中的初步应用.应用生态学报,2002,13(9):1113-1116.
[118]王宪礼等.辽河三角洲湿地的景观变化分析.地理科学,1996,16(3):260-265.
[119]王宪礼,肖笃宁,布仁仓等.辽河三角洲湿地的景观格局分析.见:景观生态学研究进展,肖笃宁主编,长沙:湖南科学技术出版社,1999:238-244.
[120]王小丹,钟祥浩.生态环境脆弱性概念的若干问题探讨.山地学报,2003,21(增刊):21-25.
[121]王效科,欧阳志云,苗鸿.中国西北干旱地区湿地生态系统的形成、演变和保护对策.国土与自然资源研究,2003,(4):52-54.
[122]王学雷,吴宜进.马尔柯夫模型在四湖地区湿地景观变化研究中的应用.华中农业大学学报,2002,21(3):288-291.
[123]王岩松,沈波.松辽流域景观分类研究.水土保持科技情报,2001,(6):36-38.
[124]闻大中.农业景观生态刍议.肖笃宁.景观生态学-理论、方法及应用.北京:中国林业出版社,1991,43-46.
[125]邬建国.景观生态学-格局、过程、尺度与等级.北京:高等教育出版社,2000.
[126]吴国庆.区域农业可持续发展的生态安全及其评价探析.生态经济,2001,16(3):227-233.
[127]吴豪,许刚,虞孝感.关于建立长江流域生态安全体系的初步探讨.地域研究与开发,2001,20(2):34-37.
[128]吴敬禄,林琳.新疆艾比湖湖面波动特征及其原因.海洋地质与第四纪地质,2004,24(1):57-60.
[129]吴敬禄.新疆艾比湖全新世沉积特征及古环境演化.地理科学,1995,15(1):39-44.
[130]吴静和.浙江省森林资源的承载能力.浙江林学院学报,1990,7(3):195-202.
[131]吴开亚,何琼,孙世群.区域生态安全的主成分投影评价模型及应用.中国管理科学,2004,12(1):106-109.
[132]伍业刚,李哈滨.景观生态学的理论发展.见:刘建国.当代生态学博论.北京:中国科学技术出版社,1992.
[133]解修平,周杰.土地利用变化预测研究.干旱区研究,2008,25(1):125-130.
[134]肖笃宁,布仁仓,李秀珍.生态空间理论与景观异质性.1997,17(5):453-461.
[135]肖笃宁,陈文波,郭福良.论生态安全的基本概念和研究内容.应用生态学报,2002,13(3):354-358.
[136]肖笃宁,陈文波,郭福良.论生态安全的基本概念和研究内容.应用生态学报.2002,13(3):354-358.
[137]肖笃宁,胡远满,李秀珍.环渤海三角洲湿地的景观生态学研究.北京:科学出版社,2001.
[138]肖笃宁,李秀珍.当代景观生态学的进展及展望.1997,17(4):356-364.
[139]肖笃宁.干旱区生态安全研究的意义与方法.李文华,王如松.生态安全与生态建设.北京:气象出版社.2002:23-27.
[140]肖笃宁.景观生态学-理论、方法及应用.北京:中国林业出版社,1991.
[141]肖洪波,欧阳志云,韩艺师等.海南岛生态安全评价.自然资源学报,2004,19(6):769-775.
[142]谢花林,张新时.城市生态安全水平的物元评判模型研究.地理与地理信息科学,2004,20(2):87-90.
[143]谢季坚.模糊数学方法及其应用.武汉:华中理工人学出版社,2000.
[144]徐德成.森林资源环境人口承载能力初探.林业经济,1993,(4):21-35.
[145]徐海根,包浩生.自然保护区生态安全设计的方法研究.应用生态学报,2004,15(7):1266-1270.
[146]徐建华.现代地理学中的数学方法(第二版).北京:高等教育出版社,2002.
[147]徐岚,赵羿.利用马尔柯夫过程预测东陵区土地利用格局的变化应用生态学报,1993,4(3):272-277.
[148]徐中民,陈国栋,张志强.生态足迹方法:可持续性定量研究的新方法-以张掖地区1995年的生态足迹计算为例.生态学报,2001,21(9):1484-1493.
[149]许学工,林辉平,付在毅等.黄河三角洲湿地区域生态风险评价.北京大学学报(自然科学版),2001,37(1):111-120.
[150]许英勤,徐曼.塔里木河下游垦区绿洲景观格局变化分析.干旱区地理,2004,27(2):193-198.
[151]阎顺,穆桂金,远腾邦彦等.2500年来艾比湖的环境演变信息.干旱区地理,2003,26(3):227-232.
[152]阎顺.艾比湖及周边地区环境演变与对策.干旱区资源与环境,1996,10(1):30-37.
[153]阎伍玖.区域农业生态环境质量综合评价方法及模型研究.环境科学研究,1999,12(3):49-52.
[154]燕乃玲,虞孝感.我国生态功能区划的目标、原则与体系.长江流域资源与环境,2003,12(6):579-585.
[155]杨川德.艾比湖流域水资源利用的环境效益.干旱区地理,1990,13(4):45-50.
[156]杨帆.景观的概念与效应.中南林业调查规划,2000,19(2):40-43.
[157]杨国清,刘耀林,吴志峰.基于CA-Markov模型的土地利用格局变化研究.武汉大学学报,2007,32(5):414-418.
[158]杨京平,卢剑波.生态安全的系统分析.北京:化学工业出版社,2002.
[159]杨利普等.新疆艾比湖流域水资源利用与艾比湖演变.干旱区地理,1990,13(4):1-14.
[160]杨平.长岭县生态足迹分析与生态安全初步研究.吉林大学,2005.
[161]杨永兴.国际湿地科学研究主要特点、进展与展望.地理科学进展,2002,21(2):111-120.
[162]杨云良,阎顺,贾宝全.艾比湖流域生态环境演变与人类活动关系初探.生态学杂志,1996,15(6):43-49.
[163]殷康前,倪晋仁.湿地研究综述.生态学报,1998,18(5):539-546.
[164]殷康前,倪晋仁.湿地综合分类研究:Ⅱ.模型.自然资源学报,1998,13(4):312-319.
[165]余谋昌.论生态安全的概念及其主要特点.清华大学学报,2004,19(2):29-35.
[166]俞孔坚,李迪华,段铁武.敏感地段的景观安全格局设计及地理信息系统应用-以北京香山滑雪场为例.中国园林,2001,1:11-16.
[167]俞孔坚.生物保护的景观生态安全格局.生态学报,1999,19(1):8-15.
[168]俞穆清,田卫等.湿地资源开发环境影响评价探析.东北师大学报,2000,32(1):84-89.
[169]袁国映,张莉.拟建呼斯台西里水库工程对巴音布鲁克天鹅保护区生态环境影响探讨.环境科学,1991,12(2):92-93.
[170]袁国映.艾比湖退缩及其对环境的影响.干旱区地理,1990,13(4):62-67.
[171]曾辉,刘国军.基于景观结构的区域生态风险分析.中国环境科学,1999,19(5):454-457.
[172]张金屯,丘扬,郑凤英.景观格局的数量研究方法.山地学报,2000,18(4):346-352.
[173]张明详,严承高.中国湿地效益研究.林业资源管理,1999,3:43-47.
[174]张显峰,崔伟宏.集成GIS和元胞自动机模型进行地理时空过程模拟与预测的新方法.测绘学报,2001,30(2):148-155.
[175]张小飞等.景观功能网络的等级与结构探讨.地理科学进展,2005,25(1):10-20.
[176]张艳芳.景观尺度上的生态安全研究.西安:陕西师范大学,2005.
[177]张诤,张建文,李寅年等.湿地生态评价指标体系.农业环境保护,1999,18(6):283-285.
[178]中国科学院长春地理研究所.中国沼泽研究.北京:科学出版社,1988.
[179]钟政林.环境风险评价研究进展.环境科学进展,1996,4(6):17-21.
[180]周长海,雷加强.艾比湖地区风沙危害趋势及对欧亚大陆桥的影响.干旱区地理,2005,28(1):98-102.
[181]周成虎,孙战利,谢一春.地理元胞自动机研究.北京:科学出版社,2001.
[182]周国富.生态安全与生态安全研究.贵州师范大学学报,2003,21(3):105-108.
[183]周华荣,肖笃宁.塔里木河中下游河流廊道景观生态功能分区研究.干旱区研究,2006,23(1):16-20.
[184]周华荣.干旱区河流廊道景观生态学研究.北京:科学出版社,2007.
[185]周华荣.干旱区湿地多功能景观研究的意义与前景分析.干旱区地理,2005,22(1):16-20.
[186]周华荣.新疆北疆地区景观生态类型分类初探.生态学杂志,1999,18(4):69-72.
[187]周可法,吴世新,李静.新疆湿地资源时空变异研究.干旱区地理,2004,27(3):405-408.
[188]周旭.我国生态安全评价研究综述.西华师范大学学报,2007,28(3):200-206.
[189]周亚萍,安树青.生态质量与生态系统服务功能.生态科学,2001,20(1-2):85-90.
[190]邹长新,沈渭寿.生态安全研究进展.农村生态环境,2003,19(1):56-59.
[191]左伟,王桥,王文杰等.区域生态安全综合评价模型分析.地理科学,2005,25(2):209-214.
[192]左伟.基于RS、GIS的区域生态安全综合评价研究.北京:测绘出版社,2004.
[193]A.l.伊萨钦科.景观调查与景观图的编制.长春:吉林科学技术出版社,1987.
[194]I.S.宗纳维尔.地生态学.北京:科学出版社,2003,29-45.
[195]Allen EB,et al.Restoration ecology:limits and possibilities in arid and semi-arid land,INT-GTR-315,1995:7-15.
[196]Antrop M.Changing patterns in the urbanized countryside of Western Europe.Landscape Ecology,2000,15:257-270.
[197]Balzter H,Braun PW,Koehler W.Cellular automata models for vegetation dynamics.Ecological Modelling,1998,107:113-125.
[198]Barnthouse LW.The role of models in ecological risk assessment.Environ.Toxicol.Chem.,1992,11:1751-1760.
[199]Batty M,Xie Yichun,Sun Zhanli.Modeling urban dynamics through GIS-based cellular automata.Computers,Environment and Urban Systems,1999,23(3):205-233.
[200]Boothby J.Landscape Research.Farming a strategy for pond landscape conservation:Aims,objectives and issues.1992,24(1):67-83.
[201]Briggs MK.Riparian ecosystem recovery in arid lands:Strategies and references.Tucson,University of Arizona Press,1996.
[202]Cairns J.Protecting the delivery of ecosystem services.EcosysHealth,1997,3(3):185-194.
[203]Campbell KR,Bartell SM.Ecological models and ecological risk assessment.In:Newman MC and Strojan CL,eds.Risk Assessment:Logic and Measurement.Michigan:Ann Arbor Press.1998.
[204]Cannas SA et al.Modeling plant spread in forest ecology using cellular automata.Computer Physics Communications,1999,121-122.
[205]Clark CW.Dynamic models of behavior:An extension of life history theory.Trends Ecol.Evol.2001,8:205-209.
[206]Costanza R et al.The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature.1997,387:253-260.
[207]Costanza R.Toward an operational definition of health.In:Costanza R,Norton B,Haskell B(eds)Ecosystem Health:New Goals for Environmental management,IslandPress.Washington,DC,1992:239-256.
[208]Cynil O.Environmental conflict and national security in Nigeria:ramifications of the ecology-security nexus for sub-regional peace.ACDIS Occasional Paper,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
[209]Forman R,Godron M.Landscape ecology.New York,John Wiley & Sons,1996.
[210]G Wilkinson,I Shephed.Testing the Water:monitoring and modeling wetland using integrated GIS and RS techniques,GIS Europe,1995,4(7):38-40.
[211]Gerald B et al.Saving failed states,foreign policy No.89 Winter,1992.
[212] Godron M. Some aspects of heterogeneity in grasslands of Cantal. Statistical Ecology. 1972, (3):397-415.
[213] Gomezsal A et al. Patterns of change in the landscape in an area of the Cantabrian Mountains (Spain)-Assessment by Transition Probabilities. IN landscape Ecology and agro-ecisystems. Edited by GH Bunce et al. Lewis Publishers, 1993.
[214] Hammer DA. Designing constructed wetlands systems to treat agricultural nonpoint source pollution, Ecological Engineering, 1992.1(1-2):49-87.
[215] Hanratty MP, Stay FS. Field evaluation of the littoral ecosystem risk assessment model's predictions of the effects of chlorpyrifos. J . Ecol. 1994,31 :439-453.
[216] Haworth L et al. A dual-perspective model of agro ecosystem health: system functions and system goals.Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 1997,10(2):127-152.
[217] Itami. Simulating spatial dynamics: cellar automate theory. Landscape Urban Planing, 1994,30:27-47.
[218] Johnson LB, Gage SH. Landscape approaches to the analysis of aquatic ecosystems, Freshwater Biology, 1997,37(1 ):113-132.
[219] Karafyllidis I, Theanailakis A. A model for predicting forest fire spreading using cellular automata, Ecological Modeling, 1997, 99(1):87-97.
[220] Karr JR et al. Assessing biological integrity in running waters: a method and its rational. Champaign: Illinois Natural History Survey. Illinois: Special Publication, 1986.
[221] Lewis HG et al. Incorporating Uncertainty in land cover classification from remote sensing minagery. Adv.Space Res.,2000,26(7): 1123-1126.
[222] Lioubimtseva E, Defourny P. Gis-based landscape classification and mapping of European Russia. Landscape. Urban plan.1999,44:63-75.
[223] Luijten JC. A systematic method for generating land use patterns using stochastic rules and basic landscape characteristics: results for a Colombian hillside watershed. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 2003, 95 :427-441.
[224] Mark H. State of the art review of environment, security and development co-operation Working paper of conducted on behalf of the OECD DAC Working Party on Development and Environment,2000,43.
[225] MOSS MR. Fostering academic and institutional activities in landscape ecology. WIENSJ A, MOSS MR eds. Issues in landscape Ecology. International Association for Landscape Ecology 5~(th) world Congress. Colorado: Snowmass Village.1999,138-144.
[226] Myers N. Ultimate security: the environmental basis of political stability. New York: W. Norton & Co. 1993.
[227] NM Jarman et al. Evaluation of created freshwater wetland in Massachusetts. Restoration & Management Notes. 1991, 9(1):26-29.
[228] Naveh Z, Lieberman AS. Landscape ecology: theory and application.New York: Springer-Verlag. 1984.
[229] O'Neill et al. Indices of landscape pattern, landscape ecology, 1998,1:153-162.
[230] Obeysekera J, Rutchey K. Selection of Everglades landscape models. Landscape Ecology, 1997, 12(1):7-18.
[231] Olaf Bastian. Landscape classification in Saxony ( Germany)- a tool for holistic regional planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2000,50:145-155.
[232] Olsen ER et al. A modified factual dimension as a measure of landscape diversity. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote sensing,1993,59:1517-1520.
[233] P. Denny. Biodiversity and Wetlands, Wetlands Ecology & Management, 1994, 3(1):55-61.
[234] Pickett TA, Gadansso ML. Landscape ecology: spatial heterogeneity in ecological systems. Science, 1995,35-39.
[235] Riitters KH et al. Assessing habitat suitability at multiple scales: a landscape-level approach. Biological Conservation.1996,81(1-2):191-202.
[236] Rogers KS. Ecological security and multinational corporations. In: Environmental change and security project report. Issue,1997, 3: 29-36.
[237] Rogers KS. Ecological security and multinational corporation, http://www.ecsp.si.edu/ ecsplib.nsf, 1999,11-13.
[238] Roy Haines-Young and Mark Chopping. Quantifying landscape structure: A review of landscape indices and their application to forested landscape. Progress in phusical Geography, 1996,20(4):418-445.
[239] Samersov V, Trepashko L. Power consumption of systems of Plant Protection as criterion of their ecological safety. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 1998, 31: 4, 335-340.
[240] Schaeffer DJ et al. Establishing ecosystem threshold criteria.Ecosystem Health —New Goods for Environmental Management.Washington DC:Island Press, 1992.
[241] Shrestha DP, Zinck A. Land use of image knowledge classification in mountainous areas: integration processing, digital elevation data and field(application to Nepal).Int.J.Appl. Earth Obser. Geoinfor.2001,3(1):78-85.
[242] Sprott JC, Bolliger J, David JM. Self-organized criticality in forest-landscape evolution. Physics Letters A,2002,297:267-271.
[243] Sui DZ. Zeng H. Modeling the dynamics landscape structure in Asia's emerging desakota regions: a case study in Shenzhen. Landscape and Urban Planing,2001,53:37-52.
[244] Sutter GW. Ecological risk assessment. Michigan: Lewis Publisher, 1993.
[245] Tobias P, Fernando J. Effects of land-use and landscape structure on holm oak recruitment and regeneration at farm level in quercus ilex L. dehesas. Journal of Arid Environments,2004,57(3):345-364.
[246] Toner M, Keddy P. River hydrology and riparian wetlands: a predictive model for ecological assembly, Ecological Applications, 1997, 7(1):236-246.
[247] Tran LT et al. Fuzzy decision analysis for integrated environmental vulnerability assessment of the Mid-Atlantic region. Environ Manage, 2002,29:845-859.
[248] Travis C et al. Interspecific scaling of toxicity data. Risk Anal. 1988, 8(3): 119 - 125.
[249] Travis C et al. The emergence of ecological risks assessment. Risk Anal, 1992. 12(2): 167-168.
[250] Turner MG, Arthaud GJ, Engstrom RT, et al. Usefulness of spatially explicit population models in land management. Ecol. Appl. 1995,5:12-16.
[251] Turner MG, Gardner RH. Quantitative methods in landscape ecology: The analysis and interpretation of landscape heterogeneity. New York: Springer-Verlag,1990.
[252] Victor Wagner. Analysis of a Russian landscape map and landscape classification for use in computer-aided forestry research. IR-97-54, International institute for Applied Systems Analysis. Laxenburg, Austria, 1997.
[253] WJ Mitsch. Combining ecosystem and landscape approaches to Great Lakes wetlands. Journal of Great Lakes Research. 1992, 18(4):552-570.
[254] Waekernagel M, Rees WE. Our Eologieal Footprint: Redueing Hurnan Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island: New Soeiety Publishers, 1996.
[255] Ward DP, Murray AT, Phinn SR. A stochastically constrained cellular model of urban growth. Computer, Environment and Urban System, 2000:24:539-558.
[256] WCED. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.
[257] Whisment SG et al. Landscape dynamics and arid land restoration, INT-GTR-315, 1995: 26-34.
[258] Wiens JA, Milne BT. Scaling of landscape"in landscape ecology, or, landscape ecology from a beetlep's perspective. L andscap ecology, 1989, 3: 87-96.
[259] Wiens JA. The science and practice of landscape ecology. Pages 371-383 in Kiopateck JM and Gardner RH (eds.) Landscape Ecological Analyses: Issues and Applications in Landscape Ecology. Springer, New York, 1999.
[260] William H et al. Agrochemical use on banana plantations in Latin American perspective on ecological risk. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 1997,16(1):91- 99.
[261] Wu JG, Levin SA. A spatial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in an annual grassland. Ecological Monographs, 1994.64:447-464.