文章摘要
刘娟, 王飞, 韩文辉, 赵颖.汾河上中游流域生态系统健康评价Journal of Water Resources and Water Engineering[J].,2018,29(3):91-98
汾河上中游流域生态系统健康评价
The ecosystem health evaluation in the upper and middle reaches of Fen River Basin
  
DOI:10.11705/j.issn.1672-643X.2018.03.16
中文关键词: 综合评价指标体系  河流生态健康  生态系统健康评价  灰色关联度  汾河中上游流域
英文关键词: comprehensive evaluation index system  river ecosystem health  ecosystem health evaluation  grey correlation degree  upper and middle reaches of Fen River basin
基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目 (41401020、41601202); 山西省青年科技研究基金项目 (2015021173); 山西省科技攻关项目 (20150313001-2)
Author NameAffiliation
LIU Juan1, WANG Fei2,3, HAN Wenhui1, ZHAO Ying1 (1.山西省环境科学研究院 山西 太原 030027 2.山西大学 生命科学学院 山西 太原 0300063.山西大学 体育科学研究所 山西 太原 030006) 
Hits: 1517
Download times: 669
中文摘要:
      为综合整治汾河流域生态环境,依据汾河流域2016年水生态监测数据,从涵盖水体物理化学和水生生物特性等方面构建生态系统健康的候选指标体系。采用主成分与相关性分析方法对评价指标进行筛选,得出包含底栖动物多样性指数、鱼类多样性指数、石油类、溶解氧、硝态氮、化学需氧量、五日生化需氧量、总氮、总磷、氟化物、阴离子表面活性剂、锌、铬、铜和镉这15个指标构成的河流健康综合评价指标体系。采用改进的灰色关联方法对河流生态系统健康进行评价,评判综合多指标条件下的河流健康等级情况。结果表明:汾河上中游流域的37个采样点中“健康”等级有12个,“亚健康”等级有1个,共占35%;“一般”等级有7个,占19%;“较差”和“极差”等级采样点为17个,占46%。其中健康与亚健康等级采样点均位于汾河上中游北部地区,较少受人类活动影响,而较差和极差等级主要位于汾河上中游流域南部河段,城市生活及工业畜牧业排污是导致河流健康受影响的主要原因。
英文摘要:
      In order to comprehensively renovate the ecological environment of Fen River basin, according to the water ecological monitoring data of Fen River in 2016, the candidate index system of ecosystem health was constructed from the water physical chemistry and aquatic biological characteristics aspects. The principal component analysis and correlation analysis method were adopted to screen evaluation indicators, and the river health evaluation index system of 15 indexes was obtained, which incorporated the benthic animal diversity index, fish diversity index, petroleum , dissolved oxygen, nitrate nitrogen, COD, BOD, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, fluoride, anionic surfactant, zinc, chromium, copper and cadmium. The improved grey correlation degree method was then used to evaluate the health of river ecosystem and the river health grade under the conditions of multiple indicators. The results showed that in 37 sampling points of the upper and middle reaches of Fen River, the number of the "healthy" level was 12 and the "sub-healthy" level was 1, accounting for 35%. The "ordinary " level was 7, accounting for 19%, and the other 46% was classified as the "sub-sick" and "sick" level. The health and sub-health level sampling points were located in the north of the upper and middle reaches of Fen River, which was less affected by human activities, while the sub-sick and the sick grades were mainly located in the south. The domestic sewage, industry and animal husbandry industry pollution were the main causes of river pollution.
View Full Text   View/Add Comment  Download reader
Close
function PdfOpen(url){ var win="toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status=yes,menubar=yes,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes"; window.open(url,"",win); } function openWin(url,w,h){ var win="toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=no,width=" + w + ",height=" + h; controlWindow=window.open(url,"",win); } &et=BA2B87C6BDDCE84D97FB33AC6F01E7B4EF5FA71FFFB7FB03F3B51E9F603C0DEC8CE9AA9F79CD1FC5FB0022110EC9732E9E2ABA0FF9732810DE3D93B04DBB23995C47EF4500B6847C9659DF3B8A5C6F4C36E3BB43E477A585&pcid=5B3AB970F71A803DEACDC0559115BFCF0A068CD97DD29835&cid=3ECA06F115476E3F&jid=BC473CEDCB8CE70D7B12BDD8EA00FF44&yid=EA357AD73C8E13BC&aid=48B122D52A6E45522DCD4F247CF1FB80&vid=&iid=38B194292C032A66&sid=C753EB8AC8F551B9&eid=10F298ED9F164662&fileno=20180316&flag=1&is_more=0">