机构地区:[1]重庆市农业科学院,重庆401329 [2]逆境农业研究重庆市重点实验室,重庆401329 [3]北京市农林科学院植物营养与资源环境研究所,北京100097 [4]重庆市农业资源与生态保护站,重庆401121
出 处:《西南农业学报》2022年第12期2850-2859,共10页Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences
基 金:重庆市科学技术局技术预见与制度创新项目(cstc2018jsyj-jsyjX0017)。
摘 要:【目的】开展重庆市水田、旱地两类耕地资源动态变化特征研究,探明驱动水田、旱地资源流失的主要因素,分析耕地资源利用的区域差异,为提高耕地资源利用率、加强省域农业资源管理、保障区域粮食安全提供支撑。【方法】基于历史遥感影像数据的解译结果,运用地理重心分析、耕地资源流失率等指标和方法,对重庆地区1980—2000年、2000—2018年两个历史阶段的水田和旱地动态变化特征及空间分异进行定量研究。【结果】重庆市各区县近40年的水田、旱地面积均有所减少,水田流失面积少于旱地,但水田流失率更高。随着时间推移,水田和旱地均呈由缓慢零散占用到快速集聚流失的趋势,二者面积重心逐渐由经济发展速度快、耕地质量较好的渝西低海拔区域向经济增速较慢、耕地质量较差的东北方向丘陵区转移。1980—2000年,水田、旱地面积重心转移距离分别为0.58、0.97 km;2000—2018年的重心转移距离分别为2.14、1.57 km。耕地资源流失率结果表明大部分区县水田和旱地属于缓慢流失类型,2000—2018年流失速度远高于1980—2000年。水田严重流失区主要集中在主城区及近郊区县,快速流失区主要聚集在渝东北地区;旱地严重流失区和快速流失区均集中在主城区,呈缓慢流失的区县离主城区有一定的距离。建设占用和生态占用是旱地流失的两大因素;水田流失以建设占用为主,生态占用为辅。综合考虑区县耕地资源流失率及耕地转出类型,可将各区县水田、旱地的耕地资源动态类型归纳为建设占用主导、生态占用主导、无优势主导类型及内部调整4大类,结合流失速度的严重、快速、缓慢和无流失可细分为10小类。【结论】重庆水田和旱地流失的主要特征及驱动力存在区域差异,应基于区域耕地流失特征加强水田和旱地的分区管理,优化开发区现存耕地的生态功�【Objective】The present paper aimed to carry out research on dynamic change characteristics of paddy field and dry land resources in Chongqing,identify the main factors driving the loss of paddy field and dry land resources,analyze the regional differences in the utilization of cultivated land resources,and provide support for improving the utilization rate of cultivated land resources,strengthening the management of provincial agricultural resources,and ensuring regional food security.【Method】Based on the interpretation results of historical remote sensing image data,the dynamic change characteristics and spatial differentiation of paddy field and dry land in the two historical stages of Chongqing from 1980 to 2000 and from 2000 to 2018 were quantitatively studied by using geographic gravity center analysis,cultivated land loss rate and other indicators and methods.【Result】The study found that areas of paddy field and dry land in each district of Chongqing decreased in the past 40 years.The loss area of paddy field was less than dry land,but the loss rate of paddy field was higher than dry land.The loss of paddy field and dry land both showed a trend from slow scattered occupation to rapid agglomeration occupation over time,and the area gravity center of both cultivated lands had gradually shifted to the northeast,indicating the shift from the western low-altitude area(with high economic growth rate and high-quality cultivated land)to the northeast hilly area(with relatively low economic growth rate and low quality cultivated land).From 1980 to 2000,the area gravity center shift distances of paddy field and dry land were 0.58,0.97 kilometers,respectively,while that distances from 2000 to 2018 were 2.14,1.57 kilormeters.According to the result of cultivated land loss rate index,paddy field and dry land in most districts belonged to the slow loss type,and the losing rate from 2000 to 2018 was much higher than that from 1980 to 2000.Severely loss regions of paddy field were mainly located in the urban ar
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...