The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Urban expansion dynamics and natural habitat loss in China: a multiscale landscape perspective
Abstract
China's extensive urbanization has resulted in a massive loss of natural habitat, which is threatening the nation's biodiversity and socioeconomic sustainability. A timely and accurate understanding of natural habitat loss caused by urban expansion will allow more informed and effective measures to be taken for the conservation of biodiversity. However, the impact of urban expansion on natural habitats is not well‐understood, primarily due to the lack of accurate spatial information regarding urban expansion across China. In this study, we proposed an approach that can be used to accurately summarize the dynamics of urban expansion in China over two recent decades (1992–2012), by integrating data on nighttime light levels, a vegetation index, and land surface temperature. The natural habitat loss during the time period was evaluated at the national, ecoregional, and local scales. The results revealed that China had experienced extremely rapid urban growth from 1992 to 2012 with an average annual growth rate of 8.74%, in contrast with the global average of 3.20%. The massive urban expansion has resulted in significant natural habitat loss in some areas in China. Special attention needs to be paid to the Pearl River Delta, where 25.79% or 1518 km 2 of the natural habitat and 41.99% or 760 km 2 of the local wetlands were lost during 1992–2012. This raises serious concerns about species viability and biodiversity. Effective policies and regulations must be implemented and enforced to sustain regional and national development in the context of rapid urbanization.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on Earth
Olson, D. M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E. D., Burgess, N. D., Powell, G. V. N., Underwood, E. C., D'amico, J. A., Itoua, I., Strand, H. E., Morrison, J. C., et al. (2001) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[0933:teotwa]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 8,488
Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools
Seto, K. C., Güneralp, B., & Hutyra, L. R. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1211658109 · Cited by 5,086
Cited by
Assessing human and environmental pressures of global land-use change 2000–2010
Creutzig, F., Bren d'Amour, C., Weddige, U., Fuss, S., Beringer, T., Gläser, A., Kalkuhl, M., Steckel, J. C., Radebach, A., & Edenhofer, O. (2019) · Global Sustainability · doi:10.1017/sus.2018.15 · Cited by 96
Zhang, Y.-Z., Jiang, Z.-Y., Li, Y.-Y., Yang, Z.-G., Wang, X.-H., & Li, X.-B. (2021) · Forests · doi:10.3390/f12070847 · Cited by 75
Wilk, A. J., Donlon, K. C., & Peterman, W. E. (2020) · Urban Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s11252-020-00958-8 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- He, C., Liu, Z., Tian, J., & Ma, Q.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-04-12
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2886-2902
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2169214517
- Cited by
- 508
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 15.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.