CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 54

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Linking Ecosystem Service and MSPA to Construct Landscape Ecological Network of the Huaiyang Section of the Grand Canal

Tang, Feng, Zhou, Xu, Wang, Li, Zhang, Yangjian, Fu, Meichen, Zhang, Pengtao·2021·Land
DOI 10.3390/land10090919
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Rapid urbanization and drastic land-use change have led to landscape fragmentation and ecological environment deterioration in the regions along the Grand Canal. Building an ecological network is an important means to improve the connectivity of habitat patches and carry out ecological protection and restoration of territorial space, which is of great significance to ensure regional biodiversity and ecological security. In this article, we took the Huaiyang Section of the Grand Canal (Huaiyang Canal) as the study area, used the ecosystem service assessment model, morphological spatial pattern analysis (MSPA), and the landscape connectivity evaluation method to identify ecological sources, then used the minimum cumulative resistance (MCR) model and the gravity model to extract and grade ecological corridors. Based on these, the ecological network was constructed by combining the identification method of ecological nodes and ecological breakpoints. The aim of this was to provide a reference for the ecological space optimization of Huaiyang Canal and even the entire Grand Canal, the formulation of an ecological protection plan, and the implementation of territorial space ecological restoration. The results showed that the spatial distribution of the water conservation service, soil conservation service, carbon sequestration service, and biodiversity conservation service were significantly different, and the level of ecosystem services showed a trend of continuous degradation from 1990 to 2018. There were 12 ecological source patches comprehensively identified by multiple methods, with a total area of 2007.06 km2. In terms of spatial distribution, large ecological source patches were mainly distributed in the central and western areas adjacent to the Grand Canal, while small ecological source patches were scattered in the eastern and southern border regions of the study area. The total length of ecological corridors was 373.84 km, of which the number of the primary ecological corridor, secondary ecological corridor, and tertiary ecological corridor were 9, 7, and 7, respectively, and the suitable width of the ecological corridor was 200–400 m. After optimization, the proposed ecological network was composed of 3 key ecological source patches, 9 important ecological source patches, 23 terrestrial corridors, 10 aquatic corridors, and 18 ecological nodes. Twenty-nine ecological breakpoints were key areas requiring ecological restoration. The overlap rate of the integrated ecosystem service change area and land-use change area was 99%, indicating that land-use change has a significant impact on regional ecosystem services. This study is of great significance for carrying out the ecological protection and restoration of the Huaiyang Canal and adjusting local land-use policies. It also provides a typical case demonstration for identifying an ecological network and formulating ecological restoration planning for other sections of the Grand Canal and cities along the canal.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/land10090919

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Location of the study area.
Figure 1 Location of the study area.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Spatial distribution of land-use types in the Huaiyang Canal.
Figure 2 Spatial distribution of land-use types in the Huaiyang Canal.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 Logical framework and flowchart of this study.
Figure 3 Logical framework and flowchart of this study.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Spatial distribution of each ecosystem service in the Huaiyang Canal from 1990 to 2018 (Note: ( A ) water conservation service; ( B ) soil conservation service; ( C ) carbon sequestration service; ( D ) biodiversity conservation service).
Figure 4 Spatial distribution of each ecosystem service in the Huaiyang Canal from 1990 to 2018 (Note: ( A ) water conservation service; ( B ) soil conservation service; ( C ) carbon sequestration service; ( D ) biodiversity conservation service).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 Spatial distribution of integrated ecosystem service in the Huaiyang Canal from 1990 to 2018.
Figure 5 Spatial distribution of integrated ecosystem service in the Huaiyang Canal from 1990 to 2018.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 Area ratio of each integrated ecosystem service grade from 1990 to 2018.
Figure 6 Area ratio of each integrated ecosystem service grade from 1990 to 2018.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 Landscape pattern based on MSPA ( A ) and spatial distribution of ecological sources ( B ).
Figure 7 Landscape pattern based on MSPA ( A ) and spatial distribution of ecological sources ( B ).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 Ecological resistance surface ( A ) and spatial distribution of ecological corridors ( B ).
Figure 8 Ecological resistance surface ( A ) and spatial distribution of ecological corridors ( B ).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 9 Spatial distribution of the ecological network.
Figure 9 Spatial distribution of the ecological network.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 10 Spatial distribution of the ecological network after optimization.
Figure 10 Spatial distribution of the ecological network after optimization.CC-BY · From the PDF

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 89

  1. Li, 2021, Estimation of remote sensing based ecological index along the Grand Canal based on PCA-AHP-TOPSIS methodology, Ecol. Indic. Toxicol., 122, 107214, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107214 · DOI
  2. Shen, 2020, Pollution level and ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in riverside sediments of the Grand Canal (Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei section), Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 105, 440, 10.1007/s00128-020-02957-z · DOI
  3. Wang, 2010, Spatial and seasonal variations of the contamination within water body of the Grand Canal, China, Environ. Pollut., 158, 1513, 10.1016/j.envpol.2009.12.018 · DOI
  4. Li, 2020, Spatiotemporal variations of land urbanization and socioeconomic benefits in a typical sample zone: A case study of the Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal, Appl. Geogr., 117, 102187, 10.1016/j.apgeog.2020.102187 · DOI
  5. Cai, 2019, Introduction of Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal and analysis of its heritage values, J. Hydro-Environ. Res., 26, 2, 10.1016/j.jher.2018.10.002 · DOI
  6. Zhang, 2020, Mismatched canal conservation and the authorized heritage discourse in urban China: A case of the Hangzhou Section of the Grand Canal, Int. J. Herit. Stud., 26, 105, 10.1080/13527258.2019.1608458 · DOI
  7. Xu, Y., Rollo, J., Jones, D.S., Esteban, Y., Tong, H., and Mu, Q. (2020). Towards Sustainable Heritage Tourism: A Space Syntax-Based Analysis Method to Improve Tourists’ Spatial Cognition in Chinese Historic Districts. Buildings, 10. · DOI
  8. Zhuang, 2016, A new index for assessing heavy metal contamination in sediments of the Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal (Zaozhuang Segment): A case study, Ecol. Indic., 69, 250, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.04.029 · DOI
  9. Piao, 2017, Perfluoroalkyl substances in waters along the Grand Canal, China, Chemosphere, 179, 387, 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.03.133 · DOI
  10. Shi, 2012, An approach to analyzing spatial patterns of protozoan communities for assessing water quality in the Hangzhou section of Jing-Hang Grand Canal in China, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 19, 739, 10.1007/s11356-011-0615-0 · DOI
  11. Liu, 2021, Ecological network analysis and construction: A case study of the urban agglomeration of the Min River Delta, Chin, Resour. Sci., 43, 357
  12. Pili, 2019, Landscape and the city: Agro-forest systems, land fragmentation and the ecological network in Rome, Italy, Urban For. Urban Green, 41, 230, 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.04.016 · DOI
  13. Cunha, 2019, Methodology for mapping the national ecological network to mainland Portugal: A planning tool towards a green infrastructure, Ecol. Indic., 104, 802, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.04.050 · DOI
  14. Edge, 2020, Habitat network topology influences the importance of ecological traps in metapopulations, Ecosphere, 11, e03146, 10.1002/ecs2.3146 · DOI
  15. Zhao, 2019, Landscape pattern analysis and ecological network planning of Tianjin City, Urban For. Urban Green, 46, 126479, 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126479 · DOI
  16. Zhang, 2021, Identification and optimization of ecological network in the plain area of the lower Yangtze River: A case study of Jintan District, Changzhou, Acta Ecol. Sin., 41, 3449
  17. Tang, 2020, Construction of county-level ecological security pattern based on ecological protection red line and network in China, Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng., 36, 263
  18. Liu, 2017, Research progress on landscape ecological networks, Acta Ecol. Sin., 37, 3947
  19. Gurrutxaga, 2010, GIS-based approach for incorporating the connectivity of ecological networks into regional planning, J. Nat. Conserv., 18, 318, 10.1016/j.jnc.2010.01.005 · DOI
  20. Ahern, 1991, Planning for an extensive open space system: Linking landscape structure and function, Landsc. Urban Plan., 6, 131, 10.1016/0169-2046(91)90037-M · DOI
  21. Linehan, 1995, Greenway planning: Developing a landscape ecological network approach, Landsc. Urban Plan., 33, 179, 10.1016/0169-2046(94)02017-A · DOI
  22. 2000, A multi-level ecological network in the Czech Republic: Implementating the territorial system of ecological stability, GeoJournal, 51, 211, 10.1023/A:1017518529210 · DOI
  23. Jongman, 2011, The pan European ecological network: PEEN, Landsc. Ecol., 26, 311, 10.1007/s10980-010-9567-x · DOI
  24. Gobster, 2004, The human dimensions of urban greenways: Planning for recreation and related experiences, Landsc. Urban Plan., 68, 147, 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00162-2 · DOI
  25. Bascompte, 2010, Ecology structure and dynamics of ecological networks, Science, 329, 765, 10.1126/science.1194255 · DOI
  26. Delmas, 2018, Analysing ecological networks of species interactions, Biol. Rev., 94, 1
  27. 2020, The structure of ecological networks across levels of organization, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 51, 433, 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-012220-120819 · DOI
  28. Guo, 2021, Construction of municipal ecological space network based on MCR model, Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach., 52, 275
  29. Jongman, 2004, European ecological networks and greenways, Landsc. Urban Plan., 68, 305, 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00163-4 · DOI
  30. Swiader, 2017, Building ecological networks in Slovakia and Poland, Ekologia, 36, 303
  31. Zhang, 2017, Coupling ecosystem services supply and human ecological demand to identify landscape ecological security pattern: A case study in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China, Urban Ecosyst., 20, 701, 10.1007/s11252-016-0629-y · DOI
  32. Peng, 2018, Linking ecosystem services and circuit theory to identify ecological security patterns, Sci. Total Environ., 644, 781, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.292 · DOI
  33. Dong, 2021, Integrating regional and interregional approaches to identify ecological security patterns, Landsc. Ecol., 36, 2151, 10.1007/s10980-021-01233-7 · DOI
  34. Wang, 2021, Promoting landscape connectivity of highly urbanized area: An ecological network approach, Ecol. Indic., 125, 107487, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107487 · DOI
  35. Song, S., Xu, D.W., Hu, S.S., and Shi, M.X. (2021). Ecological Network Optimization in Urban Central District Based on Complex Network Theory: A Case Study with the Urban Central District of Harbin. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18. · DOI
  36. Orantes, M.J.C., Kim, J., and Kim, J. (2017). Socio-Cultural Asset Integration for a Green Infrastructure Network Plan in Yesan County, Korea. Sustainability, 9. · DOI
  37. Jiang, X., and Zhao, T.Y. (2020). Research on the Spatial Structure of County Greenway Network Based on Gravitation-Resistance Measurement-A Case Study of Ning’an in China. Sustainability, 12. · DOI
  38. Yu, 2018, Optimization of ecological node layout and stability analysis of ecological network in desert oasis: A typical case study of ecological fragile zone located at Deng Kou County (Inner Mongolia), Ecol. Indic., 84, 304, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.09.002 · DOI
  39. Fu, 2020, Identification and optimization strategy of county ecological security pattern: A case study in the Loess Plateau, China, Ecol. Indic., 112, 106030, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.106030 · DOI
  40. Zhou, D., and Song, W. (2021). Identifying ecological corridors and networks in mountainous areas. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18. · DOI
  41. Cong, 2020, Determination of landscape ecological network of wetlands in the Yellow River Delta, Wetlands, 40, 2729, 10.1007/s13157-020-01357-7 · DOI
  42. Kharrazi, 2016, Evaluating the evolution of the Heihe River basin using the ecological network analysis: Efficiency, resilience, and implications for water resource management policy, Sci. Total. Environ., 572, 688, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.210 · DOI
  43. Shi, 2020, Ecological network construction of the heterogeneous agro-pastoral areas in the upper Yellow River basin, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 302, 107069, 10.1016/j.agee.2020.107069 · DOI
  44. Zhou, 2021, Assessing an ecological security network for a rapid urbanization region in Eastern China, Land Degrad. Dev., 21, 2642, 10.1002/ldr.3932 · DOI
  45. Dai, 2021, Integrating the MCR and DOI models to construct an ecological security network for the urban agglomeration around Poyang Lake, China, Sci. Total. Environ., 754, 141868, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141868 · DOI
  46. Xu, 2021, Construction of landscape ecological network based on landscape ecological risk assessment in a large-scale opencast coal mine area, J. Clean. Prod., 286, 125523, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125523 · DOI
  47. Jalkanen, 2020, Identification of ecological networks for land-use planning with spatial conservation prioritization, Landsc. Ecol., 32, 353, 10.1007/s10980-019-00950-4 · DOI
  48. Jakiel, M., and Bernatek, A. (2015). Assessment of an ecological network at local scale in the context of landscape changes: A case study from NE Poland. Landscape Analysis and Planning, Springer Geography, Springer International Publishing. · DOI
  49. Zhang, 2021, An optimized evaluation method of an urban ecological network: The case of the Minhang District of Shanghai, Urban For. Urban Green, 62, 127158, 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127158 · DOI
  50. Shi, 2019, Biodiversity conservation of mountains-rivers-forests-farmlands-lakes-grasslands using an ecological network: A case study on the Zuoyoujiang River basin in Guangxi Province, China, Acta Ecol. Sin., 39, 8930
  51. Jia, 2017, Developing and optimizing ecological networks for the towns along the Three Gorges Reservoir: A case of Kaizhou New Town, Chongqing, Chin. J. Ecol., 36, 779
  52. Jiang, 2021, Linking ecological background and demand to identify ecological security patterns across the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area in China, Landsc. Ecol., 36, 2135, 10.1007/s10980-021-01234-6 · DOI
  53. Shen, 2021, Identifying and setting the natural spaces priority based on the multi-ecosystem services capacity index, Ecol. Indic., 125, 107473, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107473 · DOI
  54. Xiao, 2020, An evaluation framework for designing ecological security patterns and prioritizing ecological corridors: Application in Jiangsu Province, China, Landsc. Ecol., 35, 2517, 10.1007/s10980-020-01113-6 · DOI
  55. Chen, 2020, The optimization of urban ecological network planning based on the minimum cumulative resistance model and granularity reverse method: A case study of Haikou, China, IEEE Access, 8, 43592, 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2976548 · DOI
  56. Tang, 2018, Construction of ecological corridors in Changli County based on ecological sensitivity and ecosystem service values, Chin. J. Appl. Ecol., 29, 2675
  57. Takahashi, 1980, The empirical formula of evaporation estimated by monthly mean temperature and precipitation, Meteorol. Sci. Technol., S4, 48
  58. Elvidge, C.D., Zhizhin, M., Ghosh, T., Hsu, F.C., and Taneja, J. (2021). Annual time series of global VIIRS nighttime lights derived from monthly averages: 2012 to 2019. Remote. Sens., 13. · DOI
  59. Yang, 2021, Spatiotemporal variations and influencing factors of soil conservation service in Ziwuling Area, J. Soil Water Conserv., 35, 188
  60. Liu, 2020, Soil conservation efficiency assessment based on land use scenarios in the Nile River Basin, Ecol. Indic. Toxicol., 119, 106864, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106864 · DOI
  61. Arnoldus, H.M.J. (1980). An Approximation of the Rainfall Factor in the Universal Soil Loss Equation, John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Press.
  62. Williams, 1996, Using soil erosion models for global change studies, J. Soil Water Conserv., 51, 381
  63. Wischmeier, 1976, Use and misuse of universal soil loss equation, J. Soil Water Conserv., 31, 5
  64. Liu, B.Y., Xie, Y., and Zhang, K.L. (2001). Soil Erosion Prediction Model, China Science and Technology Press.
  65. Tang, F. (2019). Research on Ecological Security Pattern in Qinglong County based on Ecological Protection Red Line and Ecological Network. [Master’s Thesis, Hebei Agricultural University].
  66. Zha, 2015, Dynamic changes of soil erosion in the Chaohu Watershed from 1992 to 2013, Acta Geogr. Sin., 70, 1708
  67. Zhu, 2019, Assessment of territorial ecosystem carbon storage based on land use change scenario: A case study in Qihe River Basin, Acta Geogr. Sin., 74, 446
  68. Chen, 2007, Total below ground carbon allocation in China’s forests, Acta Ecol. Sin., 27, 5148
  69. Giardina, 2000, Evidence that decomposition rates of organic carbon in mineral soil do not vary with temperature, Nature, 404, 858, 10.1038/35009076 · DOI
  70. Alam, 2013, Tree biomass and soil organic carbon densities across the Sudanese woodland savannah: A regional carbon sequestration study, J. Arid. Environ., 89, 67, 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2012.10.002 · DOI
  71. Tang, 2020, Land-use change in Changli County, China: Predicting its spatio-temporal evolution in habitat quality, Ecol. Indic., 117, 106719, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106719 · DOI
  72. Tang, F., Fu, M.C., Wang, L., Song, W.J., Yu, J.F., and Wu, Y.B. (2021). Dynamic evolution and scenario simulation of habitat quality under the impact of land-use change in the Huaihe River Economic Belt, China. PLoS ONE, 16. · DOI
  73. Terrado, 2016, Model development for the assessment of terrestrial and aquatic habitat quality in conservation planning, Sci. Total Environ., 540, 63, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.03.064 · DOI
  74. Sun, 2019, Monitoring spatio-temporal dynamics of habitat quality in Nansihu Lake basin, eastern China, from 1980 to 2015, Ecol. Indic., 102, 716, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.03.041 · DOI
  75. Xu, L.T., Chen, S.S., Xu, Y., Li, G.Y., and Su, W.Z. (2019). Impacts of Land-Use Change on Habitat Quality during 1985–2015 in the Taihu Lake Basin. Sustainability, 11. · DOI
  76. Vogt, 2009, Mapping functional connectivity, Ecol. Indic., 9, 64, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.01.011 · DOI
  77. Saura, 2011, Key structural forest connectors can be identified by combining landscape spatial pattern and network analyses, Forest Ecol. Manag., 262, 150, 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.03.017 · DOI
  78. Saura, 2006, Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: Towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation, Landsc. Ecol., 21, 959, 10.1007/s10980-006-0013-z · DOI · Paper page
  79. Gao, 2020, Integrating ecosystem services and rocky desertification into identification of karst ecological security pattern, Landsc. Ecol., 36, 2113, 10.1007/s10980-020-01100-x · DOI
  80. Peng, 2018, Identification and optimization of ecological security pattern in Xiong’an New Area, Acta Geogr. Sin., 73, 701
  81. Knaapen, 1992, Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning, Landsc. Urban Plan., 23, 1, 10.1016/0169-2046(92)90060-D · DOI
  82. Xu, 2018, Ecological corridor construction based on important ecological nodes in Duliujian River Basin, Res. Environ. Sci., 31, 805
  83. Zhu, 2005, The width of ecological corridor in landscape planning, Acta Ecol. Sin., 25, 2406
  84. Dong, 2021, Entwining ecosystem services, Land Use Change and human well-being by nitrogen flows, J. Clean. Prod., 308, 127442, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127442 · DOI
  85. Arunyawat, S., and Shrestha, R.P. (2016). Assessing Land Use Change and Its Impact on Ecosystem Services in Northern Thailand. Sustainability, 8. · DOI
  86. Kim, 2021, Assessing the impacts of urban land use changes on regional ecosystem services according to urban green space policies via the patch-based cellular automata model, Environ. Manag., 61, 192, 10.1007/s00267-020-01394-2 · DOI
  87. Koo, 2019, Impact assessment of land use changes using local knowledge for the provision of ecosystem services in northern Ghana, West Africa, Ecol. Indic., 103, 156, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.04.002 · DOI
  88. Bai, 2019, Impact of land use and climate change on water-related ecosystem services in Kentucky, USA, Ecol. Indic., 102, 51, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.01.079 · DOI
  89. Chen, 2021, Construction of ecological network in Qinling Mountains of Shaanxi, China based on MSPA and MCR model, Chin. J. Appl. Ecol., 32, 1545

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 54

Metadata

Authors
Tang, F., Zhou, X., Wang, L., Zhang, Y., Fu, M., & Zhang, P.
Venue
Land
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-08-31
Volume
10
Issue
9
Pages
919
ISSN
2073-445X
DOI
10.3390/land10090919
Cited by
54
References
1
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
  • the National Key Research and Development Project of China (Grant No. 2016YFC0502501)
  • the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41871347)
  • the Social Science Foundation of Hebei Province (Grant No. HB19YJ020)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Linking Ecosystem Service and MSPA to Construct Landscape Ecological Network of the Huaiyang Section of the Grand Canal. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/land10090919
The paper
Tang, F., Zhou, X., Wang, L., Zhang, Y., Fu, M., & Zhang, P. (2021). Linking Ecosystem Service and MSPA to Construct Landscape Ecological Network of the Huaiyang Section of the Grand Canal. Land. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10090919