数学模型与自然保护科学

日益加剧的人类干扰和景观破碎化已危及全球的生物多样性。自然保护成为人类所面临的最重要也最富有挑战性的任务。指导这一实践的理论和原则极为需要。本文试图综述与自然保护科学有关的几个学科在理论和实际研究(尤其是模型)方面的近期成果以及发展趋势,从而提出自然保护模型的发展方向。文中涉猎基于不同方法论、不同组织水平的模型,并对数学模型在自然保护科学中的作用和实用性加以讨论。     

能让大自然长久为我们服务吗?

人类对自然界的依赖和保护伴随人类的发展持续到今天,然而越来越壮大的人类与自然界的冲突也在快速升级。森林减少的速度让自然保护人士感到窒息。保护的努力越来越多,但成效却远未达到目标。大自然保护协会(TNC)首席科学家皮特·卡瑞瓦将数学家的逻辑带到了关于人与自然问题的辩论中:"世界上已经没有纯粹的自然了,一旦你认识到了这一点,你就会在完全不同的框架内考虑自然保护。"他这样说可不是意味着"放下武器,承认失败"。他强调:"我们的问题是如何在这个前提下服务于自然,并让自然为我们服务。"     

城市野境： 城市区域中野性自然的保护与营造

城市野境是城市内部或周边区域中自然过程占主导的土地,其中人类开发和控制程度相对较低,允许在一定程度上发生自然演替和生态过程,各类野生生物能够与人类繁荣共存。城市野境在重新连接人与自然、促进人类身心健康、保护生物多样性、维持生态系统服务方面具有重要和独特的价值。基于文献综述与案例研究,提出并阐释了保护与营造城市野境的 4 种途径,包括保护、修复、设计与融合,即在城市保护地中保护野性自然、再野化部分城市区域、在城市公园中营造类荒野景观以及在城市空间中系统性融入野性自然。建议在中国城市规划与城市设计中,融入野性自然保护与修复的理念,进一步探索城市野境保护与营造的理论与方法。     

浅析高中生物环境教学的实践思考

生物的环境适应性教学也即环境生物学,它以受人类干扰的生态系统为研究对象,以现场调查、室内实验、生物模拟等技术为研究方法,从生态环境切入,研究自然的保护,以促进人类对自然的合理利用,为保护和改善人类的生存环境提供理论基础,促进人、生物、环境的协调平衡发展。     

自然保护地生物多样性保护研究进展

建立自然保护地是保护生物多样性最为重要的措施之一。总体来看, 自然保护地生物多样性保护研究主要围绕关键生态系统以及珍稀濒危物种等保护对象的状态以及变化两个层面进行, 并重点关注自然保护地数量与面积、保护了多少重要生态系统和物种、能否有效保护生物多样性等一系列科学问题。然而, 在自然保护地生物多样性保护研究方面, 还缺少针对上述研究领域的系统性综述。为此, 本文系统梳理了自然保护地空间布局及其与生物多样性分布的关系、自然保护地生物多样性变化及其保护成效等近20年来相关领域的研究进展。自然保护地的空间布局以及与生物多样性分布的关系主要围绕自然保护地与生物多样性在某一阶段的状态开展研究, 致力于探究自然保护地“保护多少” “代表性如何” “在哪儿保护”等一系列关键科学问题。同时, 自然保护地内的生物多样性会随着气候变化、人类活动以及自身演替等发生时空动态变化, 基于自然保护地生物多样性变化分析, 各国学者在全球尺度、国家尺度和单个自然保护地进行了大量的保护成效评估研究, 并逐渐发展出了自然保护地内外配对分析方法以提升保护成效评估的精度, 进而识别出不同自然保护地的主要影响因素。在此基础上, 本文进一步对自然保护地生物多样性保护研究提出了展望, 主要包括: (1)综合考虑自然保护地生物多样性状态和变化; (2)开展多目标协同的自然保护地空间优化布局; (3)强化自然保护地主要保护对象的识别、调查与监测; (4)提升自然保护地的质量和连通性; (5)探究自然保护地管理措施与保护成效的关联机制。本文可为“2020年后全球生物多样性框架”的制定与实施特别是在自然保护地体系建设与优化方面提供参考与借鉴。     

高强度开发地区鸟类自然保护地保护空缺识别——以天津市为例

高强度开发地区因长期受到人类活动干扰,自然生境退化严重,生物多样性受到严重威胁,区域内自然保护地保护效率亟待提升。科学评价高强度开发地区自然保护地保护效率、识别生物多样性保护热点与空缺地区,对城镇化建设可持续发展具有重要意义。本研究以鸟类作为生物多样性指示物种,运用MaxEnt与InVEST模型分别计算天津市鸟类多样性及生境质量热点地区,并与现有自然保护地边界进行比较,精确识别保护空缺区域。结果表明：参与本研究MaxEnt模型建模的鸟类共19目54科228种;滨海地区各类自然与人工湿地为天津市鸟类最适宜生境,占天津市鸟类多样性热点地区的66.8%,且水库、鱼塘等人工湿地因食物来源充足,鸟类生境适宜度较高,表明适度的人工建设有利于提升鸟类多样性;天津市自然保护地对鸟类多样性热点地区覆盖率仅为37.7%,存在较为严重的保护空缺,空缺区域主要包括大神堂及临港地区湿地、河流交汇处及入海口湿地,是未来需进行重点保护的关键区域。采用两种模型协同分析的方法,能提高保护空缺区域识别精度,对高强度开发地区提高生物多样性保护效率具有一定普适性。     

“自然对人类的贡献”的实现、发展趋势和启示

生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学政策平台(IPBES)的目标是加强科学政策对生物多样性和生态系统服务的影响。为了更好地理解和展示IPBES目标的基本要素及其相互关系, 在千年生态系统评估(MA)的基础上, IPBES融合多种知识体系, 不断完善、创新, 逐步形成了以“自然对人类的贡献” (NCP)为核心的概念框架。本文首先梳理了NCP的发展历程, 论述了NCP与生态系统服务的关系, 指出两者均关注人类福祉, 但与生态系统服务不同的是, NCP涵盖了自然对人类生活的消极影响, 强调社会文化因素、传统知识和土著居民的地位以及人与自然共同作用的重要性。其次, 本文阐述了人与自然共同实现NCP进而影响人类良好生活质量的机制, 并分析了NCP大幅下降的全球趋势, 提出世界各国应不断推动生物多样性保护主流化, 增加国际交流与合作, 致力实现“人与自然和谐共生”的2050年愿景。最后, 本文讨论了NCP在IPBES评估和《生物多样性公约》磋商谈判中的应用前景, 为今后NCP理论研究和实践提供科学支持。     

景观保护与受胁景观红皮书

地球上大多数景观是自然过程与人类文化过程交互作用的产物,是长期适应和演化形成的稳定类型。它们可以作为协调人类与环境相互关系的模型,具有十分重要的科学、文化和示范价值。但近几十年来,随着人口的快速增长,新技术的采用,世界各地的景观正受到严重威胁,使它们面临退化,有些走向消失。保护和抢救一部分有价值的景观已成为当前的紧迫任务。 国际上于1991年在 IUCN 的 CESP 内成立了“景观保护工作组”,制定了“景观保护计划”,接着在意大利和英国分别举行了两次景观保护专题讨论会,并在希腊克里特岛开展了事例研究。现正着手编制事例研究地点的《受胁景观红皮书》和世界范围的《濒危景观红色名录》。     

城市可持续发展新型定量研究方法进展

城市体现了集约化的发展方式,以仅占陆地3%的面积承载了世界一多半的人口,因此城市是人类社会可持续发展的主阵地,城市可持续发展是区域可持续发展的重要实践。研究试图从可持续发展的基本内涵着手,聚焦于城市尺度的研究,梳理了相关理论和概念演变历程,着重对新型定量方法——评价指标体系法、复杂系统建模、资源环境可持续性探索等进行综述。研究发现指标体系法常用于传统的城市可持续发展评估,大多是针对表象的分析,隔离了系统内部的组织关联,对系统机理探索不够。资源环境对人类社会的发展起到基础支撑作用,从资源环境可持续性出发研究可持续发展诞生了一些较为创新的方法,但研究集中在描述人类对自然的压力和影响,而对于自然对人类的反馈以及人对自然的积极改造探索不足,也很难直接表达系统整体的可持续性。弹性思维和复杂系统科学近年来被多次用于解释城市运行的灰箱模型,但研究稍浅。研究提出可将弹性思维和复杂系统科学结合起来,借助数据科学和计算科学的新兴方法,分析城市的可持续发展,深入探索可持续性的科学表达和深层机理,为解决复杂的城市问题提供科学指导,为城市可持续发展提供理论依据。     

自然保护区学说与麦克阿瑟-威尔逊理论

全球正两临着一场物种灭绝的大危机,自然保护己成为人类面临的重大课题,自然保护区的建立是减缓物种灭绝速率、保护生物多样性的重要途径。岛屿生物地理学为自然保护区理论的产生起了重要的作用。然而,许多研究表明,该学科尚未成熟,尤其在自然保护区方面的应用颇为有限,无疑,现代自然保护区理论应是多学科研究的综合产物。本文概述了岛屿生物地理学的基本内容及其在自然保护方面的影响,并对种群脆性分析和景观生态学途径在自然保护区理论中的作用进行讨论。     

Complementarity as a biodiversity indicator strategy

Richness, rarity, endemism and complementarity of indicator taxon species are often used to select conservation areas, which are then assumed to represent most regional biodiversity. Assessments of the degree to which these indicator conservation areas coincide across different taxa have been conducted on a variety of vertebrate, invertebrate and plant groups at a national scale in Britain, Canada, USA and South Africa and at a regional scale in Cameroon, Uganda and the USA. A low degree of spatial overlap among and within these selected indicator conservation areas has been demonstrated. These results tend to suggest that indicator conservation areas display little congruence across different taxa. However, some of these studies demonstrate that many conservation areas for indicator taxa capture a high proportion of non-target species. Thus it appears that indicator conservation areas might sample overall biodiversity efficiently. These indicator conservation areas may, however, exclude species essential for effective conservation, e.g. rare, endemic or endangered species. The present study investigated the value of indicator taxa as biodiversity surrogates using spatial congruence and representativeness of different indicator priority conservation areas. The conservation status of species excluded by the indicator approaches is also assessed. Indicator priority conservation areas demonstrate high land area requirements in order to fully represent non-target species. These results suggest that efficient priority area selection techniques must reach a compromise between maximizing non-target species gains and minimizing land-use requirements. Reserve selection procedures using indicator-based complementarity appear to be approaches which best satisfy this trade-off.     

On the importance of taking into account agricultural practices when defining conservation priorities for regional planning

Conserving biodiversity in managed landscapes requires the definition of spatial conservation priorities. The systematic conservation planning tools which are used to define these conservation priorities, assess the vulnerability of different locations by combining two different elements: some measurement of the biological assets in question, and some measurement of the key processes which threaten these biological assets. For instance, in cumulative impact mapping, maps of individual human activities that impact ecosystems (hereafter referred to as ‘stressor’ for individual maps and ‘cumulative stressor’ for combined maps) are overlaid with maps of ecosystem vulnerability, in order to estimate the overall ecological impact of human activities on natural ecosystems. These tools are appealing because they are easy to use and inform regional land planning. However, given that once these spatial conservation priorities are defined they potentially have far-reaching consequences, there is a need to test their robustness and reliability. Here we propose to investigate how the uncertainties related to the estimation of a cumulative stressor layer affect the definition of spatial conservation priorities. We conduct a sensitivity analysis of the different ways of estimating major stressors related to human activities (transport, urbanization and population) with a specific focus on agriculture. We show that spatial conservation priorities are little sensitive to most of the parameters and input data used to estimate the cumulative stressor map. In particular, they are not very sensitive to changes in spatially overlapping stressors, i.e. those which overlap spatially with other stressors. However, our analyses also reveal that spatial conservation priorities are highly sensitive to how the agriculture stressor is defined. These results highlight the importance of better understanding how agricultural activities impact biodiversity and establishing how more accurate information on agricultural practices can be used to define spatial conservation priorities.     

Mind the gaps when using science to address conservation concerns

Conservation science and conservation action are assumed to have identical goals. However, in reality, there is a strong divide between research and practical conservation that has been mostly discussed with respect to the ‘knowing-doing gap’, i.e. the results from science are not being translated into practical management. In this commentary, we argue that there is not one but there are at least three different types of gaps impeding a positive impact of science on conservation: (1) the knowing-doing gap; (2) the thematic gap that exists between the topics addressed by conservation science and the problems faced in conservation; and (3) the disciplinary gap, i.e. the lack of communication and cooperation between different fields of science, e.g. between fundamental biodiversity research and conservation research. These different gaps have different origins and require different means to be overcome. In a survey, scientists from the field of conservation research (all contributing to this special issue on European grasslands) assessed the importance of these three gaps. They highlight that the disciplinary gap is just as relevant as the knowing-doing gap, while the importance of the thematic gap between practical conservation needs and theoretical conservation science is, in the view of the authors, of less importance. Also, the respondents identified the complexity of academic content in scientific publications as an additional cause for knowing-doing gaps. Based on our survey and various other studies analysing these gaps, we suggest two ways to overcome the gaps: if you consider yourself to be a conservation scientist make sure to address questions of relevance for conservation issues, if you are a scientist interested in fundamental issues, be open to mutual interaction and translation of scientific results with conservation scientists. The knowing-doing gap could be addressed by more readily translating the theoretical findings into practical advice. “Conservation Journals” could, for instance, require a second “Conservation Management Abstract”, which has to be published open-access, and back-to-back with the conventional abstract.     

Governance factors in the identification of global conservation priorities for mammals

Global conservation priorities have often been identified based on the combination of species richness and threat information. With the development of the field of systematic conservation planning, more attention has been given to conservation costs. This leads to prioritizing developing countries, where costs are generally low and biodiversity is high. But many of these countries have poor governance, which may result in ineffective conservation or in larger costs than initially expected. We explore how the consideration of governance affects the selection of global conservation priorities for the world's mammals in a complementarity-based conservation prioritization. We use data on Control of Corruption (Worldwide Governance Indicators project) as an indicator of governance effectiveness, and gross domestic product per capita as an indicator of cost. We show that, while core areas with high levels of endemism are always selected as important regardless of governance and cost values, there are clear regional differences in selected sites when biodiversity, cost or governance are taken into account separately. Overall, the analysis supports the concentration of conservation efforts in most of the regions generally considered of high priority, but stresses the need for different conservation approaches in different continents owing to spatial patterns of governance and economic development.     

中国生态系统水源涵养空间特征及其影响因素

水源涵养是陆地生态系统重要生态服务功能之一,包含着大气、水分、植被和土壤等自然过程,其变化将直接影响区域气候水文、植被和土壤等状况,是区域生态系统状况的重要指示器。我国水资源贫乏,降水时空分布不均,在区域尺度上评估全国生态系统水源涵养功能空间特征及其影响因素,对科学认识和合理保护我国生态系统水源涵养,和制定生态环境保护决策具有十分重要的意义。以全国生态系统水源涵养功能为研究对象,通过收集和分析相关数据,对各类典型生态系统水源涵养数据进行归类与统计,在区域尺度上评估中国生态系统水源涵养功能,并分析气候与人类活动对其影响。结果表明:(1)中国水源涵养总体上呈现东南高西北低、由东到西逐渐递减特征。2010年全国生态系统水源涵养总量为12224.33亿m~3。(2)森林是我国生态系统水源涵养的主体,其水源涵养量最高,占全国水源涵养总量的60.80%。其中,常绿针叶林生态系统水源涵养量最多,而常绿阔叶林水源涵养能力最高。按流域统计,相对于其他一级流域,长江流域生态系统的水源涵养量最高。(3)中国生态系统水源涵养受气候和人类活动的影响,与降水、温度、蒸散、坡度、COD密度和长江生态工程呈现显著的正相关,而与GDP密度和农村人口密度呈现明显的负相关。     

中国的濒危物种及其保护

重点分析了濒危物种的概念，确定原则，阐述了物种保护的三种基因类型，即自养保护、圈养保护和基因保护。简要介绍了国家自然科学基金资助的与物种保护有关的项目。初步探讨限各种不同保护类型中存在的重要科学问题、可能研究领域和方向，以促进我国物种保护和研究的发展。     

Conservation planning with insects at three different spatial scales

Deciding which areas to protect, and where to manage and how, are no easy tasks. Many protected areas were established opportunistically under strong political and economic constraints, which may have resulted in inefficient and ineffective conservation. Systematic conservation planning has helped us move from ad-hoc decisions to a quantitative and transparent decision-making process, identifying conservation priorities that achieve explicit objectives in a cost-efficient manner. Here we use Finnish butterflies to illustrate different modeling approaches to address three different types of situations in conservation planning at three different spatial scales. First, we employ species distribution models at the national scale to construct a conservation priority map for 91 species at the resolution of 10×10  km. Species distribution models interpolate sparse occurrence data to infer variation in habitat suitability and to predict species responses to habitat loss, management actions and climate change. Second, at the regional scale we select the optimal management plan to protect a set of habitat specialist species. And third, at the landscape scale, we use a metapopulation approach to manage a network of habitat patches for long-term persistence of a single butterfly species. These different modeling approaches illustrate trade-offs between complexity and tractability and between generality and precision. General correlation-based models are helpful to set priorities for multiple species at large spatial scales. More specific management questions at smaller scales require further data and more complex models. The vast numbers of insect species with diverse ecologies provide a source of information that has remained little used in systematic conservation planning.     

Forest biodiversity in a changing climate: which logic for conservation strategies?

Climate change has direct and indirect impacts on forest ecosystems worldwide. In this context, changing site conditions and altered disturbance regimes as well as forest management responses are challenging the conservation of biodiversity in forests. Climate-induced dynamics and uncertainties related to future forest ecosystem development are calling into question current conservation strategies and concepts. Given the longevity of trees, slow development rates of forest ecosystems and slow migration rates of many forest species, the planning of adaptation measures in response to climate change are especially difficult though highly important for forest biodiversity conservation. This paper introduces a special issue with eight contributions which deal with a variety of aspects of forest biodiversity conservation in the face of climate change. More specifically, the papers address direct impacts of climate change on forest biodiversity, adaptation measures for forest and conservation management, as well as resulting challenges for conservation strategies and concepts. In conclusion, adaptation measures that enhance diversity and provide different options for future action, thereby maintaining ecosystems’ resilience, as well as conservation management operating on a landscape level, are promoted as being beneficial for coping with uncertainties related to climate change. Adaptive management, which constantly reviews conservation goals and measures, and which takes into account both science-based and local ecological knowledge on climate change can be a valuable tool to inform decisions for forest biodiversity conservation.     

三北防护林体系建设工程区森林水源涵养格局变化研究

三北防护林体系水源涵养功能是三北地区生态环境状况的重要指示器,然而,三北防护林体系水源涵养研究仍较缺乏。动态评估三北防护林体系建设工程区(三北工程区)森林水源涵养功能及其影响因素,对科学认识、保护和调控三北防护林体系森林水源涵养,制定三北工程植被建设与保护决策具有重要意义。以三北工程区森林为研究对象,通过收集和分析相关数据,在植被分区的基础上,分析三北工程区森林水源涵养时空格局与变化特征,对比研究各区不同森林类型水源涵养功能差异,揭示各区森林水源涵养功能与地形及森林状况与质量的定量关系。结果表明:(1)三北工程区森林水源涵养功能持续增强,单位面积水源涵养量从1990年的73.92mm增加到2015年的75.14mm,空间格局呈东高西低、南高北低态势。(2)森林水源涵养功能在植被分区和森林类型间差异显著,森林植被区是三北工程区森林水源涵养的主体;针阔混交林是三北工程区水源涵养功能最强的森林类型。(3)三北工程区森林水源涵养受其地形、状况与质量的影响显著,除个别植被区外,各区森林水源涵养量随坡度、覆盖度和NPP增加而增大,随生物量增加而降低,这是区域植被适应及滥砍滥伐、毁林开垦、植被建设与保护等人为干扰共同作用的结果。因此,可通过调整与优化林分结构,调控区域森林水源涵养功能。