首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
   检索      

新型生态系统理论及其争议综述
引用本文:张绍良,杨永均,侯湖平.新型生态系统理论及其争议综述[J].生态学报,2016,36(17):5307-5314.
作者姓名:张绍良  杨永均  侯湖平
作者单位:中国矿业大学环境与测绘学院, 徐州 221116;中国矿业大学, 矿山生态修复教育部工程研究中心, 徐州 221116,中国矿业大学环境与测绘学院, 徐州 221116,中国矿业大学环境与测绘学院, 徐州 221116
基金项目:国家自然科学基金资助项目(51474214)
摘    要:澳大利亚Richard J Hobbs教授等近年提出的新型生态系统(Novel Ecosystems)理论认为,由于人类作用,地球生态系统经历了前所未有的变化,很多生态系统已经越过不可逆转的阈值,不可能恢复到原有状态,形成了新的生态系统,其生物要素、非生物要素和系统功能等都发生了显著改变;人类应该面对现实,必须反思传统生态保护和生态恢复的行为、政策和思维;应该致力新型生态系统的特征、属性和演替规律的研究,在管理、规划、政策、组织和技术等方面的创新。新型生态系统理论引起了很大争议。质疑者认为,由于自然作用力和人类的持续扰动,地球生态系统一直在不断变化,所以一直都是"新"的,根本没必要贴上"新型"标签;该理论基本概念模糊,理论模型不精确,缺乏严密的逻辑推理,还很不成熟;该理论无助于生态保护和生态恢复的实践,会扰乱人们的思想,没有实践价值。不过,支持者和质疑者都承认地球上很多生态系统的确遭到严重破坏,已经发生深刻演替,极有必要对这类系统的非线性机制、系统阈值、恢复力、新范式,以及破坏后的所有特征等开展研究,应该理性选择合适的修复方法,理性分析人工干预的程度及其成功的可能性,科学制定行动方案和优选标准。跟踪国际前沿,开展新型生态系统理论研究有助于丰富我国恢复生态学理论以及创新工程实践。

关 键 词:恢复生态学  新型生态系统  恢复力  综述
收稿时间:2015/2/27 0:00:00
修稿时间:2016/6/13 0:00:00

Overview of novel ecosystems theory and its critiques
ZHANG Shaoliang,YANG Yongjun and HOU Huping.Overview of novel ecosystems theory and its critiques[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2016,36(17):5307-5314.
Authors:ZHANG Shaoliang  YANG Yongjun and HOU Huping
Institution:School of Environment Science & Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China;Engineering Research Center of Mine Ecological Construction, Ministry of Education, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China,School of Environment Science & Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China and School of Environment Science & Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
Abstract:Novel ecosystems theory was recently founded by Australian Professor Richard J Hobbs, et al. This theory argued that many historical ecosystems on the Earth had been transformed due to human activities and had crossed an irreversible threshold and could not be restored to the historical condition. Therefore, the biotic and abiotic elements and ecosystem function varied remarkably. This variation was indisputable; hence, human beings should become more responsible, and the past activities, planning, management, and policy of ecological reservation and restoration need to be reconsidered. The characteristics, attributes, and succession tendency of novel ecosystems need to be investigated for implementing innovative management, planning, policy, organization, and technology practices of ecological reservation and restoration. However, these ideas have spurred vigorous debates. Some research scholars contended that there was no need to develop a new label for the transformed ecosystems, because the global ecosystem continues to change at a larger temporal and spatial scale intervened by physical and anthropogenic disturbances; the definition of novel ecosystems was still impaired by logical contradictions and ecological imprecisions; it challenged the current practices of conservation and restoration since it could render decision- and policy-making difficult. Nonetheless, unanimous agreement was obtained on the fact that some seriously damaged ecosystems had profoundly degraded; therefore, investigating the nonlinear mechanisms, thresholds, resilience, new paradigms, and features of damaged ecosystems was necessary. Hence, rational and deliberative restoration options need to be considered, anthropogenic intervention degree and the possibility of success need to be cautiously studied, and scientific optional actions and standards need to be identified.
Keywords:restoration ecology  novel ecosystems  resilience  literature overview
本文献已被 CNKI 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《生态学报》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《生态学报》下载免费的PDF全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号