| Literature DB >> 21318028 |
Chen Zeng1, Yaolin Liu, Yanfang Liu, Jiameng Hu, Xiaogang Bai, Xiaoyu Yang.
Abstract
Aquatic ecological carrying capacity is an effective method for analyzing sustainable development in regional water management. In this paper, an integrated approach is employed for assessing the aquatic ecological carrying capacity of Wujin District in the Tai Lake Basin, China. An indicator system is established considering social and economic development as well as ecological resilience perspectives. While calculating the ecological index, the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) is extracted from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) time-series images, followed by spatial and temporal analysis of vegetation cover. Finally, multi-index assessment of aquatic ecological carrying capacity is carried out for the period 2000 to 2008, including both static and dynamic variables. The results reveal that aquatic ecological carrying capacity presents a slight upward trend in the past decade and the intensity of human activities still exceeded the aquatic ecological carrying capacity in 2008. In terms of human activities, population has decreased, GDP has quadrupled, and fertilizer application and industrial wastewater discharge have declined greatly in the past decade. The indicators representing aquatic ecosystem conditions have the lowest scores, which are primarily attributed to the water eutrophication problem. Yet the terrestrial ecosystem is assessed to be in better condition since topographic backgrounds and landscape diversity are at higher levels. Based on the work carried out, it is suggested that pollutant emission be controlled to improve water quality and agricultural development around Ge Lake (the largest lake in Wujin District) be reduced.Entities:
Keywords: GIS; NDVI; aquatic ecological carrying capacity; indicator system
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21318028 PMCID: PMC3037074 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph8010264
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Location of the study area.
Figure 2Indicator hierarchy for AECC assessment.
Criteria system for the assessment. V
| Level | V | IV | III | II | I | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 0–0.2 | 0.2–0.4 | 0.4–0.6 | 0.6–0.8 | 0.8–1 | |
| Indicator | Unit | Criteria | ||||
| Population density | /km2 | >1000 | 500–1000 | 400–500 | 200–400 | <200 |
| GDP per capita | 104 yuan per capita | <2 | 2–2.5 | 2.5–3.75 | 3.75–5 | >5 |
| Agricultural water use per cultivated land | 106 m3/ha | <30 or >142 | 30–60 or 112–142 | 60–69 or 103–112 | 69–73 or 99–103 | 73–99 |
| Industrial water use per industrial added value | m3/104 yuan | >100 | 56–100 | 45–56 | 31–45 | <31 |
| Fertilizer application per cultivated land | kg/ha | >1200 | 600–1200 | 525–600 | 300–525 | <300 |
| Industrial waste water per GDP | m3/104 yuan | >25 | 13–25 | 10–13 | 7–10 | <7 |
| Concentration of TP | mg/L | 0.9–1.3 | 0.2–0.9 | 0.05–0.2 | 0.01–0.05 | 0.001–0.01 |
| Concentration of TN | mg/L | 9–16 | 2–9 | 0.5–2 | 0.1–0.5 | 0.02–0.1 |
| Concentration of COD | mg/L | 40–60 | 10–40 | 4–10 | 1–4 | 0.15–1 |
| Drainage density | km/km2 | <0.5 | 0.5–2 | 2–4 | 4–6 | >6 |
| NDVI | / | <0.5 | 0.5–1.5 | 1.5–3 | 3–4.5 | >4.5 |
| Elevation | meter | >1000 | 500–1000 | 50–500 | 5–50 | <5 |
| Slope | degree | >25 | 10–25 | 5–10 | 1–5 | <1 |
| Aquatic biological Shannon diversity | / | <1 | 1–1.8 | 1.8–2.5 | 2.5–3.5 | >3.5 |
| Shannon diversity of landscape | / | <0.5 | 0.5–1.25 | 1.25–1.75 | 1.75–2.25 | >2.25 |
| (AECC) Aquatic ecological carrying capacity | The threshold of aquatic ecological carrying capacity assessment was 0.6 and scores above it mean the ecosystem is capable of bearing the human activities. | |||||
Figure 3Temporal Variation in NDVI from 2003 to 2007.
Figure 4Maps of NDVI distribution. (a) April, 2003; (b) September, 2003; (c) April, 2006; (d) September, 2006.
Figure 5Spatial Variation in NDVI in August from 2003 to 2007.
Values of pressure factors in 2000, 2004 and 2008.
| Pressure Factors | Units | 2000 | 2004 | 2008 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Population | / | 1,199,155 | 960,804 | 982,266 |
| GDP | 104 yuan | 2,339,228 | 3,887,695 | 8,501,987 |
| Industrial added value | 104 yuan | 1,260,405 | 2,477,723 | 5,556,690 |
| Cultivated land area | ha | 78,457 | 48,629 | 39,975 |
| Irrigation water use | 106 m3 | 632.16 | 359.52 | 280.42 |
| Industrial water use | 106 m3 | 127 | 136.79 | 150.52 |
| Fertilizer application | 106 kg | 112.84 | 67.48 | 45.56 |
| Industrial wastewater discharge | 106 t | 39.75 | 87.87 | 88.5 |
Figure 6(a) Spatial distribution TP concentration (July in 2007); (b) Spatial distribution of TN concentration (July in 2008); and (c) Spatial distribution of COD concentration (July in 2007).
Concentration of COD, TN and TP.
| January 2007 | April 2007 | July 2007 | January 2008 | May 2008 | July 2008 | May 2009 | August 2009 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COD Concentration | ||||||||
| Max | 77.46 | 89.39 | 90.88 | 66.13 | 45.7 | 57.94 | 120.49 | 46.52 |
| Min | 43.46 | 31.84 | 26.59 | 33.51 | 26.76 | 19.84 | 29.01 | 25.24 |
| Mean | 62.1 | 49.27 | 45.02 | 44.86 | 37.15 | 36.62 | 43.65 | 38.43 |
| TN Concentration | ||||||||
| Max | 11.25 | 9.23 | 8.02 | 10.72 | 14.4 | 9.12 | 6.38 | 2.54 |
| Min | 5.19 | 5.57 | 3.13 | 4.85 | 1.59 | 2.73 | 3.46 | 4.12 |
| Mean | 8.31 | 7.24 | 6.55 | 7.85 | 6.58 | 5.05 | 5.14 | 3.36 |
| TP Concentration | ||||||||
| Max | 0.61 | 0.98 | 0.92 | 1.21 | 0.498 | 0.028 | 0.489 | 0.181 |
| Min | 0.093 | 0.19 | 0.11 | 0.042 | 0.105 | 1.063 | 0.221 | 0.539 |
| Mean | 0.296 | 0.402 | 0.43 | 0.392 | 0.296 | 0.304 | 0.353 | 0.31 |
Figure 7Hydrology network and sampling distribution.
Results of indicators of resilience.
| Indicator | Value | Description | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Water eutrophication (pollutants concentration) | TP | 0.35 mg/L | Water eutrophication condition is assessed by the sum of the evenly weighted three pollutants evaluated values |
| TN | 6.26 mg/L | ||
| COD | 44.64 mg/L | ||
| Drainage density (DD) | 2.37 km/km2 | DD = Length/catchment area | |
| NDVI | 1.55 | Mean value of the research area | |
| Elevation | 5.59 m | Mean value of the research area | |
| Slope | 1.102 degree | Mean value of the research area | |
| Aquatic biological diversity (Shannon diversity index of plankton community) | Algae | 2.93 | Aquatic biological diversity is assessed by the sum of the three evenly weighted evaluated Shannon index of planktons |
| Protozoa | 1.24 | ||
| Rotifer | 1.79 | ||
| Shannon diversity of landscape (SHDI) | 2.18 | It is calculated according to Land Use Classification System (2001 version) in China | |
Results of aquatic ecological carrying capacity assessment.
| 2000 | 2004 | 2008 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pressure | 0.35 | 0.41 | 0.57 |
| Resilience | 0.47 | 0.47 | 0.47 |
| AECC | 0.41 | 0.44 | 0.53 |
| Level | III | III | III |