LI Zuoyu, DONG Hongxian, LIU Leilei, et al. Evaluation of forest ecosystem service value in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve of Zhejiang Province[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2020, 37(5): 891-897. DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20190573
Citation: LI Zuoyu, DONG Hongxian, LIU Leilei, et al. Evaluation of forest ecosystem service value in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve of Zhejiang Province[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2020, 37(5): 891-897. DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20190573

Evaluation of forest ecosystem service value in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve of Zhejiang Province

DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20190573
  • Received Date: 2019-09-29
  • Rev Recd Date: 2020-03-25
  • Available Online: 2020-10-10
  • Publish Date: 2020-08-20
  •   Objective  The multi-functional ecological services provided by Wuyanling National Nature Reserve play a vital role in protecting and improving the ecological environment of Taishun and Wenzhou.  Method  Taking Wuyanling National Nature Reserve as the research area, the quality and value of the ecological services of the forest ecosystem in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve were quantitatively evaluated with reference to the Forest Ecosystem Assessment Standard (LY/T 1721−2008).  Result  The total value of forest ecosystem ecological services in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve in 2017 was 100.24 ×108 yuan·a−1, and the value of forest ecological service per unit area was 3.92×105 yuan·hm−2·a−1. The proportion of forest ecosystem service value from large to small in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve was soil conservation, water conservation, accumulation of nutrients, carbon fixation and oxygen release, biodiversity protection, and purification of the atmospheric environment. It could be seen that conservation soil, water conservation and accumulation of nutrients were the main services of Wuyanling forest ecosystem, and the sum of the three accounted for 91.92%, occupying a dominant position. The service value of different forest types in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve ranging from large to small was evergreen broad-leaved forest, Chinese fir forest, bamboo forest, Masson pine forest, coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest, cedar forest, and economic forest. The evergreen broad-leaved forest contributed more than 50% to Wuyanling forest ecosystem service value, occupying an absolute position.  Conclusion  The ecological service value per unit area of evergreen broad-leaved forest in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve is much higher than that of other forest types. Therefore, through forest facies transformation technologies such as transforming coniferous forest into broad-leaved forest, the quality of forest stands can be improved, the structure of ecosystems can be optimized, and the output and value of ecosystem services can be increased. [Ch, 5 tab. 27 ref.]
  • [1] SHEN Fangfang, WANG Binyu, YAO Bida, MO Mingmin, LIAO Yingchun, FANG Huanying, ZOU Xianhua, LIU Wenfei, YUAN Yinghong, FAN Houbao.  Response of high nitrogen-loaded forest ecosystem to decreasing atmospheric nitrogen deposition: a review . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2024, 41(1): 211-222. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20230380
    [2] GONG Yuan, JI Xiaofang, HUA Yuting, ZHANG Yinlong, LI Nan.  Research progress of CO2 flux in forest ecosystem based on eddy covariance technique: a review . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2020, 37(3): 593-604. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20190412
    [3] MA Li, YANG Xiao, ZHANG Yi, JIA Jiqun, SUN Qixiang, ZHANG Qian, ZHOU Jinxing.  Ecosystem services of forests for snail control and schistosomiasis prevention in the Yangtze River Basin . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2019, 36(1): 130-137. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2019.01.016
    [4] NIU Xiaodong, JIANG Hong, FANG Chengyuan, CHEN Xiaofeng, SUN Heng.  Water vapor flux features of an evergreen and deciduous broadleaf mixed forest in Mount Tianmu area . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2016, 33(2): 216-224. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2016.02.005
    [5] YANG Jie, XIANG Tingting, JIANG Peikun, WU Jiasen, KE Hejia.  Phytolith-occluded organic carbon accumulation and distribution in a Dendrocalamopsis oldhami bamboo stand ecosystem . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2016, 33(2): 225-231. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2016.02.006
    [6] CHEN Liping, LI Pingheng, MO Lufeng, ZHOU Guomo, LI Jinrong.  Carbon flux extraction for a Phyllostachys violascens ecosystem based on the flux footprint analysis . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2016, 33(1): 1-10. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2016.01.001
    [7] NIU Xiaodong, JIANG Hong, WANG Fan.  Stable isotope composition for atmospheric water vapor in the forest ecosystem of Mount Tianmu . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2015, 32(3): 327-334. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2015.03.001
    [8] FAN Qindong.  Research and discussion on the valuation of insects' ecosystem services . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2014, 31(5): 774-778. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2014.05.018
    [9] LIU Jiamin, ZHANG Hui, HUANG Xiufeng, XU Huachao.  Insect diversity to monitor and evaluate forest environmental quality . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2013, 30(5): 719-723. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2013.05.013
    [10] Lü Kunlong, RAO Liangyi, LI Feifei, LI Huijie, ZHU Mengxun, ZHU Zhenya, ZHOU Jian.  Storage and determinants of coarse woody debris in China’s forests . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2013, 30(1): 114-122. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2013.01.017
    [11] WEI Shujing, SUN Long, WEI Shuwei, HU Haiqing.  Coarse woody debris in forest ecosystems: a review . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2013, 30(4): 585-598. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2013.04.019
    [12] CAI Xia, WANG Zu-hua, CHEN Li-juan.  Zoning with spatial division of forest ecosystem services in Chun’an County,Zhejiang Province . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2011, 28(5): 727-734. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2011.05.007
    [13] 杨廉雁, 张树斌, 郑征.  Research progress on the hollow-bearing trees in forest ecosystems . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2010, 27(6): 928-934. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2010.06.021
    [14] YAN En-rong, WANG Liang-yan, YANG Wen-zhong, ZHOU Wu.  Ecological benefit from nutrient cycling in the Tiantong regional forests of Zhejiang Province . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2010, 27(4): 585-590. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2010.04.018
    [15] WANG Zu-hua, CAI Liang-liang, GUAN Qing-wei, CAI Xia.  Evaluation of forest ecosystem services in Chun’an County . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2010, 27(5): 757-761. doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.2010.05.019
    [16] JIE Cheng-yue, XIN Zan-hong, XIN Xiao-ying, JIANG Hong, WEI Xiao-hua.  Principle,method and application of FORECAST model . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2009, 26(6): 909-915.
    [17] YOU Jian-lin, WEI Xin-liang, LI Dong, HUANG Jun-zhen, ZHAO Ming-shui.  Forest recreational value assessment of National Nature Reserve of Mount Tianmu . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2009, 26(4): 575-580.
    [18] WANG Bin, YANG Xiao-sheng, ZHANG Biao, LIU Mou-cheng.  Dynamics of ecosystem services in China during 1973 - 2003 . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2009, 26(5): 714-721.
    [19] HE Ying,  WEI Xin-liang,  CAI Xia,  LI Ke-zhui,  WANG Zhen.  Quantitative analysis of community structure in ecological landscape forests . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2007, 24(6): 711-718.
    [20] AI Jian-guo,  YU Lin,  ZHANG Li-ying,  QIAN Liu-qin,  ZHANG Teng-chao.  Plant community properties in a Hemsleya zhejiangensis habitat in Wuyanling Nature Reserve, Zhejiang Province . Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2007, 24(6): 706-710.
  • [1]
    ZHAO Tongqian, OUYANG Zhiyun, ZHENG Hua, et al. China’s forest ecosystem service function and its value evaluation [J]. J Nat Resour, 2004, 19(4): 480 − 491.
    [3]
    XUE Dayuan, BAO Haosheng, LI Wenhua. A valuation study on the indirect values of forest ecosystem in Changbaishan Mountain Biosphere Reserve of China [J]. China Environ Sci, 1999, 19(3): 247 − 252.
    [4]
    GAO Yanni, ZHANG Linbo, LI Kai, et al. An indicator system for estimating ecosystem values [J]. Res Environ Sci, 2019, 32(1): 58 − 65.
    [5]
    COSTANZA R, d’ARGE R, de GROOT R, et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital [J]. Nature, 1997, 387: 253 − 260.
    [6]
    Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being [R]. Washington D C: Island Press, 2005.
    [7]
    HOU Yuanzhao, WANG Qi. China forest resources accounting research [J]. World For Res, 1995, 8(3): 51 − 56.
    [8]
    WANG Bing, REN Xiaoxu, HU Wen. Assessment of forest ecosystem services value in China [J]. Sci Silv Sin, 2011, 47(2): 145 − 153.
    [9]
    LIU Dong, HUANG Haiqing, ZHANG Lin, et al. Estimation of forest ecological service value in Zhejiang Province and its monthly variation analysis [J]. J Geo-Inf Sci, 2014, 16(2): 225 − 232.
    [10]
    FU Mengdi, LI Junsheng, ZHANG Rongan, et al. Valuation of the ecosystem services in southern mountain of Zhejiang Province [J]. Ecol Econ, 2016, 32(4): 189 − 193.
    [11]
    CHI Yongkuan, XIONG Kangning, LIU Zhaojun, et al. Study on value evalution of natural grassland ecosystem services in China [J]. Ecol Econ, 2015, 31(10): 134 − 139.
    [12]
    CHEN Cui, LIU Xian’an, YAN Lili, et al. Evaluation on ecosystem service values of Sichuan Nanhe National Wetland Park [J]. Wetland Sci, 2018, 16(2): 238 − 244.
    [13]
    LI Nan, LI Longwei, ZHANG Yinlong, et al. Changes of ecosystem services value of Hangzhou Bay Wetland [J]. J Zhejiang A&F Univ, 2019, 36(1): 118 − 129.
    [14]
    WEI Changyuan. Value evaluation of forest ecological service function of Nanping Mangdang Mountain National Nature Reserve [J]. Anhui Agric Sci Bull, 2019, 25(5): 139 − 142.
    [19]
    YAN Enrong, WANG Liangyan, YANG Wenzhong, et al. Ecological benefit from nutrient cycling in the Tiantong regional forests of Zhejiang Province [J]. J Zhejiang For Coll, 2010, 27(4): 585 − 590.
    [20]
    WANG Hailun, WANG Jinye, YAN Wende, et al. Estimation of the value of the service status of the forest ecosystem in the Maoershan National Family Natural Conservation Area in Guangxi [J]. J Guilin Univ Technol, 2018, 38(1): 117 − 123.
    [21]
    CHEN Huadan, GUO Guoying, YUE Xinjian, et al. Evaluation of the service function value of forest ecosystem in Fujian Province [J]. For Surv Des, 2018(1): 5 − 10.
    [22]
    WENG Guohang, MAO Xiaopeng, PAN Chengqiu, et al. Restoration and reconstruction of Tragopan caboti habitats [J]. J Zhejiang For Sci Technol, 2007, 27(4): 29 − 33.
    [23]
    WANG Zuhua, CAI Liangliang, GUAN Qingwei, et al. Evaluation of forest ecosystem services in Chun’an County [J]. J Zhejiang For Coll, 2010, 27(5): 757 − 761.
    [24]
    HU Luyun, ZHOU Yafeng, YI Lita, et al. Evaluation of soil and water conservation capacity and value of main forest types in Suichang County [J]. Int J Ecol, 2013, 2(2): 7 − 14.
    [25]
    GONG Xicheng, ZHANG Shusheng, PAN Chengsong, et al. SWOT analysis of developing ecological tourism in Wuyanling Nature Reserve [J]. East China For Manage, 2015, 29(3): 45 − 49.
    [26]
    WU Qiang, PENG Yuanying, MA Hengyun, et al. Research on the value of forest ecosystem services and compensation in a Pinus massoniana forest [J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2019, 39(1): 117 − 130.
    [27]
    SHENG Wenping, ZHEN Lin, XIAO Yu. Distinct eco-compensation standards for ecological forests in Beijing [J]. Acta Ecol Sin, 2019, 39(1): 45 − 52.
  • Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Amount of accessChart context menuAbstract Views, HTML Views, PDF Downloads StatisticsAbstract ViewsHTML ViewsPDF Downloads2024-052024-062024-072024-082024-092024-102024-112024-122025-012025-022025-032025-040Highcharts.com
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Class DistributionFULLTEXT: 22.5 %FULLTEXT: 22.5 %META: 74.7 %META: 74.7 %PDF: 2.8 %PDF: 2.8 %FULLTEXTMETAPDFHighcharts.com
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Area Distribution其他: 7.0 %其他: 7.0 %其他: 0.2 %其他: 0.2 %China: 1.3 %China: 1.3 %Philippines: 0.1 %Philippines: 0.1 %Rochester: 0.0 %Rochester: 0.0 %Seattle: 0.1 %Seattle: 0.1 %Switzerland: 0.1 %Switzerland: 0.1 %Turkey: 0.0 %Turkey: 0.0 %United Kingdom: 0.1 %United Kingdom: 0.1 %United States: 0.4 %United States: 0.4 %[]: 0.5 %[]: 0.5 %三明: 0.2 %三明: 0.2 %上海: 1.5 %上海: 1.5 %东京: 0.0 %东京: 0.0 %临汾: 0.0 %临汾: 0.0 %丽水: 0.0 %丽水: 0.0 %佳木斯: 0.1 %佳木斯: 0.1 %保定: 0.1 %保定: 0.1 %兰州: 0.0 %兰州: 0.0 %北京: 17.1 %北京: 17.1 %北伯根: 0.0 %北伯根: 0.0 %南京: 0.2 %南京: 0.2 %南昌: 0.1 %南昌: 0.1 %南通: 0.0 %南通: 0.0 %南阳: 0.0 %南阳: 0.0 %博阿努瓦: 0.0 %博阿努瓦: 0.0 %台州: 0.7 %台州: 0.7 %合肥: 0.0 %合肥: 0.0 %呼伦贝尔: 0.0 %呼伦贝尔: 0.0 %呼和浩特: 0.1 %呼和浩特: 0.1 %哈尔滨: 0.0 %哈尔滨: 0.0 %哥伦布: 0.1 %哥伦布: 0.1 %嘉兴: 0.1 %嘉兴: 0.1 %大连: 0.1 %大连: 0.1 %天津: 0.0 %天津: 0.0 %太原: 0.0 %太原: 0.0 %娄底: 0.0 %娄底: 0.0 %宁波: 0.0 %宁波: 0.0 %宣城: 0.1 %宣城: 0.1 %常州: 0.2 %常州: 0.2 %广州: 0.1 %广州: 0.1 %廊坊: 0.0 %廊坊: 0.0 %张家口: 1.6 %张家口: 1.6 %徐州: 0.0 %徐州: 0.0 %忻州: 0.0 %忻州: 0.0 %恩施土家族苗族自治州: 0.1 %恩施土家族苗族自治州: 0.1 %惠州: 0.0 %惠州: 0.0 %成都: 0.0 %成都: 0.0 %扬州: 0.2 %扬州: 0.2 %斯托姆莱克: 0.2 %斯托姆莱克: 0.2 %无锡: 0.0 %无锡: 0.0 %旧金山: 0.1 %旧金山: 0.1 %昆明: 0.0 %昆明: 0.0 %晋城: 0.0 %晋城: 0.0 %普洱: 0.0 %普洱: 0.0 %朝阳: 0.1 %朝阳: 0.1 %杭州: 3.0 %杭州: 3.0 %柳州: 0.0 %柳州: 0.0 %武汉: 0.5 %武汉: 0.5 %汕尾: 0.0 %汕尾: 0.0 %法国奥克西塔尼: 0.1 %法国奥克西塔尼: 0.1 %洛杉矶: 0.2 %洛杉矶: 0.2 %洛阳: 0.0 %洛阳: 0.0 %济南: 0.0 %济南: 0.0 %海得拉巴: 0.0 %海得拉巴: 0.0 %淮安: 0.0 %淮安: 0.0 %深圳: 0.3 %深圳: 0.3 %温州: 1.6 %温州: 1.6 %温州市乐清: 0.0 %温州市乐清: 0.0 %湖州: 0.4 %湖州: 0.4 %漯河: 0.6 %漯河: 0.6 %潍坊: 0.3 %潍坊: 0.3 %白银: 0.0 %白银: 0.0 %石家庄: 0.4 %石家庄: 0.4 %福州: 0.2 %福州: 0.2 %纳什维尔: 0.0 %纳什维尔: 0.0 %绵阳: 0.0 %绵阳: 0.0 %芒廷维尤: 6.6 %芒廷维尤: 6.6 %芝加哥: 0.3 %芝加哥: 0.3 %苏州: 0.6 %苏州: 0.6 %衢州: 0.6 %衢州: 0.6 %西宁: 44.6 %西宁: 44.6 %西安: 0.2 %西安: 0.2 %贵阳: 0.0 %贵阳: 0.0 %运城: 1.5 %运城: 1.5 %邯郸: 0.1 %邯郸: 0.1 %郑州: 0.5 %郑州: 0.5 %重庆: 0.2 %重庆: 0.2 %金华: 1.8 %金华: 1.8 %锦州: 0.0 %锦州: 0.0 %长沙: 0.6 %长沙: 0.6 %长治: 0.0 %长治: 0.0 %阜阳: 0.0 %阜阳: 0.0 %阳泉: 0.4 %阳泉: 0.4 %青岛: 0.0 %青岛: 0.0 %其他其他ChinaPhilippinesRochesterSeattleSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States[]三明上海东京临汾丽水佳木斯保定兰州北京北伯根南京南昌南通南阳博阿努瓦台州合肥呼伦贝尔呼和浩特哈尔滨哥伦布嘉兴大连天津太原娄底宁波宣城常州广州廊坊张家口徐州忻州恩施土家族苗族自治州惠州成都扬州斯托姆莱克无锡旧金山昆明晋城普洱朝阳杭州柳州武汉汕尾法国奥克西塔尼洛杉矶洛阳济南海得拉巴淮安深圳温州温州市乐清湖州漯河潍坊白银石家庄福州纳什维尔绵阳芒廷维尤芝加哥苏州衢州西宁西安贵阳运城邯郸郑州重庆金华锦州长沙长治阜阳阳泉青岛Highcharts.com
  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(17)

    1. 杨海江,勾晓华,唐呈瑞,薛冰. 2010—2021年中国森林生态系统服务功能价值评估研究进展. 生态学杂志. 2024(01): 244-253 .
    2. 雷祖培,高洪娣,刘西,周佳俊,斯煌凯,郑方东,刘宝权. 浙江乌岩岭发现库氏鼹. 动物学杂志. 2024(06): 969-973 .
    3. 邹祖有,康剑,李莹莹,余斐,苏艳,丁晓纲. 粤北地区针阔混交林土壤TP含量分布特征. 林业与环境科学. 2023(02): 1-5 .
    4. 张仕超,刘竞宇,冉龙池,张煊赟,邵景安. 基于提高森林覆盖率目标的跨区县横向生态补偿与供需对接——以重庆市为例. 生态学报. 2023(11): 4651-4663 .
    5. 李彪,杨承伶,陈琦,龙植豪. 南流江流域森林土壤保持功能变化分析. 福建林业科技. 2023(02): 64-69 .
    6. 邓紫君,刘鑫,祖浩然,苏闪闪,陈颖,罗俊毅,闫文德,张翔,王明旭. 湖南省森林型国家级自然保护区森林生态系统服务功能价值评估. 湖南林业科技. 2023(04): 72-80 .
    7. 李连强,杨会侠,丁国泉,李虹谕,白荣芬,王品. 辽宁仙人洞国家级自然保护区森林生态服务物质量评估及权衡与协同. 北京林业大学学报. 2023(09): 83-94 .
    8. 张颖,刘平辉,朱传民,张林颖. 基于NPP的抚州市生态系统服务功能重要性评价. 贵州农业科学. 2022(02): 133-140 .
    9. 赵铁,付根生. 珊溪水库生态系统服务物质量和价值量评估. 环境生态学. 2022(Z1): 31-39 .
    10. 朱程昊,王剑武,谢秉楼,邬枭楠,骆义波. 森林生态系统服务功能市县联动核算与精度控制. 浙江农林大学学报. 2022(02): 430-437 . 本站查看
    11. 赵芸,赵文涛,杨宁,齐明霞,闫然,逄晨. 青岛市主要树种含碳量及森林生态系统碳储量变化分析. 林业科技. 2022(03): 54-57 .
    12. 邹佳敏,李建中,禹慧琴,乔金笛,廖文梅. 生态公益林生态系统服务价值评估研究——以江西省为例. 中国林业经济. 2022(05): 8-14 .
    13. 徐来仙,郭秋菊,艾训儒,刘学全,向钦,赵奂敦. 森林风景区生态系统服务价值评估. 林业与生态科学. 2022(04): 456-465 .
    14. 夏丽芝,刘西,雷祖培,潘向东,权伟. 浙江乌岩岭国家级自然保护区山豆根分布生境特征及生长特性研究. 浙江林业科技. 2022(06): 28-33 .
    15. 张卫民. 中国自然保护地生态资产核算框架研究. 自然保护地. 2021(02): 22-30 .
    16. 万雁华,周宏,柳丽杰,谢少平,周嘉炜. 粤北生态特别保护区(韶关市范围)优势树种(组)生态系统服务功能价值评估. 林业与环境科学. 2020(06): 96-102 .
    17. 蒲莹,牟耀杰,邵景安. 三峡库区近20年森林生态服务功能变化及影响因素分析——以石柱县为例. 林业资源管理. 2020(06): 31-39+60 .

    Other cited types(10)

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Tables(6)

Article views(1808) PDF downloads(66) Cited by(27)

Related
Proportional views

Evaluation of forest ecosystem service value in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve of Zhejiang Province

doi: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20190573

Abstract:   Objective  The multi-functional ecological services provided by Wuyanling National Nature Reserve play a vital role in protecting and improving the ecological environment of Taishun and Wenzhou.  Method  Taking Wuyanling National Nature Reserve as the research area, the quality and value of the ecological services of the forest ecosystem in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve were quantitatively evaluated with reference to the Forest Ecosystem Assessment Standard (LY/T 1721−2008).  Result  The total value of forest ecosystem ecological services in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve in 2017 was 100.24 ×108 yuan·a−1, and the value of forest ecological service per unit area was 3.92×105 yuan·hm−2·a−1. The proportion of forest ecosystem service value from large to small in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve was soil conservation, water conservation, accumulation of nutrients, carbon fixation and oxygen release, biodiversity protection, and purification of the atmospheric environment. It could be seen that conservation soil, water conservation and accumulation of nutrients were the main services of Wuyanling forest ecosystem, and the sum of the three accounted for 91.92%, occupying a dominant position. The service value of different forest types in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve ranging from large to small was evergreen broad-leaved forest, Chinese fir forest, bamboo forest, Masson pine forest, coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest, cedar forest, and economic forest. The evergreen broad-leaved forest contributed more than 50% to Wuyanling forest ecosystem service value, occupying an absolute position.  Conclusion  The ecological service value per unit area of evergreen broad-leaved forest in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve is much higher than that of other forest types. Therefore, through forest facies transformation technologies such as transforming coniferous forest into broad-leaved forest, the quality of forest stands can be improved, the structure of ecosystems can be optimized, and the output and value of ecosystem services can be increased. [Ch, 5 tab. 27 ref.]

LI Zuoyu, DONG Hongxian, LIU Leilei, et al. Evaluation of forest ecosystem service value in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve of Zhejiang Province[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2020, 37(5): 891-897. DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20190573
Citation: LI Zuoyu, DONG Hongxian, LIU Leilei, et al. Evaluation of forest ecosystem service value in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve of Zhejiang Province[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A&F University, 2020, 37(5): 891-897. DOI: 10.11833/j.issn.2095-0756.20190573
  • 森林与湿地、海洋并称为全球三大生态系统,被誉为“地球之肺”“绿色水库”和“物种基因库”[1]。森林生态系统是陆地生态系统中面积最大、组成结构最复杂、生物种类最丰富、适应性最强、稳定性最大、功能最完善、与人类生存发展关系最密切的一种自然生态系统,对改善和维护生态环境起着决定性的作用[2-3]。森林不仅能够为人类提供清新的空气、清洁的水源和舒适宜人的气候环境等生态产品,还能够提供保持水土、涵养水源、防风固沙、调节气候、生物多样性保育等生态服务[4]。CONSTANZA等[5]对全球生态系统服务价值进行较为全面的评估,算出全球陆地生态系统服务功能平均每年的价值高达33万亿美元,相当于当年全世界国民生产总值的1.8倍,不仅在国际上引起了广泛关注,而且掀起了对生态系统服务价值研究的热潮。联合国千年生态系统评估组(millennium ecosystem assessment,MA)开展了全球尺度和33个地区的生态系统与人类福利的研究,对生态系统的内涵、分类、评价基本理论和方法均进行了深入的阐述,极大推进了生态系统服务在世界范围内的理论方法及应用方面的研究[6]。侯元兆等[7]在国外生态服务价值评估的基础上,第1次估算出中国森林资源的价值约13.7万亿元,开创了国内森林生态系统生态服务价值评估的先河。有学者分别从不同尺度对中国、浙江省、泰顺县的森林生态系统服务价值进行评估[8-10]。也有学者分别对草原、湿地、森林等不同类型的生态系统进行价值评估[11-14]。本研究依据LY/T 1721−2008《森林生态系统服务功能评估规范》[15],对乌岩岭国家级自然保护区森林生态系统服务的物质量及价值量进行评估,有助于增进人们对森林环境的保护意识以及对自然保护区的重视程度。

  • 乌岩岭国家级自然保护区(27°20′52″~27°48′39″N,119°37′08″~119°50′00″E)地处浙江省泰顺县西北部,总面积约18 861.5 hm2,其中林业用地17 605.1 hm2,占土地总面积的93.3%。乌岩岭在全球陆生生物圈的地带生物群落分类中属于热带、暖温带交错区,由于地理位置处于28°N附近的敏感区,且靠近太平洋,加上保护区西北面高山阻隔,温度偏高。乌岩岭有775属种子植物,其中,包括中国种子植物属的15个分布区类型。乌岩岭国家级自然保护区是中国—日本森林植物亚区华东区与华南区过渡地带,无论是地形、地势、气候等非生物因素和动植物种群都呈现明显过渡性。乌岩岭国家级自然保护区被誉为物种基因库,森林覆盖率为92.8%,其中阔叶林蓄积量达28 万m3以上,所占比例为45%,是华东地区保存最完善的大面积原生性中亚热带常绿阔叶林[16]

  • 数据来源有乌岩岭国家级自然保护区典型森林样地调查数据(2017年)、乌岩岭国家级自然保护区森林资源二类清查数据(2017年)、泰顺县气象局监测数据和中华人民共和国林业行业标准LY/T 1721−2008《森林生态系统服务功能评估规范》。不同类型林分净生产力和土壤年固碳量采用华东地区森林生态系统定位站的观测数据[17]

  • 依据LY/T 1721−2008《森林生态系统服务功能评估规范》,同时结合乌岩岭国家级自然保护区森林生态系统的实际情况,本次评估选取固碳释氧、涵养水源、积累营养物质、保育土壤、净化大气环境、生物多样性保护等6项服务15项指标(表1),并从物质量和价值量2个方面对乌岩岭国家级自然保护区森林生态系统服务进行评估。

    服务类别评估指标
    涵养水源   调节水量、净化水质
    保育土壤   固土、保肥
    固碳释氧   固碳、释氧
    积累营养物质 林木营养积累(氮、磷、钾)
    净化大气环境 负离子量、二氧化硫量、氟化物量、氮氧化物量、滞尘量
    生物多样性保护物种保育

    Table 1.  Evaluation index system of forest ecosystem service in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve

  • 参照LY/T 1721−2008《森林生态系统服务功能评估规范》,对以上指标进行评估。乌岩岭国家级自然保护区森林生态系统服务的物质量结合表2计算得出,价值量结合表3计算得出。林分类型分为针叶林(杉木Cunninghamia lanceolata林、马尾松Pinus massoniana林、柳杉Cryptomeria fortunei林),常绿阔叶林,针阔混交林,经济林(主要为茶树Camellia sinensis、猕猴桃Actinidia chinensis林),竹林。

    涵养水源保育土壤积累营养物质
    林分类型地表径
    流量/
    mm
    林分蒸
    散量/
    mm
    土壤侵
    蚀模数/
    (t·hm−2·a−1)
    土壤
    容重/
    (t·m−3)
    土壤
    氮/%
    土壤
    磷/%
    土壤
    钾/%
    土壤
    有机
    质/%
    氮/%磷/%钾/%
    针叶林马尾松林5.70 916.080.111.3960.0900.0841.2932.1560.3250.1600.680
    杉杉木林5.701 072.920.161.2000.0960.0821.3332.5160.3240.1650.700
    柳杉林 5.701 072.920.110.9560.0810.0871.3423.2700.3240.1650.700
    常绿阔叶林2.60 667.630.140.9010.1490.0881.3333.3910.2370.9721.390
    针阔混交林2.60 966.050.131.3720.0900.0751.2333.0590.2800.5661.0325
    经济林  6.30 914.690.131.4070.1540.1191.0733.1390.1800.0720.390
    竹林   6.30 902.200.111.2420.1380.1091.1093.2560.0310.0120.562

    Table 2.  Material quality parameter data of forest ecosystem services in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve

    净化大气环境生物多样性保护
    林分类型负离子量/
    (个·cm−3)
    平均树
    高/m
    吸收二氧
    化硫量/
    (kg·hm−2·a−1)
    吸收氟
    化物量/
    (kg·hm−2·a−1)
    吸收氮氧
    化物量/
    (kg·hm−2·a−1)
    滞尘量/
    (kg·hm−2·a−1)
    香农-威纳
    多样性指数
    针叶林马尾松林 6 67813.75117.604.656.033 2002.29
    杉木林  4 88013.36117.604.656.033 2000.83
    柳杉林  7 33516.83117.604.656.033 2001.62
    常绿阔叶林24 17514.0288.652.586.021 6553.03
    针阔混交林 9 82511.50152.132.586.021 6552.03
    经济林   877 1.20152.132.586.021 6550.45
    竹林   11 75314.06152.132.586.021 6550.84
      说明:年平均降水量采用保护区2010−2016年生态站监测数据,为2 405.36 mm·a−1;无林地水土流失土壤年侵蚀模数参照中国科     学院观测点泥沙流失量,为17.66 t·hm−2·a−1[18]。土壤氮、土壤磷、土壤钾、土壤有机质、氮、磷、钾均为质量分数
    单位库容
    造价/(元·t−1)
    水质净化费用/
    (元·t−1)
    运输和挖取单位
    体积的土方花费/
    (元·m−3)
    磷酸二铵化肥
    价格/(元·t−1)
    氯化钾化肥
    价格/(元·t−1)
    有机质价格/
    (元·t−1)
    固碳费用/
    (元·t−1)
    6.112.0912.602 400.002 200.00320.001 200.00
    氧气制造
    费用/(元·t−1)
    负离子制造
    费用/(10−18元·个−1)
    二氧化硫排
    污费/(元·kg−1)
    氟化物排
    污费/(元·kg−1)
    氮氧化物排
    污费/(元·kg−1)
    滞尘排污费/
    (元·kg−1)
    1 000.009.461.850.690.970.23

    Table 3.  Value parameter data of forest ecosystem services in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve

  • 表4可知:2017年乌岩岭国家级自然保护区森林生态系统净化大气环境服务的物质量最大,其次为涵养水源的物质量,为3.99×108 m3

    林分类型固碳量/
    (t·a−1)
    释氧量/
    (t·a−1)
    固碳释氧量/
    (t·a−1)
    调/净水量/
    (m3·a−1)
    积累营养物质量/
    (t·a−1)
    固土量/
    (t·a−1)
    针叶林 马尾松林5.96×1031.19×1041.78×1044.75×1071.16×1045.62×104
    杉木林 2.20×1044.82×1047.02×1047.57×1074.82×1049.99×104
    柳杉林 9.78×1022.25×1033.23×1032.77×1062.25×1033.67×103
    常绿阔叶林3.91×1049.19×1041.31×1051.97×1082.01×1051.99×105
    针阔混交林9.84×1021.97×1032.95×1035.71×1063.10×1036.97×103
    经济林  4.58×1011.04×1021.50×1022.55×1056.07×1013.02×102
    竹林   2.50×1046.08×1048.58×1047.00×1073.23×1048.21×104
    均值   1.34×1043.10×1044.45×1045.70×1074.26×1046.40×104
    合计   9.41×1042.17×1053.11×1053.99×1082.98×1054.48×105
    林分类型保肥量/
    (t·a−1)
    负离子量/
    (个·a−1)
    二氧化硫/
    (kg·a−1)
    氟化物/
    (kg·a−1)
    氮氧化物量/
    (kg·a−1)
    滞尘量/
    (kg·a−1)
    针叶林 马尾松林2.04×1051.55×10233.77×1051.49×1041.92×1041.06×108
    杉木林 4.02×1051.96×10236.71×1052.65×1043.43×1041.90×108
    柳杉林 1.75×1041.36×10222.46×1049.72×1021.25×1036.94×106
    常绿阔叶林9.88×1052.02×10241.01×1062.93×1046.82×1042.46×108
    针阔混交林3.10×1042.36×10226.04×1041.03×1032.38×1038.60×106
    经济林  1.34×1039.51×10182.62×1038.00×1011.03×1023.72×105
    竹林   3.78×1054.06×10237.11×1051.21×1042.81×1041.01×108
    均值   2.89×1054.03×10234.08×1051.21×1042.19×1049.42×107
    合计   2.02×1062.82×10242.85×1068.49×1041.53×1056.59×108

    Table 4.  Material quality of ecosystem services in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve

  • 表5可知:2017年乌岩岭国家级自然保护区森林生态系统服务的总价值为100.24×108元·a−1,单位面积生态服务价值为3.92×105元·hm−2·a−1。马尾松林、常绿阔叶林、针阔混交林、杉木林、柳杉林、经济林、竹林生态服务价值分别为1.00×109、5.33×109、1.34×108、1.93×109、7.59×107、5.32×106和1.55×109元·a−1。马尾松林、常绿阔叶林、针阔混交林、杉木林、柳杉林、经济林、竹林的单位面积生态服务价值分别为3.21×105、4.69×105、3.36×105、3.38×105、3.63×105、3.10×105、3.31×105、3.51×105和3.92×105元·hm−2·a−1

    生态系统服务价值量/(元·a−1)单位面积
    生态服务
    价值/
    (元·hm−2·a−1)
    林分类型固碳释
    氧价值
    生物多样性
    保护价值
    涵养水
    源价值
    积累营养
    物质价值
    保育土
    壤价值
    净化大
    气价值
    生态服务
    总价值
    针叶林马尾松林1.90×1073.20×1073.90×1088.15×1074.50×1082.76×1071.00×1093.21×105
    杉木林 7.46×1071.71×1076.21×1083.36×1088.34×1084.65×1071.93×1093.38×105
    柳杉林 3.43×1061.05×1062.28×1071.57×1073.12×1071.76×1067.59×1073.63×105
    常绿阔叶林1.39×1082.27×1081.62×1091.43×1091.85×1097.72×1075.33×1094.69×105
    针阔混交林3.15×1063.97×1064.68×1072.20×1075.54×1072.30×1061.34×1083.36×105
    经济林  1.59×1055.16×1042.09×1064.17×1052.51×1069.07×1045.32×1063.10×105
    竹林   9.08×1071.40×1075.74×1081.51×1086.88×1082.83×1071.55×1093.31×105
    均值   4.71×1074.22×1074.68×1082.90×1085.59×1082.63×1071.43×1093.51×105
    合计   3.30×1082.96×1083.27×1092.03×1093.91×1091.84×1081.00×10103.92×105

    Table 5.  Value quality of ecosystem services in Wuyanling National Nature Reserve

    保护区森林生态系统服务价值所占比例分别为保育土壤39.00%、涵养水源32.65%、积累营养物质20.27%、固碳释氧3.29%、生物多样性保护2.95%、净化大气环境1.83%。可见,保育土壤、涵养水源和积累营养物质是乌岩岭森林生态系统主要的服务价值,三者比例之和高达91.92%,占据绝对优势。

    保护区不同森林类型生态系统服务价值从大到小依次为常绿阔叶林、杉木林、竹林、马尾松林、针阔混交林、柳杉林、经济林,其对应的生态系统服务价值所占比例分别为53.20%、19.24%、15.43%、9.98%、1.33%、0.76%、0.05%。可见,常绿阔叶林对乌岩岭森林生态系统服务价值贡献在50%以上,占绝对地位。

  • 乌岩岭国家级自然保护区不同森林类型的生态服务价值与单位面积服务价值的排序并不一致,这说明生态系统服务价值除受各林分面积大小的影响外,还受林分的结构、活力、生态力的影响[19-21]。常绿阔叶林的单位面积生态服务价值远远高于其他林分,因此可在森林总面积保持不变的情况下,通过把针叶林改造成阔叶林等林相改造技术,提高林分质量,优化生态系统的结构,进而增加生态系统服务的产出和价值[22-24]

    乌岩岭国家级自然保护区提供的主要生态服务是保育土壤、涵养水源,这与付梦娣等[10]对泰顺县生态服务的研究一致,但乌岩岭国家级自然保护区的单位面积生态服务价值(3.92×105元·hm−2·a−1)是泰顺县单位面积生态服务价值(1.90×105元·hm−2·a−1)的2倍多。可见,乌岩岭国家级自然保护区对维护泰顺县生态安全具有重要作用。

    乌岩岭国家级自然保护区净化大气环境服务价值达1.84×108元,这其中还不包括可吸入颗粒物(PM10),细颗粒物(PM2.5)等服务价值。可见,保护区在养生保健、预防疾病等方面具有巨大的潜力,十分适合建设成为森林康养基地[25]。借助乌岩岭的生态优势,整合森林康养资源,丰富生态旅游产品的内涵,提高康养的层次和满意度,从而实现保护区的可持续发展,开辟绿水青山转化为金山银山的另一种途径。

    自然保护区生态补偿资金的分配与生态系统服务长期脱钩,是造成保护区与周边村民矛盾的重要因素。生态补偿的本质就是对生态系统服务的外溢效益进行补偿[26]。评估生态系统的服务价值可作为生态补偿标准的依据[27]

Reference (27)

Catalog

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return