Please wait a minute...
Journal of Arid Land
Journal of Arid Land  2024, Vol. 16 Issue (6): 816-833    DOI: 10.1007/s40333-024-0058-3     CSTR: 32276.14.s40333-024-0058-3
Research article     
Spatiotemporal variations of ecosystem services and driving factors in the Tianchi Bogda Peak Natural Reserve of Xinjiang, China
ZHU Haiqiang1,2,3, WANG Jinlong4, TANG Junhu4, DING Zhaolong4, GONG Lu4,*()
1Key Laboratory of Sustainable Development of Xingjiang's Historical and Cultural Tourism, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
2College of Tourism, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
3Ecological Postdoctoral Research Station, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
4College of Ecology and Environment, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830017, China
Download: HTML     PDF(2625KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Abstract  

Nature reserves play a significant role in providing ecosystem services and are key sites for biodiversity conservation. The Tianchi Bogda Peak Natural Reserve (TBPNR), located in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China, is an important ecological barrier area in the temperate arid zone. The evaluation of its important ecosystem services is of great significance to improve the management level and ecological protection efficiency of the reserve. In the present study, we assessed the spatiotemporal variations of four ecosystem services (including net primary productivity (NPP), water yield, soil conservation, and habitat quality) in the TBPNR from 2000 to 2020 based on the environmental and social data using the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs (InVEST) model. In addition, the coldspot and hotspot areas of ecosystem services were identified by hotspot analysis, and the trade-off and synergistic relationships between ecosystem services were analyzed using factor analysis in a geographic detector. During the study period, NPP and soil conservation values in the reserve increased by 48.20% and 25.56%, respectively; conversely, water yield decreased by 16.56%, and there was no significant change in habitat quality. Spatially, both NPP and habitat quality values were higher in the northern part and lower in the southern part, whereas water yield showed an opposite trend. Correlation analysis revealed that NPP showed a synergistic relationship with habitat quality and soil conservation, and exhibited a trade-off relationship with water yield. Water yield and habitat quality also had a trade-off relationship. NPP and habitat quality were affected by annual average temperature and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), respectively, while water yield and soil conservation were more affected by digital elevation model (DEM). Therefore, attention should be paid to the spatial distribution and dynamics of trade-off and synergistic relationships between ecosystem services in future ecological management. The findings of the present study provide a reference that could facilitate the sustainable utilization of ecosystem services in the typical fragile areas of Northwest China.

Key words： net primary productivity (NPP)      water yield      soil conservation      habitat quality      Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs (InVEST) model      geographic detector      Tianchi Bogda Peak Natural Reserve     
Received: 04 January 2024      Published: 30 June 2024
Corresponding Authors: *GONG Lu (E-mail: gonglu721@163.com)
Service
E-mail this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
ZHU Haiqiang
WANG Jinlong
TANG Junhu
DING Zhaolong
GONG Lu
Cite this article:

ZHU Haiqiang, WANG Jinlong, TANG Junhu, DING Zhaolong, GONG Lu. Spatiotemporal variations of ecosystem services and driving factors in the Tianchi Bogda Peak Natural Reserve of Xinjiang, China. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(6): 816-833.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1007/s40333-024-0058-3     OR     http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2024/V16/I6/816

Fig. 1 Overview of the Tianchi Bogda Peak Natural Reserve (TBPNR) based on digital elevation model (DEM). The boundary of the study area was extracted from the National Geomatics Center of China (http://www.ngcc.cn/).
Category Indicator Resolution Time period Brief introduction Data source
Environmental
factors		 NDVI 30 m 2000, 2010,
2020		 The dataset is based on the
Google Earth Engine cloud
computing platform, with
an annual temporal resolution.		 National Science &
Technology Infrastructure
(http://www.nesdc.org.cn)
NPP 500 m 2000, 2010,
2020		 Obtained by multiplying by
a scaling factor of 0.0001.		 Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center
(https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/data)
DEM 30 m - Data used for factor analysis
in a geographic detector.		 Geospatial Data Cloud
(http://www.gscloud.cn)
Temperature 1000 m 2000, 2010,
2020		 Merging monthly temperature
into annual average temperature
for factor analysis in a
geographic detector.		 National Earth System
Science Data Center
(http://loess.geodata.cn)
Evapotranspiration 1000 m 2000, 2010,
2020		 Used for the calculation of
water yield.
Soil type and
texture		 500 m - Including soil root depth,
organic matter content, and silt,
sand, clay contents.		 Harmonized World Soil Database
(http://westdc.westgis.ac.cn)
Precipitation 1000 m 2000, 2010,
2020		 Combining monthly values into
annual value for subsequent
analysis.		 National Earth System Science Data Centre (http://loess.geodata.cn)
Social factors Lengths of roads
in the reserve		 - 2000, 2010,
2020		 Used for the calculation
of habitat quality.		 Open street map
(https://www.openstreetmap.
org)
LUCC 30 m 2000, 2010,
2020		 Used for analyzing land transfer
matrixes. The land use
classification in the study area
is based on the primary
classification standards of
LUCC established by the
Chinese Academy of Sciences.		 Resource and Environmental
Science Data Center of the
Chinese Academy of Sciences (https://www.resdc.cn)
Table 1 Description of the data sources
Fig. 2 Spatial distribution of ecosystem services in the TBPNR in 2000, 2010, and 2020. (a1-a3), NPP (net primary productivity); (b1-b3), water yield; (c1-c3), soil conservation; (d1-d3), habitat quality.
Fig. 3 Distribution of ecosystem services in the TBPNR at different altitudinal gradients in 2000, 2010, and 2020. (a), NPP; (b), water yield; (c), soil conservation; (d), habitat quality.
Ecosystem service 2000 2010 2020 Rate of change from 2000 to 2020 (%)
NPP (g C/m2) 193.08 230.32 286.15 48.20
Water yield (mm) 71.43 176.85 59.60 -16.56
Soil conservation (t/hm2) 20.89 12.86 26.23 25.56
Habitat quality 0.664 0.652 0.653 -1.657
Table 2 Changes of four ecosystem services in the Tianchi Bogda Peak Natural Reserve (TBPNR) from 2000 to 2020
Fig. 4 Spatial distribution of the coldspots and hotspots of ecosystem services in the TBPNR in 2000, 2010, and 2020. (a1-a3), NPP; (b1-b3), water yield; (c1-c3), soil conservation; (d1-d3), habitat quality.
Area type Area proportion (%)
NPP Water yield Soil conservation Habitat quality
2000 2010 2020 2000 2010 2020 2000 2010 2020 2000 2010 2020
Hotspot 53.62 56.72 57.09 16.77 22.38 15.87 24.48 11.88 13.56 65.49 67.73 69.56
Coldspot 39.98 41.13 38.32 76.00 32.77 29.52 13.06 18.59 25.51 26.86 23.99 27.87
Table 3 Proportions of the coldspot and hotspot areas of ecosystem services in the TBPNR in 2000, 2010, and 2020
NPP Habitat quality Water yield Soil conservation
NPP 1.000
Habitat quality 0.534** 1.000
Water yield -0.506** -0.829** 1.000
Soil conservation 0.296** -0.126 0.053** 1.000
Table 4 Correlation coefficients between ecosystem services in the TBPNR
Fig. 5 Factor analysis on q values of drivers influencing ecosystem services in the TBPNR. (a), NPP; (b), water yield; (c), soil conservation; (d), habitat quality. q denotes the explanatory power of the drivers on ecosystem services and their trade-off and synergistic relationships, with a value closer to 1.0000 indicating a higher explanatory power.
Fig. 6 Factor analysis on q values of drivers influencing the trade-off and synergistic relationships between ecosystem services in the TBPNR. (a), habitat quality-NPP; (b), habitat quality-soil conservation; (c), habitat quality-water yield; (d), NPP-soil conservation; (e), NPP-water yield; (f), soil conservation-water yield.
Fig. 7 Land use transition matrix of the TBPNR from 2000 to 2020. The values in the figure represent the transition areas between land-use types (unit: hm2).
[1]   A Y L, Wang G Q, Liu T X, et al. 2019. Spatial variation of correlations between vertical soil water and evapotranspiration and their controlling factors in a semi-arid region. Journal of Hydrology, 574: 53-63.
[2]   Anache J A A, Flanagan D C, Srivastava A, et al. 2018. Land use and climate change impacts on runoff and soil erosion at the hillslope scale in the Brazilian Cerrado. Science of the Total Environment, 622: 140-151.
[3]   Bacani V M, da Silva B H M, Sato A, et al. 2024. Carbon storage and sequestration in a eucalyptus productive zone in the Brazilian Cerrado, using the Ca-Markov/Random Forest and InVEST models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 444: 141291, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141291.
[4]   Bai H, Yin L Y, Su H M, et al. 2022. Camera trapping survey of birds and mammals in the Tianchi Bogda Peak Nature Reserve of Xinjiang, China. Arid Land Geography, 45(3): 459-484. (in Chinese)
[5]   Bailey S. 2007. Increasing connectivity in fragmented landscapes: an investigation of evidence for biodiversity gain in woodlands. Forest Ecology and Management, 238(1-3): 7-23.
[6]   Bera B, Bhattacharjee S, Sengupta N, et al. 2022. Significant reduction of carbon stocks and changes of ecosystem service valuation of Indian Sundarban. Scientific Reports, 12(1): 7809, doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-11716-5.
[7]   Chen J Y, Jiang B, Bai Y, et al. 2019a. Quantifying ecosystem services supply and demand shortfalls and mismatches for management optimisation. Science of the Total Environment, 650: 1426-1439.
[8]   Chen W X, Chi G Q, Li J F. 2019b. The spatial association of ecosystem services with land use and land cover change at the county level in China, 1995-2015. Science of the Total Environment, 669: 459-470.
[9]   Clerici N, Cote-Navarro F, Escobedo F J, et al. 2019. Spatio-temporal and cumulative effects of land use-land cover and climate change on two ecosystem services in the Colombian Andes. Science of the Total Environment, 685: 1181-1192.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.275
[10]   Cord A F, Bartkowski B, Beckmann M, et al. 2017. Towards systematic analyses of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies: main concepts, methods and the road ahead. Ecosystem Services, 28: 264-272.
[11]   Dai E F, Wang Y H. 2024. Identifying driving factors of ecosystem service trade-offs in mountainous region of southwestern China across geomorphic and climatic types. Ecological Indicators, 158: 111520, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111520.
[12]   Feng J Y, Chen F S, Tang F R, et al. 2022. The trade-offs and synergies of ecosystem services in Jiulianshan National Nature Reserve in Jiangxi Province, China. Forests, 13(3): 416, doi: 10.3390/f13030416.
[13]   Fulford R S, Russell M, Myers M, et al. 2022. Models help set ecosystem service baselines for restoration assessment. Journal of Environmental Management, 317: 115411, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115411.
[14]   Geng W L, Li Y Y, Zhang P Y, et al. 2022. Analyzing spatio-temporal changes and trade-offs/synergies among ecosystem services in the Yellow River Basin, China. Ecological Indicators, 138: 108825, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108825.
[15]   Gomes E, Inacio M, Bogdzevi K, et al. 2021. Future land-use changes and its impacts on terrestrial ecosystem services: A review. Science of the Total Environment, 781: 146716, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146716.
[16]   Gong J, Xie Y C, Cao E, et al. 2019. Integration of InVEST-habitat quality model with landscape pattern indexes to assess mountain plant biodiversity change: A case study of Bailongjiang watershed in Gansu Province. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 29(7): 1193-1210.
doi: 10.1007/s11442-019-1653-7
[17]   Gower S T, Krankina O, Olson R J, et al. 2001. Net primary production and carbon allocation patterns of boreal forest ecosystems. Ecological Applications, 11(5): 1395-1411.
[18]   Guo M M, Wang W L, Wang T C, et al. 2020. Impacts of different vegetation restoration options on gully head soil resistance and soil erosion in loess tablelands. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 45(4): 1038-1050.
[19]   Guo P F, Zhang F F, Wang H Y. 2022a. The response of ecosystem service value to land use change in the middle and lower Yellow River: A case study of the Henan section. Ecological Indicators, 140: 109019, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109019.
[20]   Guo S S, Wu C Y, Wang Y H, et al. 2022b. Threshold effect of ecosystem services in response to climate change, human activity and landscape pattern in the upper and middle Yellow River of China. Ecological Indicators, 136: 108603, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108603.
[21]   Kang J M, Li C L, Zhang B L, et al. 2023. How do natural and human factors influence ecosystem services changing? A case study in two most developed regions of China. Ecological Indicators, 146: 109891, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.109891.
[22]   Kang Z W. 2022. Research on ecosystem service function of Manas River Basin based on InVEST model. MSc Thesis. Shihezi: Shihezi University. (in Chinese)
[23]   Li F, Li Y M, Zhou X W, et al. 2022a. Modeling and analyzing supply-demand relationships of water resources in Xinjiang from a perspective of ecosystem services. Journal of Arid Land, 14(2): 115-138.
[24]   Li M Y, Liang D, Xia J, et al. 2021. Evaluation of water conservation function of Danjiang River Basin in Qinling Mountains, China based on InVEST model. Journal of Environmental Management, 286: 112212, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112212.
[25]   Li Q, Li W J, Wang S, et al. 2022b. Assessing heterogeneity of trade-offs/synergies and values among ecosystem services in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration. Ecological Indicators, 140: 109026, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109026.
[26]   Li Y G, Liu W, Feng Q, et al. 2023. The role of land use change in affecting ecosystem services and the ecological security pattern of the Hexi Regions, Northwest China. Science of the Total Environment, 855: 158940, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158940.
[27]   Liang J Y, Xia J Y, Liu L L, et al. 2013. Global patterns of the responses of leaf-level photosynthesis and respiration in terrestrial plants to experimental warming. Journal of Plant Ecology, 6(6): 437-447.
doi: 10.1093/jpe/rtt003
[28]   Liu Q, Yang Z P, Shi H, et al. 2019. Ecological risk assessment of geohazards in Natural World Heritage Sites: an empirical analysis of Bogda, Tianshan. Open Geosciences, 11(1): 327-340.
[29]   Liu S S, Liao Q P, Xiao M Z, et al. 2022a. Spatial and temporal variations of habitat quality and its response of landscape dynamic in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(6): 3594, doi: 10.3390/ijerph19063594.
[30]   Liu W, Zhan J Y, Zhao F, et al. 2022b. Spatio-temporal variations of ecosystem services and their drivers in the Pearl River Delta, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 337: 130466, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130466.
[31]   Liu W, Zhan J Y, Zhao F, et al. 2022c. Scale effects and time variation of trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in the Pearl River Delta, China. Remote Sensing, 14(20): 5173, doi: 10.3390/rs14205173.
[32]   Mengist W, Soromessa T, Feyisa G L. 2021. Landscape change effects on habitat quality in a forest biosphere reserve: implications for the conservation of native habitats. Journal of Cleaner Production, 329: 129778, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129778.
[33]   Mouchet M A, Lamarque P, Martín-López B, et al. 2014. An interdisciplinary methodological guide for quantifying associations between ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 28: 298-308.
[34]   Pacifici M, Visconti P, Butchart S H M, et al. 2017. Species' traits influenced their response to recent climate change. Nature Climate Change, 7(3): 205-208.
doi: 10.1038/NCLIMATE3223
[35]   Paiola A, Assandri G, Brambilla M, et al. 2020. Exploring the potential of vineyards for biodiversity conservation and delivery of biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services: A global-scale systematic review. Science of the Total Environment, 706: 135839, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135839.
[36]   Pan H H, Wang J Q, Du Z Q, et al. 2023. Spatiotemporal evolution of ecosystem services and its potential drivers in coalfields of Shanxi Province, China. Ecological Indicators, 148: 110109, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110109.
[37]   Peng Z T, Zhang Y D, Zhu L J, et al. 2022. Divergent tree growth and the response to climate warming and humidification in the Tianshan Mountains, China. Forests, 13(6): 886, doi: 10.3390/f13060886.
[38]   Ran C, Wang S J, Bai X Y, et al. 2020. Trade-offs and synergies of ecosystem services in southwestern China. Environmental Engineering Science, 37(10): 669-678.
[39]   Sharp R, Tallis H T, Ricketts T, et al. 2015. InVEST 3.2.0 User's Guide. The Natural Capital Project. Stanford University, University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy, and World Wildlife Fund. [2023-10-20]. https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/software/invest/invest-downloads-data.
[40]   Su B R, Liu M C. 2023. An ecosystem service trade-off management framework based on key ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators, 154: 110894, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.110894.
[41]   Tan F L, Lu Z Y, Zeng F S. 2024. Study on the trade-off/synergy spatiotemporal benefits of ecosystem services and its influencing factors in hilly areas of southern China. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 11: 1342766, doi: 10.3389/fevo.2023.1342766.
[42]   Wang T, Chen X D, Zheng X, et al. 2022a. Identification of priority conservation areas for natural heritage sites integrating landscape ecological risks and ecosystem services: A case study in the Bogda, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(4): 2044, doi: 10.3390/ijerph19042044.
[43]   Wang X Z, Wu J Z, Liu Y L, et al. 2022b. Driving factors of ecosystem services and their spatiotemporal change assessment based on land use types in the Loess Plateau. Journal of Environmental Management, 311: 114835, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114835.
[44]   Wang Y H, Dai E F. 2020. Spatial-temporal changes in ecosystem services and the trade-off relationship in mountain regions: A case study of Hengduan Mountain region in Southwest China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 264: 121573, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121573.
[45]   Wang Y W, Yue H B, Peng Q, et al. 2020. Recent responses of grassland net primary productivity to climatic and anthropogenic factors in Kyrgyzstan. Land Degradation & Development, 31(16): 2490-2506.
[46]   Wei W, Nan S X, Xie B B, et al. 2023. The spatial-temporal changes of supply-demand of ecosystem services and ecological compensation: A case study of Hexi Corridor, Northwest China. Ecological Engineering, 187: 106861, doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2022.106861.
[47]   Wen B, Zhang X L, Yang Z P, et al. 2016. Influence of tourist disturbance on soil properties, plant communities, and surface water quality in the Tianchi scenic area of Xinjiang, China. Journal of Arid Land, 8(2): 304-313.
doi: yangzp@ms.xjb.ac.cn
[48]   Williams J R. 1990. The erosion-productivity impact calculator (EPIC) model: A case history. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 329(1255): 421-428.
[49]   Wischmeier W H, Smith D D. 1958. Rainfall energy and its relationship to soil loss. Transactions American Geophysical Union, 39(2): 285-291.
[50]   Xian J L, Xia C Q, Cao S X. 2020. Cost-benefit analysis for China's Grain for Green Program. Ecological Engineering, 151: 105850, doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.105850.
[51]   Xiang Q, Kan A K, Yu X X, et al. 2023. Assessment of topographic effect on habitat quality in mountainous area using InVEST model. Land, 12(1): 186, doi: 10.3390/land12010186.
[52]   Xu W H, Xiao Y, Zhang J J, et al. 2017. Strengthening protected areas for biodiversity and ecosystem services in China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(7): 1601-1606.
[53]   Xu X B, Jiang B, Chen M K, et al. 2020. Strengthening the effectiveness of nature reserves in representing ecosystem services: The Yangtze River Economic Belt in China. Land Use Policy, 96: 104717, doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104717.
[54]   Yang H F, Zhong X N, Deng S Q, et al. 2021a. Assessment of the impact of LUCC on NPP and its influencing factors in the Yangtze River basin, China. Catena, 206: 105542, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105542.
[55]   Yang J, Xie B P, Zhang D G, et al. 2021b. Climate and land use change impacts on water yield ecosystem service in the Yellow River Basin, China. Environmental Earth Sciences, 80(3): 72, doi: 10.1007/s12665-020-09277-9.
[56]   Yang X, Chen R S, Meadows M E, et al. 2020. Modelling water yield with the InVEST model in a data scarce region of Northwest China. Water Supply, 20(3): 1035-1045.
[57]   Yin C H, Chen X Q, Luo M, et al. 2023. Quantifying the contribution of driving factors on distribution and change of net primary productivity of vegetation in the Mongolian Plateau. Remote Sensing, 15(8): 1986, doi: 10.3390/rs15081986.
[58]   Yohannes H, Soromessa T, Argaw M, et al. 2021. Spatio-temporal changes in habitat quality and linkage with landscape characteristics in the Beressa watershed, Blue Nile basin of Ethiopian highlands. Journal of Environmental Management, 281: 111885, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111885.
[59]   Yuan X M, Guo B, Lu M. 2023. The responses of vegetation NPP dynamics to the influences of climate-human factors on Qinghai-Tibet Plateau from 2000 to 2020. Remote Sensing, 15(9): 2419, doi: 10.3390/rs15092419.
[60]   Zani D, Crowther T W, Mo L, et al. 2020. Increased growing-season productivity drives earlier autumn leaf senescence in temperate trees. Science, 370(6520): 1066-1071.
doi: 10.1126/science.abd8911 pmid: 33243884
[61]   Zhang J J, Zhu W B, Zhu L Q, et al. 2022a. Multi-scale analysis of trade-off/synergistic effects of forest ecosystem services in the Funiu Mountain Region, China. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 32(5): 981-999.
[62]   Zhang Q F, Lü X Z, Yu X X, et al. 2022b. Species and spatial differences in vegetation rainfall interception capacity: A synthesis and meta-analysis in China. Catena, 213: 106223, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2022.106223.
[63]   Zhang Z Y, Liu Y F, Wang Y H, et al. 2020. What factors affect the synergy and tradeoff between ecosystem services, and how, from a geospatial perspective? Journal of Cleaner Production, 257: 120454, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120454.
[64]   Zhao J, Li C. 2022. Investigating ecosystem service trade-offs/synergies and their influencing factors in the Yangtze River Delta Region, China. Land, 11(1): 106, doi: 10.3390/land11010106.
[65]   Zhao Q J, Wen Z M, Chen S L, et al. 2020. Quantifying land use/land cover and landscape pattern changes and impacts on ecosystem services. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(1): 126, doi: 10.3390/ijerph17010126.
[66]   Zhao T, Pan J H, Bi F. 2023. Can human activities enhance the trade-off intensity of ecosystem services in arid inland river basins? Taking the Taolai River basin as an example. Science of the Total Environment, 861: 160662, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160662.
[67]   Zhou B H, Liao Z Z, Chen S R, et al. 2022. Net primary productivity of forest ecosystems in the Southwest Karst Region from the perspective of carbon neutralization. Forests, 13(9): 1367, doi: 10.3390/f13091367.
[1] ZHENG Guoqiang, Li Cunxiu, LI Runjie, LUO Jing, FAN Chunxia, ZHU Hailing. Spatio-temporal evolution analysis of landscape pattern and habitat quality in the Qinghai Province section of the Yellow River Basin from 2000 to 2022 based on InVEST model[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(9): 1183-1196.
[2] Xijiri, ZHOU Ruiping, BAO Baorong, Burenjirigala . Spatiotemporal patterns and drivers of cultivated land conversion in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, northern China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(9): 1197-1213.
[3] ZUBAIDA Muyibul. Trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services in Yutian County along the Keriya River Basin, Northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(7): 943-962.
[4] CHEN Jiazhen, KASIMU Alimujiang, REHEMAN Rukeya, WEI Bohao, HAN Fuqiang, ZHANG Yan. Temporal and spatial variation and prediction of water yield and water conservation in the Bosten Lake Basin based on the PLUS-InVEST model[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(6): 852-875.
[5] CHANG Sen, WEI Yaqi, DAI Zhenzhong, XU Wen, WANG Xing, DUAN Jiajia, ZOU Liang, ZHAO Guorong, REN Xiaoying, FENG Yongzhong. Landscape ecological risk assessment and its driving factors in the Weihe River basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(5): 603-614.
[6] BAI Jizhou, LI Jing, RAN Hui, ZHOU Zixiang, DANG Hui, ZHANG Cheng, YU Yuyang. Influence of varied drought types on soil conservation service within the framework of climate change: insights from the Jinghe River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(2): 220-245.
[7] WEI Zhudeng, DU Na, YU Wenzheng. Land use change and its driving factors in the ecological function area: A case study in the Hedong Region of the Gansu Province, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(1): 71-90.
[8] WANG Jing, WEI Yulu, PENG Biao, LIU Siqi, LI Jianfeng. Spatiotemporal variations in ecosystem services and their trade-offs and synergies against the background of the gully control and land consolidation project on the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(1): 131-145.
[9] WANG Xinyu, SU Yu, SUN Yiqiu, ZHANG Yan, GUAN Yinghui, WANG Zhirong, WU Hailong. Sediment yield and erosion-deposition distribution characteristics in ephemeral gullies in black soil areas under geocell protection[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(2): 180-190.
[10] CAO Yijie, MA Yonggang, BAO Anming, CHANG Cun, LIU Tie. Evaluation of the water conservation function in the Ili River Delta of Central Asia based on the InVEST model[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(12): 1455-1473.
[11] ZHANG Shubao, LEI Jun, TONG Yanjun, ZHANG Xiaolei, LU Danni, FAN Liqin, DUAN Zuliang. Temporal and spatial responses of ecological resilience to climate change and human activities in the economic belt on the northern slope of the Tianshan Mountains, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(10): 1245-1268.
[12] LUAN Yongfei, HUANG Guohe, ZHENG Guanghui. Spatiotemporal evolution and prediction of habitat quality in Hohhot City of China based on the InVEST and CA-Markov models[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(1): 20-33.
[13] YAN Xue, LI Lanhai. Spatiotemporal characteristics and influencing factors of ecosystem services in Central Asia[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(1): 1-19.
[14] DONG Jianhong, ZHANG Zhibin, LIU Benteng, ZHANG Xinhong, ZHANG Wenbin, CHEN Long. Spatiotemporal variations and driving factors of habitat quality in the loess hilly area of the Yellow River Basin: A case study of Lanzhou City, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2022, 14(6): 637-652.
[15] WU Changxue, QIU Dexun, GAO Peng, MU Xingmin, ZHAO Guangju. Application of the InVEST model for assessing water yield and its response to precipitation and land use in the Weihe River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2022, 14(4): 426-440.