Assessing the ecological vulnerability of the upper reaches of the Minjiang River

Abstract

The upper reaches of the Minjiang River (URMR), located on the eastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau in southwestern China, are an important component of the ecological barrier of the Upper Yangtze River Basin. Climate change and human activities have increased the ecological sensitivity and vulnerability of the region, which may pose a threat to the ecological security of the Yangtze River Basin and have negative impacts on local social and economic development. In this study, we analyzed land use and cover change (LUCC) of the URMR between 2000 and 2010, and found that the total rate of LUCC was less than 0.50% during this period. In addition, net primary production (NPP) was employed to describe the changes in ecosystem sensitivity and vulnerability, and the results demonstrated that slightly and moderately sensitive and vulnerable zones occupied the largest area, distributed mainly in forest, shrub, and grassland ecosystems. However, compared with the period from 2000 to 2005, the ecological sensitivity and vulnerability showed a worsening trend in the period 2005–2010. Exploring the relationship between vulnerability/sensitivity and environmental factors, we found that sensitivity and vulnerability were positively correlated with precipitation (>700 mm) and aridity index (>36 mm/°C). The results highlight that the future ecological sensitivity and vulnerability of URMR should be further investigated, and that the LUCC induced by human activities and climate change have caused alteration of in ecosystem vulnerability.

Mapping Ecosystem Service Bundles to Detect Distinct Types of Multifunctionality within the Diverse Landscape of the Yangtze River Basin, China

“…As an ecological shelter zone, the natural landscape in the upper Yangtze River (e.g., grassland and forest) must be conserved because it is very important for the sustainable development of ecosystems in the whole basin [43]. In addition, the ecosystems in the upper reaches are sensitive and vulnerable to climate change and to human activities [44]. Therefore, the ecosystem service management of the counties comprising these bundles should focus on conserving their unique and important ecological functions.…”

Assessing vulnerability of forest ecosystem in the Indian Western Himalayan region using trends of net primary productivity

“…The integration of various components would be complex as the intricacies of direct measurement of these factors are very high (Sharma et al 2013). Vulnerability of forest ecosystem is modulated by stress imposed by climatic changes that is beyond the capacity to overcome or adapt to stress (Blaikie et al 2014;Pandey and Bardsley 2015) and can be expressed as the difference between sensitivity and adaptability (Yongxiang et al 2015;Zhang et al 2017). Sensitivity refers to the response degree of the ecosystem to environmental change, expressed as the inter-annual variability (e.g.…”

“…Sensitivity refers to the response degree of the ecosystem to environmental change, expressed as the inter-annual variability (e.g. trend of NPP) during the period of assessment for ecosystem under evaluation (Yongxiang et al 2015;Zhang et al 2017). Ecosystem adaptation signifies the self-regulation tool of the ecosystem, regarded as a measure of maintenance of the system in a relatively stable state (IPCC 2014;Sharma et al 2017).…”

“…The vulnerability of forest describes particularly the degree of alteration of forest type distributions and carbon-related functions (such as NPP expressed as Mg carbon ha −1 year −1 and soil organic carbon) due to climate change. In recent years, various methods and models have evolved and have been applied for the assessment of forest vulnerability (Quillet et al 2010;Chaturvedi et al 2011;Zhang et al 2017;Kumar et al 2018). Most of these methods and models assume forest deliverable such as NPP as a dependent observational entity with the consideration that the entity has compounded impacts of all biotic and abiotic factors (Yongxiang et al 2015;Zhang et al 2017).…”

“…In recent years, various methods and models have evolved and have been applied for the assessment of forest vulnerability (Quillet et al 2010;Chaturvedi et al 2011;Zhang et al 2017;Kumar et al 2018). Most of these methods and models assume forest deliverable such as NPP as a dependent observational entity with the consideration that the entity has compounded impacts of all biotic and abiotic factors (Yongxiang et al 2015;Zhang et al 2017). NPP, the difference between gross primary productivity (GPP) and autotrophic respiration (AR), is resultant of the various physiological processes of the plant as per the biotic and abiotic structure associated with the plant.…”