Traditional rural landscape security pattern construction based on “Source-Sink” theory

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201807044

JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY ›› 2019, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (6): 143-151.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201807044

Previous Articles Next Articles

Traditional rural landscape security pattern construction based on “Source-Sink” theory

XIONG Xing¹^,²(), TANG Xiaolan²^,^*(), LIU Lan², WANG Junwei³

1. College of Environment and Ecology, Jiangsu Open University, Nanjing 210036, China
2. College of Landscape Architecture, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
3. College of Fine Art, Jiangsu Second Normal University, Nanjing 210013, China

Received:2018-07-15 Revised:2019-02-26 Online:2019-11-30 Published:2019-11-30
Contact: TANG Xiaolan E-mail:xiongxing84@126.com;xiaolant@163.com

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】 By constructing the traditional rural landscape security pattern in towns, the fragile cultural and ecological landscape system in traditional rural areas can be maintained. 【Method】 Based on the theory and method of “Source-Sink”, we took Xishan in Taihu Lake Scenic Spot as an example. We identified the category, location, scope and intensity of the “source” of ecological and cultural landscape system using the four indicators: “land use type”, “slope”, “vegetation coverage” and “distance from road” as evaluation elements of resistance “sink”. Based on the ArcGIS 9.3 platform and minimum cumulative resistance model (MCR), the processes of “source” and “sink” of the traditional ecological and cultural landscape in Xishan were calculated to obtain the security pattern of both ecological and cultural landscape. 【Result】 High-level areas of ecological and cultural security in Xishan accounted for 67.11% and 38.29%, respectively, of total areas; while medium-level areas of ecological and cultural security in Xishan accounted for 19.88% and 49.16%, respectively, of total areas; low-level areas of ecological and cultural security accounted for only 13.01% and 12.55%, respectively, of total areas. 【Conclusion】 The theory and method of “Source-Sink” have strong applicability for constructing traditional rural landscape security pattern in Xishan. They can play an active role in the simulation of the ecological and cultural landscape processes, the classification of ecological and cultural landscape security levels, and for zonal conservation and management of traditional rural landscape areas.

Key words: rural landscape, “Source-Sink” theory, security pattern, Xishan in Taihu Lake Scenic Spot

CLC Number:

TU984

XIONG Xing, TANG Xiaolan, LIU Lan, WANG Junwei. Traditional rural landscape security pattern construction based on “Source-Sink” theory[J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(6): 143-151.

Figures/Tables 7

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

The “source” identification and patching of Xishan traditional rural landscape system"

源地类别 categories of “sources”	源地子类别 sub-categories of “sources”	现有源地识别及说明 existing “sources” identification and descriptions	补缀源地 patch “sources”
生态性景观源地 ecological landscape	水土保持源地	将坡度分为≤2°、>2°~6°、>6°~15°、>15°~25°、>25°等5个等级使用重分类工具,采用自然断点法(natural break)将植被覆盖度分成-0.210 304、-0.099 151、-0.000 348、0.098 455、0.201 374、0.300 177、0.390 746、0.468 965等8个断点9 个等级利用栅格计算工具,将坡度大于 15°和植被覆盖度小于0.300 17重合栅格作为水土保持源地	无
生态性景观源地 ecological landscape	生物多样性源地	包括缥缈峰、东湖山、回龙山、潜龙山、笠帽顶、凉帽顶、水月坞等处;此外,北部扇子山、虎豹顶和渡渚山,以及西部平龙山和南部潜龙山植被覆盖度高、丰富度大,也是众多动物的栖息地和生物多样性水平较高的区域	无
生产性景观源地 productive landscape	茶果农业景观源地	辨识出茶果农业景观面积较大且相对集中的5块生产性景观源地,多围绕在西山中部山峦地带,包含山腰、山脚部分缓坡地及村落周边的主要风水林	无
	湿地农业景观源地	鱼塘、荷塘等湿地农业主要分布在滨湖沿岸地势低洼区域,以原荒废或冲毁的圩田地带为主。经筛选,辨识出11个面积较大、传统性较强的湿地农业景观源地	补缀“消夏渔歌” (西山八景之一)
	稻田农业景观源地	无	补缀“玄阳稻浪” (西山八景之一)
生活性景观源地 life landscape	重点生活景观源地	考虑人口吸引力、旅游环境等因素的综合影响,文化遗产相对聚集的历史村落相对具有较高的保护等级和较强的潜在扩张能力;一般性传统村落的人口外流相对较多,扩张的动力和强度则较为有限。因此按照村落的保护等级来确定生活性景观源地的扩张强度	无
生活性景观源地 life landscape	“山坞-湖湾” 生活景观源地	按照此类型将西山传统村落等生活性景观空间进行分类,可将其划分为“山坞”、“湖湾”以及“山坞-湖湾混合式”景观源地	无
信仰性景观源地 belief landscape	关键地域性信仰源地	民间宗教信仰主要有禹王、天妃和五老爷等信仰类型	无
	重要历史信仰源地	按照优先保护地域文化和民间信仰的原则,将3个关键西山信仰性景观载体:禹王庙、天妃宫和五老爷庙作为最高保护强度赋值;“三庵十八寺”作为次高等级保护及扩张强度	补缀已损毁的 “三庵十八寺”
	一般性信仰源地	其他宗教场所	无

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Evaluation index system of “sink” of ecological and cultural landscape existence"

阻力面/ 影响因素 resistance surface/ influencing factors	人文景观存续 cultural landscape existence									生态景观存续 ecological landscape existence
	子分类 sub-category	传统生活系统保护 traditional residential system conservation (w=0.131 5)		传统生产系统保护 traditional productive system conservation (w=0.509 6)				传统信仰系统保护 traditional belief system conservation (w=0.358 9)		类型 category	基于水土保持 soil and water conservation (w=0.189 1)		基于生物多样性保护 biodiversity conservation (w=0.810 9)
		阻力系数 resistan- ce value	权重 weight	阻力系数 resistance value			权重 weight	阻力系数 resistan- ce value	权重 weight		阻力系数 resistan- ce value	权重 weight	阻力系数 resistan- ce value	权重 weight
		阻力系数 resistan- ce value	权重 weight	湿地 wetland	茶果区 tea and fruits area	稻田 rice field	权重 weight	阻力系数 resistan- ce value	权重 weight			权重 weight		权重 weight
土地利用类型 land use types	传统果林	2	0.707 8	7	1	7	0.439 6	3	0.554 1	传统果林		8		0.076 1	3	0.205 0
	现代果林	5		5	5	5		5		现代果林		7			4
	水塘或鱼塘	2		1	6	1		3		水塘或鱼塘		7			3
	河道水系	2		3	7	3		3		河道水系	8	2
	草地	3		2	2	2		3		草地	5	4
	林地	4		4	2	4		2		林地	9	1
	传统聚落或建筑	1		8	8	8		1		传统聚落或建筑	3	8
	非传统聚落或建筑	8		9	9	9		4		非传统聚落或建筑	3	5
	传统公共空间	2		6	6	6		1		传统公共空间	1	7
	现代公共空间	7		8	8	8		6		现代公共空间	3	9
	现代商业用地	9		9	9	9		9		现代商业用地	3	5
	传统道路	3		7	7	7		1		传统道路	2	6
	现代道路	5		9	9	9		5		现代道路	3
坡度/ (°) slope	≤2	1	0.096 6	1	9	1	0.234 4	1	0.095 0	≤2	9	0.668 9	—	—
	>2~6	3		3	5	3		3		>2~6	7		—
	>6~15	5		5	1	5		5		>6~15	5		—
	>15~25	7		7	3	7		7		>15~25	3		—
	>25	9		9	7	9		9		>25	1		—
植被覆盖度 vegetation coverage	>0.528	1	0.073 8	9	1	9	0.225 9	1	0.279 0	>0.469	9	0.255 0	1	0.721 7
	>0.455~0.528	2		8	2	8		2		>0.391~0.469	8		2
	>0.391~0.455	3		7	3	7		3		>0.300~0.391	7		3
	>0.329~0.391	4		6	4	6		4		>0.201~0.300	6		4
	>0.275~0.329	5		5	5	5		5		0.098~ 0.201	5		5
	>0.217~0.275	6		4	6	4		6		>-0.000 3~0.098	4		6
	>0.140~0.217	7		3	7	3		7		>-0.099 2~-0.000 3	3		7
	>0.051~0.140	8		2	8	2		8		>0.210~-0.099	2		8
	≤0.051	9		1	9	1		9		≤-0.210	1		9
到道路的距离/ m distance to roads	≤30	1	0.121 8	1	0.121 8	1	0.100 1	1	0.071 9	城镇道路	≤30	—	9	0.073 3
	≤30	1		1		1		1			>30~60	—	7
	>30~60	3		3		3		3			>60~90	—	5
	>30~60	3		3		3		3			>90~120	—	3
	>60~90	5		5		5		5			>120	—	1
	>60~90	5		5		5		5		村镇道路	≤30	—	5
	>90~120	7		7		7		7			>30~60	—	4
	>90~120	7		7		7		7			>60~90	—	3
	>120	9		9		9		9			>90~120	—	2
	>120	9		9		9		9			>120	—	1

Table 4

Fig.3

References 24

[1]	陈英瑾. 风景名胜区中乡村类文化景观的保护与管理[J]. 中国园林, 2012, 28(1):102-104. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6664.2012.01.026.
	CHEN Y J. Conservation and management of rural cultural landscape in famous scenic site[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2012, 28(1):102-104.
[2]	熊星, 唐晓岚, 叶海跃, 等. 基于预警策略的传统乡村文化景观保护与安全体系研究[J]. 山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 49(4):646-652. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2324.2018.04.020.
	XIONG X, TANG X L, YE H Y, et al. Study on the protection and security system of traditional rural cultural landscape based on early warning strategy[J]. Journal of Shandong Agricultural University(Natural Science Edition), 2018, 49(4):646-652.
[3]	刘澜, 唐晓岚, 熊星, 等. 基于GIS的苏南乡村自然景观的生态敏感性分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 42(4):159-164. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201709006.
	LIU L, TANG X L, XIONG X, et al. Ecological sensitivity analysis of rural natural landscape in the south of Jiangsu Province based on GIS[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition), 2018, 42(4):159-164.
[4]	俞孔坚, 李迪华, 韩西丽, 等. 新农村建设规划与城市扩张的景观安全格局途径:以马岗村为例[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2006 (5):38-45. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3363.2006.05.006.
	YU K J, LI D H, HAN X L, et al. Rescuing a village: the approach of landscape security patterns: with the case of Magang,Shunde, Guangdong Province[J]. Urban Planning Forum, 2006(5):38-45.
[5]	冯淑华, 沙润. 古村落场理论及景观安全格局探讨[J]. 地理与地理信息科学, 2006, 22(5):91-94.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-0504.2006.05.018.
	FENG S H, SHA R. On ancient village scenery field theory and scenery safety pattern[J]. Geography and Geo-Information Science, 2006, 22(5):91-94.
[6]	文博, 刘友兆, 夏敏. 基于景观安全格局的农村居民点用地布局优化[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(8):181-191.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2014.08.022.
	WEN B, LIU Y Z, XIA M. Layout optimization of rural residential land based on theory of landscape security pattern[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014, 30(8):181-191.
[7]	周存宇. 大气主要温室气体源汇及其研究进展[J]. 生态环境, 2006, 15(6):1397-1402. DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2006.06.051.
	ZHOU C Y. Review on sources and sinks of main GHGes in atmosphere[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2006, 15(6):1397-1402.
[8]	陈利顶, 张淑荣, 傅伯杰, 等. 流域尺度土地利用与土壤类型空间分布的相关性研究[J]. 生态学报, 2003, 23(12):2497-2505. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2003.12.001.
	CHEN L D, ZHANG S R, FU B J, et al. Correlation analysis on spatial pattern of land use and soil at catchment scale[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2003, 23(12):2497-2505.
[9]	李海防, 卫伟, 陈瑾, 等. 基于“源”“汇”景观指数的定西关川河流域土壤水蚀研究[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(14):4460-4467. DOI: 10.5846/stxb201212191821.
	LI H F, WEI W, CHEN J, et al. Research on soil erosion based on location-weighted landscape index(LWLI) in Guanchuanhe River basin, Dingxi, Gansu Province[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(14):4460-4467. doi: 10.5846/stxb
[10]	陈昌笃. 景观生态学的发展及其对资源管理和自然保护的意义[C]// 中国生态学学会第六届全国会员代表大会暨学科前沿报告会论文集. 扬州, 2000.
[11]	陈利顶, 傅伯杰, 赵文武. “源”“汇”景观理论及其生态学意义[C]// 第十届中国科协年会论文集. 郑州, 2008.
[12]	曹蕾. 基于“源-汇”景观理论的中卫沙坡头自然保护区功能分区研究[D]. 兰州:兰州大学, 2016.
	CAO L. Research on the function zoning of Zhongwei-Shapotou Nature Reserve based on“Source-Sink”landscape theory[D]. Lanzhou:Lanzhou University, 2016.
[13]	刘孝富, 舒俭民, 张林波. 最小累积阻力模型在城市土地生态适宜性评价中的应用: 以厦门为例[J]. 生态学报, 2010, 30(2):421-428.
	LIU X F, SHU J M, ZHANG L B. Research on applying minimal cumulative resistance model in urban land ecological suitability assessment: as an example of Xiamen City[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2010, 30(2):421-428.
[14]	王琦, 付梦娣, 魏来, 等. 基于源-汇理论和最小累积阻力模型的城市生态安全格局构建: 以安徽省宁国市为例[J]. 环境科学学报, 2016, 36(12):4546-4554.DOI: 10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2016.0167.
	WANG Q, FU M D, WEI L, et al. Urban ecological security pattern based on source-sink landscape theory and MCR model: A case study of Ningguo City, Anhui Province[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 2016, 36(12):4546-4554.
[15]	李振鹏, 刘黎明, 谢花林. 乡村景观分类的方法探析:以北京市海淀区白家疃村为例[J]. 资源科学, 2005(2):167-173. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1007-7588.2005.02.027.
	LI Z P, LIU L M, XIE H L. Methodology of rural landscape classification: a case study in Baijiatuan Village, Haidian District, Beijing[J]. Resources Science, 2005, 27(2):167-173.
[16]	KNAAPEN J P, SCHEFFER M, HARMS B. Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1992, 23(1):1-16. DOI: 10.1016/0169-2046(92)90060-d. doi: 10.1016/0169-2046(92)90060-D
[17]	赵筱青, 王海波, 杨树华, 等. 基于GIS技术支持下的土地资源空间格局生态优化[J]. 生态学报, 2009, 29(9):4892-4901.DOI: 10.3321/j.issn.1000-0933.2009.09.036.
	ZHAO X Q, WANG H B, YANG S H, et al. GIS-based ecological optimization of spatial patterns of land resourced[J]. Acta Ecological Sinica, 2009, 29(9):4892-4901.
[18]	钟式玉, 吴箐, 李宇, 等. 基于最小累积阻力模型的城镇土地空间重构: 以广州市新塘镇为例[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(11):3173-3179. DOI: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.2012.0474.
	ZHONG S Y, WU Q, LI Y, et al. Reconstruction of urban land space based on minimum cumulative resistance model: a case study of Xintang Town, Guangzhou City[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2012, 23(11):3173-3179.
[19]	俞孔坚, 王思思, 李迪华, 等. 北京市生态安全格局及城市增长预景[J]. 生态学报, 2009, 29(3):1189-1204. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2009.03.015.
	YU K J, WANG S S, LI D H, et al. The function of ecological security patterns as an urban growth framework in Beijing[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009, 29(3):1189-1204.
[20]	秦伟, 朱清科, 张学霞, 等. 植被覆盖度及其测算方法研究进展[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2006, 34(9):163-170. DOI: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2006.09.031.
	QIN W, ZHU Q K, ZHANG X X, et al. Review of vegetation covering and its measuring and calculating method[J]. Journal of Northwest Sci-Tech University of Agriculture and Forestry(Natural Sciences Edition), 2006, 34(9):163-170.
[21]	罗亚, 徐建华, 岳文泽. 基于遥感影像的植被指数研究方法述评[J]. 生态科学, 2005, 24(1):75-79. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-8873.2005.01.021.
	LUO Y, XU J H, YUE W Z. Research on vegetation indices based on the remote sensing images[J]. Ecologic Science, 2005, 24(1):75-79.
[22]	李晓文, 胡远满, 肖笃宁. 景观生态学与生物多样性保护[J]. 生态学报, 1999, 19(3):399-407. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.1999.03.019.
	LI X W, HU Y M, XIAO D N. Landscape ecology and biodiversity conservation[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 1999, 19(3):399-407.
[23]	汪芳, 蒋春燕, 卫然. 文化景观安全格局: 概念和框架[J]. 地理研究, 2017, 36(10):1834-1842. DOI: 10.11821/dlyj201710002. doi: 10.11821/dlyj201710002
	WANG F, JIANG C Y, WEI R. Cultural landscape security pattern: concept and structure[J]. Geographical Research, 2017, 36(10):1834-1842.
[24]	熊星, 唐晓岚, 刘澜, 等. 风景名胜区乡村文化景观管理数据库平台建构策略[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 41(5):99-106.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201607024.
	XIONG X, TANG X L, LIU L, et al. Construction strategy of rural cultural landscape database management platform in scenic area[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition), 2017, 41(5):99-106.

Metrics

Comments

www.nldxb.njfu.edu.cn

Edited ＆ Published by Editorial Department of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition)
Address： No.159 Longpan Road,Nanjing 210037 Jiangsu,P.R.China
E-mail ：xuebao@njfu.edu.cn , xuebao@njfu.com.cn
Telephone +86-25-85428247,85427076
Distributed by China International Book Trading Corporation P.O. Box 399, Beijing ,P.R. China

源地分布 source distribution	传统村落 traditional villages	入选名录 belong to heritage lists	强度赋值 assignment
源1	明月湾	《国家历史文化名村》、《江苏省历史文化名村》	5
源2	东村	《中国传统村落名录》及《江苏省历史文化名村》	4
源3、源4、源5、源6、源7	植里村、后埠、衙甪里村、堂里、东蔡村	《中国传统村落名录》及《苏州市控制保护古村落》	3
源8、源9	东西蔡(西蔡村部分)、甪里	《苏州市控制保护古村落》	2
其他传统村落源	其他传统村落	—	1

源地类型 sources type	源地分布 sources distribution	源地构成 consist of source	强度赋值 assignment
关键地域性信仰源地	源1、源2、源补1	禹王庙、天妃宫、五老爷庙	5
重要历史信仰源地	源3、源4、源5、源6、源7、源8、源9、源10、源12、源补2、源补3、源补4、源补5、源补6、源补7、源补8、源补9、源补10、源补11、源补12、源补13	甪里庵、水月寺、包山寺、罗汉寺、实际寺、观音寺、资庆寺、石佛寺、东湖寺、文化寺、西湖寺、天王寺、福源寺、草庵、上方寺、下方寺、柴庵、报忠寺、侯王寺、长寿寺、西湖寺	3
一般性信仰源地	源11、源12、源13	明月寺、圣堂寺、古樟寺	1

Traditional rural landscape security pattern construction based on “Source-Sink” theory

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 24

Related Articles 4

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

Author

Reader

Reviewer

[1]	LUAN Chunfeng, GUO Xinran. Research on land use conflict identification from the perspective of ecological security pattern [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(5): 156-164.
[2]	TAN Shizhu, HUANG Yingying, ZHENG Yejing, SHEN Yamei, WU Xiaohua, TAO Yizhou, XU Bin, YAN Shaojun. Spatial characteristics analysis of rural landscape values based on residents’ perceptions [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(3): 207-216.
[3]	TANG Xiaolan, WANG Yimei, ZHOU Kongfei. Protection and utilization of landscape resources in mountainous scenic areas based on ecological security patterns [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(2): 178-186.
[4]	GUO Tianwei, LU Chunfeng, WANG Junxiao, LIU Ruicheng, ZHOU Shenglu. Construction and optimization of ecological security pattern based on the coupling of ecological-production-living spaces: taking Yangzhou City as an example [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2021, 45(5): 133-142.