Distribution suitability analysis of the tree species of shelter forest in coastal area of Shandong based on LandUSEM model

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202109006

JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY ›› 2023, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (4): 42-50.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202109006

Special Issue: 第三届中国林草计算机应用大会论文精选（Ⅱ）

Previous Articles Next Articles

Distribution suitability analysis of the tree species of shelter forest in coastal area of Shandong based on LandUSEM model

SONG Ge¹(), HAN Fang¹^,^*(), XU Jingwei², YANG Zhijun³, MU Haoxiang¹, WANG Zhiyong¹, WANG Zhe¹

1. School of Architectural Engineering, Shandong University of Technology, Zibo 255000, China
2. Shandong Academy of Forestry Sciences, Ji'nan 250014, China
3. Shandong Institute of Forestry Territorial and Spatial Planning, Ji'nan 250014, China

Received:2021-09-02 Revised:2022-02-14 Online:2023-07-30 Published:2023-07-20

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】Analyzing distribution suitability of forest protection tree species in seven coastal cities of Shandong Province can comprehensively reflect the impacts of different site factors on each forest protection tree species, thereby enabling further scientific forest protection tree species planning. 【Method】The distribution suitability of the tree species in protection forests within seven coastal cities of the Shandong Province was analyzed with the LandUSEM model using survey data of ‘One map’ of forest resource management in Shandong Province, as well as the 1∶10⁶ digital soil map and DEM data as auxiliary data. 【Result】There were 26 species which were significantly affected by geomorphological factors. Furthermore, it was found that the soil types were relatively sensitive to the influence of dominant tree species and that the suitability of dominant tree species varied greatly depending on the different forest types. The average relative weights of the seven factors on the 49 dominant tree species were as follows: landform (0.19) > soil type (0.15) = slope (0.15) = soil thickness (0.15) > forest species (0.14) > slope position (0.13) > slope aspect (0.09). In the protection forests dominated by Pinus thunbergii, P. densiflora and Robinia pseudoacacia, the relative suitabilities of the first two species were higher than that of the latter; 90.48% of R. pseudoacacia forests were not suitable or critically suitable. This suggests that Pinus thunbergii, P. tabulaeformis, Quercus acutissima, Crataegus pinnatifida, Eucommia ulmoides, Q. mongolica, Q. spp., Cerasus pseudocerasus, Cerasus pseudocerasus, Ziziphus jujuba var. spinosa and other tree species should be mixed in low mountains and hilly areas where R. pseudoacacia forests have poor distribution suitability to improve the ecological benefits of R. pseudoacacia forests. 【Conclusion】 The distribution suitabilities of tree species in the protective forests within the seven selected cities along the coast of the Shandong Province are generally good, and the LandUSEM model analysis provides reliable information on tree species distribution suitability.

Key words: shelter forest, tree species distribution, suitability, LandUSEM model

CLC Number:

S718.5

SONG Ge, HAN Fang, XU Jingwei, YANG Zhijun, MU Haoxiang, WANG Zhiyong, WANG Zhe. Distribution suitability analysis of the tree species of shelter forest in coastal area of Shandong based on LandUSEM model[J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(4): 42-50.

Figures/Tables 5

Table 1

Table 2

Influence weights of multiple factors on distribution suitability of dominant tree species"

序号 No.	树种 tree species	地貌 landform	土壤类型 soil type	坡度 slope	土层厚度 soil thickness	林种 forest species	坡位 slope position	坡向 aspect	极差 range
1	落叶松Larix gmelinii	0.14	0.18	0.12	0.14	0.20	0.11	0.11	0.09
2	赤松Pinus densiflora	0.16	0.20	0.11	0.15	0.21	0.10	0.07	0.14
3	黑松Pinus thunbergii	0.15	0.36	0.08	0.11	0.19	0.09	0.02	0.34
4	油松Pinus tabuliformis	0.16	0.13	0.15	0.21	0.15	0.15	0.05	0.16
5	华山松Pinus armandii	0.18	0.09	0.14	0.21	0.14	0.14	0.10	0.12
6	火炬松Pinus taeda	0.28	0.16	0.13	0.14	0.15	0.10	0.04	0.24
7	水杉Metasequoia glyptostroboides	0.18	0.11	0.19	0.17	0.11	0.13	0.12	0.08
8	侧柏Platycladus orientalis	0.23	0.24	0.10	0.14	0.16	0.09	0.03	0.21
9	栎麻Quercus acutissima	0.20	0.22	0.15	0.14	0.17	0.08	0.03	0.19
10	蒙古栎Quercus mongolica	0.15	0.23	0.11	0.12	0.28	0.09	0.03	0.25
11	水曲柳Fraxinus mandshurica	0.20	0.12	0.18	0.13	0.10	0.13	0.14	0.10
12	胡桃楸Juglans mandshurica	0.16	0.13	0.18	0.15	0.12	0.17	0.10	0.08
13	黄檗Phellodendron amurense	0.14	0.14	0.18	0.14	0.20	0.10	0.10	0.10
14	榆树Ulmus pumila	0.21	0.11	0.17	0.23	0.06	0.12	0.10	0.17
15	刺槐Robinia pseudoacacia	0.17	0.20	0.14	0.09	0.14	0.22	0.04	0.18
16	五角枫Acer pictum subsp. mono	0.15	0.19	0.16	0.13	0.08	0.19	0.11	0.11
17	椿树Ailanthus altissima	0.25	0.12	0.20	0.05	0.09	0.16	0.12	0.20
18	黄栌Cotinus coggygria	0.20	0.28	0.09	0.09	0.16	0.09	0.08	0.20
19	黑杨Populus nigra	0.22	0.13	0.19	0.13	0.13	0.09	0.10	0.13
20	毛白杨Populus tomentosa	0.21	0.11	0.17	0.15	0.10	0.15	0.11	0.11
21	柳树Salix spp.	0.22	0.06	0.19	0.15	0.04	0.17	0.16	0.18
22	泡桐Paulowinia tomentosa	0.23	0.11	0.17	0.18	0.13	0.10	0.08	0.15
23	楝树Melia azedarach	0.22	0.16	0.18	0.11	0.06	0.16	0.12	0.16
24	火炬树Rhus typhina	0.18	0.13	0.20	0.06	0.25	0.10	0.08	0.19
25	毛竹Phyllostachys edulis	0.13	0.18	0.14	0.15	0.15	0.14	0.11	0.07
26	苹果Malus domestica	0.21	0.16	0.19	0.12	0.10	0.15	0.07	0.14
27	梨Pyrus spp.	0.19	0.11	0.16	0.18	0.07	0.15	0.14	0.12
28	桃Amygdalus persica	0.16	0.12	0.15	0.12	0.21	0.15	0.10	0.11
29	李Prunus salicina	0.16	0.10	0.16	0.21	0.18	0.11	0.08	0.13
30	杏Armeniaca vulgaris	0.16	0.15	0.14	0.17	0.16	0.15	0.07	0.10
31	枣Ziziphus jujuba	0.18	0.12	0.15	0.17	0.12	0.14	0.13	0.06
32	山楂Crataegus pinnatifida	0.17	0.12	0.15	0.17	0.14	0.14	0.12	0.05
33	柿Diospyros kaki	0.14	0.19	0.13	0.12	0.16	0.16	0.11	0.08
34	核桃Juglans regia	0.17	0.14	0.18	0.11	0.16	0.17	0.07	0.11
35	板栗Castanea mollissima	0.24	0.19	0.09	0.22	0.12	0.13	0.01	0.23
36	茶Camellia sinensis	0.17	0.12	0.15	0.17	0.14	0.14	0.12	0.05
37	樱桃Cerasus pseudocerasus	0.21	0.17	0.17	0.14	0.19	0.06	0.06	0.15
38	杜仲Eucommia ulmoides	0.18	0.13	0.14	0.16	0.14	0.13	0.12	0.06
39	银杏Ginkgo biloba	0.14	0.20	0.12	0.14	0.13	0.16	0.11	0.09
40	白蜡Fraxinus chinensis	0.21	0.10	0.18	0.14	0.06	0.16	0.15	0.15
41	日本小檗Berberis thunbergii	0.17	0.12	0.15	0.17	0.14	0.14	0.12	0.05
42	杜鹃Rhododendron simsii	0.21	0.15	0.18	0.20	0.11	0.09	0.06	0.15
43	栎类Quercus spp.	0.22	0.18	0.09	0.20	0.15	0.14	0.02	0.20
44	酸枣Ziziphus jujuba var. spinosa	0.16	0.18	0.17	0.09	0.21	0.15	0.04	0.17
45	荆条Vitex negundo var. heterophylla	0.29	0.21	0.09	0.16	0.12	0.09	0.03	0.26
46	胡枝子Lespedeza bicolor	0.17	0.12	0.17	0.17	0.16	0.11	0.09	0.08
47	山茶Camellia japonica	0.17	0.11	0.15	0.17	0.13	0.14	0.13	0.06
48	怪柳Tamarix chinensis	0.18	0.11	0.16	0.16	0.12	0.15	0.13	0.07
49	竹灌bamboo irrigation	0.21	0.15	0.10	0.19	0.17	0.10	0.07	0.14
	平均mean	0.19	0.15	0.15	0.15	0.14	0.13	0.09	0.10

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Environment of Robinia pseudoacacia, Pinus thunbergii and P. densiflora with inappropriate and critical suitability distribution"

因素 factor	类型 type	CH		HS		CS
因素 factor	类型 type	面积/hm² area	占比/% proportion	面积/hm² area	占比/% proportion	面积/hm² area	占比/% proportion
林种 forest species	水源涵养林	1 507.68	3.49	558.63	5.71	21.15	1.80
	水土保持林	38 140.56	88.29	2 755.35	28.17	1 122.39	95.53
	防风固沙林	2 528.37	5.85	3 850.56	39.37	1.98	0.17
	农田牧场林	265.68	0.62	43.92	0.45	0	0
	护岸林	295.83	0.68	318.06	3.25	0	0
	护路林	286.38	0.66	1 892.43	19.35	23.94	2.04
	其他防护林	174.87	0.40	362.43	3.71	5.40	0.46
地貌 landform	中山	816.93	1.89	262.71	2.69	0	0
	低山	14 167.53	32.79	282.33	2.89	142.83	12.16
	丘陵	24 783.39	57.37	3 137.13	32.07	423.00	36.00
	平原	3 431.52	7.94	6 099.21	62.35	609.03	51.83
土层厚度 soil thickness	[0,10)cm	3 626.73	8.39	161.37	1.69	0	0
	[10,30)cm	19 361.34	44.82	311.04	32.16	695.43	59.19
	[30,40)cm	16 555.32	38.32	3 361.68	34.55	382.68	32.57
	[40,60]cm	3 655.98	8.46	3 147.93	31.60	96.75	8.24
坡度类型 slope type	平坡	6 705.72	15.52	8 347.05	85.33	1 132.38	96.38
	缓坡	11 759.40	27.22	461.7	4.72	2.52	0.21
	斜坡	15 318.54	35.46	187.47	1.92	37.08	3.16
	陡坡	8 615.43	19.94	655.56	6.70	2.88	0.25
	急坡	646.92	1.50	129.6	1.32	0	0
	险坡	153.36	0.35	0	0	0	0
坡位 slope position	脊	4 125.06	15.79	112.77	1.16	14.85	1.26
	上	16 535.52	24.99	749.34	7.69	26.19	2.22
	中	11 277.72	12.78	248.40	2.55	1.08	0.09
	下	4 375.62	4.00	102.24	1.05	7.74	0.65
	谷	715.59	1.50	322.11	3.30	0	0
	平	5 273.28	40.93	8 208.45	84.25	1125	95.76
坡向 aspect	北	8 998.65	20.83	219.15	1.86	0	0
	东北	3 421.62	7.92	119.07	1.01	0	0
	东	5 164.56	11.95	173.97	1.48	0	0
	东南	2 701.17	6.25	141.57	1.74	63.09	5.37
	南	4 939.74	11.43	225.45	2.25	39.51	3.36
	西南	2 476.98	5.73	77.31	0.71	5.94	0.50
	西	4 719.42	10.92	309.24	2.72	11.70	0.99
	西北	2 457.63	5.69	119.16	9.96	0	0
	无	8 319.60	19.26	8 396.46	78.29	1 054.62	89.77
土壤类型 soil type	棕壤	33 577.65	77.72	4 788.81	48.96	1 086.84	92.51
	褐土	6 653.07	15.40	1 417.23	14.49	32.40	2.76
	潮土	2448.09	5.67	3 535.11	36.14	55.62	4.73
	砂姜土	22.41	0.52	38.97	4.00	0	0
	盐土	485.64	1.12	1.26	0.01	0	0
	风沙土	12.51	0.03	0	0	0	0

Table 4

Table 5

References 23

[1]	许景伟, 李传荣, 程鸿雁, 等. 山东省沿海防护林可持续经营的途径和对策[J]. 山东林业科技, 2006(3):84-87.
	XU J W, LI C R, CHENG H Y, et al. Ways and countermeasures of sustai-nable management of coastal shelterbelt in Shandong Province[J]. J Shandong For Sci Technol, 2006(3): 84-87. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2724.2006.03.044.
[2]	陈艳瑞, 刘康, 陈启民, 等. 准噶尔盆地南缘防护林树种适宜性评价[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2011, 25(11): 152-156.
	CHEN Y R, LIU K, CHEN Q M, et al. Suitability evaluation on trees species of shelter belt on the southern edge of Xinjiang Junggar Basin[J]. J Arid Land Resour and Environ, 2011, 25(11): 152-156. DOI: CNKI:SUN:GHZH.0.2011-11-027.
[3]	李荔. 南疆沙区防风固沙林结构与效益研究——以224团为例[D]. 阿拉尔: 塔里木大学, 2016.
	LI L. Research on structure and benefit of the windbreaking and fining sand of desert in Southern Xinjiang-case study in 224 corps[D]. Ala'er: Tarim University, 2016.
[4]	王圳, 高亚军, 闫凡峰, 等. 海滨城市道路绿化树种综合评价体系构建[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 45(2): 187-196.
	WANG Z, GAO Y J, YAN F F, et al. Construction of a comprehensive assessment system for road greening tree species in coastal cities[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2021, 45(2): 187-196. DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202007030.
[5]	鲁敏, 孔亚飞, 徐杨, 等. 济南市居住区绿化植物生态效能综合评价研究[J]. 山东建筑大学学报, 2015, 30(5):409-415.
	LU M, KONG Y F, XU Y, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of ecological effect of Jinan residential area greening plants[J]. J Shandong Jianzhu Univ, 2015, 30(5): 409-415. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-7644.2015.05.001.
[6]	王仁卿. 山东半岛和辽东半岛植被的比较研究[J]. 植物生态学与地植物学丛刊, 1984, 8(1):41-50.
	WANG R Q. Comparative study on the vegetation between Shandong and Liaoning Peninsulas[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 1984, 8(1): 41-50.
[7]	曹伟, 郑美林, 刘童燕. 东北地区主要树种分布与气候的关系[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2013, 27(3):132-136.
	CAO W, ZHENG M L, LIU T Y. The relationship between climate and distribution of main trees in the northeast China[J]. J Arid Land Resour Environ, 2013, 27(3):132-136. DOI:10.13448/j.cnki.jalre.2013.03.018.
[8]	孙晓宇, 苏奋振, 周成虎, 等. 基于底质条件的广东东部海岸带土地利用适宜度评价[J]. 海洋学报, 2011, 33(5):169-176.
	SUN X Y, SU F Z, ZHOU C H, et al. Evaluation of land use suitability based on sedimentary conditions at the area of eastern Guangdong coastal zone[J]. Acta Oceanol Sin, 2011, 33(5): 169-176. DOI: CNKI:SUN:SEAC.0.2011-05-022
[9]	李伟芳, 俞腾, 李加林, 等. 海岸带土地利用适宜性评价——以杭州湾南岸为例[J]. 地理研究, 2015, 34(4):701-710.
	LI W F, YU T, LI J L, et al. Suitability evaluation of land use in coastal zones: a case study in southern Hangzhou Bay[J]. Geogr Res, 2015, 34(4): 701-710. DOI: 10.11821/dlyj201504009.
[10]	乔勇进, 张敦伦, 郗金标. 山东省沿海沙质海岸的特点及适宜的防护林树种[J]. 河北林果研究, 2002, 17(2): 106-110.
	QIAO Y J, ZHANG D L, XI J B. The characteristics of coastal sandy bank in Shandong Province and suited tree species for afforestation[J]. For Ecol Sci, 2002, 17(2): 106-110. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-4961.2002.02.003.
[11]	姜霞, 张佐玉, 许才万. 南江峡谷不同森林类型土壤理化指标对比研究[J]. 贵州林业科技, 2014, 42(1):13-17.
	JIANG X, ZHANG Z Y, XU C W. Comparison study on soil physical-chemical properties of different forest types in Nanjiang Canyon[J]. Guizhou For Sci Technol, 2014, 42(1): 13-17. DOI: CNKI:SUN:GZLY.0.2014-01-005.
[12]	姜丽, 魏天兴, 李亦然, 等. 地形因子对陕北黄土丘陵区防护林树种分布的影响[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6):1763-1771.
	JIANG L, WEI T X, LI Y R, et al. Effects of topographical factors tree species distribution of shelter forest in loess hilly region of northern Shaanxi[J]. Arid Land Geogr, 2021, 44(6): 1763-1771.
[13]	沈泽昊, 张新时, 金义兴. 地形对亚热带山地景观尺度植被格局影响的梯度分析[J]. 植物生态学报, 2000, 24(4):430-435.
	SHEN Z H, ZHANG X S, JIN Y X. Gradient analysis of the influence of mountain topography on vegetation pattern[J]. Acta Phytoecol Sin, 2000, 24(4): 430-435.
[14]	李清顺, 金万洲, 王得军, 等. 利用多树种立地形指数对林地质量进行综合评价[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 45(6):81-89.
	LI Q S, JIN W Z, WANG D J, et al. A comprehensive evaluation of forest land quality using multi tree site form index[J]. J Nanjing For Univ(Nat Sci Ed), 2021, 45(6):81-89. DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202103007.
[15]	田迅, 高凯, 张丽娟, 等. 坡位对土壤水分及植被空间分布的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2015, 35(5):12-16.
	TIAN X, GAO K, ZHANG L J, et al. Effects of slope position on spatial distribution of soil water and vegetation in sandy land[J]. Bull Soil Water Conserv, 2015, 35(5): 12-16..
[16]	刘聘, 乔一娜, 李静文, 等. 安溪县福建柏人工林立地质量数量化评价[J]. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 36(2):324-329,358.
	LIU P, QIAO Y N, LI J W, et al. Quantitative evaluation of site quality of Fujian cypress plantations in Anxi County[J]. J Yunnan Agri Univ(Nat Sci Ed) 2021, 36(2): 324-329,358.
[17]	尚武. 防护林体系树种选择[J]. 农村科技, 2014(9):61-62.
	SHANG W. Selection of tree species in protective forest system rural[J]. Sci Technol, 2014(9): 61-62. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6193.2014.09.039.
[18]	凌成星, 刘华, 纪平, 等. 基于无人机影像VDVI指数的植被覆盖度估算: 以陕西神木防护林工程研究区为例[J]. 森林工程, 2021, 37(2):57-66.
	LING C X, LIU H, JI P, et al. Estimation of vegetation coverage based on VDVI index of UAV visible image: using the shelterbelt research area as an example[J]. Forest Engineering, 2021, 37(2):57-66.
[19]	郗金标, 何源, 许景伟, 等. 论山东沿海防护林体系建设的树种选择[J]. 防护林科技, 2004(3):17-20.
	XI J B, HE Y, XU J W, et al. Selection of tree species for coastal protective forest system construction in Shandong Province[J]. Prot For Sci Technol, 2004(3): 17-20. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5215.2004.03.009.
[20]	王月海, 韩友吉, 夏江宝, 等. 黄河三角洲盐碱地低效防护林现状分析与类型划分[J]. 水土保持通报, 2018, 38(2):303-306.
	WANG Y H, HAN Y J, XIA J B, et al. Present situation analysis and type division of low-benefit protection forest in saline alkali soil of Yellow River Delta[J]. Bull Soil Water Conserv, 2018, 38(2): 303-306. DOI: 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2018.02.050.
[21]	裴韬, 刘亚溪, 郭思慧, 等. 地理大数据挖掘的本质[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(3):586-598.
	PEI T, LIU Y X, GUO S H, et al. Principle of big geodata mining[J]. Acta Geogr Sin, 2019, 74(3): 586-598. DOI:10.11821/dlxb201903014.
[22]	张文建. 世界气象组织综合观测系统(WIGOS)[J]. 气象, 2010, 36(3):1-8.
	ZHANG W J. WMO integrated global observing system(WIGOS)[J]. Meteorol Mon, 2010, 36(3): 1-8. DOI: 10.7519/j.issn.1000-0526.2010.3.001.
[23]	NOAA/National Centers for Environmental Information. Global historical climate network daily-description[R/OL]. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ghcn-daily-description, 2018.

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

因子名称factor name	分级标准classification standard
地貌landform	平原(平坦开阔、起伏很小);丘陵(相对高差<100 m);低山[100,1 000)m;中山(≥1 000 m)
坡度slope	平坡(0°~5°);缓坡(6°~15°);斜坡(16°~25°);陡坡(26°~35°);急坡(36°~45°);险坡(≥46°)
坡向aspect	北、东北、东、东南、南、西南、西、西北
坡位slope position	脊、上、中、下、谷、平
土壤类型soil type	棕壤、褐土、潮土、砂姜土、盐土、碱土、风沙土
土层厚度soil thickness	[0,10)m、[10,30)m、[30,40)m、[40,60]m
林种forest species	水源涵养林、水土保持林、防风固沙林、农田牧场防护林、护岸林、护路林、其他防护林

分级 classification	HS
分级 classification	面积/ hm² area	占比/% proportion	面积/ hm² area	占比/% proportion	面积/ hm² area	占比/% proportion
不适宜 inapplicability	53.19	0.05	222.30	0.15	10 324.44	21.62
临界适宜 critical suitability	1 121.67	0.95	9 559.08	6.41	32 874.66	68.86
中等适宜 medium suitable	107 097.70	91.06	138 825.50	93.03	4 545.54	9.52
比较适宜 more suitable	9 339.03	7.94	615.96	0.41	0	0
非常适宜 very suitable	0	0	0	0	0	0

树种类型 tree species	龄组类型 age group type	R²
赤松 Pinus densiflora	中龄林	0.639 8
	近熟林	0.606 0
黑松 Pinus thunbergii	中龄林	0.616 5
	近熟林	0.676 4
刺槐 Robinia pseudoacacia	中龄林	0.709 9
	近熟林	0.706 0

Distribution suitability analysis of the tree species of shelter forest in coastal area of Shandong based on LandUSEM model

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 5

References 23

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

Author

Reader

Reviewer

[1]	FEI Wenjun, LIU Siyu, GAO Xiangfei. Research on the resource evaluation method of forest health care bases [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(2): 187-196.
[2]	LUO Fengmin, GAO Junliang, XIN Zhiming, HAO Yuguang, LI Xinle, DUAN Ruibing. Study on the microclimate effects of oasis shelter forest in the Ulan Buh Desert [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2021, 45(5): 143-152.
[3]	ZHANG Caihong, XUE Wei, XIN Ying, GAO Yujuan. Suitability evaluation of rest and recuperation sites in Guizhou Yushe National Forest Park by analytic hierarchy process(AHP) [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(2): 215-219.
[4]	ZHANG Jinguang, WEI Wei, CHENG Yingyi, ZHAO Bing. Study on site selection of small and medium-sized city parks based on GIS suitability evaluation [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(1): 171-178.
[5]	XU Xinzhou, LU Zhichao, QIU Bing, WANG Hao. Suitability evaluation of functional layout of National Urban Wetland Park in Jiangsu Province [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(6): 152-158.
[6]	TANG Peng,WANG Hao. Analysis on the suitability of green sponge space in modern city based on MCR model [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(03): 116-122.
[7]	MA Siwen, ZHANG Hongjiang, CHENG Jinhua, LI Mingfeng, WANG Ping. Characteristics of soil saturated hydraulic conductivity in classic suburb shelter forests in the Three Gorges Reservoir [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2018, 42(05): 99-106.
[8]	SHI Ying,WANG Hao,FEI Wenjun. Methods and analysis of suitability impact factors of earthquake resistance and hazardous reduction of comprehensive park [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2014, 38(04): 158-162.
[9]	FEI Wenjun，WANG Hao*，SHI Ying,ZHANG Kaiyun，HU Wei. Research on urban green space suitability for earthquake resistance and hazardous reduction [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2012, 36(05): 92-96.
[10]	XIAN Mingrui, SHI Hao, XU Yannan, WANG Kun. Suitability assessment of urban green space based on AHP and FR model [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2012, 36(04): 23-28.
[11]	MA Shunsheng, ZHANG Peiqi, ZHU Liqun, BIAN Xinmin. Evaluation of the urban ecological suitability and a case analysis [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2011, 35(04): 51-57.
[12]	KONG Yuguang,, WANG Yinhua, ZHANG Jinchi, CHU Dongsheng, ZHANG Donghai, WANG Ruyan, ZHANG Xiaoqing. Soil heterotrophic respiration of metasequoia shelter forests in silting coastal area of northern Jiangsu province [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2010, 34(01): 15-18.
[13]	SHEN Shiguang, WANG Hao*, JIA Deping, GU Kang. Land suitability evaluation methods for urban green space system planning based on GIS in Changzhou city [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2009, 33(04): 72-76.
[14]	SUN Guoji1,ZHANG Jinchi1*,WANG Zhi2,HUANG Xiayin3. The Negative-effect Disciplinarian of Popular Shelter Forest Belts on Wheat Output in Xuhuai Plain Area [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2003, 27(04): 67-71.
[15]	CHEN Jinlin1,PAN Genxing2,ZHANG Aiguo1,YU Bin1,TIAN Weibin1. The Controlling Effects of Shelter Forest on Non-point Source Pollution of Agricultural Lands in Taihu Lake Area [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2002, 26(06): 17-20.