欢迎访问《应用生态学报》官方网站,今天是

应用生态学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (5): 1583-1594.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202605.026

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

祁连山生态安全格局构建及生态网络韧性评估

杜怀玉1*, 白珊1, 孙涛1, 郝若男1, 俞金凤2   

  1. 1西北师范大学管理学院, 兰州 730000;
    2皋兰县自然资源局, 甘肃皋兰 730200
  • 收稿日期:2025-11-22 接受日期:2026-03-28 出版日期:2026-05-18 发布日期:2026-11-18
  • 通讯作者: * E-mail: duhuaiyu@nwnu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:杜怀玉, 男, 1979 年生, 博士, 副教授。主要从事土地生态与GIS应用研究。E-mail: duhuaiyu@nwnu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家社会科学基金项目(24CSH032)、甘肃省科技计划项目(26JRZA074)和高校教师创新基金项目(2024A010)

Construction of the ecological security pattern in the Qilian Mountains and the assessment of ecological network resilience.

DU Huaiyu1*, BAI Shan1, SUN Tao1, HAO Ruonan1, YU Jinfeng2   

  1. 1School of Management, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
    2Gaolan County Natural Resources Bureau, Gaolan 730200, Gansu, China
  • Received:2025-11-22 Accepted:2026-03-28 Online:2026-05-18 Published:2026-11-18

摘要: 祁连山是我国西部生态安全重要屏障,构建祁连山生态安全格局对维护其生态功能及生物多样性有重要意义。本研究基于“生态源地-阻力面-廊道”研究范式,采用形态空间格局分析(MSPA)方法、InVEST模型、电路理论初步构建生态网络,并结合社会网络分析和鲁棒性评估对生态网络特征及网络韧性进行分析,从而构建生态安全格局。结果表明:基于结构和功能双重属性,结合MSPA和InVEST模型识别出祁连山共有78块生态源地,主要是位于祁连山东北部的林地、东南部的草地和水域以及西北部盐池湾地区;生态廊道175条,生态夹点280个(总面积47.5 km2),生态障碍点188个(总面积1009.0 km2);利用Gephi对生态源地节点中心度进行分级,其中,程度中心度最高一级有4个,中介中心度最高一级有32个,表明祁连山4个生态源地承担生态网络枢纽功能,其他生态源地更多承担“桥梁”连接功能;生态网络连通鲁棒性和脆弱鲁棒性在蓄意攻击和随机攻击情境下均呈下降趋势,但脆弱鲁棒性下降更快,表明祁连山生态网络功能比结构更脆弱,更依赖中心度高的节点;基于全局效率指标与连通性指标修正生态廊道,提出“一屏四区多廊”的生态安全格局。

关键词: 祁连山, 电路理论, 社会网络分析, 鲁棒性评估, 生态安全格局

Abstract: Qilian Mountains are an important ecological security barrier in the western part of China. It is of great significance to construct an ecological security pattern of the Qilian Mountains to maintain ecological functions and biodiversity. Based on the research paradigm of “ecological source area-resistance surface-corridor”, we initially constructed an ecological network using the morphological spatial analysis (MSPA) method, InVEST models, and circuit theory. By combining social network analysis and robustness assessment, we analyzed the characteristics and resilience of ecological networks, thereby constructing the ecological security pattern. Based on the dual attributes of structure and function, combined with the MSPA and InVEST models, we identified 78 ecological source areas, mainly located in the forest land in the northern part of the Qilian Mountains, the grassland and water bodies in the southeastern part, and the Yanchiwan in the northwest. There were 175 ecological corridors, 280 ecological junctions (with a total area of 47.5 km2), 188 ecological barriers (with a total area reaching 1009.0 km2). Using Gephi, the centrality of ecological source nodes was classified, with the highest level of degree centrality comprising four nodes and the highest level of betweenness centrality comprising 32 nodes, which indicated that the four ecological sources in the Qilian Mountains served as hubs in the ecological network, while the other ecological sources primarily functioned as “bridges” connecting different parts. The robustness of ecological network connectivity and vulnerability robustness showed a downward trend under intentional and random attack scenarios, but the vulnerability robustness decreased faster, indicating that the functional aspects of the Qilian Mountains ecological network were more fragile than its structural aspects and more reliant on nodes with high centrality. Based on the global efficiency index and connectivity index, the ecological corridors were modified to propose an ecological security pattern of “one screen, four zones, and multiple corridors”.

Key words: Qilian Mountains, circuit theory, social network analysis, robustness evaluation, ecological security pattern