生态修复对江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地植被碳储量的提升效应及其时间响应特征

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202609.032

应用生态学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (9): 3085-3097.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202609.032

生态修复对江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地植被碳储量的提升效应及其时间响应特征

张明^1,2, 杨春^1,3,4, 聂珉川^1,3,4, 郝如梦^1,3,4, 邱秦^1,3,4, 赵晓松^1,3,4王晓龙^1,3,4, 蔡永久^1,3,4, 谭志强^1,3,4*

¹中国科学院南京地理与湖泊研究所湖泊与流域水安全全国重点实验室, 南京 211135;
²江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地国家级自然保护区管理处, 江苏泗洪 223900;
³中国科学院大学, 北京 100049;
⁴中国科学院大学南京学院, 南京 211135

收稿日期:2026-03-29 接受日期:2026-06-22 出版日期:2026-09-18 发布日期:2026-10-12
通讯作者: ^*E-mail: zqtan@niglas.ac.cn
作者简介:张明, 男, 1982年生, 硕士研究生。主要从事湿地生态保护与修复研究。E-mail: 190877832@qq.com
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目(2023YFF0807203)和国家自然科学基金项目(32471651)

Enhancement effects of ecological restoration on vegetation carbon storage in Sihong Hongze Lake wetland, Jiangsu Province, and the temporal variations.

ZHANG Ming^1,2, YANG Chun^1,3,4, NIE Minchuan^1,3,4, HAO Rumeng^1,3,4, QIU Qin^1,3,4, ZHAO Xiaosong^1,3,4, WANG Xiaolong^1,3,4, CAI Yongjiu^1,3,4, TAN Zhiqiang^1,3,4*

¹State Key Laboratory of Lake and Watershed Science for Water Security, Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 211135, China;
²Jiangsu Sihong Hongze Lake Wetland National Nature Reserve Management Office, Sihong 223900, Jiangsu, China;
³University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
⁴Nanjing College, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 211135, China

Received:2026-03-29 Accepted:2026-06-22 Online:2026-09-18 Published:2026-10-12

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 湿地植被碳储量是衡量生态修复增汇成效的重要指标,但现有研究多基于修复前后静态对比,对植被碳储量动态变化过程及不同修复阶段差异的认识仍缺乏直接定量证据。本研究以江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地国家级自然保护区为研究对象,基于多源遥感数据获取2020—2025年30 m反射率序列,结合8类优势植被群落精细分类和类型分辨的生物量反演模型,系统估算保护区植被碳储量的时空分布特征,并定量评估2019—2023年先后启动的14个生态修复项目的增汇效应。结果表明:2020—2025年保护区植被碳储量年均为0.18×10⁶ t C,2025年基准植被碳储量为0.15×10⁶ t C,空间上呈现“湖滨高、湖心低”的分布格局。以项目启动年为基准、以2025年为统一对比时点进行比较,14个修复项目相对于基准年植被碳储量净增加1429.25 t C,平均单位面积增汇2.75 t C·hm^-2;在杨毛嘴退化湿地生态修复(二期)及物种保护保育相关项目所在的重点修复区内,面积233.33 hm²的4个项目累计增碳713.12 t C,单位面积增汇3.06 t C·hm^-2。按截至2025年的修复持续时间将项目划分为约2、3、4和5年4组进行描述性比较,约2年组植被碳储量变化仍表现为短期净减,单位面积净变化为-1.59 t C·hm^-2;约3、4和5年组均表现为正向增汇,单位面积净增分别为7.77、6.01和1.79 t C·hm^-2。表明生态修复项目对浅水湖泊湿地植被碳储量的提升并非实施后立即稳定显现,而是在植被恢复和群落重建过程中逐步形成增汇效应。该研究为认识湖泊湿地生态修复增汇过程及修复绩效评估和增汇型管理提供了定量依据。

关键词: 生态修复, 湿地碳汇, 植被碳储量, 退渔还湿, 洪泽湖湿地

Abstract: Vegetation carbon storage is an important indicator for evaluating carbon sequestration benefits of ecologi-cal restoration. While most available studies have relied on static comparisons before and after restoration, direct quantitative evidence remains limited regarding the dynamics in vegetation carbon storage and its temporal response during restoration. Taking the Jiangsu Sihong Hongze Lake National Wetland Nature Reserve as the study area, we constructed a 30 m reflectance series for 2020-2025 using multi-source remote sensing data. Combined with fine classification of eight dominant vegetation communities and type-specific biomass inversion models, we systematically estimated the spatiotemporal patterns of vegetation carbon storage in the reserve and quantitatively evaluated the carbon enhancement effects of 14 ecological restoration projects initiated successively during 2019-2023. The results showed that the mean of the annual baseline vegetation carbon storage during 2020-2025 was 0.18 × 10⁶t C, and the value in 2025 was 0.15 × 10⁶t C. Spatially, vegetation carbon storage exhibited a pattern of being higher in the lakeshore zone and lower in the open lake area. With the project initiation year as the baseline and 2025 as the unified comparison time point, we found that the 14 restoration projects showed a net increase of 1429.25 t C in vegetation carbon storage relative to their baseline years, with an average carbon gain of 2.75 t C·hm^-2. In the key restoration area where the Yangmaozui degraded wetland ecological restoration project Phase II and species conservation-related projects were located, four projects covering approximately 233.33 hm² generated a cumulative carbon increase of 713.12 t C, with an average gain of 3.06 t C·hm^-2. Based on a comparison by restoration duration up to 2025, the projects were divided into four groups of 2, 3, 4, and 5 years. The 2-year group still showed a short-term net decrease in vegetation carbon storage, with a mean change of -1.59 t C·hm^-2. In contrast, the 3-, 4-, and 5-year groups all showed carbon enhancement, with mean net increases of 7.77, 6.01, and 1.79 t C·hm^-2, respectively. These results indicated that the enhancement of vegetation carbon storage by ecological restoration in shallow lake wetlands would not become stable immediately after implementation, but gradually emerge through vegetation recovery and community reconstruction. This study could provide quantitative evidence for understanding the carbon enhancement process of ecological restoration in lake wetlands and offer a scientific basis for restoration performance evaluation and carbon-oriented management.

Key words: ecological restoration, wetland carbon sink, vegetation carbon storage, aquaculture removal and wetland restoration, Hongze Lake wetland

张明, 杨春, 聂珉川, 郝如梦, 邱秦, 赵晓松王晓龙, 蔡永久, 谭志强. 生态修复对江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地植被碳储量的提升效应及其时间响应特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(9): 3085-3097.

ZHANG Ming, YANG Chun, NIE Minchuan, HAO Rumeng, QIU Qin, ZHAO Xiaosong, WANG Xiaolong, CAI Yongjiu, TAN Zhiqiang. Enhancement effects of ecological restoration on vegetation carbon storage in Sihong Hongze Lake wetland, Jiangsu Province, and the temporal variations.[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2026, 37(9): 3085-3097.

参考文献

[1] Nahlik AM, Fennessy MS. Carbon storage in US wetlands. Nature Communications, 2016, 7: 13835
[2] Bao T, Jia G, Xu X. Warming substantially weakens the greenhouse gas sink of global natural wetlands. Nature Climate Change, 2023, 13: 295-301
[3] Zhao JY, Zhang M, Pu YN, et al. Dynamic and high methane emission flux in pond and lake aquaculture. Journal of Hydrology, 2025, 653: 132765
[4] 强柳燕, 张风菊, 陈诗越. 近百年来洪泽湖有机碳垂直分布特征及其影响因素. 人民长江, 2021, 52(12): 40-46
[5] 戚甲豪, 刘泰北, 赵华. 近60年来洪泽湖的碳埋藏特征. 水文地质工程地质, 2024, 51(4): 66-76
[6] Hou N, Zeng QS, Wang WQ, et al. Soil carbon pools and microbial network stability depletion associated with wetland conversion into aquaculture ponds in Southeast China. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 954: 176492
[7] 李金帅, 郝天象, 杨萌, 等. 中国自然湿地生态系统碳循环关键过程及增汇途径. 中国科学: 地球科学, 2024, 54(8): 2478-2495
[8] 周念清, 郭梦申, 蔡奕, 等. 湿地关键带碳循环与碳源碳汇转化机制及碳交换量化模式. 地学前缘, 2024, 31(6): 436-449
[9] Chen YW, Zhang JL, Qiao PY, et al. Switch from source to sink: Greenhouse gas fluxes in razor clam aquaculture ponds at different statuses of mangrove restoration. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 2025, 323: 109403
[10] 潘宝宝, 张金池, 冯开宇, 等. 洪泽湖典型水生植物群落碳储量. 湿地科学, 2014, 12(4): 471-476
[11] 杨国栋, 许志敏, 王云云, 等. 洪泽湖湿地优势植物群落碳储量及保护策略研究. 低碳世界, 2022, 12(11): 16-18
[12] 王汉钊. 基于无人机遥感的洪泽湖湿地人工林地上碳储量估算研究. 硕士论文. 南京: 南京林业大学, 2024
[13] 陈龙, 李成之, 许志敏, 等. 不同恢复年限下洪泽湖湿地植物群落物种多样性. 湿地科学, 2025, 23(1): 181-189
[14] 李瑞. 洪泽湖退养还湿对沉积物有机碳稳定性的影响. 硕士论文. 南京: 南京林业大学, 2023
[15] 郭俨辉. 不同土地利用/覆被类型对洪泽湖湿地有机碳储量及其稳定性的影响. 硕士论文. 南京: 南京林业大学, 2024
[16] Tian L, Huang WY, Cui G, et al. Wetland restoration enhances soil carbon sequestration in lake ecosystems: Integrating multi-source remote sensing and optimized ensemble machine learning to map soil organic carbon density. Ecological Indicators, 2026, 182: 114551
[17] 贺依婷. 宁乡市退耕还湿工程对植物多样性及水质净化的影响. 硕士论文. 长沙: 中南林业科技大学, 2021
[18] Li B, Xing P, Wu QL. Synergistic alleviation of lake eutrophication and carbon emission by macrophyte restoration. The Innovation, 2025, 6: 101044
[19] 刘文静, 张平究, 董国政, 等. 不同退耕年限下菜子湖湿地土壤磷素组分特征变化. 生态学报, 2014, 34(10): 2654-2662
[20] 包先明, 程新峰, 纪磊, 等. 不同退耕年限下菜子湖湿地土壤酶活性变化. 土壤, 2016, 48(4): 692-697
[21] 何洪盛, 田青, 王理德, 等. 青土湖退耕地植被群落特征与土壤理化性质分析. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(1): 223-232
[22] 蒋伟, 王昊, 尕着玛, 等. 洪泽湖湿地植物群落优势种和均匀度变化对植物残体分解的影响. 生态学杂志, 2023, 42(10): 2336-2344
[23] 季淮, 韩建刚, 李萍萍, 等. 洪泽湖湿地植被类型对土壤有机碳粒径分布及微生物群落结构特征的影响. 南京林业大学学报: 自然科学版, 2021, 45(1): 141-150
[24] 程锦萍, 郭欢, 刘宇昂, 等. 洪泽湖底泥产甲烷速率及其对温度变化的响应. 湿地科学, 2023, 21(3): 439-448
[25] Zheng HJ, Liu DY, Li Y, et al. Wetland restoration suppresses microbial carbon metabolism by altering keystone species interactions. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2025, 16: 1570703
[26] Schuster L, Taillardat P, Macreadie PI, et al. Freshwater wetland restoration and conservation are long-term natural climate solutions. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 922: 171218
[27] 张奇奇, 韩广轩, 路峰, 等. 不同修复年限对黄河三角洲湿地植物多样性和群落稳定性的影响. 生态学杂志, 2022, 41(7): 1249-1257
[28] 邹雨函. 黄河三角洲滨海湿地退耕还湿区域的土壤、植物及种子库的演变过程分析. 硕士论文. 烟台: 鲁东大学, 2023
[29] 宋玉芝, 黄巧玉, 李成之, 等. 修复时间对洪泽湖湿地沉积物有机碳库及组分变化的影响. 环境生态学, 2025, 7(8): 120-129
[30] Zhou J, Wang Z, He Y, et al. Evaluating the effects of wetland restoration on ecosystem services using InVEST and Geostatistics: A case study of Dongting Lake in China. Remote Sensing, 2024, 16: 4062
[31] 卜弘毅, 朱正杰, 崔素珍, 等. 洪泽湖不同湿地类型表层土壤与沉积物碳氮含量特征分析. 湿地科学与管理, 2025, 21(1): 45-51
[32] 李成之, 张亦默, 许志敏, 等. 江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地国家级自然保护区退渔还湿工程实践. 湿地科学与管理, 2022, 18(4): 44-48
[33] Chen S, Wang J, Liu Q, et al. Global 30-m seamless data cube (2000-2022) of land surface reflectance generated from Landsat-5, 7, 8, 9 and MODIS Terra constellations. Earth System Science Data, 2024, 16: 5449-5479
[34] Valach AC, Kasak K, Hemes KS, et al. Productive wetlands restored for carbon sequestration quickly become net CO₂ sinks with site-level factors driving uptake variability. PLoS One, 2021, 16: e0248398
[35] Li Z, Wei J, Zhou X, et al. Dynamic restoration mechanism of plant community in the burned area of northeastern margin of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2024, 15: 1368814
[36] Wang T, Deng Z, Zhang C, et al. Vegetation types and flood water level are dominant factors controlling the carbon sequestration potential in Dongting Lake floodplain, China. Science of the Total Environment, 2024, 921: 171146
[37] Chen HY, Ge ZM, Zhu KH, et al. Ecosystem carbon and nitrogen recovery in restored coastal wetlands. Communications Earth & Environment, 2026, 7: 8

生态修复对江苏泗洪洪泽湖湿地植被碳储量的提升效应及其时间响应特征

Enhancement effects of ecological restoration on vegetation carbon storage in Sihong Hongze Lake wetland, Jiangsu Province, and the temporal variations.

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	韩广轩. 滨海湿地与全球变化:研究进展、趋势及挑战 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(9): 2886-2896.
[2]	余炜诚, 李峰, 谢永宏, 耿明明, 朱可欣, 何昊轩. 湿地植被调控沉积物-水界面磷迁移转化机制研究进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(9): 2945-2962.
[3]	李慧, 王法明. 当前全球红树林研究的进展与热点: 以MMM7会议为视角 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(9): 3079-3084.
[4]	齐新羽, 王晨, 田湘婷, 颜莫涵, 郭皓元, 苗原, 张冰, 邱林, 单燕祥, 李月凤, 王冬. 火烧对亚热带-暖温带过渡带森林土壤线虫群落结构及微食物网能量流动的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(8): 2793-2802.
[5]	吴明豪, 崔峻景, 云露洋, 金文德, 李豪, 张任菲. 景观生态风险与生态系统服务价值耦合的永定河平原段生态修复分区调控 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(4): 1187-1201.
[6]	朱晋立, 赵庆, 罗皓, 章驰. 粤港澳大湾区国土空间生态修复路径 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(2): 563-571.
[7]	朱宗斌, 姚龙杰, 万营娜, 薛立尧, 李骞国, 徐冰洁, 徐新有, 岳邦瑞. 基于生态系统服务“源-流-汇”特征的国土空间生态修复分区划定: 以西安市为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2026, 37(1): 243-252.
[8]	姚龙杰, 张栋林, 朱丹莉, 朱宗斌, 潘卫涛, 岳邦瑞. 国土空间生态修复优先级:概念认知、评估框架与规划议题 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(9): 2885-2898.
[9]	任海燕, 远远, 赵文多, 李安婷, 李雨昕, 宋晓辉. 抗逆增效草种包衣丸化技术在生态修复中的应用进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(8): 2563-2570.
[10]	刘新卫, 孔凡婕, 刘雯, 唐秀美, 杜佩昱, 淮贺举, 孙想, 张东元. 空间优化-功能提升框架下的塔里木河流域国土空间生态修复分区 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(12): 3625-3635.
[11]	张伦, 张宇龙, 夏振尧, 丁瑜, 刘畅, 张昺榴, 周孟夏, 崔磊, 肖海. 干热河谷区高陡岩质边坡生态修复效果评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(12): 3636-3646.
[12]	陈昆仑, 林如梦, 陈恁宇, 何丽娜, 何清俊. 楚雄彝族自治州景观生态风险评价和生态安全格局构建 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2025, 36(11): 3467-3478.
[13]	阚恒, 丁冠乔, 郭杰, 刘疆, 欧名豪. 基于生态安全格局分析的国土空间生态修复关键区域识别: 以环太湖城市群为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(8): 2217-2227.
[14]	高梦雯, 胡业翠, 刘新卫, 梁梦茵, 孔凡婕, 白羽萍. 多维视角下水生态修复分区划定——以典型喀斯特地区河池市为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(6): 1661-1670.
[15]	钟蕊, 王娇月, 徐婷婷, 郗凤明, 韩美, 胡琴琴, 邴龙飞, 尹岩. 光伏+矿山生态修复模式的减碳增汇潜力评估 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(5): 1379-1387.