現在位置首頁 > 博碩士論文 > 詳目
  • 同意授權
論文中文名稱:應用景觀指數評估地景變遷與其對水質及生態之衝擊-以台北水源特定區為例 [以論文名稱查詢館藏系統]
論文英文名稱:Assessment of Landuse Change and Associated Impacts on Water Quality and Ecology by Employing Landscape Metrics -Case Study in Taipei Water Source Special District. [以論文名稱查詢館藏系統]
院校名稱:臺北科技大學
學院名稱:工程學院
系所名稱:土木與防災研究所
畢業學年度:101
出版年度:102
中文姓名:李元喻
英文姓名:Yuan-Yu Lee
研究生學號:100428080
學位類別:碩士
語文別:中文
口試日期:2013-07-19
論文頁數:155
指導教授中文名:朱子偉;譚智宏
指導教授英文名:Tzyy-Woei Chu;Chih-Hung Tan
口試委員中文名:陳莉;阮忠信
口試委員英文名:Li Chen;Chung-Hsin Juan
中文關鍵詞:景觀指數土地利用河川水質環境生態監測指標
英文關鍵詞:landscape metricsland usageriver water qualityenvironmental ecology indices
論文中文摘要:集水區土地利用之變遷,容易造成長期的水文及生態環境改變,然而此種變化往往是緩慢且不易查覺的,其中地理環境的改變很容易導致生態環境變遷,對水質也會產生直接或間接的影響。臺北水源特定區為大台北重要供水來源,其水質控管是首要的工作。因此,如何建立集水區內土地利用與流域內水質及生態的關連性知識,實為迫切需要的。
本研究旨在應用景觀生態指數計量方法,評估地景變遷與其對水質及生態之衝擊。研究收集特定區94和101兩年度之SPOT衛星影像,藉由影像分類、變遷偵測與景觀生態軟體,量化出之特定區八樣站之景觀生態指標;再比較七年間土地利用、上下游地景與景觀生態指數變遷之情形。結果顯示北勢溪之坪林、虎寮潭與南勢溪粗坑壩等三個樣區,作物類別都有取代森林與道路類別而擴張之情形;而桶後溪上游以及碧湖區塊變化較小。由各樣站量化出之景觀指數探討特定區上游至下游各類地景變遷情形發現,越趨於下游地段建成區塊群聚增加、森林區塊零碎下降、作物區塊鄰近增大、道路區塊蜿蜒上升而水體區塊有聚合增大等情形。
本研究進一步將各地區地景生態指數,與監測之水質生態指標進行相關性分析,結果顯示,當建成區與道路類別在地景中面積越大、邊緣長度越長,即人類的活動越頻繁時,會對各類水質指標產生負面影響。而農作區塊嵌塊數量增加、密度的提升以及有碎裂與穿孔等情況時,水質生態指標也有變差的趨勢。在草地、林地等森林區塊方面,若區塊面積越大、彼此相鄰且呈帶狀分布,會有類似過濾緩衝帶的功能,對水質有正面影響。綜合分析得知,經由空間與時間上地景指數的比較,能夠推測出該區域景觀分布與變遷情形以及水質變化之趨勢。
論文英文摘要:The change of hydrological environment in a watershed due to land use variation is usually slow and imperceptible. Since there are complicated relationships among water quality, water resource and ecosystem, the change of geographical environment will result in a variation of ecological environment and impacts of water quality. The rivers and the Feitsui reservoir at the Taipei water source district is an important source of water supply in Taipei Area. The control and management of water quality is a primary concern in this area. Therefore, it is an urgent need to establish the knowledge in land uses, water quality and ecology in the watershed.
The objective of the study is to use the landscape ecological metrics to assess land use change and associated impacts on water quality and ecology. The SPOT satellite images of 1995 and 2012 were implemented classification, change detection, and the landscape ecology metrics calculation at eight sampling sites in the district. The results showed that the agricultural area has expanded and partially replaced the area of forest and road at the Pinglin, Hu Liao Tan of Peishih River and Cukeng Dam of Nanshih River. The change was less in Bihu and in the upstream of Tungho River. It can also conclude from the study that when it tends to the downstream location in the special district, the cluster of construction zone, the contiguity of agricultural zone, the meander of road zone and the polymerization of water zone increase, but the fractional of forest zone decrease.
This study performed the correlation analysis for landscape metrics of each area and ecological indices of water quality. The result showed that it could bring out negative influences when large area and long length of edge of construction zone and road exist, which is the results of human activities. The trend was getting worse in agricultural blocks when the quantity of patches increased, the density elevated and there were situation such as perforation and fragmentation. There were positive effects in blocks of grass and forest if they were in large area of blocks and adjacent to each other, because they functioned like the buffer strips. It can see from the study that it is capable of evaluating the landscape distribution and the change of water quality in this area by comparing the spatial and temporal variation of landscape metrics.
論文目次:摘要 i
ABSTRACT iii
誌謝 v
表目錄 viii
圖目錄 x
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2 研究動機與目的 1
1.3 研究流程 3
第二章 文獻回顧 5
2.1 景觀生態學 5
2.2 景觀生態元素 6
2.3 景觀生態指數 8
2.4 景觀指數相關研究 9
2.4.1 現今景觀生態學的研究領域與範疇 9
2.4.2 國內景觀生態相關研究 9
2.4.3 景觀生態相關研究-水質 11
第三章 理論與方法 15
3.1 研究區域 15
3.1.1 地理位置 15
3.1.2 水系介紹 17
3.1.3 氣象與水文 17
3.1.4 研究樣區劃分 18
3.2影像分類與衛星之介紹 20
3.2.1 影像分類 20
3.2.2 衛星介紹 21
3.3景觀生態圖示之學理原則 23
3.3.1 嵌塊體 23
3.3.2 邊界 27
3.3.3 廊道與連接性 30
3.3.4 鑲嵌體 32
3.4地景參數公式與意義 35
3.4.1 嵌塊體指標 36
3.4.2 形狀指標 38
3.4.3 空間結構指標 41
3.5 環境生態指標簡述 42
3.5.1 河川水質指標(Water Quality Index, WQI) 42
3.5.2 生物整合指數(Index of Biotic Integrity, IBI) 44
3.5.3 水棲昆蟲科級生物指標(Family-level biotic index, FBI) 45
3.5.4 藻類生物指標 46
3.5.5 環境生態整合性指標 47
第四章 研究結果與資料分析 49
4.1影像分類結果 49
4.1.1 土地利用分類情形(北勢溪) 50
4.1.2 土地利用分類情形(南勢溪) 63
4.2 景觀指數-結果與分析 74
4.2.1 北勢溪流域分析 74
4.2.2 南勢溪流域分析 88
4.3 上下游地景趨勢分析 99
4.3.1 建成區(construction) 100
4.3.2 森林(forest plant) 103
4.3.3 作物(crop) 106
4.3.4 水體(water) 109
4.3.5 道路(road) 112
4.4 景觀指數與水質指標相關性分析 115
4.4.1 建成區(construction) 117
4.4.2 水體(water) 120
4.4.3 道路(road) 124
4.4.4 作物(crop) 127
4.4.5 森林(forest plant) 130
4.4.6 水質參數與地景指數相關性 132
4.4.7 整體景觀與水質生態相關性 142
第五章 結論與建議 147
5.1 結論 147
5.2 未來研究建議 150
參考文獻 151
論文參考文獻:1. A. Baker, “Land use and water quality,” Hydrol Process, vol.17, 2003, pp.2499-2501.
2. A. Veldkamp and L.O. Fresco, “CLUE:a conceptual model to study the Conversion of Land Use and its Effects,” Ecological Modelling, vol.85, 1996, pp.253-270.
3. A.B. Leitao, J. Miller, J. Ahern and K. McGarigal, Measuring Landscapes: A Planner’s Handbook, Washington, D.C.:Island Press , 2006.
4. A.S. Donigian, B.R. Bicknell and J.C. Imhoff, Hydrological Simulation Program - Fortran (HSPF), Colorado:Water Resources Publications , 1995, pp.395-442.
5. B.J. Zebarth, B. Hii, H. Liebscher, K. Chipperfield, J.W. Paul, G. Grove and S.Y. Szeto, “Agricultural land use practices and nitrate contamination in the Abbotsford Aquifer, British Columbia, Canada,” Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, vol. 69, 1998, pp. 99-112.
6. D.C. Parker, S.M. Manson, M. Janssen, M.J. Hoffmann and P.J. Deadman, “Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land use and land cover change: a review, ”Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol.93, no.2, 2003, pp.314-337.
7. D.R. Keeney and T.H. Deluca, “Des-Moines River nitrate in relation to watershed agricultural practices-1945 versus 1980s, ” Journal of Environmental Quality, vol.22, no.2, 1993, pp.267-272.
8. E. Hietel, R. Waldhardt and A. Otte, “Linking socio-economic factors, environment and land cover in the German Highlands, 1945–1999,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol.75, no.2, 2005, pp.133–143.
9. E. Uuemaa, J. Roosaare and U. Mander, “Scale dependence of landscape metrics and their indicatory value for nutrient and organic matter losses from catchments,” Ecological Indicators, vol.5, no.4, 2005, pp.350-369.
10. E.J. Gustafson, “Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: What is the state of the art?, ” Ecosystems, vol.1, no.2 ,1998, pp.143-156.
11. I.S. Zonneveld, “Changing Landscapes: An Ecological Perspective Scope and Concepts of Landscape Ecology as an Emerging Science, ”New York:Springer-Verlag, 1990, pp.3-20
12. K. McGarigal and B. J. Marks, FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure, 1995, USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tec. Rep. PNW-351.
13. L. Sliva and D.D. Williams, “Buffer zone versus whole catchment approaches to studying land use impact on river water quality,” Water Research, vol.35, no.14, 2001, pp.3462-3472.
14. M. Munafo, G. Cecchi, F. Baiocco and L. Mancini, “River pollution from non-point sources: a new simplified method of assessment,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol.77, 2005, pp.93-98.
15. M.G. Turner, G.J. Arthaud, R.T. Engstrom, S.J. Hejl and L. Jianguo, “Usefulness of Spatially Explicit Population Models in Land Management, ” Ecological Applications , vol.5, no.1, 1995, pp.12–16.
16. M.R. Muller and J. Middleton, “A Markov Model of Land-Use Change Dynamics in the Niagara Region, ” Landscape Ecology, vol.9, no.2, 1994, pp.151-157.
17. N. Batisani and B.Yarnal, “Uncertainty awareness in urban sprawl simulations: Lessons from a small US metropolitan region,” Land Use Policy, vol.26, no.2, 2009, pp.178-185.
18. P. Basnyat, L.D. Teeter, B.G. Lockaby and K.M. Flynn, “The use of remote sensing and GIS in watershed level analyses of non-point source pollution problems,” Forest Ecology and Management, vo.128, no.1-2, 2000, pp.65-73.
19. P. Pekarova and J. Pekar, “The impact of land use on stream water quality in Slovakia,” Journal of Hydrology, vol.180, no.1-4, 1996, pp.333-350.
20. P.H. Verburg, M.J. Dijst and P. Schot, “Determinants of Land-Use Change Patterns in the Neitherland,” Environment and Planning, vol.B, no.31, 2004, pp.125-150.
21. R.F. Hulshoff, “Landscape indices describing a Dutch landscape, ” Landscape Ecology, vol.10, no.2, 1995, pp.101-111.
22. R.P. Smart, C. Soulsby, C. Neal, A. Wade, M.S. Cresser, M.F. Billett, S.J. Langan, A.C. Edwards, H.P. Jarvie and R. Owen, “Factors regulating the spatial and temporal distribution of solute concentrations in a major river system in NE Scotland,” The Science of the Total Environment, vol.221, no.2-3,1998, pp.93-110.
23. R.T.T. Forman and M. Godron, Landscape ecology, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1986.
24. R.T.T. Forman, Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions, Cambridge:UK. Cambridge University Press,1995.
25. S.W. Lee, S.J. Hwang, S.B. Lee, H.S. Hwang and H.C. Sung, “Landscape ecological approach to the relationships of land use patterns in watersheds to water quality characteristics,” Landscape and Urban Planning, vol.92, no.2, 2009, pp.80-89.
26. W.E. Dramstard, J.D. Olson and R.T.T. Forman, Landscape Principles in Landscape Architecture and Land-use Planning, Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1996.
27. Z. Naveh and A.S. Lieberman, Landscape Ecology: Theory and Application, Berlin:Springer-Verlag, 1993.
28. Z. Naveh, “Biocybernetic and thermodynamic perspectives of landscape functions and land use patterns,” Landscape Ecology, vol.1, no.2, 1987, pp.75-83.
29. Z. Naveh, “Interactions of landscapes and cultures,”Landscape and Urban Planning, vol.32, no.1, 1995, pp.43-54.
30. Z. Naveh, “Landscape Ecology as an Emerging Branch of Human Ecosystem Science,” Advances in Ecological Research, vol.12, 1982, pp.189-237.
31. 王智聖,都市公園生態空間特性之研究-以台南市公園鳥類為例,碩士論文,國立成功大學都市計劃學系,台南,2002。
32. 史瓊雯,應用景觀生態計量方法探討集水區河川沿岸土地利用變遷—以德基水庫集水區為例,碩士論文,中國文化大學地學研究所,台北,2003。
33. 朱子偉,「非點源汙染控制」,環境工程會刊,第十七卷,第四期,2006,第35-41頁。
34. 吳振發、林裕彬、張俊彥、張琪如,景觀量測,台北:五南出版社,2011,292頁。
35. 李瑞陽、林士強,「利用空間技術與景觀生態指數分析墾丁國家公園土地覆蓋變遷影響之研究」,地理學報,第四十六期,2006,第31-48頁。
36. 肖篤寧,「論現代景觀科學的形成與發展」,地理科學,第十九卷,第四期, 1999,第379-384頁。
37. 肖篤寧,景觀生態學:理論、方法及應用,台北:地景企業股份有限公司,1992,431頁。
38. 周辰諭,雲林縣口湖地區土地利用與農漁業產值變遷相關性之研究,碩士論文,逢甲大學景觀與遊憩研究所,台中,2004
39. 林裕彬,林信輝,陳秋楊,應用遙測影像與景觀生態計量方法於集水區土地利用變遷之研究─以陳有蘭溪集水區為例,台北:行政院農業委員會水土保持局92年度土石流防災暨監測科技計畫,2003。
40. 林裕彬、吳振發、鄧東波,「景觀生態面向及指數分析汐止地區 1990至 2001 土地利用時空間鑲嵌特徵」,都市與計畫,第三十一卷,第三期,2004,第239-268頁。
41. 唐克敏,蘭陽溪流域地景變遷及驅動力之研究,碩士論文,中國文化大學景觀學系碩士班,台北,2009。
42. 莊健源,以碎形與景觀指標探討河川棲地特性,碩士論文,中央大學土木工程系,桃園,2005。
43. 曾正輝,景觀生態計量方法於集水區生態水文之研究-以淡水河流域為例,碩士論文,中國文化大學地學研究所,台北,2002。
44. 黃炫國,海岸地區土地利用變遷對生態環境影響之分析,碩士論文,國立中山大學海洋環境及工程學系研究所,高雄,2011。
45. 楊剛,遙測資訊應用於墾丁國家公園地景生態變遷監測之研究,碩士論文,屏東科技大學森林系,屏東,2004。
46. 葉春國,廖學誠,詹進發,黃正良,薛美莉,「水里溪上游集水區土地利用與溪流水中硝酸鹽濃度關係之探討」,中華水土保持學報,第三十九卷,第二期,2008,第141-153頁。
47. 農業工程研究中心,101年台北水源特定區生態調查監測計畫報告書,桃園:農業工程研究中心,2012。
48. 農業工程研究中心,台灣省新竹農田水利會101年度地理資訊系統與航照加值應用計畫報告書,桃園:農業工程研究中心,2012。
49. 鄔建國,「景觀生態學-概念與理論」,生態學雜誌,第十九卷,第一期, 2000,第42-52頁。
50. 鄔建國,景觀生態學-格局、過程、尺度與等級,台北:五南圖書出版股份有限公司,2003。
51. 蔡志偉,集水區土地變遷對水域棲地環境影響評估之研究,博士論文,中興大學水土保持學系所,台中,2009。
52. 鄧東波,從景觀生態學觀點探討都市綠地─以台北市信義計畫區為例,碩士論文,中國文化大學地學研究所,台北,2001。
53. 賴明洲、薛怡珍,「地景生態學的相關書籍與台灣地區文獻介紹」,造園季刊,第四十九期,2003,第47-58頁。
54. 賴明洲、薛怡珍、趙羿,景觀生態學理論與實務,台北:地景企業股份有限公司,2004。
論文全文使用權限:同意授權於2014-08-26起公開