福建省森林生态系统水源涵养服务评估:InVEST模型与meta分析对比

Evaluation of water retention services of forest ecosystems in Fujian Province:Comparison between results from the InVEST model and meta-analysis

生态系统水源涵养服务评估已存在基于不同原理和数据源的多种评价方法,然而,不同方法造成的评估结果异同尚缺乏系统性定量化比较。为了揭示不同评估机制对同一地区产生的影响,分别采用"点数据-综合蓄水能力法-meta分析"和"面数据-水量平衡法-InVEST模型"两套方法体系对福建省森林水源涵养服务状况进行对比评估。结果显示:InVEST模型模拟的水源涵养能力年均值为529.62 mm,涵养总量236.18×10^(8)m^(3);meta分析法估算的能力均值为653.68 mm,涵养总量291.07×10^(8)m^(3)。水源涵养能力表现出相当大的空间差异,随海拔升高呈递增趋势,西部、北部山地高于东南沿海平原。InVEST模型侧重气象、地形和土坡覆被因素,meta分析侧重林分条件,因此同一森林类型不同方法的涵养能力存在显著差异。结合点尺度分析,造成结果差异的不确定性包括水源涵养相关参数定义的多样化、测量方法及误差以及系数本地化水平。分析自上而下的InVEST模型与自下而上的meta分析两类方法的特点和机理,为不同区域研究选择适宜的评估方法提供借鉴,有助于完善生态系统水源涵养服务评估的理论和技术。

Water retention(WR)services of ecosystems can be evaluated using various methods based on different theories and data sources.However,there was still no quantitative comparison to comprehensively evaluate the variations and consistencies of results from different methods.To determine the influences of different methods,we used two methods,including‘site data-comprehensive storage capacity method-meta-analysis’and‘spatial data-water balance method-InVEST model’,to compare forest WR services in Fujian Province,China.The results showed that the mean annual capacity of WR was 529.62 mm(653.68 mm),and the total amount of WR was 236.18×10^(8)m^(3)(291.07×10^(8)m^(3))from the InVEST model(meta-analysis).The WR capacities showed a large spatial variation,which were higher in the western and northern mountains than in the southeastern coastal plain.Meteorological,topographical and land cover factors were considered in the InVEST model,whereas specific stand conditions were applied in the meta-analysis.Therefore,the results of WR capacities from different methods in the same forest cover were different.In addition,we also conducted a site-scale analysis,and found the uncertainty sources of results were from multiple definitions of WR parameters,inconsistent measurement methods,measurement errors,and differences of coefficient localization.Our findings provide references for selecting appropriate evaluation methods in different regional studies and improving the theory and technology of evaluation in ecosystem WR services.