2001−2022年黄土高原植被时空变化

Spatiotemporal dynamics of vegetation in the Loess Plateau from 2001 to 2022

摘要

为揭示黄土高原植被时空变化特征及其演变规律，基于2001−2022年归一化植被指数（normalized difference vegetation index，NDVI）数据，分析黄土高原植被年际与季节变化特征，分时段比较植被变化趋势及持续性，并探讨不同自然植被的空间增减与变化趋势差异。结果表明：22年间黄土高原NDVI持续增长，增速为0.057 6/（10 a）；季节增长依次为夏季[0.058/（10 a）]>秋季[0.052/（10 a）]>春季[0.044/（10 a）]>冬季[0.025/（10 a）]，秋季增长较春季更快且更稳定；NDVI呈东南高、西北低的空间特征，植被改善区占比89.55%，退化区占6.84%；分时段对比显示，2011年后植被恢复减缓，改善区较2001−2011年减少7.88%面积占比，退化区增加8.48%；Hurst指数显示，68.07%区域NDVI变化趋势有反持续性，仅28.16%区域具有持续性；自然植被空间变化表现为林地集中扩张、草地向西北延伸；土地利用未变化区域自然植被NDVI普遍增长，且林地增长最稳定，草地和灌木有更强的恢复优势，黄土高原植被恢复呈现空间扩张与质量提升并行的良好态势。黄土高原植被时空变化分析可为生态修复分区管理、植被类型优化配置及长期生态治理决策提供科学依据。

Abstract

The Loess Plateau, the world's largest continuous loess region, is marked by severe soil erosion and serves as the primary sediment source for the Yellow River, making it a key focus of national soil and water conservation initiatives. The vegetation cover on the Plateau has increased significantly since the implementation of ecological engineering projects such as the Grain-for-Green Program. In certain subregions, vegetation growth is nearing the ecological carrying capacity, constrained by water availability and the development of persistent soil dry layers. The 2021 Outline of Ecological Protection and High-Quality Development of the Yellow River Basin emphasizes the importance of spatially optimized ecological planning and scientifically guided vegetation restoration. Under this policy framework, a comprehensive assessment of the spatial and temporal changes, as well as the sustainability of vegetation cover, is essential for determining effective restoration approaches and erosion control measures in the area. This study examined the spatiotemporal features of vegetation dynamics throughout the Loess Plateau using MODIS MOD13Q1 v061 NDVI data (250 m, 2001–2022). Interannual and seasonal variations in vegetation growth were investigated, and spatial patterns of NDVI change trends were compared across time periods using the Theil-Sen median trend estimator and Mann-Kendall significance test. The Hurst exponent was used to further evaluate the persistence of vegetation change trends. Furthermore, by combining land use data, this study investigated the spatial expansion and contraction of various natural vegetation types, as well as their NDVI change trends, to reveal differences in ecological restoration effectiveness. Results indicate that: (1) NDVI exhibited a sustained upward trend over the past two decades, with a growth rate of 0.057 6/(10 a). Seasonal trends were ranked as summer [0.058/(10 a)], autumn [0.052/(10 a)], spring [0.044/(10 a)], and winter [0.025/(10 a)], with autumn exhibiting faster and more stable growth than spring. (2) On a spatial scale, NDVI decreased from southeast to northwest. Vegetation improvement areas made up 89.55% of the entire region during the study period, while degraded areas made up 6.84%, suggesting a general trend toward recovery. However, during 2012–2022, high-coverage zones experienced intensified degradation, with improvement areas reduced by 7.88% and degradation areas increased by 8.48% compared with 2001–2011. (3) According to Hurst exponent analysis, only 28.16% of the region showed persistent growth, whereas 68.07% showed anti-persistent NDVI changes. (4) Natural vegetation underwent distinct spatial changes, including contiguous forest expansion and the northwestward extension of grasslands. In non-converted areas, NDVI generally increased across all vegetation types, with forests exhibiting the most stable growth, while grasslands and shrubs showed relatively faster improvement. Overall, vegetation restoration on the Loess Plateau has progressed through both spatial expansion and quality enhancement, but significant spatial heterogeneity remains, with some areas showing signs of slowed recovery or degradation. These results suggest that future restoration initiatives should prioritize the rehabilitation and adaptive management of grassland and shrubland ecosystems, optimize the spatial planning of ecological interventions, and be in line with regional water resource constraints. For ecological restoration and soil and water conservation to be sustainable over the long term throughout the Loess Plateau, site-specific and unique approaches are crucial.

关键词

植被指数 / 趋势分析 / Hurst指数 / 黄土高原 / 时空变化 / MODIS-NDVI

Key words

vegetation index / trend analysis / Hurst exponent / Loess Plateau / spatiotemporal evolution / MODIS-NDVI

参考文献

[1] Liu Xiaoyan, Dang Suzhen, Liu Changming, et al. Effects of rainfall intensity on the sediment concentration in the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2020, 30(11): 455-467. DOI: 10.1007/s11442-020-1737-4.

[2] 胡春宏, 张晓明. 黄土高原水土流失治理与黄河水沙变化[J]. 水利水电技术, 2020, 51(1): 1-11. DOI: 10.13928/j.cnki.wrahe.2020.01.001.

[3] 傅伯杰. 黄土高原土地利用变化的生态环境效应[J]. 科学通报, 2022, 67(32): 3768-3779. DOI: 10.1360/TB-2022-0543.

[4] 张芳宁, 杨亮洁, 杨永春. 1981−2016年黄土高原植被NDVI变化及对气候和人类活动的响应[J]. 水土保持研究, 2023, 30(2): 230-237. DOI: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.02.044.

[5] 刘兴宇, 宋宏利, 李润杰, 等. 黄河流域青海段2000−2020年土壤侵蚀时空动态变化[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2025, 23(2): 251-259. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2025.0032.

[6] Zhang Shuilei, Yang Dawen, Yang Yuting, et al. Excessive afforestation and soil drying on China's Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 2018, 123(3): 923-935. DOI: 10.1002/2017jg004038.

[7] 高海东, 庞国伟, 李占斌, 等. 黄土高原植被恢复潜力研究[J]. 地理学报, 2017, 72(5): 863-874. DOI: 10.11821/dlxb201705008.

[8] 中共中央、 国务院. 黄河流域生态保护和高质量发展规划纲要[EB/OL]. https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2021-10/08/content_5641438.htm, 2021-10-08.

[9] 姬广兴, 高慧珊, 高红凯, 等. 汉江流域植被变化及对径流的影响[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2024, 22(3): 512-520. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2024.0053.

[10] 田卫堂, 刘淼, 张子元, 等. 考虑气候时滞效应的河北山区NDVI演变归因[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2023, 21(5): 962-971. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2023.0092.

[11] Su Jingxuan, Fan Liangxin, Yuan Zhanliang, et al. Dynamics of vegetation response patterns to drought and its driving factors across China's Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2025, 393: 126946. DOI: 10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2025.126946.

[12] 杨灿, 魏天兴, 李亦然, 等. 黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错区退耕还林工程前后NDVI时空变化特征[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2021, 43(6): 83-91. DOI: 10.12171/j.1000-1522.20210128.

[13] 解晗, 同小娟, 李俊, 等. 2000−2018年黄河流域生长季植被指数变化及其对气候因子的响应[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(11): 4536-4549. DOI: 10.5846/stxb202104271108.

[14] Yang Xinyuan, Liu Jincheng, Dong Zhen. Critical role of potential natural vegetation in guiding future restoration strategies for China's Loess Plateau[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2025, 392: 126919. DOI: 10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2025.126919.

[15] 邵全琴, 刘树超, 宁佳, 等. 2000−2019年中国重大生态工程生态效益遥感评估[J]. 地理学报, 2022, 77(9): 2133-2153. DOI: 10.11821/dlxb202209001.

[16] 韩磊, 曹鑫鑫, 朱会利, 等. 基于特征分区的陕北黄土高原植被覆盖变化及其驱动因素[J]. 生态学报, 2023, 43(20): 8564-8577. DOI: 10.20103/j.stxb.202208142316.

[17] 刘荔昀, 鲁瑞洁, 丁之勇, 等. 黄土高原气候变化特征及原因分析[J]. 地球环境学报, 2021, 12(6): 615-631. DOI: 10.7515/JEE212018.

[18] 吉珍霞, 裴婷婷, 陈英, 等. 黄土高原植被物候变化及其对季节性气候变化的响应[J]. 生态学报, 2021, 41(16): 6600-6612. DOI: 10.5846/stxb202006301704.

[19] 张志强, 刘欢, 左其亭, 等. 2000−2019年黄河流域植被覆盖度时空变化[J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(4): 849-858. DOI: 10.18402/resci.2021.04.18.

[20] 刘静, 温仲明, 刚成诚, 等. 黄土高原不同植被覆被类型NDVI对气候变化的响应[J]. 水利水电技术（中英文）, 2025, 56(8): 61-77. DOI: 10.13928/j.cnki.wrahe.2025.08.005.

[21] 袁毓婕, 高学睿, 黄可静, 等. 基于RHESSys模型的延河流域水文要素定量模拟[J]. 南水北调与水利科技（中英文）, 2023, 21(1): 116-126. DOI: 10.13476/j.cnki.nsbdqk.2023.0013.

[22] 涂兴华, 栾小晨, 王战. 吸收光谱线二次谐波的频率分解和SG滤波复合降噪[J]. 光谱学与光谱分析, 2025, 45(5): 1209-1216. DOI: 10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2025)05-1209-08.

[23] 王建邦, 赵军, 李传华, 等. 2001−2015年中国植被覆盖人为影响的时空格局[J]. 地理学报, 2019, 74(3): 504-519. DOI: 10.11821/dlxb201903008.

[24] 袁丽华, 蒋卫国, 申文明, 等. 2000−2010年黄河流域植被覆盖的时空变化[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(24): 7798-7806. DOI: 10.5846/stxb201305281212.

[25] Liu Chenxi, Zhang Xiaodong, Wang Tong, et al. Detection of vegetation coverage changes in the Yellow River basin from 2003 to 2020[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2022, 138: 108818. DOI: 10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2022.108818.

[26] 信忠保, 许炯心. 黄土高原地区植被覆盖时空演变对气候的响应[J]. 自然科学进展, 2007, 17(6): 770-778. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1002-008X.2007.06.010.

[27] 雷俊, 姚玉璧, 孙润, 等. 黄土高原半干旱区物候变化特征及其对气候变暖的响应[J]. 中国农业气象, 2017, 38(1): 1-8. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6362.2017.01.001.

[28] Garonna I, Jong R, Wit A J, et al. Strong contribution of autumn phenology to changes in satellite-derived growing season length estimates across Europe (1982-2011)[J]. Global Change Biology, 2014, 20(11): 3457-3470. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12625.

[29] 武永利, 栾青, 赵永强, 等. 近25年山西植被指数时空变化特征分析[J]. 生态环境, 2008, 17(6): 2330-2335. DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2008.06.038.

[30] 申丛林. 内蒙古黄河流域NDVI时空变化及影响因子研究[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2023. DOI: 10.27229/d.cnki.gnmnu.2022.000908.

[31] 赵安周, 张安兵, 刘海新, 等. 退耕还林（草）工程实施前后黄土高原植被覆盖时空变化分析[J]. 自然资源学报, 2017, 32(3): 449-460. DOI: 10.11849/zrzyxb.20160411.

[32] 王凯利, 王志慧, 肖培青, 等. 基于水量平衡原理的黄土高原林草植被覆盖度恢复潜力评估[J]. 生态学报, 2022, 42(20): 8352-8364. DOI: 10.5846/stxb202108302444.

[33] 吴亚彪, 高晓东, 何娜娜, 等. 黄土高原极端降水对人工林地深层土壤水分的补给效应[J]. 生态学报, 2024, 44(23): 10757-10769. DOI: 10.20103/j.stxb.202312242806.

[34] 周国逸, 夏军, 周平, 等. 不恰当的植被恢复导致水资源减少[J]. 中国科学: 地球科学, 2021, 51(2): 175-182. DOI: 10.1360/N072020-0157.

[35] 夏露, 马耘秀, 李云霄, 等. 不同植被恢复模式对黄土高原生态水文特征的影响[J]. 中国资源综合利用, 2025, 43(6): 210-212. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-9500.2025.06.062.

基金资助

国家自然科学基金黄河水科学研究联合基金项目(U2243601)

国家重点研发计划项目(2024YFF1306300)

国家重点研发计划项目(2022YFO3201700)

水利部重大科技项目(SKR-2022056)