4.6 Article

Salt dust storm in the Ebinur Lake region: its 50-year dynamic changes and response to climate changes and human activities

期刊

NATURAL HAZARDS
卷 77, 期 2, 页码 1069-1080

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-015-1642-9

关键词

Salt dust storm; Playa; Wind erosion; Climate change; Human activities

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41201539]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2013M530439]
  3. National Key Technology R&D Program of China [2011BAC02B03]
  4. Personnel training program of Light west of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
  5. Program of Higher-level talents of Inner Mongolia University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dynamic changes characteristics of salt dust storm in the Ebinur Lake of Xinjiang were investigated using the monitoring data during 1957-2007 of atmospheric dust storm and floating dust from four meteorological stations surrounding the dry lakebeds, and the gray correlation analysis method was used to calculate the correlation degree between annual dust storm days and meteorological and socioeconomic factors. The results showed that salt dust storm in the Ebinur Lake region presented a fluctuating process during 1957-2007, in which 1975 and 2000 were the two cut-off points. During 1975-2000, there were very frequent storms, and the average annual number of salt dust storm days was 10-48, while the average annual number of storm days was not more than 12 both before 1975 and after 2000. The annual variation of salt dust storm displayed a double-peak pattern, of which storm in spring accounted for 62-90 % of the total dust storm days of a year, and that in autumn accounted for 7-13 %. Among the meteorological factors, strong winds had the greatest impact on salt dust storm, followed by temperature and precipitation. For the anthropogenic factors, agricultural acreage exhibited the strongest influence on salt dust storm, followed by lake surface area and population number, while livestock number showed the smallest effect.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据