4.7 Article

Regional land salinization assessment and simulation through cellular automaton-Markov modeling and spatial pattern analysis

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 439, 期 -, 页码 260-274

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.09.013

关键词

Cellular automaton model; Desalinization; Landscape pattern analysis; Salinity assessment; Salinization; Yinchuan Plain

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41130526, 41071146]
  2. Chinese Government Scholarship Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Land salinization and desalinization are complex processes affected by both biophysical and human-induced driving factors. Conventional approaches of land salinization assessment and simulation are either too time consuming or focus only on biophysical factors. The cellular automaton (CA)-Markov model, when coupled with spatial pattern analysis, is well suited for regional assessments and simulations of salt-affected landscapes since both biophysical and socioeconomic data can be efficiently incorporated into a geographic information system framework. Our hypothesis set forth that the CA-Markov model can serve as an alternative tool for regional assessment and simulation of land salinization or desalinization. Our results suggest that the CA-Markov model, when incorporating biophysical and human-induced factors, performs better than the model which did not account for these factors when simulating the salt-affected landscape of the Yinchuan Plain (China) in 2009. In general, the CA-Markov model is best suited for short-term simulations and the performance of the CA-Markov model is largely determined by the availability of high-quality, high-resolution socioeconomic data. The coupling of the CA-Markov model with spatial pattern analysis provides an improved understanding of spatial and temporal variations of salt-affected landscape changes and an option to test different soil management scenarios for salinity management. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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