根据生态系统服务目标的完整性要求评估和诊断水生生态系统完整性

IF 5.1 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Hong-Zhu Wang
{"title":"根据生态系统服务目标的完整性要求评估和诊断水生生态系统完整性","authors":"Hong-Zhu Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.watbs.2023.100230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper critically reviews the progress in ecosystem integrity (health) assessment of inland waters and provides future directions for assessment. Current biotic integrity assessments mainly use multimetric indices and predictive models to evaluate overall health status; the criteria largely rely on pristine reference sites, but such an approach is not applicable to unique natural waters and irreversibly modified waters. Biotic diagnostic assessments are still in the exploratory stage and can only diagnose possible stressor types and wide-ranges of their intensities through empirical models linking stressors and species-trait-indices. Current chemical integrity assessments mainly use criteria determined by small-scale ecotoxicity tests, rather than quantitative relationships developed between chemical factors and biotic effects in real ecosystems, thus potentially under or over-estimating pollutant toxicity. Current physical integrity assessments focus on overall habitat quality, rather than quantitative habitat requirements, and thus cannot provide quantitative support for ecological restoration and conservation. Current hydrological integrity (environment flow) assessments largely depend on quantitative relationships between hydrological regimes with a few species and single groups, rather than with whole communities, and fail to comprehensively diagnose hydrological causes of biotic resource decline. In the future, integrity assessments need to be based on ecosystem integrity requirements of ecosystem service targets: first, there is a need to build quantitative relationships between biotic integrity and ecosystem services, assess requirements of community structure and function for service goals, and establish biotic integrity assessment methods; second, we must build quantitative relationships between biotic integrity and abiotic integrity in real ecosystems, assess chemical, physical, and hydrological integrity requirements of biotic needs, and establish diagnostic assessment methods.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101277,"journal":{"name":"Water Biology and Security","volume":"3 1","pages":"Article 100230"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772735123001257/pdfft?md5=2d36d61e0478db28b52efb454f9c682a&pid=1-s2.0-S2772735123001257-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessments and diagnoses of aquatic ecosystem integrity based on integrity requirements of ecosystem service targets\",\"authors\":\"Hong-Zhu Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.watbs.2023.100230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper critically reviews the progress in ecosystem integrity (health) assessment of inland waters and provides future directions for assessment. Current biotic integrity assessments mainly use multimetric indices and predictive models to evaluate overall health status; the criteria largely rely on pristine reference sites, but such an approach is not applicable to unique natural waters and irreversibly modified waters. Biotic diagnostic assessments are still in the exploratory stage and can only diagnose possible stressor types and wide-ranges of their intensities through empirical models linking stressors and species-trait-indices. Current chemical integrity assessments mainly use criteria determined by small-scale ecotoxicity tests, rather than quantitative relationships developed between chemical factors and biotic effects in real ecosystems, thus potentially under or over-estimating pollutant toxicity. Current physical integrity assessments focus on overall habitat quality, rather than quantitative habitat requirements, and thus cannot provide quantitative support for ecological restoration and conservation. Current hydrological integrity (environment flow) assessments largely depend on quantitative relationships between hydrological regimes with a few species and single groups, rather than with whole communities, and fail to comprehensively diagnose hydrological causes of biotic resource decline. In the future, integrity assessments need to be based on ecosystem integrity requirements of ecosystem service targets: first, there is a need to build quantitative relationships between biotic integrity and ecosystem services, assess requirements of community structure and function for service goals, and establish biotic integrity assessment methods; second, we must build quantitative relationships between biotic integrity and abiotic integrity in real ecosystems, assess chemical, physical, and hydrological integrity requirements of biotic needs, and establish diagnostic assessment methods.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Water Biology and Security\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100230\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772735123001257/pdfft?md5=2d36d61e0478db28b52efb454f9c682a&pid=1-s2.0-S2772735123001257-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Water Biology and Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772735123001257\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Biology and Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772735123001257","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认真回顾了内陆水域生态系统完整性(健康)评估的进展,并提出了未来的评估方向。目前的生物完整性评估主要使用多指标指数和预测模型来评估整体健康状态;这些标准主要依赖于原始参考点,但这种方法不适用于独特的自然水域和不可逆转的改造水域。生物诊断评估仍处于探索阶段,只能通过将压力源与物种特征指数联系起来的经验模型来诊断可能的压力源类型及其强度范围。目前的化学完整性评估主要使用小规模生态毒性试验确定的标准,而不是在真实生态系统中化学因素与生物效应之间建立的定量关系,因此有可能低估或高估污染物的毒性。目前的物理完整性评估侧重于整体栖息地质量,而不是对栖息地的定量要求,因此无法为生态恢复和保护提供定量支持。目前的水文完整性(环境流量)评估在很大程度上依赖于水文系统与少数物种和单一群体而非整个群落之间的定量关系,无法全面诊断生物资源衰退的水文原因。未来,完整性评估需要基于生态系统服务目标对生态系统完整性的要求:首先,需要建立生物完整性与生态系统服务之间的定量关系,评估服务目标对群落结构和功能的要求,建立生物完整性评估方法;其次,我们必须建立真实生态系统中生物完整性与非生物完整性之间的定量关系,评估生物需求对化学、物理和水文完整性的要求,建立诊断评估方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessments and diagnoses of aquatic ecosystem integrity based on integrity requirements of ecosystem service targets

This paper critically reviews the progress in ecosystem integrity (health) assessment of inland waters and provides future directions for assessment. Current biotic integrity assessments mainly use multimetric indices and predictive models to evaluate overall health status; the criteria largely rely on pristine reference sites, but such an approach is not applicable to unique natural waters and irreversibly modified waters. Biotic diagnostic assessments are still in the exploratory stage and can only diagnose possible stressor types and wide-ranges of their intensities through empirical models linking stressors and species-trait-indices. Current chemical integrity assessments mainly use criteria determined by small-scale ecotoxicity tests, rather than quantitative relationships developed between chemical factors and biotic effects in real ecosystems, thus potentially under or over-estimating pollutant toxicity. Current physical integrity assessments focus on overall habitat quality, rather than quantitative habitat requirements, and thus cannot provide quantitative support for ecological restoration and conservation. Current hydrological integrity (environment flow) assessments largely depend on quantitative relationships between hydrological regimes with a few species and single groups, rather than with whole communities, and fail to comprehensively diagnose hydrological causes of biotic resource decline. In the future, integrity assessments need to be based on ecosystem integrity requirements of ecosystem service targets: first, there is a need to build quantitative relationships between biotic integrity and ecosystem services, assess requirements of community structure and function for service goals, and establish biotic integrity assessment methods; second, we must build quantitative relationships between biotic integrity and abiotic integrity in real ecosystems, assess chemical, physical, and hydrological integrity requirements of biotic needs, and establish diagnostic assessment methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信