Advertisement

Management Methods and Demonstration on Pollution Load Control of Song-Liao River Basin

  • Kun Lei
  • Ya Tao
  • Weijing Kong
  • Fei Qiao
  • Gang Zhou
  • Yuan Zhang
  • Yixiang Dend
  • Richard Williams
  • Kexin Liu
  • Jieyun Wu
Chapter
Part of the Terrestrial Environmental Sciences book series (TERENVSC)

Abstract

This deliverables reports the “aquatic eco-function zoning map” delineation activities of the SUSTAIN H\(_2\)O project consortium during the project’s reporting period.

References

  1. 1.
    GB 3838-2002 Environmental quality standards for surface water.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    GB12941-91 Water quality standards for landscape entertainment.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    SL278-2002 Hydrological calculation of water conservancy and hydropower project.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abell, Frances, Michael Krams, John Ashburner, Richard Passingham, Karl Friston, Richard Frackowiak, Francesca Happé, Chris Frith, and Uta Frith. 1999. The neuroanatomy of autism: A voxel-based whole brain analysis of structural scans. Neuroreport 10 (8): 1647–1651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abell, Robin, Michele L. Thieme, Carmen Revenga, Mark Bryer, Maurice Kottelat, Nina Bogutskaya, Brian Coad, Nick Mandrak, Salvador Contreras Balderas, William Bussing, et al. 2008. Freshwater ecoregions of the world: A new map of biogeographic units for freshwater biodiversity conservation. BioScience 58 (5): 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abell, Robin A. 2000. Freshwater ecoregions of North America: A conservation assessment, vol. 2. Island Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Albert, D.A., S.R. Denton, B.V. Barnes, and K.E. Simpson. 1986. Regional landscape ecosystems of Michigan. School of Natural Resources: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andersen, M.M., F.F. Riget, and H. Sparholt. 1984. A modification of the trent index for use in Denmark. Water Research 18 (2): 145–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Armitage, P.D., Dorian Moss, J.F. Wright, and M.T. Furse. 1983. The performance of a new biological water quality score system based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running-water sites. Water Research 17 (3): 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Austrian Standards Institute. 1997. Entwurf, berechnung und bemessung in der geotechnik.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bailey, Kenneth D. 1998. Social ecology and living systems theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science: 421–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bailey, R. G. Ecoregions of the United States.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bailey, R.G. 2014. Ecoregions: The ecosystem geography of the oceans and continents. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bedford, Barbara L. 1996. The need to define hydrologic equivalence at the landscape scale for freshwater wetland mitigation. Ecological Applications 6 (1): 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bedford, Barbara L., and Eric M. Preston. 1988. Developing the scientific basis for assessing cumulative effects of wetland loss and degradation on landscape functions: Status, perspectives, and prospects. Environmental management 12 (5): 751–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Biggs, Barry J.F. 1995. The contribution of flood disturbance, catchment geology and land use to the habitat template of periphyton in stream ecosystems. Freshwater Biology 33 (3): 419–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bjerring, Rikke, Emily Gwyneth Bradshaw, Susanne Lildal Amsinck, Liselotte Sander Johansson, Bent Vad Odgaard, Anne Birgitte Nielsen, and Erik Jeppesen. 2008. Inferring recent changes in the ecological state of 21 Danish candidate reference lakes (EU Water Framework Directive) using palaeolimnology. Journal of Applied Ecology 45 (6): 1566–1575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bojie, Fu. 2001. Landscape Ecology Theory and Application. Beijing: Science Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bojie, Fu, Guohua Liu, Liding Chen, Keming Ma, and Junran Li. 2000. Schee of ecological regionalization in China. Acta Ecologica Sinica 21 (1): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bonada, Nuria, Narcís Prat, Vincent H. Resh, and Bernhard Statzner. 2006. Developments in aquatic insect biomonitoring: A comparative analysis of recent approaches. Annual Review of Entomology 51: 495–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Breine, Jan, Ilse Simoens, Peter Goethals, Paul Quataert, Dirk Ercken, Chris Liefferinge, and Claude Belpaire. 2004. A fish-based index of biotic integrity for upstream brooks in Flanders (Belgium). Hydrobiologia 522 (1–3): 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brismar, Anna. 2002. River systems as providers of goods and services: A basis for comparing desired and undesired effects of large dam projects. Environmental Management 29 (5): 598–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brookes, Andrew, and F. D. Shields. 1996. River channel restoration: Guiding principles for sustainable projects. Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Butler, David, and John Davies. 2000. Urban drainage. CRC Press.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cao, Y., D.P. Larsen, R.M. Hughes, P.L. Angermeier, and T.M. Patton. 2002. Sampling effort affects multivariate comparisons of stream assemblages. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 21 (4): 701–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chutter, F.M. 1972. An empirical biotic index of the quality of water in South African streams and rivers. Water Research 6 (1): 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Costanza, Robert, Ralph d’Arge, Rudolf De Groot, Stephen Farber, Monica Grasso, Bruce Hannon, Karin Limburg, Shahid Naeem, Jose Paruelo, Robert V. O’neill, et al. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387 (6630): 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Costanza, Robert, Ralph d’Arge, Rudolf De Groot, Stephen Farber, Monica Grasso, Bruce Hannon, Karin Limburg, Shahid Naeem, Robert V. O’Neill, Jose Paruelo, et al. 1998. The value of ecosystem services: Putting the issues in perspective. Ecological Economics 25 (1): 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Crowley, John M. 1967. Biogeography. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien 11 (4): 312–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Daily, Gretchen. 1997. Nature’s services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Darlington, P. J. 1957. Zoogeography: The geographical distribution of animals. Wiley.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    David Allan, J., and María M. Castillo. 2007. Stream ecology: structure and function of running waters. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Groot, De, S. Rudolf, Matthew A. Wilson, and M.J. Boumans. 2002. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41 (3): 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    de Mérona, Bernard, Régis Vigouroux, and Véronique Horeau. 2003. Changes in food resources and their utilization by fish assemblages in a large tropical reservoir in South America (Petit-Saut Dam, French Guiana). Acta Oecologica 24 (3): 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dinerstein, Eric., David M. Olson, Douglas J. Graham, Avis L. Webster, Steven A. Primm, and Marnie P. Bookbinder, George Ledec, and Kenneth R. Young. 1995. A conservation assessment of the terrestrial ecoregions of Latin America and the Caribbean. Number 333.79 BAN. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Engle, V.D., and J.K. Summers. 1999. Latitudinal gradients in benthic community composition in Western Atlantic estuaries. Journal of Biogeography 26 (5): 1007–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    European Commission. 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fiona, Wells, and Peter Newall. 1997. An examination of an aquatic ecoregion protocol for Australia. ANZECC Secretariat.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fore, Leska S., James R. Karr, and Robert W. Wisseman. 1996. Assessing invertebrate responses to human activities: Evaluating alternative approaches. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 15 (2): 212–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hawkes, Clifford L., David L. Miller, and William G. Layher. 1986. Fish ecoregions of Kansas: Stream fish assemblage patterns and associated environmental correlates. Environmental Biology of Fishes 17 (4): 267–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hawkins, Charles P. 2006. Quantifying biological integrity by taxonomic completeness: Its utility in regional and global assessments. Ecological Applications 16 (4): 1277–1294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hellawell, John M., et al. 1978. Biological surveillance of rivers; A biological monitoring handbook.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Helliwell, D.R. 1969. Valuation of wildlife resources. Regional Studies 3 (1): 41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Higgins, Paul A.T., and Stephen H. Schneider. 2005. Long-term potential ecosystem responses to greenhouse gas-induced thermohaline circulation collapse. Global Change Biology 11 (5): 699–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Host, George E., Philip L. Polzer, David J. Mladenoff, Mark A. White, and Thomas R. Crow. 1996. A quantitative approach to developing regional ecosystem classifications. Ecological Applications 6 (2): 608–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Houghton, David C. 2007. The effects of landscape-level disturbance on the composition of Minnesota caddisfly (Insecta: Trichoptera) trophic functional groups: evidence for ecosystem homogenization. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 135 (1): 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Huang, Bingwei. 1959. Draft of China’s comprehensive natural regionalization. Chinese Science Bulletin 18: 594–602.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Huang, Xiang, Yaning Chen, Jianxin Ma, and Yapeng Chen. 2010. Study on change in value of ecosystem service function of Tarim River. Acta Ecologica Sinica 30 (2): 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hughes, Robert M., Thomas R. Whittier, Christina M. Rohm, and David P. Larsen. 1990. A regional framework for establishing recovery criteria. Environmental Management 14 (5): 673–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    James, M. 1987. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Annals of the Association of American geographers 77 (1): 118–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    James, M., James M. Omernik, and Robert G. Bailey. 1997. Distinguishing between watersheds and ecoregions. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 33 (5): 935–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Jowett, Ian G., and Jody Richardson. 1990. Microhabitat preferences of benthic invertebrates in a New Zealand river and the development of in-stream flow-habitat models for Deleatidium spp. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 24 (1): 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Karr, James R. 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6 (6): 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Karr, James R. 1991. Biological integrity: A long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecological Applications 1 (1): 66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Koeppen, W. 1931. Grundriss der Klimakunde. Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Konarska, Keri M., Paul C. Sutton, and Michael Castellon. 2002. Evaluating scale dependence of ecosystem service valuation: A comparison of NOAA-AVHRR and landsat TM datasets. Ecological Economics 41 (3): 491–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kong, Y., H. Jiang, X.Y. Zhang, J.X. Jin, Z.Y. Xiao, and M.M. Cheng. 2013. The comparison of ecological geographic regionalization in China based on Holdridge and CCA analysis. Acta Ecologica Sinica 33: 3825–3836. (in Chinese).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kreuter, Urs P., Heather G. Harris, Marty D. Matlock, and Ronald E. Lacey. 2001. Change in ecosystem service values in the San Antonio area. Texas. Ecological Economics 39 (3): 333–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Lampert, Guy, and Amalia Short. 2004. River styles, indicative geomorphic condition and geomorphic priorities for river conservation and rehabilitation in the Namoi catchment. North-West NSW: Namoi CMA.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lang, Claude, and Olivier Reymond. 1995. An improved index of environmental quality for Swiss rivers based on benthic invertebrates. Aquatic Sciences-Research Across Boundaries 57 (2): 172–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Li, X.M., R.B. Xiao, S.H. Yuan, J. An Chen, and J.X. Zhou. 2010. Urban total ecological footprint forecasting by using radial basis function neural network: A case study of Wuhan city. China. Ecological Indicators 10 (2): 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Li, Zhenyu, and Yan Xie. 2002. Invasive alien Species in China. China Forestry Publishing House.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lohrer, Andrew M., Simon F. Thrush, and Max M. Gibbs. 2004. Bioturbators enhance ecosystem function through complex biogeochemical interactions. Nature 431 (7012): 1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Loomis, John, Paula Kent, Liz Strange, Kurt Fausch, and Alan Covich. 2000. Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: Results from a contingent valuation survey. Ecological Economics 33 (1): 103–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Maxwell, James R., Clayton J. Edwards, Mark E. Jensen, Steven J. Paustian, Harry Parrott, and Donley M. Hill. 1995. A hierarchical framework of aquatic ecological units in North America (Nearctic Zone). United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: Technical report.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    McNab, W. Henry, and Peter E. Avers. 1994. Ecological subregions of the United States. U.S. Forest Service, ECOMAP Team, WO-WSA-5.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    McNab, W. Henry, David T. Cleland, Jerry A. Freeouf, G. J. Nowacki, C. A. Carpenter, et al. 2007. Description of ecological subregions: Sections of the conterminous United States.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Wetlands and water, vol. 5. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ministry of Environmental Protection of the country-region of the People’s Republic of China. 2003–2012. Annual statistic report on environment in place country-region of China. China Environmental Science Press (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Moog, Otto, Astrid Schmidt-Kloiber, Thomas Ofenböck, and Jeroen Gerritsen. 2004. Does the ecoregion approach support the typological demands of the EU ‘Water Framework Directive’? Integrated Assessment of Running Waters in Europe, 21–33Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Odum, Eugene P. Fundamentals of ecology.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Odum, Eugene P., and Howard T. Odum. 1972. Natural areas as necessary components of man’s total environment. In Transactions of the North American wildlife and natural resources conference.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Palone, Roxane S., and Albert H. Todd. 1997. Chesapeake bay riparian handbook: A guide for establishing and maintaining riparian forest buffers.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Reise, Karsten. 2012. Tidal flat ecology: An experimental approach to species interactions, vol. 54. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Schaumburg, Jochen, Christine Schranz, Julia Foerster, Antje Gutowski, Gabriele Hofmann, Petra Meilinger, Susanne Schneider, and Ursula Schmedtje. 2004. Ecological classification of macrophytes and phytobenthos for rivers in Germany according to the Water Framework Directive. Limnologica-Ecology and Management of Inland Waters 34 (4): 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Seidl, Andrew F., and Andre Steffens Moraes. 2000. Global valuation of ecosystem services: Application to the Pantanal da Nhecolandia. Brazil. Ecological Economics 33 (1): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Selig, U., A. Eggert, D. Schories, M. Schubert, C. Blümel, and H. Schubert. 2007. Ecological classification of macroalgae and angiosperm communities of inner coastal waters in the southern Baltic Sea. Ecological Indicators 7 (3): 665–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Shafer, Deborah J., Bryan Herczeg, Daniel W. Moulton, Andrew Sipocz, and Kenny Jaynes. 2002. Regional guidebook for applying the hydrogeomorphic approach to assessing wetland functions of northwest Gulf of Mexico tidal fringe wetlands. Engineer Research and Development Center Vicksburg MS Environmental Lab: Technical report.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Simpson, J.C., R.H. Norris, et al. 2000. Biological assessment of river quality: Development of AUSRIVAS models and outputs. In Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques. Proceedings of an International Workshop held in Oxford, UK, 16–18 September 1997, 125–142. Freshwater Biological Association (FBA).Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Snelder, Ton H., and Barry J.F. Biggs. 2002. Multiscale river environment classification for water resources management. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38 (5): 1225–1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Stark, John D. 1993. Performance of the macroinvertebrate community index: Effects of sampling method, sample replication, water depth, current velocity, and substratum on index values. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 27 (4): 463–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Suh, Sangwon. 2004. Functions, commodities and environmental impacts in an ecological-economic model. Ecological Economics 48 (4): 451–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Sutton, Paul C., and Robert Costanza. 2002. Global estimates of market and non-market values derived from nighttime satellite imagery, land cover, and ecosystem service valuation. Ecological Economics 41 (3): 509–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Turak, Ere N., Lloyd K. Flack, Richard H. Norris, Justen Simpson, and Natacha Waddell. 1999. Assessment of river condition at a large spatial scale using predictive models. Freshwater Biology 41 (2): 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    United States Environment Protection Agency. Guide standard and protocol for testing microbiological water purifiers. Technical report, 1987.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Wallace, Ken J. 2007. Classification of ecosystem services: Problems and solutions. Biological Conservation 139 (3): 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Warry, David N., and Marcus Hanau. 1993. The use of terrestrial ecoregions as a regional-scale screen for selecting representative reference sites for water quality monitoring. Environmental Management 17 (2): 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Whittier, Thomas R., Robert M. Hughes, and David P. Larsen. 1988. Correspondence between ecoregions and spatial patterns in stream ecosystems in Oregon. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 45 (7): 1264–1278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Yan, Nailing, and Yu. Xiaogan. 2003. Objective, principle and system of ecological function zoning in China. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin 12 (6): 579–585. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Yang, Aimin, Kewang Tang, Hao Wang, and Jinhua Cheng. 2008. China ecological hydrology division. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 39 (3): 332–338. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Yuan, Lester L., Charles P. Hawkins, and John Van Sickle. 2008. Effects of regionalization decisions on an O/E index for the US national assessment. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 27 (4): 892–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Zhou, Baohua, and Binghui Zheng. 2008. Research on aquatic ecoregions for lakes and reservoirs in China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 147 (1): 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kun Lei
    • 1
  • Ya Tao
    • 1
  • Weijing Kong
    • 1
  • Fei Qiao
    • 1
  • Gang Zhou
    • 1
  • Yuan Zhang
    • 1
  • Yixiang Dend
    • 2
  • Richard Williams
    • 2
  • Kexin Liu
    • 1
  • Jieyun Wu
    • 1
  1. 1.Chinese Research Academy of Environmental SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.Centre for Ecology & HydrologyBailriggUK

Personalised recommendations