PDF(3772 KB)
长江流域重要控制断面生态流量达标情况分析及优化建议
王丹阳, 汤显强, 吴旭敏, 彭康, 胡艳平, 刘晗, 黎睿
长江科学院院报 ›› 2026, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (2) : 62-69.
PDF(3772 KB)
PDF(3772 KB)
长江流域重要控制断面生态流量达标情况分析及优化建议
Ecological Flow Compliance at Key Control Cross-Sections in Yangtze River Basin and Optimization Recommendations
生态流量是河湖水生态环境健康的重要保障。分析2023年1月—2024年7月长江流域114个重要控制断面生态流量达标情况。分析结果表明:断面总体达标率62%(71个),其余38%断面生态流量不达标天数为1~170 d,平均为25.8 d;年内达标率呈季节性单峰模式,即夏秋高、冬春低;二级流域之间达标率差异显著,跨省断面达标率低于非跨省断面,长江干流右岸断面达标率低于左岸。降水径流季节分配不均、水利工程建设改变河道流量分布、生产生活取水和跨省水量分配不平衡是部分断面不达标的主要原因。大部分断面的生态流量达标情况较好地反映了水生态环境状况,但二者匹配度在一些断面仍较低。设置生态流量目标一方面要考虑流量年内变化,使丰、枯水期有所差异;另一方面要保证生态敏感区的生态流量。此外,还应考虑采用更灵活的监测频率,引入生态环境与生态流量的综合考核体系,同时关注各级流域的生态流量整体达标情况。
[Objective] Minimum ecological flow (e-flow) targets are increasingly used as enforceable constraints in basin management, but their spatiotemporal reliability and ecological representativeness remain insufficiently evaluated at large scales. This study aims to quantify e-flow compliance across the Yangtze River Basin (YRB), identify the drivers of noncompliance and spatial heterogeneity, examine how compliance aligns with river ecological environment conditions, and propose targeted recommendations for improving goal setting, monitoring, and assessment. [Methods] The daily e-flow compliance records were compiled for 114 key control cross-sections from the Yangtze River Water Resources Commission’s monthly monitoring bulletins between January 2023 and July 2024. Compliance was summarized as (i) whether each cross-section met the minimum target throughout the full study period, and (ii) the number of noncompliant days at each cross-section and by month. For ecological environment linkage, 40 e-flow cross-sections were matched with nearby national automated surface-water quality stations, and dissolved oxygen, permanganate index, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and water-quality class were examined. Subsequently, a four-quadrant diagnostic framework was constructed using mean noncompliance days and the mean share of days classified as Class Ⅳ to Inferior Ⅴ. [Results] Throughout the study period, 71 of 114 cross-sections (62%) fully met the minimum e-flow targets, whereas 43 cross-sections (38%) experienced noncompliance ranging from 1 to 170 days (mean 25.8 d; median 5.0 d). Compliance exhibited a pronounced seasonal unimodal pattern, with lower performance in winter and spring and higher performance in summer and autumn. Specifically, 901 noncompliance days occurred from January to March and from November to December, compared to only 118 days from April to October. Notably, all cross-sections met targets in August. Interannual variability was substantial. From January to July, the number of noncompliance days decreased from 814 in 2023 to 335 in 2024, and the monthly average number of noncompliant cross-sections declined from 18.8 to 10.5. Spatially, heterogeneity was strong among secondary basins, and the left bank outperformed the right bank. Mechanistically, major contributors included seasonal unevenness in precipitation and runoff, differences in dam regulation, reduced mainstream-to-lake diversion affecting the Dongting system, intensive agricultural withdrawals in lake-dominated right-bank regions, and governance and measurement challenges in cross-province water allocation. For the 40 paired sites, pollutant indicators showed no significant monotonic relationship with e-flow compliance, and the total phosphorus could even appear lower in low-flow and noncompliant months due to particulate phosphorus dynamics. The quadrant analysis indicated that 60% of sites fell into high-match zones, but 16 sites showed notable mismatches, suggesting that e-flow compliance was a necessary but insufficient condition for good ecological environment status and that relying solely on flow as a warning indicator remained uncertain. [Conclusion] Large-scale e-flow compliance in the YRB is generally favorable but exhibits strong seasonal, interannual, and governance-linked spatial heterogeneity. To improve ecological relevance and management effectiveness, the following recommendations are proposed: (i) shifting from fixed single-value targets to higher time-resolution, multi-objective, and adaptively updated e-flow targets; (ii) optimizing monitoring networks to better cover ecological hotspots (e.g., key spawning habitats), implementing flexible temporal resolution, and conducting emergency monitoring during rapid ecological events; (iii) transitioning from flow-only, section-based assessment toward integrated basin-scale evaluation that couples flow, water quality, habitat, and biodiversity outcomes.
生态流量 / 长江流域 / 生态环境 / 水生生物 / 水质 / 控制断面
ecological flow / Yangtze River Basin / ecological environment / aquatic organisms / water quality / control sections
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
陈宇顺. 长江流域的主要人类活动干扰、水生态系统健康与水生态保护[J]. 三峡生态环境监测, 2018, 3(3):66-73.
(
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
钟华平, 刘恒, 耿雷华, 等. 河道内生态需水估算方法及其评述[J]. 水科学进展, 2006, 17(3):430-434.
(
|
| [5] |
郭文献, 夏自强. 长江中下游河道生态流量研究[J]. 水利学报, 2007, 38(增刊1): 619-623.
(
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
何亚男, 王双玉, 顾西辉. 水文变异下长江流域的生态径流变化、影响及归因[J]. 武汉大学学报(理学版), 2023, 69(3):313-322.
(
|
| [8] |
刘骏. 喀斯特区线性工程喀斯特发育特征及水文地质条件研究[J]. 工程技术研究, 2024, 9(6): 33-35.
(
|
| [9] |
张玉珊, 舒栋才, 李瑞, 等. 赤水河流域生态水文过程对土地利用/覆被变化的响应[J]. 土壤通报, 2022, 53(1):56-65.
(
|
| [10] |
汪雁佳, 李景保, 李雅妮, 等. 长江荆南三口河系水位演变规律及对江湖水量交换关系的响应[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(9): 2302-2313.
为分析荆南三口河系水位演变规律与江湖水量交换关系。依据1956—2017年荆南三口、湖南四水、洞庭湖城陵矶站以及长江干流枝城站月平均水位及流量和该流域8个雨量站的降水数据,运用Mann-Kendall趋势检验法、回归分析、流量年特征值等方法研究了三口水位的时序演变特征及其与流量、降水、江湖水量交换、人类活动的关系。结果表明:① 与阶段一(1956—1966年)相比,阶段二(1967—1980年)、三(1981—2002年)、四(2003—2017年)河系年平均水位、年最高水位分别下降0.74 m、0.37 m,年最低水位上升0.07 m;② 在涨(4—5月)、丰(6—9月)、退(10—11月)、枯(12月—次年3月)四个水文节点上,最低水位降幅最大(-0.98 m),平均水位次之(-0.78 m),最高水位最小(0.55 m),并将其降幅按水文节点排序依次为退水期(-0.95 m)>丰水期(-0.61 m)>涨水期(-0.21 m)>枯水期(0.15 m);③ 河系水位变化与其流量变化有着较好的一致性(二者的相关系数r =0.65),与降水量相关性较弱(r =-0.16),但2002—2017年相对干旱的气候加剧了河系水位的下降。从总体上看,长江枝城来水量减少和以水利工程为代表的人类活动方式是导致荆南三口河系特征水位下降的主要驱动因素。
(
|
| [11] |
王丹阳, 汤显强, 丁惠君, 等. 长江中下游圩垸水环境现状、成因和治理[J]. 人民长江, 2023, 54(6):19-26.
(
|
| [12] |
陶聪, 戴昌军, 李书飞. 关于长江流域跨省江河流域水量分配若干问题的思考[C]// 中国水利学会2021学术年会论文集第一分册. 郑州: 黄河水利出版社, 2021:169-174.
(
|
| [13] |
石晓晴, 袁建平, 张瑞嘉, 等. 跨省江河流域水量分配工作思考与建议[J]. 中国水利, 2023(17):53-56.
(
|
| [14] |
夏细禾, 陶聪. 长江流域水资源统一调度实践与思考[J]. 人民长江, 2022, 53(12):69-74.
(
|
| [15] |
尹炜, 王超, 张洪. 长江流域总磷问题思考[J]. 人民长江, 2022, 53(4):44-52.
(
|
| [16] |
严广寒, 殷雪妍, 汪星, 等. 三峡工程运行背景下洞庭湖近25年来水生态环境的动态研究[J]. 三峡生态环境监测, 2024, 9(2): 78-86.
(
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
肖卫, 周刚炎. 三种生态流量计算方法适应性分析及选择[J]. 水利水电快报, 2020, 41(12): 59-62.
(
|
| [19] |
朱超, 孙逊, 杨晓冉, 等. 巢湖浮游植物群落季节动态变化特征及其影响因素[J]. 中国环境监测, 2024, 40(4):129-142.
(
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
班学君, 樊博, 刘瀚, 等. 鱼类产卵行为与生态水文指标响应关系研究: 以长江四大家鱼为例[J]. 水生态学杂志, 2024, 45(1): 67-74.
(
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
查悉妮, 辛小康, 付婷, 等. 2022年夏季汉江中下游水华生消驱动因子及其贡献率量化研究[J]. 水生态学杂志, 2024, 45(1): 143-151.
(
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |