Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Next Article in Journal
Real-Time Tomographic Inversion of Truncated Ionospheric GNSS Radio Occultations
Next Article in Special Issue
Comparative Verification of Leaf Area Index Products for Different Grassland Types in Inner Mongolia, China
Previous Article in Journal
Vegetation Types Variations to the South of Ngoring Lake from 2013 to 2020, Analyzed by Hyperspectral Imaging
Previous Article in Special Issue
Spatial and Temporal Characteristics of Drought Events in Southwest China over the Past 120 Years
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Remote Sensing
Volume 15
Issue 12
10.3390/rs15123175
remotesensing-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Assessment of the Spatiotemporal Impact of Water Conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau

by
Xin Wen
1,
Huaiyong Shao
1,2,*,
Ying Wang
3,
Lingfeng Lv
1,
Wei Xian
4,
Qiufang Shao
5,
Yang Shu
6,
Ziqiang Yin
7,
Shuhan Liu
1 and
Jiaguo Qi
8
1
College of Earth Sciences, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China
2
Key Laboratory of Earth Exploration and Information Technology, Ministry of Education, Chengdu 610059, China
3
School of Materials and Environmental Engineering, Chengdu Technological University, Chengdu 611730, China
4
College of Resources and Environment, Chengdu University of Information Technology, Chengdu 610225, China
5
Teaching Steering Committee, Sichuan Tourism University, Chengdu 610100, China
6
College of Management, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611100, China
7
College of Ecology and Environment, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China
8
Center for Global Change and Earth Observations, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(12), 3175; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15123175
Submission received: 9 May 2023 / Revised: 7 June 2023 / Accepted: 9 June 2023 / Published: 19 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remotely Monitoring Terrestrial Carbon, Water and Energy Fluxes in Ecologically Sensitive Areas Ⅱ)
Browse Figures
Figure 1
<p>The position of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and the spatial distribution of main rivers, lakes, glaciers, meteorological, and hydrological stations: (<b>a</b>) climatic regionalization; (<b>b</b>) ecological regionalization.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Spatial distribution of soil types on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Flow chart of the technical approach of this study.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Spatial distribution of water conservation in varying periods: (<b>a</b>) 1990; (<b>b</b>) 2000; (<b>c</b>) 2010; (<b>d</b>) 2020.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Water conservation in different periods in each ecoregion and climate zone. (<b>a</b>) Water conservation in each ecoregion; (<b>b</b>) water conservation in each climate zone.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in various ecological zones of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in different periods.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in various climatic zones of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in different periods.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Statistical values of the geo-detector factor detection q for different periods.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Magnitude of the explanatory power of the interaction of the factors in different periods: (<b>a</b>) 1990; (<b>b</b>) 2000; (<b>c</b>) 2010; (<b>d</b>) 2020.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Geographically weighted regression coefficients for rainfall and NDVI versus water conservation.</p> ">
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The Qinghai–Tibet Plateau is a proven essential water conservation region in Asia. However, various factors, such as anthropogenic activities, climate, and vegetation significantly affect its water conservation. Along these lines, a deep understanding of the spatiotemporal patterns of water conservation for this plateau and relevant influencing elements is considered of great importance. This paper calculates the water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau based on the InVEST model, and given that the evapotranspiration data are an important parameter of the InVEST model, this study selects the mainstream evapotranspiration data to compare the accuracy of the simulated water yield, and also selects the most accurate remote sensing evapotranspiration data examined in the study to carry out the study of water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Due to the large area of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau and the various types of climate and ecological zones, this paper analyzes the spatial and temporal variations of water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in each ecological zone and climate zone division and detects the factors affecting water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau by using the geo-detector method. From our analysis, the following outcomes are proven: on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, (1) the overall water conservation decreased from southeast to northwest; (2) the water conservation of the studied plateau in 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020 was 656.56, 590.85, 597.4, and 651.85 mm, respectively; (3) precipitation, evapotranspiration, and NDVI exhibited a positive relationship with water conservation; (4) the precipitation factor had the biggest impact on the spatial distinctions of the water resource governance; (5) the above factors are combined with the slope factor and the interaction of each factor to improve water conservation. Our work provides valuable insights for the further implementation of ecological projects with a view to enhancing water resource management methods.

1. Introduction

As water conservation is regarded as one of the key service functions in the ecosystem, it reflects the conditions and capacity of ecosystems to reserve water resources within a spatial and temporal range [1,2]. Moreover, the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau [3], as an important water-conserving area in Asia, has bred several major rivers and is vital for soil and water conservation, wind-breaking, and sand-fixing [4,5]. Due to the arid, anoxic, and alpine climatic conditions, the ecosystem in this region is rather delicate with a poor self-regulatory capacity [6,7,8]. Furthermore, due to climate change and artificial destruction, such as overgrazing, indiscriminate logging, and inappropriate resource extraction methods [9,10,11], the water-conserving capacity of lands has been negatively affected. To preserve the plateau, the Chinese government has performed many ecological projects including returning grazing land to pasture, sand control, and reforestation [12,13,14,15]. Therefore, a scientific understanding of the spatiotemporal patterns of water conservation is a key step toward the enhancement of the water conservation function on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau.
The hydrological model [16,17], annual runoff [18,19], overall water storage [20,21], and water balance methods [22,23] are widely employed to assess water conservation. Relative to the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) [24] and the hydrological model (TerrainLab model) [25], the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST), which originated from the Budyko hydrological framework, is more often employed to evaluate the performance of various environmental protection methods. More specifically, the InVEST model can operate at different levels of complexity with fewer data inputs and higher sensitivity to changes in data availability and system dynamics [26,27]. Quantitative and visual results generated from the InVEST model can also make the decision-making processes associated with natural resources more efficient and reliable. As an important climatic factor related to the regional water and heat balance [28], evapotranspiration data are a vital input parameter during the InVEST model calculation process. Different remote sensing evapotranspiration product data have different levels of accuracy in the alpine grassland-dominated land type in this region [29,30]. Most of the evapotranspiration data used in existing studies were based on data obtained by interpolation of meteorological data [2,31,32]. Nonetheless, the link between the remote sensing evapotranspiration data and the accuracy of water production has yet to be thoroughly studied.
The adoption of reasonable water conservation and protection measures by conducting a scientific analysis of the influencing factors that induce spatiotemporal changes is a top priority in water conservation for government departments. The origins of the spatiotemporal changes in water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau were previously reported in the literature by largely examining the aspect of natural and anthropogenic [33,34,35] impacts. As far as the natural aspects are concerned, the majority of the reported works were mostly conducted with univariates, such as climate (precipitation, temperature, and evapotranspiration) [3,32,36,37] or vegetation [38,39]. The studied plateau, however, has a variety of factors that directly affect water conservation [40,41]. On top of that, various climatic factors including precipitation and evapotranspiration directly influence the water-conserving capacity by affecting the water stored in the ecosystem, while vegetation affects climate change through material and energy exchange within the atmosphere [42,43]. Thus, it is vital to explore the integrated influence of both climate and vegetation on the spatial variability of water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Studies have been conducted to analyze the correlation between single influencing factors such as precipitation, evapotranspiration, soil type, and water conservation [2,31,32]. Nonetheless, quantitative investigation of the interaction of factors influencing water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau has yet to be thoroughly studied.
In this paper, the accuracy of three mainstream remote sensing evapotranspiration products is verified, and the remote sensing evapotranspiration data with the highest accuracy are selected for the study. Since the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau is a vast area, this paper analyzes the interdecadal variation of overall water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau from 1990 to 2020 based on the InVEST model in each ecological zone and each climatic zone of the plateau. Then the factors influencing water conservation on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and the interactions among the influencing factors were detected by using geo-detector method in combination with slope factor and DEM. The goal of this work is to determine the key conservation areas and provide an effective basis for further reaching ecological conservation and construction decisions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Located between 73°19′ and 104°47′ east longitude and 26°00′ to 39°47′ north latitude, the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau covers approximately 2.5 million square kilometers, spanning six domestic provinces including Tibet, Sichuan, Yunnan, Qinghai, Gansu, and Xinjiang, and many other lands in neighboring countries, with an average altitude of over 4000 m. As the highest plateau in the globe, it is ranked as the “Roof of the World” (Figure 1). The Tibetan Plateau borders the Pamir Plateau in the west, the Transverse Range in the east, the Himalayas in the south, as well as the Aerjin, Qilian, and Kunlun Mountains in the north.
The ecological and climatic zones of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and their corresponding codes are shown in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively.
The water resources in this region are extremely abundant and include rivers, glaciers, lakes, and other forms of water, which serve as vital sources of moisture for the ecosystem. According to the literature, in recent decades, the annual precipitation has gradually increased throughout this region, with an overall significant rise in temperature and humidification [44,45,46]. As a result, the actual evapotranspiration has increased while potential evapotranspiration has gradually decreased [47]. The Qinghai–Tibet Plateau has a cold climate, large diurnal temperature differences, strong solar radiation, as well as long daylight hours [48]. The seasonal trends are evident in the warm/humid southeast and cold/dry northwest of the region [49,50]. Seasonal permafrost is also widespread, and the most abundant soil type is alpine meadow soil [51,52]. Vegetation types, such as alpine meadows, alpine grasslands, and alpine shrubs, are also distributed over a large area, ranging from southeast to northwest according to the thermal and water conditions, slope orientation, and other factors, with significant zonal differences. On this Plateau, the variation of water conservation has vital implications for climate regulation, ecosystems, and hydrology in China and the world.

2.2. Materials

Based on water balance, various parameters including root depth, potential evapotranspiration, land use, precipitation, and available moisture content of vegetation were combined in this work, and the InVEST model was used to calculate the water yield of the watershed. To achieve water conservation, the water yield was subsequently adjusted using the water conservation formula, which involved the flow rate coefficient, soil-saturated hydraulic conductivity, and topographic index. In the water yield module of the InVEST model, three different types of remote sensing evapotranspiration products for 2020 were selected. Additionally, to verify the accuracy of these products, the accuracy of the water yield was verified. The remote sensing evapotranspiration data with the highest accuracy were also chosen for calculating water conservation. It is worth noting that even if the MOD16A2 product was more accurate, it was not possible to use it during the study period. This is because MOD16A2 has existed since 2001. To maintain accuracy and consistency, the raster data required in the study were sampled at a spatial resolution of 1 km × 1 km. MOD16A2 and China’s 1 km month-by-month potential evapotranspiration dataset were synthesized using matlab2022a software for annual data. The soil-saturated hydraulic conductivity was calculated with SPAW Hydrology software 6.02.0070, which is an ArcSWAT soil database aid allowing analysis of soil moisture characteristics [53,54]. Table 3 presents the specific data sources and descriptions.

2.3. Methods

2.3.1. Water Yield

The assessment of the ecosystem services can be quantitatively evaluated through the Integrated Assessment of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) model under various scenarios [32,55]. Using the Budyko water–heat balanced framework, the water yield module of the InVEST model can calculate the annual water yield on a regional scale following the water balance principle with input parameters, such as precipitation, potential evapotranspiration, and soil root depth [56]. The formulas can be written as follows:
Y xi = 1 − AET xi P x × P x
AET x P x = 1 + w x R xj 1 + w x R xj + 1 R xj
w x = Z   ×   AWC x P x
where Y x i represents grid x’s water yield depending on the type of land utilization i, P x refers to unit x’s annual precipitation, A E T x i denotes grid x’s actual yearly evapotranspiration depending on the type of land utilization i, R x j stands for the Budyko dryness index, w x states a non-physical variable indicative of soil and climate traits, w x stands for a linear function A W C x × N p , N p represents the yearly rainfall event counts, A W C x indicates the available soil moisture content (mm), and Z refers to the Zhang coefficient that displays seasonal precipitation traits, with a value scope of 1–30. The Z-value is regional, and the model parameters are localized based on the study area data and model runs and a comparison with the actual measured data [57].
Soil type is an important factor affecting water balance [58,59]. In the northwestern part of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, there are a large number of cold calcium soils (alpine steppe soils) with thin layers and coarse grains. In the southeastern part of the plateau, there are a large number of grass-felt soils (alpine meadow soils) and black-felt soils (subalpine meadow soils). Grass felt soils are generally moist, with dense alpine dwarf grass meadows, which can effectively contain water [60,61]. Sub-alpine meadow soil is slightly milder than alpine meadow soil, rich in nutrients, and has strong water-holding capacity [62,63]. Yellow brown loam is distributed in the southeast edge of Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, with certain water-holding power but weaker than subalpine meadow soil [64,65]. The spatial distribution of soil types on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau is shown in Figure 2.
Plant available water content (PAWC) refers to a non-linear fitted model, taking into account the soil’s texture and organic content [66]. It is one of the input parameters for the InVEST model. The following formula can be written:
P A W C = 54.509 − 0.132 × sand − 0.003 × sand 2 − 0.055 × silt − 0.006 × silt 2 − 0.738 × clay + 0.007 × clay 2 − 2.668 × OM + 0.501 × OM 2
In the equation, PAWC indicates the plant available water content, sand represents sand content in the soil (%), silt denotes meal content in the soil (%), clay represents clay content in the soil (%), and OM signifies the organic matter content in the soil (%).

2.3.2. Calculation of Water Conservation

Next, the water yield obtained by the InVEST model was corrected, where the parameters including flow coefficient (velocity), topographic index (TI), and soil-saturated hydraulic conductivity ( K sat ) were selected following the water conservation formula [31]. The relevant computational equation is shown below:
Retention = Min 1 , 249 Velocity × Min 1 , 0.9 × TI 3 × Min 1 , K sat 300 × Yield
In the equation, Retention refers to the water conservation (mm), Velocity represents the flow velocity coefficient, K sat stands for the soil-saturated hydraulic conductivity (cm/d), Yield means water yield (mm), which results from InVEST model water yield module runs, and TI denotes the topographic index, which was dimensionless and acquired by Formula (6):
TI = lg ⁡ Drainage Area S oil Depth × Percent slope
In the equation, Drainage Area refers to the number of grids in the catchment area, dimensionless, Soil_Depth signifies the soil depth (mm), and Percent_Slope refers to the percentage slope.

2.3.3. Geo-Detector Model and GWR

The geo-detector model is a statistical method for measuring spatial variability and quantifying the driving forces behind it [66]. This work concentrated on the use of ecological detection, factor detection, and interaction to investigate the interdecadal change in water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau from 1990 to 2020.
Ecological detection: compare whether the impact of two independent factors ( X 1 , X 2 ) on the dependent variable (Y) show notable differences in the spatial distribution, which is represented by the F statistic, as the following expressions were used:
F = N X 1 N X 2 − 1 SSW X 1 N X 2 N X 1 − 1 SSW X 2
SSW X 1 = ∑ h = 1 L 1 N h σ h 2 , SSW X 2 = ∑ h = 1 L 2 N h σ h 2
where N X 1 and N X 2 stand, respectively, for the sample sizes of variables X 1 and X 2 ; SSW X 1 and SSW X 2 refer to the sums of the intra-stratum variability established by the individual stratification of X 1 and X 2 ; and L1 and L2 are indicative of the respective stratification quantities for X 1 and X 2 . Where the null hypothesis H 0 : SSW X 1 = SSW X 2 . If H 0 is rejected at a significance level of α, this suggests that there is a significant difference in the effect of the two factors X 1 and X 2 on the spatial distribution of attribute Y. Factor detection: the main goal is to detect the spatial heterogeneity of the dependent variable (Y) and the influence of the independent variable factor (X) on it. It can be represented by the q value as follows:
q = 1 − ∑ h = 1 L N h σ h 2 N σ 2 = 1 − SSW SST
SSW = ∑ h = 1 L N h σ h 2 , SST = N σ 2
where h = l, …, L refers to the stratification (Strata) of factor X or variable Y, i.e., partitioning or classification; N h and N stand individually for the cell quantities in stratum h and the entire region; σ h 2 and σ 2 represent the respective Y-value variances in stratum h and the entire region; SSW and SST individually indicate the sum of variance within the strata and the entire region; and q takes values from 0 to 1. A larger q value indicates a more significant spatial heterogeneity of Y; if the stratification is generated by the independent variable X, a larger q value indicates that the independent variable quantity X has a stronger explanatory power for attribute Y, and vice versa. In the extreme case, a q value of 1 indicates that factor X completely controls the spatial distribution of Y of the spatial distribution, while a q value of 0 indicates that factor X has no relationship with Y.
Interaction: the interaction between the factors is detected by comparing the univariate q value with the interaction q value to determine the impact on the dependent variable (Y), that is, to assess whether factors X 1 and X 2 together increase or decrease the explanatory power of the dependent variable Y, or whether the effects of these factors on Y are independent of each other. Table 4 presents the details of these interactions.
The geographically weighted regression model (GWR) is a local spatial analysis method [67]. It was used in the study to discuss the spatial heterogeneity between the water congeniality and its main drivers [67,68,69]. The model is expressed as follows:
y i = β μ i , v i + ∑ k = 1 p β k μ i , v i x ik + ε i
where μ i , v i refers to the spatial position of point i; p represents the number of independent variables; y i , x ik , and ε i are the dependent variables, independent variables, and random errors, respectively; β μ i , v i is the intercept at point i; and β μ i , v i is the regression coefficient. The flow chart is shown in Figure 3.

3. Results

3.1. Results Verification

Three types of remote sensing evapotranspiration product data validation in 2020 were used as the dataset for the assessment, whereas the water yield of the Qinghai and Tibet areas was selected for accuracy validation. With reference to the real statistics of total water resources in the China Water Resources Bulletin 2020, the sum of total water resources in Qinghai and Tibet was 560.92 billion cubic meters. Table 5 lists the accuracy of water yield based on the InVEST model, inputting the data of different remote sensing evapotranspiration products. The annual remote sensing evapotranspiration data from the 1 km monthly potential evapotranspiration data in China were the most accurate, with a relative error of 1.57%. Therefore, these remote sensing evapotranspiration data were selected for research on water conservation in the studied plateau.

3.2. Spatiotemporal Variation

3.2.1. Spatial Distribution

The amount of water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau decreased from southeast to northwest (Figure 4). In the southeast, the Sanjiangyuan Reserve in particular, which is known to be the “Chinese Water Tower”, is a vital water-conserving area. In the north, the Qaida Basin has extensive desert distribution and low precipitation, while in the west, glaciers and snow cover high-altitude peaks all year round, thus producing very little water and water-conserving capacity, with insignificant variation in spatial distribution. The main climate in this area is characterized by cold, dry, and low temperatures. The 0–20 mm water conservation areas on this plateau were widely distributed, concentrated in the Qaidam Basin desert ecological zone (III02), the southern Tibet alpine meadow-steppe ecological zone (III08), the southwestern part of the tropical rainforest monsoon forest ecotope of southeastern Tibet (III09), part of the geothermal arid desert ecotope of Alishan (III06), and the alpine desert grassland ecological area of northern Tibetan Plateau (III05). Areas with greater than 100 mm water conservation were also mostly distributed in the cold-temperate coniferous forest ecotope of western Sichuan (III07) and the alpine meadow grassland ecotone of Gannan (III04). The spatial distribution was significantly different.

3.2.2. Interdecadal Variation

The water conservation of the studied plateau in 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020 was 656.56, 590.85, 597.4, and 651.85 mm, respectively. The interdecadal variation in the water cover of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau showed a decreasing and then increasing trend from 1990 to 2020, and then gradually increased after a decline of 65.71 mm in 2000. The interdecadal variation of water conservation in 2020 was roughly the same as that in 1990, with a difference of only 4.71 mm. In addition, the average water content increased by about 2 mm per decade. In different ecological and climatic zones, the water conservation condition exhibited a fluctuating trend (Figure 5). Under the ecoregion division, the ecoregions with greater water conservation as a whole were I25, III07, and III09. Ecoregions I25 and III04 showed a significant increase in water conservation in 2020, reaching 638.91 mm and 485.06 mm, respectively, with a greater water conservation potential. The maximum water conservation in 2000, 2010, and 2020 occurred in III07. However, the maximum water conservation in 1990 occurred in III09, which might be related to the fact that evaporation was less than rainfall [70]. Under the climatic zoning, the overall water conservation is as follows: central subtropical (V), highland climate zone (H), northern subtropical (IV), middle temperate (II), and southern temperate (III). The plateau climate zone (H) spans a wide area, so the water conservation was larger, and its change trend conformed to the overall change in water conservation in the studied region. Although the area of central subtropical (V) was small, the average value was the highest, and the water conservation capacity was relatively large. The maximum value of water conservation was in the central subtropical (V) climate zone.
Under the ecoregion division, the precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in different time periods are displayed in Figure 6. Except for III04, where actual evapotranspiration and precipitation increased in 2020, reaching 900 mm and 1453 mm, respectively, the trends of precipitation and actual evapotranspiration did not show any significant changes in 1990, 2000, and 2010. NDVI in some ecoregions exhibited significant fluctuations: NDVI in ecoregion III04 showed an increasing trend in interdecadal variation, reaching a maximum value of 0.81 in 2020. In addition, NDVI reached a maximum value in 2020 in ecoregions I25, III01, III03, and III05, with 0.78, 0.73, 0.61, and 0.92, respectively. On the contrary, NDVI in ecoregions III02 and III08 reached the maximum in 2000, with 0.50 and 0.60, respectively. From 2010 to 2020, the water conservation in III04 increased by 76.69 mm, which was the most significant variation, followed by water conservation in the I25 ecological zone which increased by 60.78 mm.
The precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in different periods under climatic zones are illustrated in Figure 7. In the interdecadal variation, in terms of precipitation, climatic zone II increased, reaching its maximum value in 2020 (1027.18 mm). The rest of the climatic zones showed a reduction from 1990 to 2000 and an increase from 2000 to 2020. The maximum value of precipitation was 2385.99 mm in climate zone V. A large amount of precipitation is considered one of the important reasons for the high conservation potential of water in climate zone V. With respect to the actual evapotranspiration, both climate zones II and III showed an increasing trend, reaching a maximum of 708.51 mm and 878.61 mm, respectively, in 2020. In addition, rainfall increased by 222.72 mm in climate zone III compared to 2010, which was the largest increase. Although the actual evapotranspiration increased, water conservation still increased because the rainfall also increased. In 2000, the NDVI maximum occurred in climate zone V, which reached 0.76. In 1990, 2010, and 2020, the NDVI maximum occurred in climate zone H, which reached a maximum of 0.92 in 2020, while climate zones II and III showed a slight decrease in NDVI in 2020. In view of precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, and NDVI factors, precipitation and actual evapotranspiration fluctuated less in climatic zones H, IV, and V. Nonetheless, 2020 witnessed an upward trend in water-conserving capacity, which was mainly due to the improvement of NDVI.

3.3. Influencing Factors

In recent years, the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau has been experiencing warming. The warming climate has intensified the hydrological cycle, and thus changes in precipitation have important implications for regional ecosystem services [71]. However, while some regions of the Plateau are becoming wetter, some regions are becoming drier, as reflected by the significant increase in actual evapotranspiration on the Plateau since the 1960s [47]. Moreover, actual evapotranspiration plays a key role in the water cycle and is linked to a variety of surface processes [72]. In addition, the vegetation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau is very sensitive to climate change [73], and NDVI can reflect the surface vegetation cover status [74,75]. Therefore, in this study, precipitation and actual evapotranspiration were selected as factors for climatic factors, and NDVI was selected as a factor for vegetation factors. A geo-detector model was adopted for detecting the influence factors and their interactions in combination with topographic slope and elevation factors. The findings of the ecological detection revealed that there existed obvious differences in the spatial distribution between the two factors on water conservation in this region, which were further studied in terms of factor detection and interaction.

3.3.1. Single Influencing Factor

The results of the quantitative analysis of the water conservation factors were based on factor detection, and the five factors, including precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, slope, and elevation, all passed the significance test, with all p values being zero. Overall, the dominant factor influencing water conservation was precipitation, followed by NDVI, and actual evapotranspiration (Figure 8). Precipitation was also found to have a positive correlation with water conservation [57]. Precipitation gradually decreased from southeast to northwest, coinciding with water-conserving capacity distribution.

3.3.2. Interaction

The textual results of the interaction geo-probing demonstrate that the interaction of both factors non-linearly enhanced the influence on water conservation. As illustrated in Figure 9, the darker red color indicates a stronger explanatory power of the correlation between the two factors. Instead, the dark blue color stands for a weak explanatory power. The explanatory power of slope as a univariate is less than 0.1 and is thus neglected and assigned a null value in Figure 9.
In this work, the correlations between precipitation and the other factors were proved to be all greater than the interactions between the other factors. Although precipitation interacted with other factors nonlinearly to improve water-conserving capacity in this region, the improvement was minimal. The correlation between NDVI and actual evapotranspiration was roughly 2 times the univariate explanatory power of actual evapotranspiration, and roughly 1.3–1.5 times the univariate explanatory power of NDVI. The correlation between the actual evapotranspiration and slope was roughly 1.5 times the univariate explanatory power of actual evapotranspiration. Additionally, the correlation with DEM was roughly 2 times the univariate explanatory power of actual evapotranspiration. The correlation between NDVI and slope was roughly 1.5 times the univariate explanatory power of NDVI. Moreover, the correlation with DEM was roughly 3 times the univariate explanatory power of NDVI. There was a significant variation. Potential vegetation types distributed at high altitudes are more sensitive to climate change on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau [76,77].

4. Discussion

4.1. Comparison of Remote Sensing Evaporation Data

PET is a very important parameter in both hydrological and climate studies [78]. To this end, in this work, three remote sensing evapotranspiration product data were compared based on the InVEST model. The Chinese 1 km monthly potential evapotranspiration dataset was obtained based on the Chinese 1 km monthly mean, minimum, and maximum temperature datasets using the Hargreaves potential evapotranspiration formulation; the TerraClimate annual potential evapotranspiration is a dataset obtained using a water balance model derived from monthly surface water balance; and the MOD16A2 data product is based on the Penman–Monteith model-based data collection. Among them, China’s 1 km month-by-month potential evapotranspiration dataset provided the highest accuracy in water yield.
The Penman–Monteith model combines energy balance and mass transfer methods, and takes into account the influence of sunlight, air temperature, humidity, and wind speed on evapotranspiration, which is suitable for various climatic environments; the Hargreaves model is a PET estimation method based on temperature and solar radiation, which requires less raw observation data (observation data can also be applied to estimate potential evapotranspiration in areas where data are scarce, such as the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau region, etc.) and only requires temperature measurements (average, minimum, and maximum values) [79]. The PET estimated by the Penman–Monteith model and the Hargreaves model exhibit a large difference in spatial distribution. The two PET estimates are consistent in the lowest PET region but vary considerably in regions with relatively high PET magnitude, while the Hargreaves model performs better than the Penman–Monteith model in estimating PET [80,81]. The incident solar radiation at the Earth’s surface is an important determinant of PET [82]. In general, clearer skies lead to large diurnal variations in temperature, and cloudy skies lead to smaller diurnal variations in temperature. The Hargreaves model, on the other hand, has the advantage of being more sensitive to daily differences in temperature when cloud cover is overhead. The water balance model used for the TerraClimate annual potential evapotranspiration is very simple, and although the overall mean absolute error is improved compared to the coarser resolution dataset, the dataset underestimates data for temperature and evapotranspiration and overestimates data for rainfall in some areas [83], and limited validation in data-sparse areas. Therefore, the Hargreaves model-based estimates of PET for the Tibetan Plateau are more accurate.

4.2. Influence of the Main Driving Forces on the Spatial Heterogeneity of Water Conservation

Precipitation and NDVI are the most dominant drivers of water conservation, which was consistent with the results of the existing works in the literature. Among the climatic factors, precipitation and evapotranspiration can directly influence the water-conserving capacity in a certain region [84,85,86]. Under warm and humid conditions, convective precipitation can increase, bringing up the surface runoff, while the weakening of solar radiation reduces evapotranspiration. Thus, its water-conserving capacity can be improved [87,88]. The Qinghai–Tibet Plateau has diverse vegetation including alpine grasslands, meadows, and so on, all having a vital impact on water conservation on the plateau. In terms of NDVI, vegetation degradation was effectively controlled [89], and the vegetation cover was elevated notably over the past decade, which could be linked to vigorous environmentally friendly actions including the return of grazing on grass [90,91]. This conformed to the findings of the previously reported works in the literature on the vegetation’s upward trend on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau [91,92]. In areas with identical vegetation coverage, precipitation had the greatest influence on the spatial distribution of water conservation. In addition, the coefficients between the summer NDVI and contemporaneous precipitation showed a positive, negative, and positive band from south to north, which presented a relationship to the improvement of vegetation cover, and vegetation might have changed atmospheric circulation through transpiration and thus produced feedback in the climate [93].
Although the interaction of the precipitation and NDVI can enhance water conservation, there were differences in the impact of the two on the spatial heterogeneity of water conservation in the region. Since the plateau climate zone of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau accounts for 96.79% of the whole Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, this work mainly examined ecological sub-regions. The influence of precipitation and NDVI on the spatial heterogeneity of water conservation in the agricultural and grassland zone of the Loess Plateau (I12), the ecological area of evergreen broad-leaved forest in southwest Sichuan and north-central Yunnan (I25), and the alpine desert grassland ecological area of the northern Tibetan Plateau (III05) differ greatly, with spatially significant differences in the vegetation status in the I12 ecoregion, a fragile ecological environment, and a more prominent influence of climate on water conservation [94,95]. The I25 ecological zone belongs to the plateau-type semi-humid subtropical monsoon climate, with obvious differentiation of water and heat conditions and an obvious vertical band spectrum of zonal vegetation distribution. Therefore, the NDVI influence on water conservation is more significant, and the water conservation power is stronger. The water conservation area of the III05 ecoregion is sparse and belongs to the highland cold and sub-cold arid climate zone, which is cold and dry, whereas the climatic factors play a dominant role in the water conservation of this ecoregion [96]. The influence of precipitation and NDVI on the spatial heterogeneity of water conservation is the opposite in the alpine meadow grassland ecological area in southern Tibet (III08) and the seasonal rainforest ecological area of the tropical rainforest in southeast Tibet (III09). The climate of ecological zone III08 is complex, although vegetation is abundant. However, the water conservation of this ecological zone is more influenced by climatic factors. There are large areas of primary forests in the III09 ecoregion, with high vegetation diversity and a complete vertical band spectrum, and there is little anthropogenic interference in this ecoregion. Therefore, the water conservation capacity is strong, and NDVI plays a dominant role in the water conservation of this ecoregion. The influence of precipitation and NDVI on the spatial heterogeneity of the water conservation in the desert ecological area of Qaidam Basin (III02), the river source area–Gannan alpine meadow grassland ecological area (III04), and the cold temperate coniferous forest ecological area in the eastern Tibet–western Sichuan (III07) ecological zones are all greater, which further improves water conservation under the interaction effect. Ecological zone III02 belongs to the highland continental desert climate, with low precipitation and sparse vegetation. Although both precipitation and NDVI have a greater influence on water conservation, their conditions are not conducive to water conservation. The large area of the Gannan grassland in ecological zone III04 and the high annual rainfall make it a humid zone [97], so the water conservation amount is higher. The overall spatial variability of water conservation in ecological zone III07 is significant, and the climate varies vertically. Coniferous forests are also weak in evaporation, highly adaptable to wet, dry, or cold climatic conditions, and have a strong ability to trap precipitation [98]. Consequently, the water conservation capacity is strong. Geographically weighted regression coefficients for rainfall and NDVI versus water conservation are shown in Figure 10.

4.3. Limitations of the InVEST Model and Perspectives

The InVEST model used in this work provides a feasible method for quantifying water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau [19], which is suitable for large-scale studies, takes into account natural factors such as climate and vegetation, and has the advantage of spatial visualization [99]. However, the InVEST model simplifies the simulation of hydrological models and ignores the interaction between surface water and groundwater and the influence of human activities [99,100]. Since the InVEST model calculates a value of 0 for water production in the lake area [101] and does not consider glacial meltwater and freeze-thaw factors, which are widely distributed in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau [32,102], it also cannot accurately simulate the effects of freeze-thaw on water conservation and the water conservation in the lake area. In future studies, other variables affecting hydrological processes (land cover [103], soil type [104], etc.) need to be further considered to establish a more accurate water conservation assessment system. Therefore, the model may need to be improved or extended in future studies [31,105].

5. Conclusions

To conclude, in this work, a foundation for ecosystem enhancement on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau was provided by analyzing the spatiotemporal difference in water conservation on the plateau, as well as the associated influential factors. In this paper, we compared the mainstream remote sensing evapotranspiration products based on the InVEST model according to the division of the different ecological and climatic zones of the plateau and selected the data with the highest accuracy of simulated water yield to quantitatively study the spatial and temporal evolution patterns of water conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020. The interaction study was carried out and compared with the single-influence study, and the ecological and climatic zones with high water content were identified. From our analysis, it was proven that (1) the water conservation of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau decreases from southeast to northwest, and the interdecadal variation showed a reduction in water conservation from 1990 to 2000, and an increase from 2000 to 2020. (2) Precipitation greatly affects water conservation in this area, and the interaction with NDVI and the actual evapotranspiration factor non-linearly enhances water conservation. (3) The northern mountainous indeciduous broad-leaved forest ecozone (I25) in central Yunnan, cold-temperate coniferous forest ecozone (III07) in western Sichuan, and southeast Tibetan tropical rainforest monsoon forest ecoregion (III09) exhibited high water conservation. (4) The central subtropical (V) climate zone exhibited the highest water conservation capacity, followed by the Plateau climate zone (H), which covers the widest region.
To achieve effective restoration of the studied grasslands, greater stability of the ecosystem, and improved water-conserving capacity, it is essential to thoroughly investigate the correlation between the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau and nature. Moreover, the water-conserving function of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau should be maximized under the conditions that the natural environment can bear. An important contribution to global climate change and water conservation was made by our work by focusing on achieving a win-win situation for both sustainable economic and ecological development.

Author Contributions

X.W.: writing—original draft preparation and editing, visualization, and validation. H.S.: writing—review and editing, and conceptualization. Y.W.: software. L.L.: formal analysis and resources. W.X.: methodology. Q.S.: supervision. Y.S.: investigation. Z.Y.: project administration. S.L.: data curation. J.Q.: funding acquisition. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 42271405), the Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province (Grant No. 2022NSFSC0231, 2023NSFSC0248) and Provincial College Students Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program (Grant No. s202210616002).

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for helpful comments from many researchers and colleagues.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Costanza, R.; dArge, R.; deGroot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; Oneill, R.V.; Paruelo, J.; et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Xue, J.; Li, Z.X.; Feng, Q.; Gui, J.; Zhang, B.J. Spatiotemporal variations of water conservation and its influencing factors in ecological barrier region, Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. J. Hydrol.-Reg. Stud. 2022, 42, 101164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zhang, Q.; Shen, Z.; Pokhrel, Y.; Farinotti, D.; Singh, V.P.; Xu, C.-Y.; Wu, W.; Wang, G. Oceanic climate changes threaten the sustainability of Asia’s water tower. Nature 2023, 615, 87–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Li, X.Y.; Long, D.; Scanlon, B.R.; Mann, M.E.; Li, X.D.; Tian, F.Q.; Sun, Z.L.; Wang, G.Q. Climate change threatens terrestrial water storage over the Tibetan Plateau. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2022, 12, 801–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Yao, T.D.; Thompson, L.; Yang, W.; Yu, W.S.; Gao, Y.; Guo, X.J.; Yang, X.X.; Duan, K.Q.; Zhao, H.B.; Xu, B.Q.; et al. Different glacier status with atmospheric circulations in Tibetan Plateau and surroundings. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2012, 2, 663–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Georgescu, M.; Lobell, D.B. Perennial Questions of Hydrology and Climate. Science 2010, 330, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Immerzeel, W.W.; Lutz, A.F.; Andrade, M.; Bahl, A.; Biemans, H.; Bolch, T.; Hyde, S.; Brumby, S.; Davies, B.J.; Elmore, A.C.; et al. Importance and vulnerability of the world’s water towers. Nature 2020, 577, 364–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Li, Z.W.; Wang, Z.Y.; Brierley, G.; Nicoll, T.; Pan, B.Z.; Li, Y.F. Shrinkage of the Ruoergai Swamp and changes to landscape connectivity, Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Catena 2015, 126, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nazareno, A.G.; Laurance, W.F. Brazil’s drought: Beware deforestation. Science 2015, 347, 1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Shi, Y.N.; Song, J.X.; Zhang, J.L.; Huang, P.; Sun, H.T.; Wu, Q.; Cheng, L.; Zhang, J.X.; Xing, L.T.; Lyu, S.X.; et al. Hydrological response to climate change and human activities in the Bahe River, China. J. Hydrol. 2023, 617, 128762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yuan, W.; Liu, Q.; Song, S.; Lu, Y.L.; Yang, S.J.; Fang, Z.L.; Shi, Z. A climate-water quality assessment framework for quantifying the contributions of climate change and human activities to water quality variations. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 333, 117441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Cao, S.X.; Wang, G.S.; Chen, L. Assessing effects of afforestation projects in China Reply. Nature 2010, 466, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. He, J.; Shi, X.Y. Detection of social-ecological drivers and impact thresholds of ecological degradation and ecological restoration in the last three decades. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 318, 115513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Luo, K.S. Response of hydrological systems to the intensity of ecological engineering. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 296, 113173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Ouyang, Z.; Zheng, H.; Xiao, Y.; Polasky, S.; Liu, J.; Xu, W.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, L.; Xiao, Y.; Rao, E.M.; et al. Improvements in ecosystem services from investments in natural capital. Science 2016, 352, 1455–1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Huang, C.; Chen, J.; Huang, W.; Sun, C.; Guo, X. Analysis of water and sediment reducing effects of water conservation measures in the upstream of the Weihe River. J. Glaciol. Geocryol. 2020, 42, 965–973. [Google Scholar]
  17. Si, J.; Han, P.; Zhao, C. Review of Water Conservation Value Evaluation Methods of Forest and Case Study. J. Nat. Resour. 2011, 26, 2100–2109. [Google Scholar]
  18. Li, J.; Shao, Q.; Liu, J. Forest Conservation Estimation Based on the Integrated Storage Capacity MethodA Case Study of Xingguo County in Jiangxi. J. Northwest For. Coll. 2012, 27, 83–87. [Google Scholar]
  19. Qiu, W.; Zhang, Y.; Yu, J.; Zhang, C.; Zheng, C.; Yu, S. Feasibility verification with field application of a water conservation module using the InVEST Model. J. Zhejiang AF Univ. 2018, 35, 810–817. [Google Scholar]
  20. Biao, Z.; Wen-hua, L.I.; Gao-di, X.I.E.; Yu, X. Water conservation function and its measurement methods of forest ecosystem. Chin. J. Ecol. 2009, 28, 529–534. [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhao, J.; Mu, X.M.; Gao, P. Dynamic response of runoff to soil and water conservation measures and precipitation based on VAR model. Hydrol. Res. 2019, 50, 837–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Song, X.M.; Zhang, J.Y.; Zhan, C.S.; Xuan, Y.Q.; Ye, M.; Xu, C.G. Global sensitivity analysis in hydrological modeling: Review of concepts, methods, theoretical framework, and applications. J. Hydrol. 2015, 523, 739–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Zhang, M.F.; Liu, N.; Harper, R.; Li, Q.; Liu, K.; Wei, X.H.; Ning, D.Y.; Hou, Y.P.; Liu, S.R. A global review on hydrological responses to forest change across multiple spatial scales: Importance of scale, climate, forest type and hydrological regime. J. Hydrol. 2017, 546, 44–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Francesconi, W.; Srinivasan, R.; Perez-Minana, E.; Willcock, S.P.; Quintero, M. Using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) to model ecosystem services: A systematic review. J. Hydrol. 2016, 535, 625–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Govind, A.; Chen, J.M.; Margolis, H.; Ju, W.M.; Sonnentag, O.; Giasson, M.A. A spatially explicit hydro-ecological modeling framework (BEPS-TerrainLab V2.0): Model description and test in a boreal ecosystem in Eastern North America. J. Hydrol. 2009, 367, 200–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Liu, Q.; McVicar, T.R.; Yang, Z.F.; Donohue, R.J.; Liang, L.Q.; Yang, Y.T. The hydrological effects of varying vegetation characteristics in a temperate water-limited basin: Development of the dynamic Budyko-Choudhury-Porporato (dBCP) model. J. Hydrol. 2016, 543, 595–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nelson, E.; Mendoza, G.; Regetz, J.; Polasky, S.; Tallis, H.; Cameron, D.R.; Chan, K.M.A.; Daily, G.C.; Goldstein, J.; Kareiva, P.M.; et al. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hickel, K.; Zhang, L. Estimating the impact of rainfall seasonality on mean annual water balance using a top-down approach. J. Hydrol. 2006, 331, 409–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Chen, B.X.; Zhang, X.Z.; Tao, J.; Wu, J.S.; Wang, J.S.; Shi, P.L.; Zhang, Y.J.; Yu, C.Q. The impact of climate change and anthropogenic activities on alpine grassland over the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2014, 189, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hamel, P.; Guswa, A.J. Uncertainty analysis of a spatially explicit annual water-balance model: Case study of the Cape Fear basin, North Carolina. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2015, 19, 839–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Li, M.Y.; Liang, D.; Xia, J.; Song, J.X.; Cheng, D.D.; Wu, J.T.; Cao, Y.L.; Sun, H.T.; Li, Q. Evaluation of water conservation function of Danjiang River Basin in Qinling Mountains, China based on InVEST model. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 286, 112212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Wang, Y.F.; Ye, A.Z.; Peng, D.Z.; Miao, C.Y.; Di, Z.H.; Gong, W. Spatiotemporal variations in water conservation function of the Tibetan Plateau under climate change based on InVEST model. J. Hydrol.-Reg. Stud. 2022, 41, 101064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Li, Y.; Li, J.J.; Are, K.S.; Huang, Z.G.; Yu, H.Q.; Zhang, Q.W. Livestock grazing significantly accelerates soil erosion more than climate change in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau: Evidenced from Cs-137 and (210)Pbex measurements. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2019, 285, 106643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Miehe, G.; Schleuss, P.M.; Seeber, E.; Babel, W.; Biermann, T.; Braendle, M.; Chen, F.H.; Coners, H.; Foken, T.; Gerken, T.; et al. The Kobresia pygmaea ecosystem of the Tibetan highlands-Origin, functioning and degradation of the world’s largest pastoral alpine ecosystem Kobresia pastures of Tibet. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 648, 754–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Wu, J.S.; Feng, Y.F.; Zhang, X.Z.; Wurst, S.; Tietjen, B.; Tarolli, P.; Song, C.Q. Grazing exclusion by fencing non-linearly restored the degraded alpine grasslands on the Tibetan Plateau. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Qiu, J. Double threat for Tibet. Nature 2014, 512, 240–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Wang, T.; Zhao, Y.T.; Xu, C.Y.; Ciais, P.; Liu, D.; Yang, H.; Piao, S.L.; Yao, T.D. Atmospheric dynamic constraints on Tibetan Plateau freshwater under Paris climate targets. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2021, 11, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ma, S.; Wang, L.J.; Jiang, J.; Chu, L.; Zhang, J.C. Threshold effect of ecosystem services in response to climate change and vegetation coverage change in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau ecological shelter. J. Clean Prod. 2021, 318, 128592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wang, Y.F.; Lv, W.W.; Xue, K.; Wang, S.P.; Zhang, L.R.; Hu, R.H.; Zeng, H.; Xu, X.L.; Li, Y.M.; Jiang, L.L.; et al. Grassland changes and adaptive management on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2022, 3, 668–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Shen, M.G.; Wang, S.P.; Jiang, N.; Sun, J.P.; Cao, R.Y.; Ling, X.F.; Fang, B.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, L.H.; Xu, X.Y.; et al. Plant phenology changes and drivers on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2022, 3, 633–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wen, X.; Theau, J. Spatiotemporal analysis of water-related ecosystem services under ecological restoration scenarios: A case study in northern Shaanxi, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 720, 137477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Gan, G.J.; Liu, Y.B.; Sun, G. Understanding interactions among climate, water, and vegetation with the Budyko framework. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2021, 212, 103451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Satalova, B.; Kenderessy, P. Assessment of water retention function as tool to improve integrated watershed management (case study of Poprad river basin, Slovakia). Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 599, 1082–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Chen, H.; Zhu, Q.A.; Peng, C.H.; Wu, N.; Wang, Y.F.; Fang, X.Q.; Gao, Y.H.; Zhu, D.; Yang, G.; Tian, J.Q.; et al. The impacts of climate change and human activities on biogeochemical cycles on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2013, 19, 2940–2955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Guo, D.L.; Wang, H.J. The significant climate warming in the northern Tibetan Plateau and its possible causes. Int. J. Climatol. 2012, 32, 1775–1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wang, B.; Bao, Q.; Hoskins, B.; Wu, G.X.; Liu, Y.M. Tibetan plateau warming and precipitation changes in East Asia. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2008, 35, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Kuang, X.X.; Jiao, J.J. Review on climate change on the Tibetan Plateau during the last half century. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos. 2016, 121, 3979–4007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Xie, H.; Zhu, X. Reference evapotranspiration trends and their sensitivity to climatic change on the Tibetan Plateau (1970–2009). Hydrol. Process. 2013, 27, 3685–3693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Li, X.P.; Wang, L.; Chen, D.L.; Yang, K.; Wang, A.H. Seasonal evapotranspiration changes (1983–2006) of four large basins on the Tibetan Plateau. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos. 2014, 119, 13079–13095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Yin, Y.H.; Wu, S.H.; Zhao, D.S.; Zheng, D.; Pan, T. Modeled effects of climate change on actual evapotranspiration in different eco-geographical regions in the Tibetan Plateau. J. Geogr. Sci. 2013, 23, 195–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bing, L.F.; Shao, Q.Q.; Liu, J.Y. Runoff characteristics in flood and dry seasons based on wavelet analysis in the source regions of the Yangtze and Yellow rivers. J. Geogr. Sci. 2012, 22, 261–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Wang, X.F.; Ma, M.G.; Song, Y.; Tan, J.L.; Wang, H.B. Coupling of a biogeochemical model with a simultaneous heat and water model and its evaluation at an alpine meadow site. Environ. Earth Sci. 2014, 72, 4085–4096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Arnold, J.G.; Moriasi, D.N.; Gassman, P.W.; Abbaspour, K.C.; White, M.J.; Srinivasan, R.; Santhi, C.; Harmel, R.D.; van Griensven, A.; Van Liew, M.W.; et al. Swat: Model Use, Calibration, and Validation. Trans. ASABE 2012, 55, 1491–1508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Baker, T.J.; Miller, S.N. Using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) to assess land use impact on water resources in an East African watershed. J. Hydrol. 2013, 486, 100–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Benra, F.; De Frutos, A.; Gaglio, M.; Alvarez-Garreton, C.; Felipe-Lucia, M.; Bonn, A. Mapping water ecosystem services: Evaluating InVEST model predictions in data scarce regions. Environ. Modell. Softw. 2021, 138, 104982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Donohue, R.J.; Roderick, M.L.; McVicar, T.R. Roots, storms and soil pores: Incorporating key ecohydrological processes into Budyko’s hydrological model. J. Hydrol. 2012, 436, 35–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yang, D.; Liu, W.; Tang, L.Y.; Chen, L.; Li, X.Z.; Xu, X.L. Estimation of water provision service for monsoon catchments of South China: Applicability of the InVEST model. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2019, 182, 133–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Cheng, X.R.; Huang, M.B.; Si, B.C.; Yu, M.K.; Shao, M.A. The differences of water balance components of Caragana korshinkii grown in homogeneous and layered soils in the desert-Loess Plateau transition zone. J. Arid. Environ. 2013, 98, 10–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Jian, Z.; Genxu, W.; Xin, L.I.; Yongmin, Y.; Xiaoduo, P.A.N. Data Assimilation Algorithm Apply to Energy-Water Balance Analysis of the High Cold Ecosystem at Qinghai-Tibet Plain, Northwest China. Adv. Earth Sci. 2008, 23, 965–973. [Google Scholar]
  60. Shao, Q.Q.; Xiao, T.; Liu, J.Y.; Qi, Y.Q. Soil erosion rates and characteristics of typical alpine meadow using Cs-137 technique in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2011, 56, 1708–1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Su, P.; Zhou, Z.; Shi, R.; Xie, T. Variation in basic properties and carbon sequestration capacity of an alpine sod layer along moisture and elevation gradients. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2018, 38, 1040–1052. [Google Scholar]
  62. Hu, X.; Li, X.Y.; Li, Z.C.; Gao, Z.; Wu, X.C.; Wang, P.; Lyu, Y.L.; Liu, L.Y. Linking 3-D soil macropores and root architecture to near saturated hydraulic conductivity of typical meadow soil types in the Qinghai Lake Watershed, northeastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Catena 2020, 185, 104287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zi, H.; Ade, L.; Ma, L.; Hu, L.; Chen, Y.; Yang, Y.; Wang, C. Change of Ratio of Root to Soil and Soil Nutrient Content at Different Grassland Types in Alpine Meadow. Southwest China J. Agric. Sci. 2016, 29, 2916–2921. [Google Scholar]
  64. Cheng, H.; Cheng, Y.; Gong, Y.; Xiong, S.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, J.; Liu, L.; Wu, Q.; Sun, C. Hydrological effect of six soil types in northwestern Sichuan alpine and subalpine mountains. Chin. J. Appl. Environ. Biol. 2019, 25, 225–231. [Google Scholar]
  65. Lv, X.; Pan, J.; Zhang, J. Study on Reflectance Spectra of Yellow Brown Soil of Different Water Contents. Remote Sens. Inf. 2004, 19, 10. [Google Scholar]
  66. Chen, J.H.; Wang, D.C.; Li, G.D.; Sun, Z.C.; Wang, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, W. Spatial and Temporal Heterogeneity Analysis of Water Conservation in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration Based on the Geodetector and Spatial Elastic Coefficient Trajectory Models. GeoHealth 2020, 4, e2020GH000248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Lu, B.B.; Charlton, M.; Harris, P.; Fotheringham, A.S. Geographically weighted regression with a non-Euclidean distance metric: A case study using hedonic house price data. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2014, 28, 660–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chen, S.R.; Feng, Y.J.; Tong, X.H.; Liu, S.; Xie, H.; Gao, C.; Lei, Z.K. Modeling ESV losses caused by urban expansion using cellular automata and geographically weighted regression. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 712, 136509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. McMillen, D.P. Geographically weighted regression: The analysis of spatially varying relationships. Am. J. Agr. Econ. 2004, 86, 554–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kebede, S.; Travi, Y.; Alemayehu, T.; Marc, V. Water balance of Lake Tana and its sensitivity to fluctuations in rainfall, Blue Nile basin, Ethiopia. J. Hydrol. 2006, 316, 233–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Zhang, W.X.; Furtado, K.; Wu, P.L.; Zhou, T.J.; Chadwick, R.; Marzin, C.; Rostron, J.; Sexton, D. Increasing precipitation variability on daily-to-multiyear time scales in a warmer world. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, eabf8021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Zhao, F.B.; Ma, S.; Wu, Y.P.; Qiu, L.J.; Wang, W.K.; Lian, Y.Q.; Chen, J.; Sivakumar, B. The role of climate change and vegetation greening on evapotranspiration variation in the Yellow River Basin, China. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2022, 316, 108842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wu, K.; Chen, J.H.; Yang, H.; Yang, Y.; Hu, Z.M. Spatiotemporal Variations in the Sensitivity of Vegetation Growth to Typical Climate Factors on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 2355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Meng, X.Y.; Gao, X.; Li, S.Y.; Lei, J.Q. Spatial and Temporal Characteristics of Vegetation NDVI Changes and the Driving Forces in Mongolia during 1982-2015. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Zhu, L.J.; Meng, J.J.; Zhu, L.K. Applying Geodetector to disentangle the contributions of natural and anthropogenic factors to NDVI variations in the middle reaches of the Heihe River Basin. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 117, 106545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Fan, Z.M.; Bai, X.Y. Scenarios of potential vegetation distribution in the different gradient zones of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau under future climate change. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 796, 148918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Wu, J.H.; Wang, G.Z.; Chen, W.X.; Pan, S.P.; Zeng, J. Terrain gradient variations in the ecosystem services value of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2022, 34, e02008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Katipoglu, O.M. Revealing the trend and change point in Hargreaves equation based on potential evapotranspiration values with various statistical approaches. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 17, 70604–70620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhou, D.; Zhang, B.; Shen, Y. Effect of Potential Evapotranspiration Estimation Method on Reconnaissance Drought Index (RDI) Calculation. Chin. J. Agrometeorol. 2014, 35, 258–267. [Google Scholar]
  80. Li, Z.S.; Yang, Y.; Kan, G.Y.; Hong, Y. Study on the Applicability of the Hargreaves Potential Evapotranspiration Estimation Method in CREST Distributed Hydrological Model (Version 3.0) Applications. Water 2018, 10, 1882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Zhao, C.Y.; Nan, Z.G.; Feng, Z.D. GIS-assisted spatially distributed modeling of the potential evapotranspiration in semi-arid climate of the Chinese Loess Plateau. J. Arid. Environ. 2004, 58, 387–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Belaineh, G.; Sumner, D.; Carter, E.; Clapp, D. Harmonizing Multiple Methods for Reconstructing Historical Potential and Reference Evapotranspiration. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2014, 19, 05014006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Abatzoglou, J.T.; Dobrowski, S.Z.; Parks, S.A.; Hegewisch, K.C. Data Descriptor: TerraClimate, a high-resolution global dataset of monthly climate and climatic water balance from 1958–2015. Sci. Data 2018, 5, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Bai, Y.; Ochuodho, T.O.; Yang, J. Impact of land use and climate change on water-related ecosystem services in Kentucky, USA. Ecol. Indic. 2019, 102, 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Chiang, L.C.; Lin, Y.P.; Huang, T.; Schmeller, D.S.; Verburg, P.H.; Liu, Y.L.; Ding, T.S. Simulation of ecosystem service responses to multiple disturbances from an earthquake and several typhoons. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2014, 122, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Hu, W.M.; Li, G.; Li, Z.N. Spatial and temporal evolution characteristics of the water conservation function and its driving factors in regional lake wetlands-Two types of homogeneous lakes as examples. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 130, 108069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Yang, K.; Wu, H.; Qin, J.; Lin, C.G.; Tang, W.J.; Chen, Y.Y. Recent climate changes over the Tibetan Plateau and their impacts on energy and water cycle: A review. Glob. Planet. Chang. 2014, 112, 79–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Yang, M.X.; Nelson, F.E.; Shiklomanov, N.I.; Guo, D.L.; Wan, G.N. Permafrost degradation and its environmental effects on the Tibetan Plateau: A review of recent research. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2010, 103, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Liao, C.R.; Liu, B.C.; Xu, Y.N.; Li, Y.K.; Li, H.D. Effect of topography and protecting barriers on revegetation of sandy land, Southern Tibetan Plateau. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Guo, X.W.; Zhou, H.K.; Dai, L.C.; Li, J.; Zhang, F.W.; Li, Y.K.; Lin, L.; Li, Q.; Qian, D.W.; Fan, B.; et al. Restoration of Degraded Grassland Significantly Improves Water Storage in Alpine Grasslands in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Pang, G.J.; Wang, X.J.; Yang, M.X. Using the NDVI to identify variations in, and responses of, vegetation to climate change on the Tibetan Plateau from 1982 to 2012. Quat. Int. 2017, 444, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Shen, M.G.; Piao, S.L.; Jeong, S.J.; Zhou, L.M.; Zeng, Z.Z.; Ciais, P.; Chen, D.L.; Huang, M.T.; Jin, C.S.; Li, L.Z.X.; et al. Evaporative cooling over the Tibetan Plateau induced by vegetation growth. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 9299–9304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  93. Hua, W.; Fan, G.Z.; Zhou, D.W.; Ni, C.J.; Li, X.M.; Wang, Y.L.; Liu, Y.Q.; Huang, X.L. Preliminary analysis on the relationships between Tibetan Plateau NDVI change and its surface heat source and precipitation of China. Sci. China Ser. D-Earth Sci. 2008, 51, 677–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Sun, W.Y.; Mu, X.M.; Song, X.Y.; Wu, D.; Cheng, A.F.; Qiu, B. Changes in extreme temperature and precipitation events in the Loess Plateau (China) during 1960–2013 under global warming. Atmos. Res. 2016, 168, 33–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Zhang, B.Q.; Tian, L.; Zhao, X.N.; Wu, P.T. Feedbacks between vegetation restoration and local precipitation over the Loess Plateau in China. Sci. China-Earth Sci. 2021, 64, 920–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Li, S.F.; Valdes, P.J.; Farnsworth, A.; Davies-Barnard, T.; Su, T.; Lunt, D.J.; Spicer, R.A.; Liu, J.; Deng, W.Y.D.; Huang, J.; et al. Orographic evolution of northern Tibet shaped vegetation and plant diversity in eastern Asia. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, eabc7741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Huang, K.; Zhang, Y.J.; Zhu, J.T.; Liu, Y.J.; Zu, J.X.; Zhang, J. The Influences of Climate Change and Human Activities on Vegetation Dynamics in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Remote Sens. 2016, 8, 876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Brodribb, T.J.; McAdam, S.A.M.; Jordan, G.J.; Martins, S.C.V. Conifer species adapt to low-rainfall climates by following one of two divergent pathways. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 14489–14493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Cong, W.C.; Sun, X.Y.; Guo, H.; Shan, R.F. Comparison of the SWAT and InVEST models to determine hydrological ecosystem service spatial patterns, priorities and trade-offs in a complex basin. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 112, 106089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Belete, M.; Deng, J.S.; Zhou, M.M.; Wang, K.; You, S.X.; Hong, Y.; Weston, M. A New Approach to Modeling Water Balance in Nile River Basin, Africa. Sustainability 2018, 10, 810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Sun, M.L.; Hu, J.; Chen, X.L.; Lu, Y.H.; Yang, L.X. Comparison of Five Models for Estimating the Water Retention Service of a Typical Alpine Wetland Region in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 6306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Mu, C.C.; Abbott, B.W.; Norris, A.J.; Mu, M.; Fan, C.Y.; Chen, X.; Jia, L.; Yang, R.M.; Zhang, T.J.; Wang, K.; et al. The status and stability of permafrost carbon on the Tibetan Plateau. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2020, 211, 103433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Yang, X.; Chen, R.S.; Meadows, M.E.; Ji, G.X.; Xu, J.H. Modelling water yield with the InVEST model in a data scarce region of northwest China. Water Supply 2020, 20, 1035–1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Scordo, F.; Lavender, T.M.; Seitz, C.; Perillo, V.L.; Rusak, J.A.; Piccolo, M.C.; Perillo, G.M.E. Modeling Water Yield: Assessing the Role of Site and Region-Specific Attributes in Determining Model Performance of the InVEST Seasonal Water Yield Model. Water 2018, 10, 1496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Zhang, X.; Li, Y.; Lyu, C.; Bi, R.; Xia, L.; Guo, Y.; Wang, Y.; Xu, C.; Sun, B. Research progress on application of ecosystem service functions based on InVEST model. Ecol. Sci. 2022, 41, 237–242. [Google Scholar]
Remotesensing 15 03175 g001 550
Figure 1. The position of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and the spatial distribution of main rivers, lakes, glaciers, meteorological, and hydrological stations: (a) climatic regionalization; (b) ecological regionalization.
Figure 1. The position of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and the spatial distribution of main rivers, lakes, glaciers, meteorological, and hydrological stations: (a) climatic regionalization; (b) ecological regionalization.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g001
Remotesensing 15 03175 g002 550
Figure 2. Spatial distribution of soil types on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau.
Figure 2. Spatial distribution of soil types on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g002
Remotesensing 15 03175 g003 550
Figure 3. Flow chart of the technical approach of this study.
Figure 3. Flow chart of the technical approach of this study.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g003
Remotesensing 15 03175 g004 550
Figure 4. Spatial distribution of water conservation in varying periods: (a) 1990; (b) 2000; (c) 2010; (d) 2020.
Figure 4. Spatial distribution of water conservation in varying periods: (a) 1990; (b) 2000; (c) 2010; (d) 2020.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g004
Remotesensing 15 03175 g005 550
Figure 5. Water conservation in different periods in each ecoregion and climate zone. (a) Water conservation in each ecoregion; (b) water conservation in each climate zone.
Figure 5. Water conservation in different periods in each ecoregion and climate zone. (a) Water conservation in each ecoregion; (b) water conservation in each climate zone.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g005
Remotesensing 15 03175 g006 550
Figure 6. Precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in various ecological zones of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in different periods.
Figure 6. Precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in various ecological zones of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in different periods.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g006
Remotesensing 15 03175 g007 550
Figure 7. Precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in various climatic zones of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in different periods.
Figure 7. Precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, NDVI, and water conservation in various climatic zones of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau in different periods.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g007
Remotesensing 15 03175 g008 550
Figure 8. Statistical values of the geo-detector factor detection q for different periods.
Figure 8. Statistical values of the geo-detector factor detection q for different periods.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g008
Remotesensing 15 03175 g009 550
Figure 9. Magnitude of the explanatory power of the interaction of the factors in different periods: (a) 1990; (b) 2000; (c) 2010; (d) 2020.
Figure 9. Magnitude of the explanatory power of the interaction of the factors in different periods: (a) 1990; (b) 2000; (c) 2010; (d) 2020.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g009
Remotesensing 15 03175 g010 550
Figure 10. Geographically weighted regression coefficients for rainfall and NDVI versus water conservation.
Figure 10. Geographically weighted regression coefficients for rainfall and NDVI versus water conservation.
Remotesensing 15 03175 g010
Table
Table 1. Name and corresponding code of each ecological zone.
Table 1. Name and corresponding code of each ecological zone.
CodeEcological Zone
I12Agricultural and grassland zone of the Loess Plateau
I15Ecological area of deciduous and evergreen broad-leaved forest in the Qinba Mountains
I25Ecological area of evergreen broad-leaved forest in southwest Sichuan and north-central Yunnan
II03Grassland desertification ecological area in the middle of the Inner Mongolia Plateau
II08Tarim Basin–eastern Xinjiang desert ecological area
III01Qilian mountain forest and alpine grassland ecological area
III02Desert ecological area of the Qaidam Basin
III03Pamir-Kunlun–Altun alpine desert grassland ecological area
III04River source area–Gannan alpine meadow grassland ecological area
III05Alpine desert grassland ecological area of the northern Tibetan Plateau
III06Ali Mountain warm arid desert ecological area
III07Cold temperate coniferous forest ecological area in eastern Tibet–western Sichuan
III08Alpine meadow grassland ecological area in southern Tibet
III09Seasonal rainforest ecological area of tropical rainforest in southeast Tibet
Note: See this table for the ecoregion codes in the results section.
Table
Table 2. Name and corresponding code of each climate zone.
Table 2. Name and corresponding code of each climate zone.
First-Level Zone CodeFirst-Level Climate ZoneSecond-Level Zone CodeSecond-Level Climate Zone
IIMiddle Temperate ZoneIIC2Central Mongolia
IID1Menggan
IIISouth Temperate ZoneIIID1Nanjiang
IIIB3Weihe
IVNorth Subtropical ZoneIVA2Qinba
VMiddle Subtropical ZoneVA3Sichuan
VA5Northern Yunnan
HPlateau Climate ZoneHD2Northern Tibet
HC3Southern Tibet
HC2Central Tibet
HB2Changdu
HA1Bomi–Western Sichuan
HVVIVIIA1Dawang–Chayu
HC1Qilian–Qinghai Lake
HB1Southern Qinghai
HD1Qaidam
Table
Table 3. The dataset source, spatial resolution, and description of this work.
Table 3. The dataset source, spatial resolution, and description of this work.
Data Usage ModuleDataSourceSpatial ResolutionDescription
InVEST model input parameters PrecipitationCAS
(https://www.resdc.cn/, accessed on 15 January 2023)		1 km × 1 kmWith the daily data of meteorological elements at more than 2400 stations nationwide, the spatial interpolation data of meteorological elements for each year from 1960 to 2021 were generated based on the calculation of annual values of each meteorological element based on Anuspl interpolation software
InVEST model input parametersChina-1 km-monthly potential evapotranspiration dataset(https://data.tpdc.ac.cn/, accessed on 20 January 2023)0.0083333
(About 1 km)		Hargreaves Potential Evapotranspiration Calculator was used based on the 1 km monthly average, minimum, and maximum temperature data in China
InVEST model input parametersAverage annual
PET		TerraClimate
(https://www.nature.com/, accessed on 16 January 2023)		5 km × 5 kmMonthly surface water balance dataset generated using water balance model
InVEST model input parametersMOD16A2Google Earth Engine
(https://code.earthengine.google.com, accessed on 20 January 2023)		500 m × 500 mData collected based on the Penman-Monteith equation
InVEST model input parametersLand use
(LULC)		CAS
(https://www.resdc.cn/, accessed on 15 January 2023)		1 km × 1 kmSecondary classification of land resources according to their
natural attributes
InVEST model input parametersSoil root depthHWSD
(https://data.apps.fao.org/, accessed on 20 January 2023)		 Contains detailed data on
maximum root depth (mm),
clay content (%), meal content (%), sand content (%), soil capacity (g/cm³), organic matter content (%), etc.
Calculation of the water conservationVelocity
coefficient		USDA-NRCS It was obtained by multiplying the
flow–slope–landscape table
from the National Engineering Handbook provided by the
USDA-NRCS by 1000
Calculation of the water conservation DEMCAS
(https://www.resdc.cn/, accessed on 15 January 2023)		90 m × 90 mTIt is based on the latest SRTM V4.1 data, which is collated and spliced to generate 90 m of sub-provincial data
Influencing factorsActual evaporationInVEST model1 km × 1 kmDerived from the calculation
results of the InVEST model
water production module
Influencing factorsNDVINESDC
(http://www.nesdc.org.cn/, accessed on 8 February 2023)		5 km × 5 kmBased on NOAA CDR NDVI
data, monthly mean NDVI data for the 1982–2020 growing
season (April–October) in the
Chinese regions were obtained
by averaging the first 15 and
last 15 days of each month and then reconstructed using the
maximum value synthesis
method (MVC)
Partition DataClimate zone dataCAS
(https://www.resdc.cn/, accessed on 7 February 2023)		(Vector data)It was compiled by the National Meteorological Administration of China in 1978 using climate data from 1951 to 1970
Partition DataEcological zone data(http://www.ecosystem.csdb.cn/, accessed on 7 February 2023)(Vector data)Zoning by ecosystem type and natural conditions such as structural feature and geological feature
Table
Table 4. Types of geo-detection interactions.
Table 4. Types of geo-detection interactions.
JudgmentInteraction
q( X 1 ⋂ X 2 ) < min [q( X 1 ), q( X 2 )]Non-linear attenuation
min [q( X 1 ), q( X 2 )] < q( X 1 ⋂ X 2 ) < max [q( X 1 ), q( X 2 )]Single-factor non-linear weakening
q( X 1 ⋂ X 2 ) > max [q( X 1 ), q( X 2 )]Two-factor enhancement
q( X 1 ⋂ X 2 ) = q( X 1 ) + q( X 2 )Independent
q( X 1 ⋂ X 2 ) > q( X 1 ) + q( X 2 )Non-linear enhancement
Table
Table 5. Validation of the water yield accuracy of each type of remote sensing evapotranspiration data in 2020.
Table 5. Validation of the water yield accuracy of each type of remote sensing evapotranspiration data in 2020.
DataWater Yield (108 m3)Relative Error
China-1 km-monthly potential
evapotranspiration dataset		5697.401.57%
MOD16A25399.483.74%
PET dataset TerraClimate4970.3111.39%
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wen, X.; Shao, H.; Wang, Y.; Lv, L.; Xian, W.; Shao, Q.; Shu, Y.; Yin, Z.; Liu, S.; Qi, J. Assessment of the Spatiotemporal Impact of Water Conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 3175. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15123175

AMA Style

Wen X, Shao H, Wang Y, Lv L, Xian W, Shao Q, Shu Y, Yin Z, Liu S, Qi J. Assessment of the Spatiotemporal Impact of Water Conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Remote Sensing. 2023; 15(12):3175. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15123175

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wen, Xin, Huaiyong Shao, Ying Wang, Lingfeng Lv, Wei Xian, Qiufang Shao, Yang Shu, Ziqiang Yin, Shuhan Liu, and Jiaguo Qi. 2023. "Assessment of the Spatiotemporal Impact of Water Conservation on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau" Remote Sensing 15, no. 12: 3175. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15123175

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop