Comprehensive evaluation method and system for ecological shoreline

Abstract

The invention discloses an ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation method and system, and belongs to the technical field of river and lake ecological environment evaluation. The method comprises the following steps: determining an ecological shoreline evaluation range; dividing the shoreline evaluation range into different types and grades; constructing an ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation index system; aiming at the mountainous area section, the urban section and the suburban section, respectively configuring differentiated weights for the four criterion layers of the mountainous area section, the urban section and the suburban section; arranging survey sample points in the shoreline evaluation range, obtaining evaluation index data of each survey sample point through a remote sensing inversion method and a field survey method, and calculating an ecological shoreline comprehensive ecological evaluation index of each survey sample point based on the index data and the corresponding weight; and according to the ecological shoreline comprehensive ecological evaluation index, determining the ecological level of the survey sample point. According to the method, riparian zone animals, microorganisms and dynamic factors are considered, the ecological condition of the riparian can be reflected more perfectly, and a basis and support are provided for comprehensive evaluation of the ecological shoreline and restoration management of the shoreline.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of river and lake ecological environment assessment technology, and specifically relates to a comprehensive evaluation method and system for ecological shorelines. Background Technology

[0002] The riparian zone is a transitional area between land and rivers, encompassing the riverbed between high and low water levels and extending upstream to the area where the river's influence completely disappears. As an ecological transition zone, the riparian zone plays a crucial role in the flow of materials, energy, information, and organisms between land and water. Natural factors and human disturbances have led to the degradation of ecological functions in parts of the riparian ecosystem. Currently, riparian zone assessments primarily include health assessments, naturalness assessments, ecosystem service assessments, and comprehensive assessments.

[0003] Research on riparian zone assessment began earlier abroad, and the assessment methods employed also differ. Countries like the United States have established systematic assessment systems, forming multi-indicator methods for riparian zone health assessment. The riparian zone quality index is a typical multi-indicator assessment method used to evaluate the ecological status of riparian zone systems. Domestic research on riparian zone assessment is relatively recent. Scholars such as Xia Jihong ("Research on the Theory and Application of Comprehensive Evaluation of Eco-riparian Zones" - Doctoral Dissertation, June 2005) and Liu Fenghua et al. ("Construction and Research of Comprehensive Evaluation Index System for Eco-riparian Zones" - Southern Forum, February 2020) have conducted research on riparian zone health assessment from aspects such as ecological riparian zone, naturalness, and waterfront landscape. Some scholars have also evaluated riparian zones from a single perspective. For example, Ma Tao et al.'s "Research on Ecological Sensitivity Evaluation of River Shorelines" (Proceedings of the 2021 Academic Annual Meeting of Liaoning Provincial Water Conservancy Society, December 20, 2021) proposed the concept and investigation method of ecologically sensitive areas of river shorelines. They innovatively proposed the ecological sensitivity index of river shorelines and the classification standard of shoreline sensitivity level. Taking the Daling River as an example, they carried out the calculation and analysis of the ecological sensitivity index and shoreline sensitivity level of the Daling River shoreline. Xing Zhong (2022)'s team, based on the analysis of the composition, elements, and influencing factors of riparian zones, combined the two levels of the healthy operation of riparian zones and social function demands, superimposed the three-level goals of ecological protection, ecosystem services, and social services, and carried out a comprehensive evaluation of ecosystem service functions to obtain the spatial gradient distribution of comprehensive ecological-economic-social benefits of riparian zones in mountainous cities. Zhu Shaobo et al. adopted the physical structure integrity index in the indicator criteria layer of the river and lake health assessment system in the "Technical Guidelines for River and Lake Health Assessment" (SL / T 793—2020), and added some optional indicators in combination with the characteristics of the Taipu River artificial channel. They selected three major categories of indicators: riverbank condition, river connectivity and obstruction condition, and intertidal zone condition, and assigned corresponding weights to each indicator to conduct a comprehensive pre-assessment of the health status of the Taipu River's riverbank.

[0004] The aforementioned studies are ecological and related assessments conducted within the scope of riparian zones, and they mostly focus on a multi-factor integrated research method based on a single field. Each of the ecological, social, and economic aspects has its own evaluation factors and standards. The use of a single-field assessment method has the drawback of only proving that the riparian zone performs well and meets the requirements in that field, but there may be shortcomings in other aspects.

[0005] In recent years, with the gradual improvement of urban construction and the diversification of urban development, as well as the deepening understanding of the environment and ecology, river and lake health rating and happiness river and lake evaluation have become a means for water conservancy departments to systematically manage and assess the status of rivers and lakes. The judgment of river and lake ecological health has gradually shifted from a single criterion to a classification judgment based on river and lake characteristics and functions. It has also expanded from evaluating the river and lake water bodies themselves to a comprehensive evaluation including the shoreline. The development, utilization, and protection of the shoreline have become one of the important tasks of water conservancy departments. However, to date, there is no unified definition of ecological shoreline both domestically and internationally, evaluation methods and systems are lacking, and shoreline ecological restoration goals have different focuses, hindering the implementation of ecological shoreline management and restoration. Furthermore, the planning, control methods, and standards for riverbank zones tend to favor large-scale regional overall planning, but rivers typically flow from the periphery to the center and back to the periphery through most areas of a city, including rural protected areas, rural areas, reserves, suburbs, general urban areas, urban centers, and urban core areas. The functional roles and service demands of riverbank zones differ in these urban sections with varying development intensities. Current research rarely discusses these segments separately. Instead, it applies a uniform evaluation factor, indicator, and weighting system to conduct undifferentiated evaluations of large-scale regions. Such evaluation results are inaccurate and lack specificity. Summary of the Invention

[0006] To address the aforementioned issues, this invention proposes a comprehensive ecological shoreline evaluation method and system that considers the dynamic factors of the riverbank zone, providing a more comprehensive reflection of the riverbank's ecological condition and offering a basis and support for comprehensive ecological shoreline evaluation and shoreline restoration management.

[0007] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention adopts the following technical solution:

[0008] On the one hand, it is a comprehensive evaluation method for ecological shorelines. The ecological shoreline includes the original stable shorelines of rivers, lakes, and seas formed by the interaction of water and land and undisturbed by human intervention, as well as shorelines that can sustainably provide the required ecological functions after artificial construction and ecological restoration. It includes the following steps:

[0009] S1, Determine the ecological shoreline assessment scope, which is determined by defining the waterfront boundary line and the outer boundary line;

[0010] S2, the ecological shoreline evaluation scope is divided into three primary river section types: mountain section, urban section and suburban section. Based on land use type and human development intensity, the primary categories are further subdivided into sub-categories, and it is determined whether they are ecological shorelines.

[0011] S3. Construct a comprehensive evaluation index system for ecological shorelines. The system includes four criteria layers: nearshore water environment, riverbank physical morphology, vegetation status, and social service functions. Each criterion layer has an index layer with several quantifiable evaluation indicators.

[0012] S4, for the mountainous section, urban section, and suburban section, configure differentiated weights for their four criterion layers respectively; wherein, the criterion layer with the highest weight is different for each river section type:

[0013] For mountainous sections, the highest weight is assigned to the vegetation condition criterion layer;

[0014] For the urban segment, the highest weight is assigned to the social service function criterion layer;

[0015] For the suburban section, relatively high weights are assigned to the physical morphology of the riverbank and the criteria for social service functions.

[0016] S5. Within the ecological shoreline evaluation area, survey points are set up. Evaluation index data for each survey point are obtained through remote sensing inversion and field survey methods, including water duration, nearshore water nutrient status, non-point source pollution intensity, shoreline stability index, vegetation coverage, soil and water conservation rate, shoreline longitudinal connectivity, and shoreline lateral connectivity. Based on the index data and corresponding weights, the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the ecological shoreline for each survey point is calculated.

[0017] S6. Based on the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the ecological shoreline, determine the ecological level of the surveyed sample points and, in conjunction with the preliminary judgment results of S2, comprehensively determine whether they are ecological shorelines.

[0018] Furthermore, the sub-classes include:

[0019] The subcategories of the mountainous sections include undeveloped sections, recreational sections, rural construction sections, and agricultural production sections;

[0020] The subcategories of the urban sections include living sections, recreational sections, and park sections;

[0021] The subcategories of the suburban sections include preservation sections, agricultural production sections, rural construction sections, and recreational sections.

[0022] Furthermore, in step S3, the indicator layer under the criterion layer of the indicator system includes at least 11 indicators, including:

[0023] The following belong to the nearshore water environment criteria layer: duration of water presence, nutrient status of nearshore water, and intensity of non-point source pollution;

[0024] Belonging to the aforementioned riverbank physical morphology criteria layer are: shoreline stability index, soil and water conservation rate, longitudinal connectivity of the shoreline, and lateral connectivity of the shoreline.

[0025] Belonging to the vegetation condition criterion layer are: herbaceous Shannon-Wiener index and vegetation cover;

[0026] Belonging to the aforementioned social service function criteria layer are: flood control smoothness, leisure and entertainment, and landscape suitability.

[0027] Furthermore, the method for obtaining the water availability duration evaluation index data includes:

[0028] Water bodies were retrieved using Landsat 8 OLI series remote sensing images, and the presence of water bodies over a year was statistically analyzed.

[0029] The water availability during the April-October period, which has a greater impact on vegetation growth, is assigned a weight of 0.8, while the water availability during the November-March period is assigned a weight of 0.2.

[0030] Scoring is assigned based on the guaranteed water availability period.

[0031] Furthermore, the method for obtaining the nearshore water quality trophic status evaluation index data is to use a combination of outdoor and indoor experiments to measure basic water quality parameters, calculate the eutrophication degree, assign scores based on the eutrophication degree, conduct monthly surveys, evaluate by water period, and take the average value of each water period, including: non-point source pollution intensity, shoreline stability index, shoreline longitudinal connectivity, shoreline lateral connectivity, herbaceous Shannon-Wiener, vegetation coverage, flood discharge capacity, and recreational and landscape suitability.

[0032] Furthermore, in step S5, the formula for calculating the comprehensive ecological evaluation index E of the ecological shoreline is:

[0033]

[0034] In the formula: Assign a score to the i-th indicator. Let S be the weight of the i-th indicator, and S be the number of indicators.

[0035] Furthermore, in step S5, the method for calculating the vegetation coverage is as follows:

[0036] First, vegetation cover is calculated using remote sensing inversion. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0037]

[0038] , and These represent the reflectance in the near-infrared band, red band, and blue band, respectively.

[0039] Then, by setting up quadrats, vegetation cover is assessed, and scores are assigned based on the results of field surveys.

[0040] Furthermore, step S6 includes the following:

[0041] S7. Based on the difference between the evaluation index data of each of the surveyed sample points and the full score, analyze the main limiting factors that lead to the low comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline.

[0042] S8. Based on the main limiting factors and the corresponding river section types, generate differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy recommendations.

[0043] S9. Based on the main limiting factors and the primary river segment type and / or sub-class to which the surveyed sample points belong, generate differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy recommendations.

[0044] The second aspect is an ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation system, used to implement any of the above-mentioned ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation methods, the system comprising:

[0045] The scope definition module is used to determine the shoreline evaluation scope of the target river or lake;

[0046] The river segment division module is used to divide the shoreline evaluation area into river segment types with different dominant ecological function requirements based on geographical, urban ecology, landscape ecology and hydrological factors.

[0047] The weight configuration module is used to configure differentiated weights for the criteria layer and subordinate indicators of the comprehensive evaluation index system for ecological shoreline for different river section types.

[0048] The data processing and calculation module is used to acquire evaluation index data of the survey sample points, and calculate the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline based on the data and weights.

[0049] The evaluation and output module is used to determine the ecological level based on the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline and output the evaluation results.

[0050] Furthermore, the system also includes:

[0051] The limiting factor diagnosis module is used to analyze the main limiting factors that lead to a low comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline, based on the difference between the evaluation index data and the full score.

[0052] The restoration strategy generation module is used to generate differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy recommendations based on the main limiting factors and the corresponding river section types.

[0053] The beneficial effects of this invention are:

[0054] A comprehensive index system encompassing multiple dimensions, including hydrology, ecology, structure, and society, was established and assigned weights and quantitative standards, greatly improving the scientific rigor, objectivity, and accuracy of the evaluation.

[0055] A definition of ecological shoreline is proposed, and a unified standard method for ecological shoreline evaluation is provided, which makes the evaluation data of different functions and different river sections comparable. It provides a unified assessment method for the management department, which facilitates the identification of ecologically sensitive areas and priority restoration areas at a macro scale, and realizes the overall planning and systematic management of shoreline resources in the entire region.

[0056] Taking into account the dynamic factors of the riparian zone can more comprehensively reflect the ecological status of the riverbank, providing a basis and support for the comprehensive evaluation of ecological shorelines and shoreline restoration and management. Incorporating ecological functions and social service functions into the evaluation system and considering them holistically helps to find the optimal balance between ecological and socio-economic benefits in planning and development, and provides a direction for this process.

[0057] The present invention will be further explained in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. Attached Figure Description

[0058] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the steps in the comprehensive ecological shoreline evaluation method of the present invention;

[0059] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the tidal river shoreline classification results in Example 4;

[0060] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the classification results of the Chaobai River shoreline in Example 4;

[0061] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the main ecological limiting factors of the mountainous shoreline under the implementation of the fourth phase;

[0062] Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the ecological limiting factors of the suburban shoreline in Example 4. Detailed Implementation

[0063] The following points need clarification:

[0064] Definition of ecological shoreline: There is currently no authoritative definition. This invention defines ecological shoreline as: including the original stable shoreline of rivers, lakes and seas formed by the interaction of water and land and undisturbed by human intervention, as well as shorelines that can sustainably provide the required ecological functions after artificial construction and ecological restoration.

[0065] Shoreline boundary determination: The boundary is defined according to the standards outlined in the "Guidelines for the Compilation of River and Lake Shoreline Protection and Utilization Planning (Trial)" issued by the Ministry of Water Resources in 2019. The shoreline boundary is divided into the water-adjacent boundary line and the outer boundary line. The water-adjacent boundary line is the boundary line within the shoreline zone along the water-adjacent side of a river or the surrounding water-adjacent side of a lake (reservoir), based on the basic requirements of stabilizing river course, ensuring flood control safety, and maintaining river and lake ecology. The outer boundary line is the boundary line outside the shoreline zone, based on the control requirements of river and lake shoreline management and protection, and maintaining river functions, on the land-adjacent side of a river or the surrounding land-adjacent side of a lake (reservoir).

[0066] Shoreline Delineation: In this embodiment of the invention, the shoreline of the Chaobai River Basin is defined using the specifications and methods in the "Guidelines for the Compilation of River and Lake Shoreline Protection and Utilization Planning (Trial)". The waterfront boundary line is modified by combining the river channel boundary line provided by the Water Resources Bureau with remote sensing images during the flood season. The outer boundary line is vectorized using river management scope data published by the Beijing Municipal Water Resources Bureau, Huairou District Water Resources Bureau, Miyun District Water Resources Bureau, and Yanqing District Water Resources Bureau.

[0067] Example 1

[0068] A comprehensive evaluation method for ecological shorelines, wherein the ecological shoreline includes the original, stable shorelines of rivers, lakes, and seas formed by the interaction of water and land without human interference, as well as shorelines that, after artificial construction and ecological restoration, can sustainably provide the required ecological functions, such as... Figure 1 As shown, it includes the following steps:

[0069] S1, Determine the scope of ecological shoreline evaluation, which is determined by defining the waterfront boundary line and the outer boundary line.

[0070] S2, the ecological shoreline evaluation area is divided into three river segment types: mountainous, urban, and suburban. Based on land use type and intensity of human development, the level is determined, including: determining the shoreline level based on geographical, urban ecology, landscape ecology, and hydrological factors, dividing it into primary and sub-level categories; defining shoreline function types for different locations and levels, including ecotourism function shorelines, tourism and leisure function shorelines, and urban landscape function shorelines; classifying ecological shorelines based on the degree of human activity disturbance and the simultaneous impact of ecosystem structural diversity on the shoreline's filtering and barrier functions, further including: initially classifying different sub-types into ecological and non-ecological shorelines, and statistically analyzing the classification results.

[0071] S3. Construct a comprehensive evaluation index system for ecological shorelines. This system includes four criterion layers: nearshore water environment, riverbank physical morphology, vegetation status, and social service functions. Each criterion layer has an index layer with several quantifiable evaluation indicators. These include:

[0072] 1. Regarding the duration of water availability

[0073] ① Based on the remote sensing interpretation results, the presence or absence of water bodies within a year is statistically analyzed, and the variation in the duration of water presence is calculated. Landsat 8 OLI series imagery is used to retrieve water bodies. This imagery has a multispectral resolution of 30m and a revisit period of 16 days, meeting the requirements for statistical analysis of the rate of change in water presence duration. Based on the remote sensing interpretation results, the presence or absence of water bodies within a year is statistically analyzed, and then the variation in the duration of water presence is calculated.

[0074] ② Based on the different importance of water flow conditions to vegetation at different times, the water availability conditions from April to October, which have a greater impact on vegetation growth, are given a weight of 0.8, while the water availability conditions from November to March are given a weight of 0.2. The scores are also assigned based on the guarantee rate of water availability duration.

[0075] 2. Regarding the nutrient status of nearshore waters:

[0076] A combination of outdoor and indoor experiments was used to determine basic water quality parameters, calculate eutrophication levels, and assign scores based on these levels. Monthly surveys were conducted, and evaluations were performed at different water periods, with the average value for each period being recorded. This included:

[0077] ① Non-point source pollution intensity is measured and scored based on the proportion of farmland and rural areas.

[0078] ② The shoreline stability index is calculated as follows: Likelihood ratio (LR) = Percentage of area where shoreline instability occurs (a) / Percentage of area where instability does not occur (b), and different scores are assigned according to the range of likelihood ratio.

[0079] ③ Soil and water conservation rate: calculated using field survey data, divided into different levels and assigned scores.

[0080] ④ Longitudinal connectivity of the shoreline: The bridges and dams in the study area were visually interpreted using Gaofen-1 remote sensing image data. The number of bridges and dams on the riverbank was counted using ArcGIS spatial analysis module. The shoreline fragmentation was classified and scored based on the number of bridges and dams per unit length.

[0081] ⑤ Lateral connectivity of the shoreline, including the artificialization of cross-sectional shape, the hardening of construction materials, and the destruction or disappearance of the coastal zone. Calculate the hardening rate and assign a score.

[0082] ⑥ Herbal Shannon-Wiener Index The calculation method is as follows:

[0083]

[0084] in, Represents the total number of species. Indicates the first The proportion of each species to the total number is used to classify species diversity into levels and assign scores based on the calculation results of the quadrats.

[0085] ⑦ Vegetation coverage,

[0086] First, vegetation cover is calculated using remote sensing inversion. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0087]

[0088] , and These represent the reflectance of the near-infrared, red, and blue light bands, respectively. Then, by setting up quadrats, vegetation cover is assessed, and scores are assigned based on the results of field surveys.

[0089] ⑧ Flood discharge unobstructedness, which is the proportion of flood discharge space occupied by other activities within the shoreline management area.

[0090] ⑨ Leisure and recreational and landscape suitability: The suitability of the riverbank for leisure and recreation and landscape is evaluated using a scoring method.

[0091] ⑩ Flood discharge unobstructedness: The flood discharge unobstructedness described in this invention does not involve the compliance rate of dikes, etc., but only counts the proportion of flood discharge space occupied by other activities within the shoreline management area.

[0092] ⑪ Leisure and recreational suitability and landscape suitability: Investigate the construction level of leisure and recreational facilities such as waterfront walkways, the degree to which residents' leisure and recreational needs are met, and the degree of coordination with adjacent ecosystem landscapes.

[0093] S4. For the mountainous section, urban section, and suburban section, an expert scoring method is used to assign differentiated weights to the four criterion layers for each. The criterion layer with the highest weight differs for each river section type. For the mountainous section, the vegetation condition criterion layer has the highest weight; for the urban section, the social service function criterion layer has the highest weight; and for the suburban section, the riverbank physical morphology and the social service function criterion layers have relatively high weights.

[0094] S5. Within the ecological shoreline evaluation area, survey points are set up. Evaluation index data for each survey point are obtained through remote sensing inversion and field survey methods, including water duration, nearshore water nutrient status, non-point source pollution intensity, shoreline stability index, vegetation coverage, soil and water conservation rate, shoreline longitudinal connectivity, and shoreline lateral connectivity. Based on the index data and corresponding weights, the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the ecological shoreline for each survey point is calculated.

[0095] The formula for calculating the comprehensive ecological evaluation index E of the ecological shoreline is as follows:

[0096]

[0097] In the formula: Assign a score to the i-th indicator. Let S be the weight of the i-th indicator, and S be the number of indicators.

[0098] The method for calculating the vegetation coverage is as follows:

[0099] First, vegetation cover is calculated using remote sensing inversion. The calculation formula is as follows:

[0100]

[0101] , and These represent the reflectance of the near-infrared, red, and blue light bands, respectively. Then, by setting up quadrats, vegetation cover is assessed, and scores are assigned based on the results of field surveys.

[0102] S6. Based on the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the ecological shoreline, determine the ecological level of the surveyed sample points. The ecological shoreline condition is divided into four levels: excellent, good, qualified, and poor. The corresponding comprehensive ecological evaluation indices are: 90 (inclusive) to 100 for excellent, 75 (inclusive) to 90 for good, 60 (inclusive) to 75 for qualified, and <60 for poor. Based on the preliminary sub-category assessment results, those with scores greater than 75 are classified as ecological shorelines.

[0103] Furthermore, the ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation method of the present invention may also include:

[0104] S7. Based on the difference between the evaluation index data of each of the surveyed sample points and the full score, analyze the main limiting factors that lead to the low comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline.

[0105] S8. Based on the main limiting factors and the corresponding river section types, generate differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy recommendations.

[0106] S9. Based on the main limiting factors and the primary river segment type and / or sub-class to which the surveyed sample points belong, generate differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy recommendations.

[0107] Example 3:

[0108] This embodiment is an ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation system for implementing the above-described ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation method. The system includes:

[0109] The scope definition module is used to determine the shoreline evaluation scope of the target river or lake;

[0110] The river segment division module is used to divide the shoreline evaluation area into river segment types with different dominant ecological function requirements based on geographical, urban ecology, landscape ecology and hydrological factors.

[0111] The weight configuration module is used to configure differentiated weights for the criteria layer and subordinate indicators of the comprehensive evaluation index system for ecological shoreline for different river section types.

[0112] The data processing and calculation module is used to acquire evaluation index data of the survey sample points, and calculate the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline based on the data and weights.

[0113] The evaluation and output module is used to determine the ecological level based on the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline and output the evaluation results.

[0114] Further preferred options include:

[0115] The limiting factor diagnosis module is used to analyze the main limiting factors that lead to a low comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline, based on the difference between the evaluation index data and the full score.

[0116] The restoration strategy generation module is used to generate differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy recommendations based on the main limiting factors and the corresponding river section types.

[0117] Example 4

[0118] This embodiment is a specific example. Using the aforementioned method, taking the Chaobai River in Beijing as an example, the evaluation method steps include:

[0119] 1. Determine the scope of ecological shoreline assessment and classify shoreline types.

[0120] Based on geography (regional differentiation principle), urban ecology (socio-economic-natural ecosystem), landscape ecology (source-sink landscape pattern), and hydrology (dual water cycle theory), the ecological riverbanks are divided into primary and sub-categories. This invention classifies the Chaobai River shoreline into primary categories based on the topography of the study area and the division of the Chaobai River corridor in the "Comprehensive Plan for the Green Ecological Development Belt of the Chaobai River," namely, mountainous sections, urban sections, and suburban sections. Specifically, the mountainous section refers to the river section between the upper reaches of the Baihe River (Yanqing, Huairou, Miyun), the upper reaches of the Chaohe River (Miyun), and the Miyun Reservoir within the Miyun urban area; the urban section refers to the river section flowing through the areas of Miyun New City, Shunyi New City, and Tongzhou New City; and the suburban section refers to the river section outside the urban boundaries of Miyun New City, Shunyi New City, and Tongzhou New City, between the new cities, and from Tongzhou New City to the city proper. Based on land use types and development methods in the study area, riverbank classification was divided into subcategories, including mountainous sections (undeveloped, recreational, rural construction, agricultural production), urban sections (residential, recreational, park), and suburban sections (preserved, agricultural production, rural construction, recreational). The classification results for the main stream shorelines of the Chaohe, Baihe, and Chaobaihe rivers are as follows: Figure 2-4 As shown.

[0121] 2.1 Shoreline Classification and Evaluation Objectives

[0122] For the primary category, the definitions of ecological shorelines for different types of shorelines are defined. Mountainous ecological shorelines are defined as shorelines with low levels of human disturbance, stable shorelines, well-maintained natural conditions, good soil and water conservation and water source retention capacity, and suitable for the development of ecotourism. Urban ecological shorelines are defined as shorelines that fulfill flood control and drainage functions, are stable, have a good near-shore water environment, and possess urban tourism, leisure, and landscape functions. Suburban ecological shorelines are defined as shorelines with a good near-shore water environment, possessing certain habitat maintenance functions, with riverbank spaces connected to towns and villages, and possessing certain recreational functions.

[0123] 2.2 Preliminary Delineation of Ecological Shoreline

[0124] The land use types and development methods within the riverbank management area reflect the degree of human interference with the shoreline and the diversity of its ecosystem structure. They also affect the shoreline's filtering and barrier functions and can serve as a preliminary basis for the delineation of ecological shorelines.

[0125] Based on the definition of ecological shorelines for different types of shorelines and the intensity of human activities affecting shorelines, different subtypes are initially divided into ecological shorelines and non-ecological shorelines, as shown in Table 1. Following this classification, the Chaobai River shoreline is further subdivided based on the presence or absence of water pollution purification or isolation measures such as forest belts or riverbank slopes between farmland and the river. Those with purification or isolation measures are classified as ecological, while those without are classified as non-ecological. The analysis results are statistically analyzed and used as the basis for selecting points for comprehensive shoreline evaluation.

[0126] Table 1 Preliminary definition of the relationship between subtypes and ecological shoreline

[0127]

[0128] 2.3 Determination of Ecological Shoreline Evaluation Index System

[0129] Taking into account the filtering, protection and ecological barrier functions of the shoreline, and based on the ecological function requirements of the Chaobai River Basin shoreline, an evaluation index system covering 11 items in 4 categories is constructed, including nearshore water environment, shoreline physical morphology, vegetation status and social service functions.

[0130] Nearshore aquatic environments are crucial for maintaining the stability of riparian ecosystems. Water level changes significantly impact nearshore vegetation dynamics, which in turn significantly affects the exchange of substances, information flow, and energy between riparian vegetation, soil, and water. Nearshore water quality reflects sensory levels and oxygen content. Non-point source pollution has a significant impact on both riparian vegetation and the nearshore aquatic environment.

[0131] Riverbank morphology plays a crucial role in flood control and riparian ecosystems. Erosion from rainfall, river currents, and human activities such as excavation can all destabilize the structure of riparian ecosystems. This structural instability can damage terrestrial and riverine ecosystems, even causing casualties and severe property damage. Ecological riparian structural stability assessment, based on an analysis of factors influencing riparian structural stability, utilizes specific evaluation models to quantitatively analyze the impact of various factors and comprehensively assess the overall stability of the riparian structure. This provides a basis for the soil and hydraulic design of ecological riparian zones, thereby more effectively protecting terrestrial and riverine ecosystems.

[0132] Shoreline vegetation is the most direct reflection of ecological shoreline conditions. The riparian zone is an ecotone, a region rich in biodiversity, but also extremely sensitive to human disturbance. Biodiversity is a key aspect reflecting the ecological condition of the riverbank. Especially in urbanized areas, where riparian zones are subject to significant human interference, the extent of biodiversity changes remains unclear. This study only considers nearshore herbaceous plant diversity, while also taking into account vegetation cover within the riverbank management area. Nearshore aquatic environment, riverbank physical morphology, and social service functions are all affected by changes in vegetation conditions.

[0133] Riverbanks play a vital role in providing social services, and well-maintained riverbanks offer enhanced service value. While flood control is the most fundamental function of a river, landscape services are also considered. Mountainous river sections provide important recreational opportunities. Urban river sections, due to high population density, must not only meet flood control requirements but also, as far as possible, fulfill human recreational needs.

[0134] The evaluation index system is divided into three levels. The first level, the target level, is a comprehensive ecological evaluation of the shoreline, reflecting the overall status of the shoreline ecosystem. The second level, the criterion level, includes nearshore water environment, riverbank physical morphology, vegetation status, and social service functions. It reflects the complete shoreline ecosystem status and is the main factor determining the shoreline status. The third level, the index level, selects several specific characteristic elements under the second level criterion level, as shown in Table 2. In the ecological shoreline evaluation of the Chaobai River, eleven indicators were selected to evaluate the ecological status of the Chaobai River shoreline: water duration, nearshore water nutrient status, non-point source pollution intensity, shoreline stability index, soil and water conservation rate, shoreline fragmentation, hardening rate, herbaceous Shannon-Wiener index, vegetation coverage, flood discharge capacity, recreational and landscape suitability. Survey points were set up, and each indicator was calculated and scored. The survey indicators were divided into remote sensing indicators and field surveys. Water duration was obtained based on remote sensing imagery, while the other indicators were obtained based on field surveys. The survey methods are shown in Table 3.

[0135] Table 2 Ecological Shoreline Indicator System

[0136]

[0137] Table 3. Survey Methods for Indicators

[0138]

[0139] 2.4 Calculation and scoring methods for each indicator

[0140] The meanings and calculation methods of each indicator are as follows:

[0141] (1) Duration of water availability

[0142] Nearshore hydrological conditions significantly influence the exchange of matter and energy between land and rivers, as well as the growth and reproduction of riparian vegetation. Therefore, water presence duration is used to characterize nearshore hydrological conditions. Landsat 8 OLI series remote sensing images were used to retrieve water bodies. This imagery has a multispectral resolution of 30m and a revisit period of 16 days, meeting the requirements for statistical analysis of water presence duration variation. Based on the remote sensing interpretation results, the presence or absence of water bodies over a year was statistically analyzed, and the variation in water presence duration was calculated.

[0143] Since the importance of water flow conditions to vegetation varies at different times, a weight of 0.8 is assigned to water availability during April to October, which has a greater impact on vegetation growth, and a weight of 0.2 is assigned to water availability during November to March. The scoring is based on the guarantee rate of water availability duration, as shown in Table 4.

[0144] Table 4 Scoring Principles for Duration with Water

[0145]

[0146] (2) Nutrient status of nearshore waters

[0147] The impact of nearshore water quality on the overall water quality reflects the sensory level and oxygen content of nearshore water bodies. A combination of outdoor and indoor experiments was used, employing a portable water quality analyzer to rapidly measure basic water quality parameters such as dissolved oxygen and chlorophyll content. Water samples were collected, refrigerated, and analyzed in the laboratory within one week to determine the nitrogen and phosphorus content. Eutrophication assessment was performed according to the eutrophication level in the Surface Water Environmental Quality Assessment Method (Table 5). Monthly surveys were conducted, with assessments performed at different water periods, and the average value for each water period was taken. This survey only calculated data from the surveyed months.

[0148] Table 5. Principles for Assigning Trophic Status Scores to Nearshore Water Quality

[0149]

[0150] (3) Non-point source pollution intensity

[0151] Non-point source pollution intensity is positively correlated with land use type and land area ratio. Rivers are often connected with farmland, so this study mainly focuses on agricultural non-point source pollution in mountainous and suburban areas. Non-point source pollution intensity is measured and scored based on the proportion of farmland and rural areas, with scoring criteria shown in Table 6. Since non-point source pollution runoff is a watershed concept, to repeatedly consider the impact of this indicator, the definition of the width of the river buffer zone in the "Technical Guidelines for the Protection and Restoration of River Ecological Buffer Zones" is referenced in the calculation, and its relationship with the shoreline range is comprehensively considered.

[0152] Table 6. Scoring Principles for Non-point Source Pollution Intensity

[0153]

[0154] (4) Shoreline stability index

[0155] The shoreline stability index refers to the degree of erosion of the riverbank. The more unstable the riverbank, the more easily sediment will accumulate in the river channel under the action of runoff, and the more easily the natural shape and structure of the river channel will change.

[0156] Survey and calculation methods: Likelihood ratio (LR) = Percentage of area where bank slope instability occurred (a) / Percentage of area where instability did not occur (b).

[0157] Table 7. Scoring Principles for Shoreline Stability

[0158]

[0159] (5) Soil and water conservation rate

[0160] The soil and water conservation rate reflects the soil and water conservation status of riverbanks. A high soil and water conservation rate indicates strong soil and water conservation capacity and low soil erosion in the riverbank area, while a low rate indicates poor soil and water conservation capacity. The calculation method is: Soil and water conservation rate = Area of ​​land with good soil and water conservation within a 150 m straight-line distance from the monitoring point to the river channel / Total land area within a 150 m straight-line distance from the monitoring point to the river channel. The rate was calculated using field survey data, and different levels were assigned scores, as shown in Table 8.

[0161] Table 8. Scoring Principles for Soil and Water Conservation Rate

[0162]

[0163] (6) Longitudinal connectivity of the shoreline (shoreline continuity)

[0164] This refers to the phenomenon where bridges, sluices, dams, and other structures obstruct the longitudinal continuity of a river along its continuous natural shoreline. Bridges and sluices in the study area were visually interpreted using Gaofen-1 remote sensing imagery. The number of bridges and sluices along the riverbanks was counted using ArcGIS's spatial analysis module. Shoreline fragmentation was categorized and scored based on the number of bridges and sluices per unit length. Since shoreline fragmentation is a continuous range indicator, the scoring was based on the continuous length (in meters) of the shoreline between bridges and sluices within the area.

[0165] Table 9 Scoring Principles for Shoreline Continuity Indicators

[0166]

[0167] (7) Lateral connectivity of the shoreline (hardening rate)

[0168] Hardening of river channels: This refers to the use of cement mortar and stone blocks to form drainage ditches. Hardening of river channels mainly includes the following three aspects: (1) Artificialization of cross-sectional shape: The meandering natural river channel is straightened and transformed into a straight or broken-line artificial river; the complex and varied cross-section of the natural river channel is transformed into a regular geometric cross-section such as trapezoid, stepped and rectangular; (2) Hardening of construction materials: Concrete, stone blocks and other materials are used to pour (build) revetments and riverbeds, and the river channel is severely hardened; (3) Destruction or disappearance of riparian zone: The riparian zone vegetation is narrowed or disappeared, and the natural soil and vegetation system are replaced by artificial roads, docks, walkways, villages and so on.

[0169] Survey and calculation method: Hardening rate = Hardened area of ​​riparian zone / Riparian zone area. Scores are assigned based on the proportion of hardened area (Table 10).

[0170] Table 10 Scoring Principles for Hardening Rate Index

[0171]

[0172] (8) Herbal Shannon-Wiener Index

[0173] There is no unified methodology for biodiversity surveys within riverbank management areas. Due to significant human disturbance in urban river sections, such as in parks, plant diversity largely depends on human management practices. Therefore, this study only investigated plant species diversity along the riverbank slopes, from wetland vegetation to xerophytic vegetation. In northern regions, tree species are relatively limited, with poplar and willow being the dominant species. Basic information such as the number, height, canopy cover, and diameter at breast height (DBH) of trees was recorded during the sample plot survey. Both reconnaissance and quadrat methods were employed. The reconnaissance method was used to understand the species abundance and composition of the riparian zone. The quadrat method was used to investigate species composition and canopy cover within the quadrats. The selection of sample plots was determined based on the natural characteristics of the riverbank, ensuring representativeness and feasibility.

[0174] Plot setup: For urban riverbank woodland, the plot size is set at 20*20m, with five 1*1m herbaceous quadrats set along the diagonal. For riverside woodland, the plot size is set at the riverbank width * 150m, with five 1*1m herbaceous quadrats set sequentially at half the riverbank width. For riverbank grassland, five 1*1m herbaceous quadrats are set along the diagonal of the riverbank width * 150m.

[0175] Calculation method: Herb Shannon-Wiener index

[0176]

[0177] Where S represents the total number of species, and pi represents the proportion of the i-th species in the total.

[0178] Based on the calculation results of the quadrats, the species diversity levels were classified and scored (Table 11).

[0179] Table 11 Principles for Assigning Scores to Herbaceous Diversity

[0180]

[0181] (9) Vegetation coverage

[0182] Vegetation cover refers to the proportion of the projected area of ​​plant stems and leaves to the area of ​​the surveyed region. Vegetation cover can be investigated using two methods: remote sensing inversion and field surveys.

[0183] Remote sensing inversion: Riverbanks are susceptible to human activity, leading to bare land. Vegetation cover indices help determine the impact of human activities on vegetation formation. The Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) is an improvement upon the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). It undergoes comprehensive atmospheric correction based on image factors including atmospheric molecules, aerosols, thin clouds, water vapor, and ozone. EVI atmospheric correction involves three steps: first, cloud removal; second, atmospheric correction, which includes correction for Rayleigh scattering and ozone, as well as atmospheric molecules, aerosols, and water vapor, in addition to the existing NDVI corrections; and third, further processing of residual aerosol effects by utilizing the differences in aerosol transmission between blue and red light. Since the input NIR, Red, and Blue values ​​have undergone rigorous atmospheric correction, the vegetation index formula does not require the use of an NIR / Red ratio-based vegetation index to eliminate multiplicative noise. This solves the problems of vegetation index saturation and lack of linearity with actual vegetation cover.

[0184] Calculation method:

[0185]

[0186] , and These represent the reflectance of the near-infrared band, red band, and blue band, respectively.

[0187] Field survey: Vegetation cover was assessed by setting up quadrats. This study used the results of the field survey to assign scores. The vegetation cover levels and scores are shown in Table 12.

[0188] Table 12 Principles for Assigning Vegetation Cover

[0189]

[0190] (10) Flood discharge smoothness

[0191] This study's assessment of flood discharge capacity does not include dam compliance rates, but only counts the proportion of flood discharge space occupied by other activities within the shoreline management area. The intensity of human activity in the riparian zone mainly refers to the "four irregularities" in the river channel, the location of sewage outlets, farming practices, and the development and utilization of the riparian zone. Investigating the intensity of human activity in the riparian zone can characterize the extent of human disturbance to the riverbank. The investigation will examine the existence of the "four irregularities" in the riparian zone. These include illegal mining, illegal occupation, illegal dumping, and illegal construction. The investigation and calculation method involves assigning scores based on the proportion of shoreline area encroached upon by tall crops, artificial structures, and other obstacles to flood discharge facilities.

[0192] Table 13 Scoring Principles for Flood Discharge Smoothness

[0193]

[0194] (11) Leisure and recreation and landscape suitability

[0195] The survey investigated the extent to which recreational facilities such as waterfront walkways were constructed, the degree to which residents' recreational needs were met, and the degree of harmony with adjacent ecosystem landscapes.

[0196] Survey and calculation methods: The scoring method was used to evaluate the suitability of the riverbank for recreation and landscape.

[0197] Table 14 Scoring Principles for Hydrophilicity and Landscape Suitability

[0198]

[0199] 2.5 Determining Indicator Weights

[0200] The initial approach employed an expert scoring method to directly obtain the ecological shoreline indicators and criteria weights. Different weights were assigned to different indicators based on the varying primary ecological function requirements of different river sections. For mountain rivers, the focus was on maintaining their original form and preserving their water source and habitat conservation functions; for urban rivers, the focus was on providing stable flood control and a suitable recreational environment for residents; for suburban rivers, the focus was on ensuring a healthy near-shore water environment, providing flood control, and maintaining a certain degree of natural conservation. The weights of the ecological shoreline evaluation indicators for mountain, urban, and suburban river sections are shown in Table 15.

[0201] Table 15 Summary of indicator weights for river sections in mountainous, urban, and suburban areas

[0202]

[0203] 3. Overall Evaluation

[0204] Based on the above indicator data and their corresponding weights, the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the shoreline for each surveyed sample point is calculated. (Shoreline Comprehensive Ecological Evaluation Index) It should be calculated using the following formula:

[0205]

[0206] In the formula: Assign a score to the i-th indicator. Let S be the weight of the i-th indicator, and S be the number of indicators.

[0207] Based on the calculated indices, the comprehensive ecological evaluation level of the shoreline is determined, and the ecological shoreline status is divided into four levels: excellent, good, qualified, and poor, corresponding to comprehensive ecological evaluation indices of 90 (inclusive) to 100 points, 75 (inclusive) to 90 points, 60 (inclusive) to 75 points, and <60 points, respectively. Combined with the preliminary sub-category assessment results, shorelines with scores greater than 75 points are classified as ecological shorelines.

[0208] Table 16 Comprehensive Ecological Evaluation Level of Shoreline

[0209]

[0210] The sampling point layout and indicator acquisition methods are as follows: Sampling is based on systematic sampling and stratified sampling. Systematic sampling: The location and spatial distribution of sampling points are determined based on the spatial distribution characteristics of the riverbank classification results. Stratified sampling: The number of sampling points is determined based on the proportion of different types of shoreline in the riverbank segment classification results. This invention determines the distribution of sampling points through a segmented classification layout method, which comprehensively considers regional differentiation. Based on the preliminary shoreline classification, typical sampling points are selected for investigation. The applicability of the evaluation indicator system in the Chaobai River Basin and the rationality of the preliminary classification evaluation method are judged based on the actual field conditions. Sampling points are set up using a combination of segmented classification layout based on the riverbank segment classification results. The indicators required for ecological riverbank evaluation are obtained through field investigation. The selection of sampling points should ensure typicality, representativeness, and comprehensiveness. Typicality: The selected sampling points should reflect the general significance of the shoreline ecological condition. Representativeness: The selected sampling points should comprehensively reflect the overall shoreline ecological condition. Comprehensiveness: The surveyed samples should cover all riverbank ecological conditions and comprehensively reflect the riverbank ecological condition.

[0211] 4. Results of typical sample plot selection

[0212] The total length of the main stream of the Chaobai River is 510 km, of which 296 km is in mountainous areas, 108 km is in urban areas, and 106 km is in suburban areas. Among the subcategories, the undeveloped mountainous sections account for the largest proportion at 39.99%, followed by the agricultural production sections in mountainous areas and the preserved suburban sections, accounting for 11.33% and 9.29% respectively.

[0213] The riparian zone was defined according to the "Guidelines for the Compilation of River and Lake Shoreline Protection and Utilization Plans (Trial Implementation)". A segmented and categorized layout principle was adopted for the field survey. This principle was based on the aforementioned riparian segmentation and classification results, ensuring that different river sections and types had survey plots, maximizing repetition, and avoiding errors caused by using only one plot. A total of 21 typical survey plots were established, including 9 in mountainous areas, 9 in suburban areas, and 3 in urban areas, covering all ecological shoreline subtypes. The distribution and statistical characteristics of the survey plots in different river sections (mountainous, urban, and suburban) and different types (shoreline subtypes) are shown in Table 17.

[0214] Table 17 Statistical characteristics of sample plot distribution in riparian subclasses

[0215]

[0216] 5. Comprehensive Ecological Assessment Results of the Chaobai River Shoreline

[0217] As shown in Table 18, the average comprehensive ecological evaluation score of the 21 sample plots surveyed locally was 74.3 points. The average score for the mountainous section was 77.1 points, the average score for the urban section was 82.3 points, and the average score for the suburban section was only 68.8 points, with sample plots 18 and 20 scoring below 60 points. The scores among the sample plots in the mountainous section showed significant differences, with the highest score being 89.8 points and the lowest being 69.6 points. In the suburban section, except for sample plots 19 and 20, the scores among the other sample plots showed relatively small differences, with the highest score being 80 points and the lowest being 68.2 points. The highest score in the mountainous section was for sample plot 1, because it is located in a deep mountain area with less human activity and a relatively intact natural habitat. The lowest score in the mountainous section was for sample plot 5, mainly due to low vegetation cover and biodiversity, and significant disorderly human development. The urban section generally meets flood control and recreational needs, but the vegetation structure of the riverbanks is generally simple after artificial management. The suburban areas generally scored lower because they are located at the border between urban and rural areas, where population pressure is high and the level of urban development is low.

[0218] Table 18 Comprehensive Evaluation Results and Scores of the Chaobai River Shoreline

[0219]

[0220] The evaluation results above show that the scores provide a clear picture of the different ecological conditions in each section, allowing for targeted analysis and the development of personalized restoration suggestions and plans, thus providing theoretical support for management. For example, the reasons for the low overall ecological shoreline evaluation score can be analyzed by comparing the percentage of points lost for each indicator in different river sections. For mountainous shorelines, plots 2, 5, and 6 share the limiting factors of herbaceous plant diversity and vegetation cover. Plot 2 also has limiting factors such as non-point source pollution, plot 5 has limiting factors such as soil and water conservation rate, and plot 6 has limiting factors such as soil and water conservation rate and flood discharge smoothness. Figure 4-5 For the suburban section, the main limiting factors for plot 13 were biodiversity, hardening rate, and vegetation coverage; for plot 15, the main limiting factors were vegetation coverage and biodiversity; and for plots 18-21, the main limiting factors were common, mainly indicators such as flood discharge smoothness, vegetation coverage, water accessibility, and landscape suitability.

[0221] This invention clarifies the definition of ecological shoreline, constructs an ecological shoreline evaluation index system, determines the scoring standards and weights of shoreline ecological evaluation indicators, proposes shoreline classification and segmentation rules and methods, formulates sampling methods and principles for typical shoreline survey points, and proposes a complete shoreline ecological survey process and evaluation process, providing support for shoreline ecological restoration and river ecological corridor construction.

[0222] Finally, it should be noted that the above is only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention and not to limit it. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications or equivalent substitutions can be made to the technical solutions of the present invention (such as changes in the name or quantity of categories, the order of steps, etc.) without departing from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the present invention.

Claims

1. An ecological shoreline integrated evaluation method, characterized in that, The ecological shoreline includes a natural stable shoreline of rivers, lakes and seas formed by the interaction of river water and land without human interference, and a shoreline that can continuously provide the required ecological function after ecological restoration by artificial construction, including the following steps: S1, determining an evaluation range of the ecological shoreline, wherein the evaluation range is determined by defining a water boundary line and an outer boundary line; S2, dividing the evaluation range of the ecological shoreline into three first-class river section types of mountain section, urban section and rural section, and further subdividing the first-class into sub-classes according to land use types and human development intensity, and preliminarily determining whether it is an ecological shoreline; S3, constructing a comprehensive evaluation index system of the ecological shoreline, wherein the system includes four criterion layers of nearshore water environment, riverbank physical form, vegetation condition and social service function, and each criterion layer is provided with a plurality of quantifiable evaluation indexes in an index layer; S4, configuring different weights for the four criterion layers for the mountain section, the urban section and the rural section respectively; wherein the criterion layer with the highest weight for each river section type is different: for the mountain section, the vegetation condition criterion layer is configured with the highest weight; for the urban section, the social service function criterion layer is configured with the highest weight; for the rural section, the riverbank physical form and the social service function criterion layer are configured with relatively high weights; S5, arranging investigation sample points in the evaluation range of the ecological shoreline, obtaining evaluation index data of each investigation sample point by remote sensing inversion method and field investigation method, including water duration, nearshore water quality nutrition state, non-point source pollution intensity, shoreline stability index, vegetation coverage, soil and water conservation rate, shoreline longitudinal connectivity, shoreline transverse connectivity, based on the index data and corresponding weights, calculating the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of each investigation sample point of the ecological shoreline; S6, determining the ecological grade of the investigation sample point according to the comprehensive ecological evaluation index of the ecological shoreline, and combining the preliminary determination result of S2, comprehensively determining whether it is an ecological shoreline.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The sub-classes include: the sub-classes of the mountain section include undeveloped section, leisure and entertainment section, rural construction section and agricultural production section; the sub-classes of the urban section include living section, recreation and entertainment section and park section; the sub-classes of the rural section include reserved section, agricultural production section, rural construction section and recreation and entertainment section.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein, In step S3, the index layer under the criterion layer of the index system includes at least 11 indexes, including: belonging to the nearshore water environment criterion layer: water duration, nearshore water quality nutrition state, non-point source pollution intensity; belonging to the riverbank physical form criterion layer: shoreline stability index, soil and water conservation rate, shoreline longitudinal connectivity, shoreline transverse connectivity; belonging to the vegetation condition criterion layer: herbaceous Shannon-Wiener index, vegetation coverage; belonging to the social service function criterion layer: flood discharge smoothness, leisure and entertainment and landscape suitability.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The water duration evaluation index data acquisition method includes: using Landsat 8 OLI series remote sensing images to perform water body inversion, and counting the existence of water body within one year; The water condition in 4-10 months, which has a greater impact on vegetation growth, is given a weight of 0.8, and the water condition in 11-3 months is given a weight of 0.2; The score is given according to the guarantee rate interval of the water length.

5. The method according to claim 1, wherein, The nearshore water quality nutrition state evaluation index data acquisition method is to measure water quality basic parameters by combining outdoor and indoor experiments, calculate the eutrophication degree, give scores according to the eutrophication degree, investigate monthly, evaluate in water periods, take the average value of each water period, including: non-point source pollution intensity, shoreline stability index, shoreline longitudinal connectivity, shoreline transverse connectivity, herbaceous Shannon-Wiener, vegetation coverage, flood discharge smoothness, and leisure and landscape suitability.

6. The method according to claim 1, wherein, In step S5, the calculation formula of the ecological shoreline comprehensive ecological evaluation index E is: ； wherein: is assigned to the i-th indicator, is the weight of the i-th indicator, S is the number of indicators.

7. The method according to claim 1, wherein, In step S5, the calculation method of the vegetation coverage is: First, the vegetation coverage is calculated by remote sensing inversion, and the calculation formula is: ； , and represent the reflectance of the near-infrared band, the red light band and the blue light band, respectively; Then, the vegetation coverage is evaluated by setting a sample plot, and the score is given according to the field investigation results.

8. The method according to claim 1, wherein, After step S6, it further includes: S7, based on the difference between the evaluation index data of each survey sample point and the full score, analyzing the main limiting factors leading to the low shoreline comprehensive ecological evaluation index; S8, generating a differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy suggestion according to the main limiting factors and the corresponding river section type; S9, generating a differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy suggestion according to the main limiting factors and the first-level river section type and / or sub-level type to which the survey sample point belongs.

9. An integrated ecological shoreline assessment system for implementing the integrated ecological shoreline assessment method according to any one of claims 1 to 8, characterized in that, The system includes: A range defining module for determining the shoreline evaluation range of the target river or lake; A river section dividing module for dividing the shoreline evaluation range into river section types with different dominant ecological function requirements based on geographical, urban ecology, landscape ecology, and hydrology factors; A weight configuration module for configuring differentiated weights for the criterion layer and subordinate indexes of the ecological shoreline comprehensive evaluation index system for different river section types; A data processing and calculation module for acquiring evaluation index data of survey sample points and calculating a shoreline comprehensive ecological evaluation index based on the data and weights; An evaluation and output module for determining an ecological grade according to the shoreline comprehensive ecological evaluation index and outputting the evaluation results.

10. The ecological shoreline integrated evaluation system according to claim 9, characterized in that, The system further includes: A limiting factor diagnosis module for analyzing the main limiting factors leading to the low shoreline comprehensive ecological evaluation index based on the difference between the evaluation index data and the full score; A restoration strategy generation module for generating a differentiated ecological shoreline restoration strategy suggestion according to the main limiting factors and the corresponding river section type.

Images