ArticleScientific reports2025
Prediction of spatiotemporal evolution and zoning of ecological sensitivity in the upper reaches of Minjiang river, sichuan, China.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study of the regional ecological sensitivity evolution process can timely understand the regional ecological evolution law and propose ecological protection strategies. In this study, an ecological sensitivity index system is established to quantitatively analyze the interrelationships of ecological factors. The CA-MC model and center of gravity migration are used to investigate the spatial and temporal evolution of ecological sensitivity in the upper Minjiang River basin from 2000 to 2020 and to predict the ecological sensitivity in 2040. Then with the help of Geodetector to clarify the influence intensity of each factor, different types of ecological regions are identified. The results show that (i) the applicability and accuracy of the analytical framework are verified by categorizing the study area into five classes: insensitive, lightly sensitive, moderately sensitive, highly sensitive, and extremely sensitive. (ii) The ecological sensitivity of the study area from 2000 to 2020 is still dominated by moderately sensitive and highly sensitive. In this process, the environmental protection measures become more and more diversified, and the insensitive areas are increasing. (iii) There is a significant difference in the shift of the center of gravity of ecological sensitivity at all levels, with the overall shift of insensitive, lightly sensitive, and highly sensitive areas to the east. The moderately sensitive and extremely sensitive areas have shifted to the southeast as a whole. Among them, the insensitive area shifted the farthest distance from 2010 to 2020, which was 15.16 km. (iv) The CA-MC model deduced that the overall sensitivity level of the Sichuan-Tibet Railway showed a slow decreasing trend from 2000 to 2040. Through the results of ecological sensitivity evaluation and discussion, this study effectively reveals the differences in ecological sensitivity risks faced by the development of typical watershed areas in China and provides a basis for the government to formulate policies suitable for different environmental protection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.