呼和浩特白塔机场春季鸟类的鸟击危险等级评估_英文

航空发表于 2010-10-10 10:27:16

**** Hidden Message *****

航空发表于 2010-10-10 10:28:19

动　物　学　研　究　2007 , Apr . 28 ( 2) : 161 - 166 CN 53 - 1040/ Q　ISSN 0254 - 5853 Zoological Research X Assessing the Hazard Grade of Birdstrike in Spring at Baita Airport , Hohhot LI Xin1 ,2 , YANG Gui2she ng1 , 3 , J IANG Chun2yang2 , ZHANG Shi2f e ng1 , WANG Xiao2do ng1 , FAN Zuo2jie1 , XINGLian2lian1 (1. College of Life Science , Inner Mongolia University , Hohhot 　010021 , China ; 2. Inner Mongolia Civil Airport Group Co. Ltd . , Hohhot 　010070 , China) 　　Abstract : Between March and May 2005 , bird communities in four sample plots at Baita Airport were studied using strips methods in Hohhot , Inner Mongolia . A total of 59 species belonging to 10 orders and 26 families were recorded. Based on the principles of avian community ecology , the community parameters were discussed , including the comparative importance value , distribution coefficient , density and probability of interactive encounter . By analyzing these indices , combined with their flight behaviors at the airport and its neighbourhood , we identified bird species that have the potential to threaten flight security at Baita Airport ; The results showed that the 23 bird species including magpie and red falcon are the most hazard to flight security and the eight bird species including sparrow Hawk and Greenfinch are the hazard. Fur2 thermore , we assessed the bird species’different hazard grades to flight security. 　　Key words : Birdstrike ; Hazard grade ; Hohhot ; Baita airport 呼和浩特白塔机场春季鸟类的鸟击危险等级评估 李　新1 ,2 , 杨贵生1 , 3 , 姜春扬2 , 张世峰1 , 王晓东1 , 范作杰1 , 邢莲莲1 (1. 内蒙古大学生命科学学院, 内蒙古呼和浩特　010021 ; 2. 内蒙古民航机场集团公司, 内蒙古呼和浩特　010070) 　　摘要: 2005 年3 —5 月采用样带法对呼和浩特白塔机场4 个样区的鸟类进行了调查, 共记录到鸟类59 种, 隶属于10 目26 科。通过分析春季鸟类群落中各鸟种的相对重要值、分布系数、密度和种间相遇概率等群落 特征参数, 结合鸟类在机场及周边地区的活动行为等综合因素确定影响飞机飞行安全的危险鸟类。其结果 表明: 构成飞行安全威胁有两类: 喜鹊和红隼等23 种鸟类为最危险的鸟类, 雀鹰和金翅雀等8 种鸟类为较危险 的鸟类。 　　关键词: 鸟击; 危险等级; 呼和浩特; 白塔机场 　　中图分类号: Q958112 　　　　　文献标识码: A 　　　　　　文章编号: 0254 - 5853 (2007) 02 - 0161 - 06 　　Birdstrike has been a problem since nine years af2 ter planes were first manufactured in the early 20th century , causing severe damage to passengers and pos2 sessions. Nowadays , as a potential danger to flight se2 curity , these incidents call for greater global attention to the effects of birdstrike . Over the last hundred years , scientists have changed their focus from increas2 ing plane function to withstand birdstrike to ecological investigations on birds , prompting renewed global effort to reduce birdstrike . Recently , much progress has been achieved in all airports and related institutions around the world (Fang et al , 2002 ; Li et al , 2001 ; Wang et al , 1999 ; Yang et al , 1998) . In order to control the hazard of potential birdstrike at Baita Air2 X Received date : 2006- 12- 26 ; Accepted date : 2007- 02- 05 Foundation item: Supported by Inner Mongolia Civil Airports Group Co . Ltd. 　3 Corresponding author (通讯作者) , Tel : 13848146598 , E2mail : yanggsh @life1imu1edu1cn 收稿日期: 2006- 12- 26 ; 接受日期: 2007- 02- 05 基金项目: 内蒙古民航机场集团公司资助 第一作者简介: 李新(1979- ) , 男, 赤峰人, 硕士生, 研究方向为动物生态学。 port , Hohhot , we started an ecological investigation of birds in a cone area between 2004 and 2005. The study aimed to assess the species , number , ecological distribution and daily activities of birds to generate an integrated method of avoiding birdstrike . Furthermore , identifying the bird species in different seasons will help staff to avoid and control birdstrike on a daily ba2 sis. This paper identifies bird species and their activi2 ties and habitats in spring in order to classify the haz2 ard grade in this season to flight security. 1 　Method 111 　Natural environment Baita Airport is located in the marginal zone be2 tween urban and rural areas within the Saihan district , seven kilometers east of Hohhot municipal Government . The central area of the airport is located at 110°49′24″E latitude , 40°51′06″N longitude and 1 077 m above sea level . The airport has a slight gradient and is higher in the north and lower in the south. The center of the run2 way is 516 km from Wanbu Huayanjing Tower (Baita Tower ) . This area belongs to the middle temperate con2 tinental climate zone , the average daily temperature is 618 ℃ and the daily temperature variation is approxi2 mately 10 ℃. The annual average rainfall is 36119 mm , evaporation is 1 839 mm , wind speed is 118 m/ s , and the maximum depth of frozen earth is 116 m. 112 　Habitat features and settings of sample strips 11211 　Habitat features 　Four sample areas (A , B , C , D) were classified according to the landscape , veg2 etation type and distance to the flight area . The sketch map (Fig. 1) was drawn to indicate the four sample ar2 eas (A , B , C , D) . Section A is the airfield area and is mainly covered with grass. It contains five different identified bird habitats. A construction refuse dump full of grasses is approximately 100 m to the north of the eastern tip of the runway. There is a sewage dis2 posal facility at the northwest tip of the parking area , where a sewage puddle approximately 500 m2 is formed in spring. The floral community in Section A mainly consists of annual grasses , like Pennisetum centrasi2 aticum , Setaria viridis , Artemisia scoparia , Potentilla tanacetifolia , Potentilla tanacetifolia , Medicago sativ . Wood plants , such as Picea wilsonii , Pinus tabulae2 formis , Sabina chinensis and Platycladus orientalis are mainly distributed near the Air Traffic Control head2 quaters and Fire Department areas. Section B is in the north of the office area and veg2 etation is mainly coniferous and broadleaf forest , includ2 ing species such as Larix principis2rupprechtii , Pinus sylvestris var . mongolica , J uniperus rigida , Populus × Canadensis and Prunus davidiana . Scrub species , like Sorbaria sorbifolia and Prunus triloba are distributed a2 mong them , of which the dominant species are Les2 pedeza davurica and Heteropappus altaicus . There is ap2 proximately 015 ha of manufactured lawn , covering 40 % of this area. This section includes three different identi2 fied habitats. Section C lies in a inner level area except Sections A and B. It contains seven bird habitats. This Section overlaps agricultural farmland and villages and is cov2 ered with artificial forest ( such as Populus simonii , Populus alba var . pyramidalis and pine) , a few scrub species (such as Rosa rugosa) and agricultural crops. The dominant plant species are Chloris virgata and Heteropappus altaicus . Section D is the area between inner level and cone area . Except for large patches of village and farmland , water bodies , such as rivers , ponds and ditches , are dominant in this area . The terrestrial vegetation is sim2 ilar with that in Section C , while the plants in the wet2 land are predominantly Phragmites australis , and the plants near the water bank include Echinochloa crus2 galli , Polygonum lapathifolium and Achnatherum splendens. Section D contains 10 different identified bird habitats. Fig. 1 　A sketch map of sample areas at Baita airport 11212 　Settings of sample strips 　The 25 different bird habitats in the four sample sections (5 , 3 , 7 and 10 habitats respectively) were identified and 6 , 3 , 39 and 32 sample strips were established in the sites re2 spectively (total sample strips = 80) . The investigation lasted three months. Investigations strip were repeated three times a month in Sections A and B but only once each in Sections C and D. 162 　　　　　　　动　物　学　研　究　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　28 卷 113 　Investigation method Birds were investigated according to the sample strip method (Zheng , 1995) and the species and num2 ber of all birds seen within 50 m of both sides of a cen2 tral line were recorded using 10 ×50 binoculars. Species was identified by combing the flight behavior and birdcalls. Unidentified birds were photographed using a digital camera and identified using A Field Guide to the Birds of China (Yan , 1999) . 114 　Statistical method Bird density , distribution , probability of interac2 tive encounter and the comparative importance values (Luan et al , 2004) were measured. The potential haz2 ard to flight security was based on this evidence . The density was calculated using D = N/ 2LW , of which , N is the number of birds in the sample strip , L is the length and W is the width of one side of the sam2 ple strip . The distribution coeffient (Hou et al , 2001) was calculated according to ADC = ( n/ N + m/ M) × 100 % , in which , n is the number of sample strips and m is number of habitats where a bird occurs. N is the total number of strips in the investigation and M is the total number of vegetation types investigated. According to variable distribution coefficients , birds are grouped into three distribution types : wide distribution (nearly 100 %) , middle distribution (25 %- 100 %) and narrow distribution (below 25 %) . The probability of interactive encounter (Ding et al , 1989) was calculated according to PIE = Σ( ni / N) ×[ ( N - ni ) / ( N - 1) ] , in which , ni is the number of bird i , and N is the total number of birds. The comparative importance values expresses the relative position and role of a certain species within the community (Li et al , 2000) , which is an impor2 tant index for identifying the hazard grade of birds at the airport . Importance values were calculated accord2 ing to IV = (comparative number + comparative time + comparative dimension + comparative weight ) / 4 , where ; comparative number = ( number of individual birds of a species/ the largest number of individual birds of any species ) ×100 ; comparative time = (number of investigations for a bird species/ total num2 ber of investigations ) ×100 ; comparative dimension = (total number of sample strips which a bird was ob2 served on/ total number of sample strips ) ×100 ; com2 parative weight = (estimated weight of all birds of a single species/ the largest weight of all birds of any species ) ×100. The bird weight was estimated accord2 ing to Zhao ( 1995 , 2001) . The average weight of male and female birds was the final bird weight ; IV ≥ 25 was defined as the most important bird , 15 ≤IV < 25 as highly important birds , 5 ≤IV < 15 as less im2 portant birds , and IV < 5 as the least important birds within the community. 2 　Results and analysis 211 　The composition of bird species in the com2 munity In spring , a total of 59 species and 32 576 individ2 uals , belonging to 10 orders and 26 families were recorded in the sampling area of the airport . Of these species , 20 are residents , accounting for 3319 % of species , 24 are summer migrants , accounting for 4017 %of species , five are winter migrants , accounting for 815 %of species and 10 are visitors , accounting for 1619 % of species. The seasons , statistics , densities , importance values , distribution coefficients and proba2 bilities of interactive encounter are shown in Tab . 1. The distribution coeffients across the habitats (Tab. 1) , showed that in spring there were two widely distributed species , Pica pica and Passer montanus , accounting for 314 % of the total number of species. There were also 15 mid2distribution species , including Falco tinnunculus and Perdix dauuricae , accounting for 2514 % of species , and 42 narrow distribution species , including Accipiter nisus and Falco amuren2 sis , accounting for 7112 % of species. Therefore , the narrowly distributed birds are the main birds at the air2 port . The average density of birds in spring was 1616 / ha . The highest density species are Corvus dauuricus , Corvus corone and Passer montanus with densities of 1113 , 1155 and 1128/ ha respectively. The overall probability of interactive encounter was 01516 and the highest probability of interactive encounter was 01217 for jackdaws. 212 　The identif ication of the hazard grade of birds According to Tab. 1 , 15 species , including Falco tinnunculus and Perdix dauuricae , were classified as the most important species , 12 are highly important species , including Accipiter nisus and Falco amuren2 sis , 20 are less important , including Coturnix japonica and Charadrius veredus and 12 are the least important bird species , including Charadrius dubius and Apus a2 pus . According to the importance values combined with the distribution , density , probability of interactive en2 counter , group behavior , whether they fly around the 2 期　　　　　　　　　　　　李　新等: 呼和浩特白塔机场春季鸟类的鸟击危险等级评估(英文) 163 Tab. 1 　The composition and hazard grade of the avian community of Baita Airport in spring Species Distribution Quantity Number of individuals Density Transect Quantity Number of Habitats Observed in Importance Values Distribution Coefficient ( %) Probability of Interactive Encounter 11Accipiter nisus 333 P 1 1 010005 1 1 181659 5125 0100003 21 Falco tinnunculus 3333 R 12 12 010061 10 9 381446 48150 0100037 31 Falco amurensis 3333 S 3 2 010015 2 2 161359 10150 0100009 41 Falco subbuteo 3333 S 4 2 010020 2 1 181345 6150 0100012 51 Perdix dauuricae 3333 R 54 13 010276 8 6 411972 34100 0100165 61 Coturnix japonica 333 R 1 1 010005 1 1 81625 5125 0100003 71 Phasianus colchicus 3333 R 20 7 010102 7 6 1121412 32175 0100061 81Vanellus cinereus 3333 S 7 5 010036 3 3 291255 15175 0100021 91 Charadrius dubius 33 S 2 1 010010 1 1 41837 5125 0100006 101 Charadrius veredus 3333 P 18 1 010092 1 1 81659 5125 0100055 111 Tringa ochropus 3333 P 1 1 010005 1 1 81816 5125 0100003 121Actitis hypoleucos 3333 S 4 2 010020 2 1 71820 6150 0100012 131Sterna hirundo 33 S 12 2 010061 2 1 121607 6150 0100037 141 Columba sp . 3333 R 388 45 011980 28 12 821204 83100 0101177 151Streptopelia orientalis 33 R 7 3 010036 3 2 251977 11175 0100021 161Streptopelia decaocto 3333 R 188 46 010959 30 13 761985 89150 0100574 171Streptopelia chinensis 33 R 9 5 010046 3 4 201083 19175 0100028 181Athene noctua 3333 R 1 1 010005 1 1 131801 5125 0100003 191Apus apus 333 S 7 1 010036 1 1 41796 5125 0100021 201Alcedo atthis 3 S 1 1 010005 1 1 41215 5125 0100003 211Upupa epops 3333 S 47 25 010240 19 9 421661 59175 0100144 221Jynx torquilla 3 S 1 1 010005 1 1 41811 5125 0100003 231 Picoides major 33 R 35 22 010179 19 9 411023 59175 0100107 241 Picus canus 33 R 4 3 010020 3 2 161675 11175 0100012 251 Calandrella cinerea 333 S 17 4 010087 3 2 71976 11175 0100052 261 Galerida cristata 33 R 1 1 010005 1 1 51216 5125 0100003 271Alauda arvensis 3333 S 50 8 010255 3 3 101890 15175 0100153 281 Hirundo rustica 3333 S 75 10 010383 9 5 181203 31125 0100230 291Motacilla alba 333 S 32 14 010163 12 11 241226 59100 0100098 301Motacilla citreola 33 S 4 1 010020 1 1 31568 5125 0100012 311Motacilla cinerea 3 S 4 2 010020 2 2 51051 10150 0100012 321Anthus richardi 3333 S 24 3 010122 3 3 71562 15175 0100074 331Anthus godlewskii 3333 S 111 6 010566 6 5 121808 27150 0100340 341Anthus hodgsoni 33 S 192 10 010980 10 5 201299 32150 0100586 351Anthus spinoletta 33 P 13 1 010066 1 1 31694 5125 0100040 361Lanius sphenocercus 3333 R 5 3 010026 2 2 181135 10150 0100015 371Sturnia cineraceus 333 S 92 24 010469 19 9 431631 59175 0100282 381 Pica pica 3333 R 1065 111 015434 63 21 1591270 162175 0103162 391 Corvus dauuricus 3333 R 22192 17 1113224 15 11 1461618 62175 0121716 401 Corvus corone 3333 R 3029 7 115454 7 5 661874 28175 0108434 411 Corvus macrorhynchos 3333 R 2002 2 110214 2 1 571131 6150 0105768 421 Prunella montanella 33 W 4 2 010020 1 1 31780 5125 0100012 431Luscinia svecicus 3 P 1 1 010005 1 1 31192 5125 0100003 441 Phoenicurus auroreus 33 S 6 6 010031 6 5 121058 27150 0100018 451Saxicola torquata 33 S 22 2 010112 2 2 51111 10150 0100067 461Oenanthe pleschanka 33 S 15 5 010077 3 2 71839 11175 0100046 471 Turdus ruficollis 3 W 4 2 010020 2 2 111059 10150 0100012 481 Turdus eunomus 33 W 13 5 010066 5 4 151038 22125 0100040 491 Ficedula parva 33 P 27 7 010138 6 3 121182 19150 0100083 501 Phylloscopus f uscatus 3 S 2 1 010010 1 1 21536 5125 0100006 511 Parus major 33 R 10 3 010051 2 2 51296 10150 0100031 164 　　　　　　　动　物　学　研　究　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　28 卷 　(Tab. 1 　continued) Species Distribution Quantity Number of individuals Density Transect Quantity Number of Habitats Observed in Importance Values Distribution Coefficient ( %) Probability of Interactive Encounter 521 Passer montanus 3333 R 2500 82 112755 45 17 1111071 124125 0107086 531 Fringilla coelebs 33 P 1 1 010005 1 1 31597 5125 0100003 541 Fringilla montifringilla 33 W 5 3 010026 2 2 61034 10150 0100015 551 Carpodacus erythrinus 33 P 24 2 010122 2 2 51631 10150 0100074 561 Carduelis sinica 333 R 92 15 010469 8 8 191623 42100 0100282 571 Emberiza yessoensis 33 P 2 1 010010 1 1 31186 5125 0100006 581 Emberiza pusilla 333 W 112 9 010571 9 5 171550 31125 0100343 591 Emberiza spodocephala 33 P 1 1 010005 1 1 31403 5125 0100003 Total (59 species) 32576 1616204 0151628 3 are the least hazardous species ; 33 are the less hazardous species ; 333 are the highly hazardous species ; 3333 are the most hazardous species R : species of residents ; S : species of summer breeders ; W: species of winter species ; P : species of transient migrants. runway , their flying height , the distance of their activi2 ties to the flight area and so on , the 59 species were classified as the most hazardous , hazardous , less haz2 ardous and least hazardous according to its rank. 3 　Discussion 311 　The distribution of bird species influencing flight security Fourteen species from each of the resident group and the summer migrant group respectively fall into the two highest hazard groups (most hazardous and haz2 ardous birds) , accounting for 9013 %of bird species in these groups. Three species from each of the winter mi2 grants and the visitors account for the remaining 917 %. Therefore , the species which are the highest potential hazards to flight security , are mainly residents and summer migrants. 312 　Evaluation of the potential hazard to flight security at different hazard grades The most hazardous birds , with importance values over 25 , include : raptors which fly fast and have a wide activity scope ; crows and small finchs which fly in large flocks ; cooers and pigeons which fly across the runway ; quails and chickens which live on both sides of the runway ; and small snipes which inhabit the wa2 ter areas. These birds often inhabit Section A and often transverse or fly above the runway , close to the flight route. The biological features of raptors influence their hazard grade ; as they fly at high elevation , are active in a wide area and feed mainly on mice and small birds , the hot air current above the runway can support their flight and save them energy. In addition quarries on both sides of these fields provide ideal foraging habitat and therefore , the flight area becomes a preferred pre2 sent site. Meanwhile , crows , quails and small finchs fly in large flocks across the runway in spring. At times there can be more than 10 000 crows at the site , which are more dangerous than raptors as planes can not avoid them easily. The power of the impact of a group of crows is greater than that of a single raptor . Quails are common birds in the flight area . They forage on the ground close to the runway during dawn and dusk , and display scattered flight when scared. Therefore they may be drawn into the engine of the plane by the cur2 rents generated by the engine . Small snipes are always in the water areas around the flight area . They usually land in flocks when they spot water . The water from the sewage factory has formed a shining water surface to the north of the runway , which attracts birds which have flown for long distances and need to rest to renew their energy. They can easily encounter landing or air2 borne planes while descending or flying around the run2 way when disturbed. The eight hazardous2grade raptor species are dis2 tributed far away from the inner level area and seldom fly into the flight area . Their flight routes overlap with the ascending and descending route of the planes , which poses a potential threat to the airplane . Com2 pared these species with the most hazardous species that often fly within the airfield area , they are less dan2 gerous , and are thus defined as hazardous birds. There are 28 bird species that are less or least hazardous . Their activities are focused in the cone area and within the inner level area , far away from the flight route. They pose little hazard to aircraft and have not been discussed here . 2 期　　　　　　　　　　　　李　新等: 呼和浩特白塔机场春季鸟类的鸟击危险等级评估(英文) 165 References : Ding P , Zhu GY, Jiang SR. 1989. Study on avian community ecology in Gutianshan Nature Reserve of Zhejiang . Acta Ecologica Sinica , 99 (2) : 121- 127. (in Chinese) Fang YP , Liu SX , Lei Y, Cheng DD. 2002. A survey of vegetation around Wuhan Tianhe Airport . Journal of Huanggang Normal University , 22 (6) : 53- 57. (in Chinese) Hou JH , Wu ML , Hu YF , Zhang XZ , Hu ZT. 2001. Study in the bird community structure in the forest2steppe transition zone . Acta Zoologica Sinica , 47 (Special) : 148- 156. (in Chinese) Li B , Yang C , Lin P. 2000. Ecology . Beijing : Higher Education Press. (in Chinese) Li J H , He WS , Lu JJ . 2001. Design and buildup of avian situation in2 formation system for Shanghai Pudong International Airport . East China Normal University ( Natural Science) , (3) : 61- 67. (in Chi2 nese) Lu XF , Hu ZJ , Xu HF. 2004. Features of avian community and their re2 lationships with habitats in Shanghai agriculture area [ J ] . Zool Res , 25 (1) : 20- 26. (in Chinese) Milsom TP. 1990. The use of birdstrike statistics to monitor the hazard and evaluate risk on UK civil acrodromes . Helsinki : Birdstrike Committee Europe , 20 : 303- 320. Thorpe J . 1996. Fatalities and destroyed civil aircraft due to birdstrike 1912- 1955 . London : Birdstrike Committee Europe , 23 : 17 - 31. Wang XL , Yang QR , Dai ZX , Cui H , Wu FQ , He DF. 1999. Study in the ecology of bird in the Tianhe Airport . East China Normal University ( Natural Science) , 33 (4) : 579- 583. (in Chinese) Yan CW. 1999. A Field Guide to the Birds of China . China Tai2 wan : Kingfisher Culture Enterprise Limited Company. Yang XD , Wei TH , Sheng CY, Tao T , Gan ZP. 1998. Study on rela2 tionship between soil fauna and bird in Chongqing Airport Grassland . Zool Res , 19 (3) : 209- 217. (in Chinese) Yin XH , Hou WL , Li Z. 2004. Biogeography . Beijing : Higher Ed2 ucation Press. (in Chinese) Zhao ZJ . 1995. China Bird Handbook (Volume Ⅰ) . Changchun : Jinlin Science and Technology Press. (in Chinese) Zhao ZJ . 2001. China Bird Handbook (Volume Ⅱ) . Changchun : Jinlin Science and Technology Press. (in Chinese) Zheng GM. 1995. Onithology . Beijing : Beijing Normal University Press. (in Chinese) 　(上接第148 页) 赵亚军　中国农业大学农业部设施农业生物环境工 程重点开放实验室 赵元　　重庆师范大学生命科学学院 郑光美　北京师范大学生命科学学院 钟　扬　复旦大学生命科学学院 周材权　西华师范大学珍稀动植物研究所 周　放　广西大学动物科技学院 周　莉　中国科学院水生生物研究所 周立志　安徽大学生命科学学院 周荣家　武汉大学生命科学学院 周　伟　西南林学院保护生物学学院 中国科学院昆明动物研究所的陈小勇、陈自明、胡新天、季维智、蒋学龙、金　扬、孔庆鹏、 赖　仞、李文辉、李　英、马原野、毛炳宇、庞峻峰、饶定齐、王建红、王瑞武、王　文、王应祥、 文建凡、向余劲攻、肖　文、杨　岚、杨晓君、张华堂、张　明、赵其昆、郑永唐。 衷心感谢上述提及到的、没有提及到的为本刊做出贡献的所有审稿人! 《动物学研究》编委会、编辑部　　 166 　　　　　　　动　物　学　研　究　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　28 卷

页: [1]

航空论坛_航空翻译_民航英语翻译_飞行翻译's Archiver

呼和浩特白塔机场春季鸟类的鸟击危险等级评估_英文