## 3 Results  
### Spatial Variation in Ecosystem Indicators and Climate Variables  
The spatial variation trends of ET, GPP, and LAI in Xinjiang from 2001 to 2015 are shown in Figure 4. The trends of ET, GPP, and LAI in different climate zones of Xinjiang are shown in Figure S1 and Table S2. Overall, ET decreased in 73% of the Xinjiang region, and 21% of areas have significant decreasing trends (\(p<0.05\)). GPP increased in 56% of the Xinjiang region, and 19% of areas have significant increasing trends (\(p<0.05\)). LAI increased in 59% of the Xinjiang region, and 20% areas have significant increasing trends (\(p<0.05\)). Three metrics, including ET, GPP, and LAI, all showed increasing trends in the hyper-arid zone, with significant increases in 10%, 35%, and 53% of the regions, respectively. ET showed a decreasing trend in the arid zone, and had significant decreasing trends over 16% of the total area. GPP and LAI showed an increasing trend in the arid zone, and have significant increasing trends over 24% and 27%, respectively, of the total area. ET, GPP, and LAI decreased in the semi-arid zone, and have significant decreasing trends over 34%, 10%, and 8% of the total area, respectively. ET and GPP showed decreasing trends in the dry sub-humid and humid zones, and LAI did not have significant changes in neither dry sub-humid nor humid zones.  
The spatial variation trends of PRE and TEM in Xinjiang from 2001 to 2015 are shown in Figure 5. The trends of PRE and TEM in different climate zones of Xinjiang are shown in Figure S2. Overall, PRE increased in 61.2% of the entire Xinjiang region. TEM increased in 50.2% of the entire Xinjiang region. PRE showed increasing trends in the hyper-arid, arid, and semi-arid zones, with increases in 84.1%, 63.1%, and 60% of the regions, respectively. PRE decreased in the dry sub-humid and humid zones, with decreases in 57.6% and 63.3% of the total area, respectively. TEM showed increasing trends in the hyper-arid and arid zones, with increases in 56.9% and 66.1% of the regions, respectively. TEM decreased in the  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \begin{tabular}{c} **Vegetation** \\ **Trend** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Slope** \\ **(\(Vegetation_{pre}\))** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Slope** \\ **(\(Vegetation_{res}\))** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Relative** \\ **Contribution of** \\ **Climate Change (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Relative** \\ **Contribution of** \\ **Human Activities (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} & **Drivers** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{increase} & \textgreater{}0 & \textgreater{}0 & \textgreater{}0 & \begin{tabular}{c} \(slope_{obs}*100\) \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} \(slope_{obs}*100\) \\ \end{tabular} & CC and HA \\  & \textgreater{}0 & \textless{}0 & 100 & 0 & CC \\  & \textless{}0 & \textgreater{}0 & 0 & 100 & HA \\  & \textless{}0 & \textless{}0 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} \(slope_{obs}*100\) \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} \(slope_{obs}*100\) \\ \end{tabular} & CC and HA \\ decrease & \textless{}0 & \textgreater{}0 & 100 & 0 & CC \\  & \textgreater{}0 & \textless{}0 & 0 & 100 & HA \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: CC indicates that the changes in ecosystem indicators were due to climate change; HA indicates that the changes in ecosystem indicators were due to human activities.  
\end{table}
Table 1: Methods for assessing the contribution of climate change and human activities to the variation in vegetation indicators.  
semi-arid, dry sub-humid, and humid zones, with decreases in 79.3%, 95.7%, and 99.6% of the total area, respectively.