Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How to integrate remotely sensed data and biodiversity for ecosystem assessments at landscape scale

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning underpins the delivery of all ecosystem services and should be accounted for in all decision-making related to the use of natural resources and areas. However, biodiversity and ecosystem services are often inadequately accounted for in land use management decisions.

Objective

We studied a boreal forest ecosystem by linking citizen-science bird data with detailed information on forest characteristics from airborne laser scanning (ALS). In this paper, we describe this method, and evaluate how similar kinds of biological data sets combined with remote sensing can be used for ecosystem assessments at landscape scale.

Methods

We analysed data for 41 boreal forest bird species and for 14 structural ALS-based forest parameters.

Results

The results support the use of the selected method as a basis for quantifying spatially-explicit biodiversity indicators for ecosystem assessments, while suggestions for improvements are also reported. Finally, we evaluate the capacity of those indicators to describe biodiversity-ecosystem service relationships, for example with carbon trade-offs. The results showed clear distinctions between the different species as measured, for example, by above-ground forest biomass at the observation sites. We also assess how the available data sources can be developed to be compatible with the concept of essential biodiversity variables (EBV), which has been put forward as a solution to cover the most important aspects of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning.

Conclusions

We suggest that EBVs should be integrated into environmental monitoring programmes in the future, and citizen science and remote sensing methods need to be an important part of them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arzel C, Rönkä M, Tolvanen H, Aarras N, Kamppinen M, Vihervaara P (2015) Species diversity, abundance and brood numbers of breeding waterbirds in relation to habitat properties in an agricultural watershed. Ann Zool Fennici 52:00–00

  • Asner GP, Mascaro J, Muller-Landau HC, Vieilledent G, Vaudry R, Rasamoelina M, Hall JS, van Breugel M (2012) A universal airborne LiDAR approach for tropical forest carbon mapping. Oecologia 168(4):1147–1160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Auvinen AP, Kemppainen E, von Weissenberg M (ed.) (2010) Fourth national report on the implementation of the convention of biological diversity in Finland. The finnish environment 2|2010. Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki. p 192

  • Axelsson P (2000) DEM generation from laser scanning data using adaptive TIN models. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens 33:110–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbet-Massin M, Thuiller W, Jiguet F (2012) The fate of European breeding birds under climate, land-use and dispersal scenarios. Glob Chang Biol 18:881–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury RB, Hill RA, Mason DC, Hinsley SA, Wilson JD, Balzter H, Anderson GQA, Whittingham MJ, Davenport IJ, Bellamy PE (2005) Modelling relationships between birds and vegetation structure using airborne LiDAR data: a review with case studies from agricultural and woodland environments. Ibis 147:443–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brommer JE, Lehikoinen A, Valkama J (2012) The breeding ranges of central European and Arctic bird species move poleward. PLoS One 7(9):e43648

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carignan V, Villard MA (2002) Selecting indicator species to monitor ecological integrity: a review. Environ Monit Assess 78(1):45–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • City of Helsinki (2014) Helsinki Environmental Statistics. http://www.helsinginymparistotilasto.fi Accessed Apr 2014

  • Clawges R, Vierling K, Vierling L, Rowell E (2008) The use of airborne lidar to assess avian species diversity, density, and occurrence in a pine/aspen forest. Remote Sens Environ 112:2064–2073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coops NC, Duffe J, Koot C (2010) Assessing the utility of lidar remote sensing technology to identify mule deer winter habitat. Can J Remote Sens 36:81–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coops NC, Schaepman ME, Mücher CA (2013) What multiscale environmental drivers can best be discriminated from a habitat index derived from a remotely sensed vegetation time series? Landscape Ecol 28:1529–1543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damgaard C, Weiner J (2000) Describing inequality in plant size or fecundity. Ecology 81(4):1139–1142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dauber J, Hirsch M, Simmering D, Waldhardt R, Otte A, Wolters V (2003) Landscape structure as an indicator of biodiversity: matrix effects on species richness. Agric Ecosyst Environ 98:321–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLuca WV, Studds CE, Rockwood LL, Marra P (2004) Influence of land use on the integrity of marsh bird communities of Chesapeake Bay USA. Wetlands 24(4):837–847

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Environment Agency (2010) Assessing biodiversity in Europe—the 2010 report. EEA Report No 5/2010. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Flaherty S (2012) Red squirrel habitat mapping using remote sensing. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh. Available at http://hdl.handle.net/1842/7607

  • Fowler RJ, Little JJ (1979) Automatic extraction of irregular network digital terrain models. Comput Graph 13:199–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasser GJ (1962) Variance formulas for the mean difference and coefficient of concentration. J Am Stat Assoc 57(299):648–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottschalk TK, Huettmann F, Ehlers M (2005) Thirty years of analysing and modelling avian habitat relationships using satellite imagery data: a review. Int J Remote Sens 26(12):2631–2656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gove HJ (2004) Structural stocking guides: a new look at old friend. Can J For Res 34:1044–1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graf RF, Mathys L, Bollmann K (2009) Habitat assessment for forest dwelling species using LiDAR remote sensing: capercaillie in the Alps. Forest Ecol Manag 257:160–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green AJ, Elmberg J (2014) Ecosystem services provided by waterbirds. Biol Rev 89:105–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heikkinen RK (1991) Multivariate analysis of esker vegetation in southern Häme, S Finland. Ann Bot Fenn 28:201–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Heino J (2010) Are indicator groups and cross-taxon congruence useful for predicting biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems? Ecol Indic 10:112–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill RA, Hinsley SA, Gaveau DLA, Bellamy PE (2004) Cover: predicting habitat quality for Great Tits (Parus major) with airborne laser scanning data. Int J Remote Sens 25(22):4851–4855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill RA, Thomson AG (2005) Mapping woodland species composition and structure using airborne spectral and LiDAR data. Int J Remote Sens 26(17):3763–3779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinsley SA, Hill RA, Bellamy PE, Harrison NM, Speakman JR, Wilson AK, Ferns PA (2008) Effects of structural and functional habitat gaps on breeding woodland birds: working harder for less. Landscape Ecol 23:615–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg M, Akujärvi A, Anttila S, Arvola L, Bergström I, Böttcher K, Feng X, Forsius M, Huttunen I, Huttunen M, Laine Y, Lehtonen H, Liski J, Lu N, Lü Y, Mononen L, Rankinen K, Repo A, Seppänen V, Vanhala P, Vihervaara P (2015) Virtual research environment for ecosystem services—ESLab pilot application to a boreal watershed in southern Finland. Landscape Ecol. doi:10.1007/s10980-014-0122-z

  • Järvinen T (2010) Metsän laadun vaikutus boreaalisten lintulajien levinneisyyteen paikallisella ja maisematasolla. University of Oulu, Pro gradu, Oulu (In Finnish)

  • Jeanneret P, Schüpbach B, Luka H (2003) Quantifying the impact of landscape and habitat features on biodiversity in cultivated landscapes. Agric Ecosyst Environ 98:311–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones TG, Arcese P, Sharma T, Coops N (2013) Describing avifaunal richness with functional and structural bioindicators derived from advanced airborne remotely sensed data. Int J Remote Sens 34:2689–2713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung K, Kaiser S, Boehm S, Nieschhulze J, Kalko EKV (2012) Moving in three dimensions: effects of structural complexity on occurrence and activity of insectivorous bats in managed forest stands. J Appl Ecol 49:523–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koskimies P (1989) Birds as a tool in environmental monitoring. Ann Zool Fenn 26:153–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Laasasenaho J (1982) Taper curve and volume functions for pine, spruce and birch. Comm Inst For Fenn 108:1–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Lone K, Loe LE, Gobakken T, Linnel JDC, Odden J, Remmen J, Mysterud A (2014) Living and dying in a multi-predator landscape of fear: roe deer are squeezed by contrasting pattern of predation risk imposed by lynx and humans. Oikos. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00938.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Luoto M, Virkkala R, Heikkinen RK, Rainio K (2004) Predictive modeling of bird species richness using remote sensing and topography data in boreal agricultural-forest mosaic. Ecol Appl 14:1946–1962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mace GM, Norris K, Fitter AH (2012) Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends Ecol Evol 27(1):19–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maes J, Braat L, Jax K, Hutchins M, Furman E, Termansen M, Bidoglio G (2011) A spatial assessment of ecosystem services in Europe: methods, case studies and policy analysis—Phase 1 (PEER Report 3). Retrieved from http://www.peer.eu

  • Maes J, Egoh B, Willemen L, Liquete C, Vihervaara P, Schägner JP, Grizzetti B, Drakou EG, Notte AL, Zulian G, Bouraoui F, Paracchini M, Braat L, Bidoglio G (2012a) Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst Serv 1:31–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maes J, Paracchini ML, Zulian G, Dunbar MB, Alkemade R (2012b) Synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem service supply, biodiversity, and habitat conservation status in Europe. Biol Conserv 155:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran A (2004) Measuring biological diversity. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermid GJ, Hall RJ, Sanchez-Azofeifa GA, Franklin SE, Stenhouse GB, Kobliuk T, LeDrew EF (2009) Remote sensing and forest inventory for wildlife habitat assessment. Forest Ecol Manag 257:2262–2269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melin M, Packalén P, Matala J, Mehtätalo L, Pusenius J (2013) Assessing and modeling moose (Alces alces) habitats with airborne laser scanning data. Int J Appl Earth Obs 23:389–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morelli F, Jerzak L, Tryjanowski P (2014) Birds as useful indicators of high nature value (HNV) farmland in Central Italy. Ecol Indic 38:236–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller J, Brandl R (2009) Assessing biodiversity by remote sensing in mountainous terrain: the potential of LiDAR to predict forest beetle assemblages. J Appl Ecol 46:897–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Næsset E (2002) Predicting forest stand characteristics with airborne scanning laser using a practical two-stage procedure and field data. Remote Sens Environ 80:88–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Næsset E, Gobakken T, Holmgren J, Hyyppä H, Hyyppä J, Maltamo M (2004) Laser scanning of forest resources: the Nordic experience. Scand J Forest Res 19:482–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Näslund M (1937) Skogsförsöksanstaltens gallringsförsök i tallskog. Meddelanden från Statens Skogsförsöksanstalt 29:1–169 (In Swedish)

  • Newton AC, Hill RA, Echeverría C, Golicher D, Benayas JMR, Cayuela L, Hinsley SA (2009) Remote sensing and the future of landscape ecology. Prog Phys Geogr 33(4):528–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Normander B, Levin G, Auvinen AP, Bratli H, Stabbetorp O, Hedblom M, Glimskär A, Gudmundsson GA (2012) Indicator framework for measuring quantity and quality of biodiversity—exemplified in the Nordic countries. Ecol Indic 13:104–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell TJ, Jackson LE, Brooks RP (2000) Bird guilds as indicators of ecological condition in the central Appalachians. Ecol Appl 10:1706–1721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell TJ, Bishop JA, Brooks RP (2007) Sub-sampling data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey for application to the Bird Community Index, an indicator of ecological condition. Ecol Indic 7(3):679–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packalen P, Suvanto A, Maltamo M (2009) A two stage method to estimate species specific growing stock. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 75:1451–1460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pakkala T, Lindén A, Tiainen J, Tomppo E, Kouki J (2014) Indicators of forest biodiversity: which bird species predict high breeding bird assemblage diversity in boreal forests at multiple spatial scales? Ann Zool Fenn 51:457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palminteri S, Powell GVN, Asner GP, Peres CA (2012) LiDAR measurements of canopy structure predict spatial distribution of a tropical mature forest primate. Remote Sens Environ 127:98–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira HM, Belnap J, Brummit N, Collen B, Ding H, Gonzales-Espinosa M, Gregory RD, Honrado J, Jongman RHG, Julliard R, McRae J, Proenca V, Rodrigues P, Opige M, Rodriguez JP, Schmeller DS, van Swaay C, Vieira C (2010) Global biodiversity monitoring. Front Ecol Environ 9:458–460

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira HM, Ferrier S, Walters M, Geller GN, Jongman RHG, Scholes RJ, Bruford MW, Brummitt N, Butchart SHM, Cardoso AC, Coops NC, Dulloo E, Faith DP, Freyhof J, Gregory RD, Heip C, Höft R, Hurtt G, Jetz W, Karp DS, McGeoch MA, Obura D, Onoda Y, Pettorelli N, Reyers B, Sayre R, Scharlemann JPW, Stuart SN, Turak E, Walpole M, Wegmann M (2013) Essential biodiversity variables. Science 339:277–278

  • Pesonen A, Maltamo M, Eerikäinen K, Packalén P (2008) Airborne laser scanning-based prediction of coarse woody debris volumes in a conservation area. Forest Ecol Manag 255:3288–3296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pippuri I, Kallio E, Maltamo M, Peltola H, Packalén P (2012) Exploring horizontal area-based metrics to discriminate the spatial pattern of trees and need for first thinning using airborne laser scanning. Forestry 85:305–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pippuri I, Maltamo M, Packalen P, Mäkitalo J (2013) Predicting species-specific basal areas in urban forests using airborne laser scanning and existing stand register data. Eur J Forest Res 132:999–1012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranta P, Siitonen M (1996) Plant life in Vantaa. Gummerus, Jyväskylä

    Google Scholar 

  • Repola J, Ojansuu R, Kukkola M (2007) Biomass functions for Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch in Finland. Metlan työraportteja/Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 53

  • Roberge JM, Angelstam P, Villard MA (2008) Specialised woodpeckers and naturalness in hemiboreal forests—deriving quantitative targets for conservation planning. Biol Conserv 141:997–1012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadoti G, Zuckerberg B, Jarzyna MA, Porter WF (2013) Applying occupancy estimation and modelling to the analysis of atlas data. Divers Distrib 19(7):804–814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global biodiversity outlook 3. Montréal, 94 p. Available at http://www.cdb.int/gbo3/

  • Similä M, Kouki J, Mönkkönen M, Sippola AL, Huhta E (2006) Co-variation and indicators of species diversity: can richness of forest-dwelling species be predicted in northern boreal forests? Ecol Indic 6:686–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan BL, Aycrigg JL, Barry JH, Bonney RE, Bruns N, Cooper CB, Damoulas T, Dhondt AA, Dietterich T, Farnsworth A, Fink D, Fitzpatrick JW, Fredericks T, Gerbracht J, Gomes C, Hochachka WM, Iliff MJ, Lagoze C, La Sorte FA, Merrifield M, Morris W, Phillips TB, Reynolds M, Rodewald AD, Rosenberg KV, Trautmann NM, Wiggins A, Winkler DW, Wong W-K, Wood CL (2014) The eBird enterprise: an integrated approach to development and application of citizen science. Biol Conserv 169:31–40

  • Tattoni C, Rizzolli F, Pedrini P (2012) Can LiDAR data improve bird habitat suitability models? Ecol Model 245:103–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas CD, Anderson BJ, Moilanen A, Eigenbrod F, Heinemeyer A, Quaife T, Roy DB, Gillings S, Armsworth PR, Gaston KJ (2013) Reconciling biodiversity and carbon conservation. Ecol Lett 16:39–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tulloch AIT, Possingham HP, Joseph LN, Szabo J, Martin TG (2013) Realising the full potential of citizen science monitoring programs. Biol Conserv 165:128–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tynjälä M (ed) (2004) Oulun pesimälinnusto. Oulun kaupunkilintuatlaksen 1997–1999 tulokset [Breeding birds of Oulu. The results of the city bird atlas 1997–1999]. Oulun kaupungin ympäristöviraston julkaisu 2/2004. Oulun kaupunki, Pohjois-Pohjanmaan lintutieteellinen yhdistys & Pohjois-Pohjanmaan ympäristökeskus

  • Väisänen RA, Lammi E, Koskimies P (1998) Distribution, numbers and population changes of Finnish breeding birds (In Finnish with an English summary). Otava, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Valbuena R, Packalen P, Mehtätalo L, Garcia-Abril A, Maltamo M (2013a) Characterizing forest structural types and shelterwood dynamics from Lorenz-based indicators predicted by ALS. Can J Forest Res 43:1063–1074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valbuena R, Maltamo M, Martin-Fernandez S, Packalen P, Pascual C, Nabuurs GJ (2013b) Patterns of covariance between Airborne Laser Scanning metrics and Lorenz curve descriptors of tree size inequality. Can J Remote Sens 39(1):18–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valbuena R, Vauhkonen J, Packalen P, Pitkänen J, Maltamo M (2014) Comparison of airborne laser scanning methods for estimating forest structure indicators based on Lorenz curves. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 95:23–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valkama J, Vepsäläinen V, Lehikoinen A (2011) The third finnish breeding bird atlas. Finnish Museum of Natural History and Ministry of Environment, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Vehmas M, Peuhkurinen J, Eerikäinen K, Packalén P, Maltamo M (2009) Identification of boreal forest stands with high herbaceous plant diversity using airborne laser scanning. Forest Ecol Manag 257:46–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vierling KT, Bässler C, Brandl R, Vierling LA, Weiss I, Müller J (2011) Spinning a laser web: predicting spider distributions using LiDAR. Ecol Appl 21:577–588

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vihervaara P, Kumpula T, Tanskanen A, Burkhard B (2010) Ecosystem services–A tool for sustainable management of human–environment systems. Case study finnish forest Lapland. Ecol Complex 7(3):410–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vihervaara P, Kumpula T, Ruokolainen A, Tanskanen A, Burkhard B (2012) The use of detailed biotope data for linking biodiversity with ecosystem services in Finland. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosys Serv Manag 8:169–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virkkala R, Lehikoinen A (2014) Patterns of climate-induced density shifts of species: poleward shifts faster in northern boreal birds than in southern birds. Glob Chang Biol 20:2995–3003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Virkkala R, Rajasärkkä A (2006) Spatial variation of bird species in landscapes dominated by old-growth forests in northern boreal Finland. Biodivers Conserv 15:2143–2162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virkkala R, Rajasärkkä A, Väisänen RA, Vickholm M, Virolainen E (1994) The significance of protected areas for the land birds of southern Finland. Conserv Biol 8:532–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virkkala R, Heikkinen RK, Fronzek S, Kujala H, Leikola N (2013) Does the protected area network preserve bird species of conservation concern in a rapidly changing climate? Biodivers Conserv 22:459–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virkkala R, Heikkinen RK, Lehikoinen A, Valkama J (2014) Matching trends between recent distributional changes of northern-boreal birds and species-climate model predictions. Biol Conserv 172:124–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter S, McRoberts RE, Bertini R, Bastrup-Birk A, Sanchez C, Chirici G (2011) Essential features of forest biodiversity for assessment purposes. In: Chirici G, Winter S, McRoberts RE (eds) National forest inventories: contributions to forest biodiversity assessments, managing forest ecosystems 20. Springer Science+Business Media B.V, Dordrecht, pp 25–39

  • Zellweger F, Braunisch V, Baltensweiler A, Bollmann K (2013) Remotely sensed forest structural complexity predicts multi-species occurrence at the landscape scale. Forest Ecol Manag 307:303–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger F, Morsdorf F, Purves RS, Braunisch V, Bollmann K (2014) Improved methods for measuring forest landscape structure: LiDAR complements field-based habitat assessment. Biodivers Conserv 23(2):289–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the following projects, funders, and individuals, who supported this paper: the CLIMES project (Academy of Finland), the Maj and Tor Nessling foundation, the Finnish Cultural Foundation’s North Karelia Regional Fund, local BirdLife partners Tavastia Proper Ornithological Society/J. Kairamo and Pirkanmaa Ornithological Society/J. Helin, O. Lehtonen T. Tahvanainen, and the two anonymous reviewers of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Joensuu, Oulu, and Helsinki Offices, P.O. Box 140, 00251, Helsinki, Finland

    Petteri Vihervaara, Laura Mononen, Ari-Pekka Auvinen & Raimo Virkkala

  2. Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, University of Eastern Finland (UEF), P.O. Box 111, 80101, Joensuu, Finland

    Laura Mononen

  3. State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-environmental Sciences (RCEES), Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O. Box 2871, Beijing, 100085, China

    Yihe Lü

  4. School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland (UEF), P.O. Box 111, 80101, Joensuu, Finland

    Inka Pippuri, Petteri Packalen & Ruben Valbuena

  5. Finnish Museum of Natural History (FMNH), Zoological Museum, Monitoring Centre, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 17, 00014, Helsinki, Finland

    Jari Valkama

Authors
  1. Petteri Vihervaara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Mononen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ari-Pekka Auvinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Raimo Virkkala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yihe Lü
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Inka Pippuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Petteri Packalen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ruben Valbuena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Jari Valkama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Petteri Vihervaara.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 17 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 242 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vihervaara, P., Mononen, L., Auvinen, AP. et al. How to integrate remotely sensed data and biodiversity for ecosystem assessments at landscape scale. Landscape Ecol 30, 501–516 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0137-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0137-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation