Environmental Management

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 62–73 | Cite as

Decision Tree Algorithm for Detection of Spatial Processes in Landscape Transformation

  • Jan Bogaert
  • Reinhart Ceulemans
  • David Salvador-Van Eysenrode
Research
First Online:

Abstract

The conversion of landscapes by human activities results in widespread changes in landscape spatial structure. Regardless of the type of land conversion, there appears to be a limited number of common spatial configurations that result from such land transformation processes. Some of these configurations are considered optimal or more desirable than others. Based on pattern geometry, we define ten processes responsible for pattern change: aggregation, attrition, creation, deformation, dissection, enlargement, fragmentation, perforation, shift, and shrinkage. A novelty in this contribution is the inclusion of transformation processes causing expansion of the land cover of interest. Consequently, we propose a decision tree algorithm that enables detection of these processes, based on three parameters that have to be determined before and after the transformation of the landscape: area, perimeter length, and number of patches of the focal landscape class. As an example, the decision tree algorithm is applied to determine the transformation processes of three divergent land cover change scenarios: deciduous woodland degradation in Cadiz Township (Wisconsin, USA) 1831–1950, canopy gap formation in a terra firme rain forest at the Tiputini Biodiversity Station (Amazonian Ecuador) 1997–1998, and forest regrowth in Petersham Township (Massachusetts, USA) 1830–1985. The examples signal the importance of the temporal resolution of the data, since long-term pattern conversions can be subdivided in stadia in which particular pattern components are altered by specific transformation processes.

Keywords

Decision tree algorithm fragmentation land cover change landscape transformation spatial pattern 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Jan Bogaert is indebted to the Fund for Scientific Research–Flanders (F.W.O.–deren) for his postdoctoral fellowship. The authors acknowledge the reviewers for their significant input.

References

  1. 1.
    Anonymous. 1971. Webster’s third new international dictionary of the English language unabridged. G. & C. Merriam Company, Springfield, 2662 pp. Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anonymous. 1982. The American heritage dictionary—Second college edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1568 pp.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anonymous. 1991. Longman dictionary of the English language—New edition. Longman Group UK Ltd., Essex, 1890 pp. Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anonymous. 1996. Webster’s new universal unabridged dictionary. Barnes & Noble Books, New York, 2230 pp.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Anonymous. 1999. Assessing the ecological impacts of timber management: apparent impacts, actual impacts, and precautionary forest development. Silva Forest Foundation Literature Review Series, Slocan Park, 16 pp.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Antrop, M. 2001The language of landscape ecologists and planners—a comparative content analysis of concepts used in landscape ecology.Landscape and Urban Planning55163173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bannerman, S. 1997. Spatial patterns and landscape ecology: implications for biodiversity. British Columbia Ministry of Forests Research Program, Victoria, BC, 9 pp.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bender, D. J., Contreras, T. A., Fahrig, L. 1998Habitat loss and population decline: a meta-analysis of the patch size effect.Ecology79517533Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bogaert, J., Impens, I. 1998An improvement on area-perimeter ratios for interior-edge evaluation of habitats.Muge, F.Pinto, R. C.Piedade, M. eds. RecPad’98: proceedings of the 10th Portuguese conference on pattern recognition.Associação Portuguesa de Reconhecimento de PadrõesLisbon5561Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Impens, I. 1998Quantifying habitat edge for nature reserve design.Coenoses13131136Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Impens, I. 1999aA reference value for the interior-to-edge ratio of isolated habitats.Acta Biotheoretica476777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Moermans, R., Impens, I. 1999bTwist number statistics as an additional measure of habitat perimeter irregularity.Environmental and Ecological Statistics6275290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bogaert, J. 2000Quantifying habitat fragmentation as a spatial process in a patch–corridor–matrix landscape model. PhD dissertation.University of AntwerpWilrijk209Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bogaert, J., Rousseau, R., Van Hecke, P., Impens, I. 2000aAlternative area-perimeter ratios for measurement of 2-D shape compactness of habitats.Applied Mathematics and Computation1117185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Impens, I. 2000bLandscape fragmentation assessment using a single measure.Wildlife Society Bulletin28875881Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bogaert, J., Rousseau, R. 2001Spatial aggregation of two-dimensional objects in raster data structures.Applied Mathematics and Computation119117126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bogaert, J., Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Impens, I., Van Hecke, P. 2001aThe interior- to-edge breakpoint distance as a guideline for nature conservation policy.Environmental Management27493500Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bogaert, J., Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Van Hecke, P., Impens, I. 2001bGeometrical considerations for evaluation of reserve design.Web Ecology26570(+erratum Web Ecology 2:74).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bogaert, J., Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Van Hecke, P., Impens, I., Ceulemans, R. 2001cLand cover change: quantification metrics for perforation using 2-D gap features.Acta Biotheoretica49161169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bogaert, J., Myneni, R. B., Knyazikhin, Y. 2002aA mathematical comment on the formulae for the aggregation index and the shape index.Landscape Ecology178790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Ceulemans, R. 2002bThe Euler number as an index of spatial integrity of landscapes: evaluation and proposed improvement.Environmental Management29673682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bogaert, J., Zhou, L. Tucker, C. J. Myneni, R. B. Ceulemans. R. 2002c. Evidence for a persistent and extensive greening trend in Eurasia inferred from satellite vegetation index data. Journal of Geophysical Research 107:D11-10.1029/2001JD001075. Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bribiesca, E. 1997Measuring 2-D shape compactness using the contact perimeter.Computers and Mathematics with Applications3319Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Burgess, R. L., Sharpe, D. M. 1981Introduction.Burgess, R. L.Sharpe, D. M. eds. Forest island dynamics in man-dominated landscapes.Springer-VerlagNew York15Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen J. 1991. Edge effects: microclimatic pattern and biological responses in old-growth Douglas-fir forests. PhD dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, 174 pp.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    CID. 1997. CID-100 Digital plant canopy imager. Instruction manual. CID, Vancouver, BC, 18 pp. Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Collinge, S. K. 1996Ecological consequences of habitat fragmentation: implications for land- scape architecture and planning.Landscape and Urban Planning365977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Collinge, S. K. 1998Spatial arrangement of habitat patches and corridors: clues from ecological field experiments.Landscape and Urban Planning42157168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Collinge, S. K., Forman, R. T. T. 1998A conceptual model of land conversion processes: predictions and evidence from a microlandscape experiment with grassland insects.Oikos826684Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Coulson, R. N., Saarenmaa, H., Daugherity, W. C., Rykiel, E. J. Jr., Saunders, M. C., Fitzgerald, J. W. 1999A knowledge system environment for ecosystem management.Klopatek, J. M.Gardner, R. H. eds. Landscape ecological analysis—issues and applications.Springer-VerlagNew York5779Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cruz, M. D., Matos, R. P. 1998Automatic detection, characterization, and description of objects morphology.Muge, F.Pinto, R. C.Piedade, M. eds. RecPad’98: proceedings of the 10th Portuguese conference on pattern recognition.Associação Portuguesa de Reconhecimento de PadrõesLisbon6367Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Curtis, J. T. 1956The modification of mid-latitude grasslands and forests by man.Thomas, W. L.Sauer, C. O.Bates, M.Mumford, L. eds. Man’s role in changing the face of the earth.The University of Chicago PressChicago721736Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Davidson, C. 1998Issues in measuring landscape fragmentation.Wildlife Society Bulletin263237Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Debinski, D. M., Ray, C., Saveraid, E. H. 2001Species diversity and the scale of the landscape mosaic: do scales of movement and patch size affect diversity?Biological Conservation98179190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dunn, C. P., Sharpe, D. M., Guntenspergen, G. R., Stearns, F., Yang, Z. 1991Methods for analyzing temporal changes in landscape pattern.Turner, M. G.Gardner, R. H. eds. Quantitative methods in landscape ecology.Springer-VerlagNew York173198Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eng, M. 1997. Spatial patterns and landscape ecology: implications for biodiversity. Extension Note 14, British Columbia Ministry of Forests Research Program, Victoria, BC, 9 pp.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Fahrig, L. 1997Relative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population extinction.Journal of Wildlife Management61603610Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Farina, A. 1998Principles and methods in landscape ecology.Chapman & HallLondon235Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Farina, A. 2000Landscape ecology in action.Kluwer Academic PublishersDordrecht317Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Forman, R. T. T. 1995aLand mosaics—the ecology of landscapes and regions.Cambridge University PressCambridge632Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Forman, R. T. T. 1995bSome general principles of landscape and regional ecology.Landscape Ecology10133142Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Forman, R. T. T., Godron, M. 1981Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology.BioScience31733740Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Forman, R. T. T., Godron, M. 1986Landscape ecology.John Wiley & SonsNew York620Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Foster, D. R. 1992Land use history (1730-1990) and vegetation dynamics in central New England, USA.Journal of Ecology80753772Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Franklin, J. F., Forman, R. T. T. 1987Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: ecological consequences and principles.Landscape Ecology1518Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Giles, R. H., Jr., Trani, M. K. 1999Key elements of landscape pattern measures.Environmental Management23477481CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Glasbey, C. A., Horgan, G. W. 1995Image analysis for the biological sciences.John Wiley & SonsChichester, UK218Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Groom, M. J., Schumaker, N. H. 1993Evaluating landscape change: patterns of worldwide deforestation and local fragmentation.Kareiva, P. M.Kingsolver, J. G.Huey, R. B. eds. Biotic interactions and global change.Sinauer Associates Inc.Sunderland, Massachuse2444Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gustafson, E. J. 1998Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: what is the state of the art?Ecosystems1143156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Gustafson, E. J., Parker, G. R. 1991An automated method to quantify habitat spatial pattern from satellite images.Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America72132Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gustafson, E. J., Parker, G. R. 1992Relationships between landcover proportion and indices of landscape spatial pattern.Landscape Ecology7101110Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gustafson, E. J., Parker, G. R. 1994Using an index of habitat patch proximity for landscape design.Landscape and Urban Planning29117130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Haines-Young, R., Chopping, M. 1996Quantifying landscape structure: a review of landscape indices and their application to forested landscapes.Progress in Physical Geography20418445Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hansen, A. J., Urban, D. L., Marks, B. 1992Avian community dynamics: the interplay of landscape trajectories and species life histories.Hansen, A. J.diCastri, F. eds. Landscape boundaries—consequences for biotic diversity and ecological flows.Springer-VerlagNew York170195Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    He, H. S., DeZonia, B. E., Mladenoff, D. J. 2000An aggregation index (AI) to quantify spatial patterns of landscapes.Landscape Ecology15591601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Herzog, F., Lausch, A., Müller, E., Thulke, H. H., Steinhardt, U., Lehmann, S. 2001Landscape metrics for assessment of landscape destruction and rehabilitation.Environmental Management2791107CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Heywood, V. H., Watson, R. T. 1995Global biodiversity assessment.Cambridge University PressCambridge1140Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jaeger, J. A. G. 2000Landscape division, splitting index, and effective mesh size: new measures of landscape fragmentation.Landscape Ecology15115130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Johnston, C. A. 1998Geographic information systems in ecology.Blackwell ScienceOxford239Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Jorge, L. A. B., Garcia, G. B. 1997A study of habitat fragmentation in southeastern Brazil using remote sensing and geographic information systems (GIS).Forest Ecology and Management983547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kolasa, J., Waltho, N. 1998A hierarchical view of habitat and its relationship for species abundance.Peterson, D. L.Parker, V. T. eds. Ecological scale—theory and applications.Columbia University PressNew York5576Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lawrence, R. L., Ripple, W. J. 1996Determining patch perimeters in raster image processing and geographic information systems.International Journal of Remote Sensing1712551259Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Li, B.-L., Archer, S. 1997Weighted mean patch size: a robust index for quantifying landscape structure.Ecological Modelling102353361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Lovejoy, T. E., Bierregaard, R. O. Jr., Rylands, A. B., Malcolm, J. R., Quintela, C. E., Harper, L. H., Brown, K. S., Jr., Powell, A. H., Powell, G. V. N., Schubart, H. O. R., Hays, M. B. 1986Edge and other effects of isolation on Amazon forest fragments.Soulé, M. E. eds. Conservation biology: the science of scarcity and diversity.Sinauer AssociatesSunderland, Massachusetts257285Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    McGarigal, K., and Marks. B. J. 1995. FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure (PNW-GTR-351). US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR 122 pp.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mladenoff, D. J., and DeZonia. B. 1999. APACK 2.11 Analysis software user’s guide. Draft version. 43 pp.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    O’Neill, R. V., Krummel, J. R., Gardner, R. H., Sugihara, G., Jackson, B., DeAngelis, D. L., Milne, B. T., Turner, M. G., Zygmunt, B., Christensen, S. W., Dale, V. H., Graham, R. L. 1988Indices of landscape pattern.Landscape Ecology1153162Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Roseberry, J. L., Hao, Q. 1996Interactive computer program for landscape-level habitat analysis.Wildlife Society Bulletin24340341Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rosenfeld, A. 1974Compact figures in digital pictures.IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics4221223Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Bogaert, J. and Impens. I. 1998a. Horizontal canopy gap occlusion at the Tiputini Biodiversity Station, Amazonian Ecuador. Pages 60–61 in Proceedings of the second international canopy conference—forest canopies: global perspectives. The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens, Sarasota.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Impens, I. 1998bInfluence of tree-fall orientation on canopy gap shape in an Ecuadorian rain forest.Journal of Tropical Ecology14865869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Bogaert, J., Impens, I. 1999aCanopy gap morphology determinants in an Amazonian rain forest.Selbyana20339344Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Impens, I. 1999bCanopy perforation in Amazonian Ecuador.Coenoses141321Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P., Impens, I. 2000aForest canopy perforation in time and space in Amazonian Ecuador.Acta Oecologica21285291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Zak-Mnacek, V., Bogaert, J., Van Hecke, P. 2000bSpecies diversity and community structure of canopy gaps and mature forest patches in Amazonian Ecuador.Ceulemans, R.Bogaert, J.Deckmyn, G.Nijs, I. eds. Topics in ecology: structure and function in plants and ecosystems.University of AntwerpUIA, Wilrijk133141Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Salvador-Van Eysenrode, D., Kockelbergh, F., Bogaert, J., Impens, I., Van Hecke, P. 2002Canopy gap edge determination and the importance of gap edges for plant diversity.Web Ecology315Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Saunders, D. A., Hobbs, R. J., Margules, C. R. 1991Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review.Conservation Biology51832Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Shafer, C. L. 1990Nature reserves.Smithsonian Institution PressWashington189Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Stauffer, D. 1985Introduction to percolation theory.Taylor & FrancisLondon124Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Schumaker, N. H. 1996Using landscape indices to predict habitat connectivity.Ecology7712101225Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Stine, P.A., Hunsaker, C.T. 2001An introduction to uncertainty issues for spatial data used in ecological applications.Hunsaker, C.T.Goodchild, M.Friedl, M.A.Case, T.J. eds. Spatial uncertainty in ecology—implications for remote sensing and GIS applications.Springer-VerlagNew York91107Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Turner, M.G., Ruscher, C.L. 1988Changes in landscape patterns in Georgia, USA.Landscape Ecology1241251Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Vitousek, P.M. 1994Beyond global warming: ecology and global change.Ecology7518611876Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Walker, B., and Steffen W. (eds.). 1997. The terrestrial biosphere and global change: implications for natural and managed ecosystems. A synthesis of GCTE and related research. IGBP Science No. 1. IGBP, Stockholm, 32 pp.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Wickham, J.D., Riiters, K.H., O’Neill, R.V., Jones, K.B., Wade, T.G. 1996Landscape ‘contagion’ in raster and vector environments.International Journal of Geographical Information Systems10891899Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Bogaert
    • 1
  • Reinhart Ceulemans
    • 2
  • David Salvador-Van Eysenrode
    • 2
  1. 1.École Interfacultaire de Bioingénieurs, Universitié Libre de Bruxelles50 Av. F.D. Roosevelt, C.P. 165/05, B-1050 Bruxelles, Belgique
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Research Group of Plant and Vegetation EcologyUniversity of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610 WilrijkBelgium

Personalised recommendations