Advertisement

Landscape Ecology

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 465–472 | Cite as

Landscape phenology: an integrative approach to seasonal vegetation dynamics

  • Liang Liang
  • Mark D. Schwartz
Report

Abstract

This brief report addresses the theory and methodology of landscape phenology (LP), along with synopsis of a case study conducted in the northern Wisconsin temperate mixed forest. LP engages questions related to ecosystem phenology, landscape genetics, and vegetation change science across multiple scales, which have rarely been addressed by existing studies. Intensive in situ observations, remote sensing data, and spatiotemporal analysis are employed for understanding patterns and processes within the complexity of seasonal landscape dynamics. A hierarchical upscaling approach is also introduced. Results from the case study suggest that plot-scale phenology lacks spatial autocorrelation and varies individualistically, with genetic heterogeneity overriding small microenvironmental gradients. However, at the landscape level, forest phenology responds coherently to weather fluctuations. The resultant LP index confirms the relative reliability of moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS)-based land surface phenology (LSP). Due to technological advancement in spatial data acquisition and analysis, LP has the ability to connect conventional plant phenology studies back to their intricate ecological context, and provides a new approach to validating coarse-scale monitoring and modeling of LSP and other seasonal ecosystem processes.

Keywords

Landscape phenology Temperate mixed forest Spatiotemporal analysis Scaling Land surface phenology 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project has been supported by the National Science Foundation under grants BCS-0649380 and BCS-0703360. Jonathan Hanes and Rong Yu participated in data collection and/or provided valuable support with data analyses. LiDAR data were provided by Bruce Cook and Ryan Anderson of the University of Minnesota. QuickBird images were provided by NASA. Robert Cook and Suresh-Kumar Santhana-Vannan of Oak Ridge National Laboratory provided valuable help regarding using MODIS products. Changshan Wu, Eric Graham, Jake Weltzin and Jeffrey Morisette provided constructive advice on data analyses and literature review. We thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. Finally we thank Dr. Jianguo Wu for the invitation to address Landscape Phenology in this brief report for Landscape Ecology.

References

  1. Burrows SN, Gower ST, Clayton MK, Mackay DS, Ahl DE, Norman JM, Diak G (2002) Application of geostatistics to characterize leaf area index (LAI) from flux tower to landscape scales using a cyclic sampling design. Ecosystems (NY, Print) 5:667–679Google Scholar
  2. Cleland EE, Chuine I, Menzel A, Mooney HA, Schwartz MD (2007) Shifting plant phenology in response to global change. Trends Ecol Evol 22:357–365. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.04.003 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. de Beurs KM, Henebry GM (2005) Land surface phenology and temperature variation in the international geosphere biosphere program high-latitude transects. Glob Change Biol 11:779–790. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.00949.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Diaz S, Cabido M (1997) Plant functional types and ecosystem function in relation to global change. J Veg Sci 8:463–474. doi: 10.2307/3237198 Google Scholar
  5. Eastman R (2006) Idrisi Andes guide to GIS and image processing. Clark University, Worcester, 328 ppGoogle Scholar
  6. Fisher JI, Mustard JF (2007) Cross-scalar satellite phenology from ground, landsat, and MODIS data. Remote Sens Environ 109:261–273. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2007.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fisher JI, Mustard JF, Vadeboncoeur MA (2006) Green leaf phenology at landsat resolution: scaling from the field to the satellite. Remote Sens Environ 100:265–279. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2005.10.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Friedl M, Henebry G, Reed B, Huete A, White M, Morisette J, Nemani R, Zhang X, Myneni R (2006) Land surface phenology. A community white paper requested by NASA, April 10. ftp://ftp.iluci.org/Land_ESDR/Phenology_Friedl_whitepaper.pdf. Viewed 20 Jan. 2009
  9. Graham EA, Yuen EM, Robertson GF, Kaiser WJ, Hamilton MP, Rundel PW (2009) Budburst and leaf area expansion measured with a ground-based mobile camera system and simple color thresholding. Environ Exp Bot (in press). doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2008.09.013
  10. Lambers H, Chapin F, Pons T (1998) Plant physiological ecology. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Meier U (2001) Growth stages of mono-and dicotyledonous plants, BBCH monograph. German federal biological research centre for agriculture and forestry, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  12. Morisette JT, Richardson AD, Knapp AK, Fisher JI, Graham EA, Abatzoglou J, Wilson BE, Breshears DD, Henebry GM, Hanes JM, Liang L (2009) Tracking the rhythm of the seasons in the face of global change: phenological research in the 21st century. Front Ecol Environ 7 (in press). doi: 10.1890/070217
  13. Paruelo JM, Jobbagy EG, Sala OE (2001) Current distribution of ecosystem functional types in temperate south America. Ecosystems (NY, Print) 4:683–698. doi: 10.1007/s10021-001-0037-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Qi Y, Wu J (1996) Effects of changing spatial resolution on the results of landscape pattern analysis using spatial autocorrelation indices. Landscape Ecol 11:39–49. doi: 10.1007/BF02087112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roberts D, Gardner M, Church R, Ustin S, Scheer G, Green R (1998) Mapping chaparral in the Santa Monica Mountains using multiple endmember spectral mixture models. Remote Sens Environ 65:267–279. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(98)00037-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schwartz MD (ed) (2003) Phenology: an integrative environmental science. Kluwer Academic Publishers (now Springer), DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  17. Schwartz MD, Ahas R, Aasa A (2006) Onset of spring starting earlier across the northern hemisphere. Glob Change Biol 12:343–351. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01097.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wu J (1999) Hierarchy and scaling: extrapolating information along a scaling ladder. Can J Rem Sens 25:367–380Google Scholar
  19. Wu J, Li H (2006) Concepts of scale and scaling. In: Wu J, Jones KB, Li H, Loucks OL (eds) Scaling and uncertainty analysis in ecology: methods and applications. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wu C, Murray AT (2003) Estimating impervious surface distribution by spectral mixture analysis. Remote Sens Environ 84:493–505. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00136-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhang X, Hodges JCF, Schaaf CB, Friedl MA, Strahler AH, Gao F (2001) Global vegetation phenology from AVHRR and MODIS data. Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 2001. IGARSS’01. IEEE 2001 International 5: 2262–2264Google Scholar
  22. Zhang X, Friedl MA, Schaaf CB, Strahler AH, Hodges JCF, Gao F, Reed BC, Huete A (2003) Monitoring vegetation phenology using MODIS. Remote Sens Environ 84:471–475. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(02)00135-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zhang X, Tarpley D, Sullivan JT (2007) Diverse responses of vegetation phenology to a warming climate. Geophys Res Lett 34:L19405. doi: 10.1029/2007GL031447 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations