Landscape patterns from mathematical morphology on maps with contagion
The perceived realism of simulated maps with contagion (spatial autocorrelation) has led to their use for comparing landscape pattern metrics and as habitat maps for modeling organism movement across landscapes. The objective of this study was to conduct a neutral model analysis of pattern metrics defined by morphological spatial pattern analysis (MSPA) on maps with contagion, with comparisons to phase transitions (abrupt changes) of patterns on simple random maps. Using MSPA, each focal class pixel on a neutral map was assigned to one of six pattern classes—core, edge, perforated, connector, branch, or islet—depending on MSPA rules for connectivity and edge width. As the density of the focal class (P) was increased on simple random maps, the proportions of pixels in different pattern classes exhibited two types of phase transitions at threshold densities (0.41 ≤ P ≤ 0.99) that were predicted by percolation theory after taking into account the MSPA rules for connectivity and edge width. While there was no evidence of phase transitions on maps with contagion, the general trends of pattern metrics in relation to P were similar to simple random maps. Using an index P for comparisons, the effect of increasing contagion was opposite that of increasing edge width.
KeywordsPattern analysis Neutral model Percolation theory Phase transition Simulation Threshold
Two anonymous reviewers are acknowledged for their assistance. Funding was provided by the Quantitative Sciences Staff, US Forest Service. Mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the US Government.
- Burkett VR, Wilcox DA, Stottlemyer R, Barrow W, Fagre D, Baron J, Price J, Nielsen JL, Allen CD, Peterson DL, Ruggerone G, Doyle T (2005) Nonlinear dynamics in ecosystem response to climatic change: case studies and policy implications. Ecol Complex 2:357–394. doi: 10.1016/j.ecocom.2005.04.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Frary ME, Schuh CA (2007) Correlation-space description of the percolation transition in composite microstructures. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys 76:041108. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.76.041108
- Gardner RH (1999) RULE: a program for the generation of random maps and the analysis of spatial patterns. In: Klopatek JM, Gardner RH (eds) Landscape ecological analysis: issues and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 280–303Google Scholar
- Groffman PM, Baron JS, Blett T, Gold AJ, Goodman I, Gunderson LH, Levinson BM, Palmer MA, Paerl HW, Peterson GD, Poff NL, Rejeski DW, Reynolds JF, Turner MG, Weathers KC, Wiens J (2006) Ecological thresholds: the key to successful environmental management or an important concept with no practical application? Ecosystems (N Y, Print) 9:1–13. doi: 10.1007/s10021-003-0142-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mandelbrot BB (1983) The fractal geometry of nature. W.H Freeman and Company, New York, p 468Google Scholar
- Plotnick RE, Gardner RH (1993) Lattices and landscapes. In: Gardner RH (ed) Lectures on mathematics in the life sciences, Volume 23: predicting spatial effects in ecological systems. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, pp 129–157Google Scholar
- Saupe D (1988) Algorithms for random fractals. In: Peitgen HO, Saupe D (eds) The science of fractal images. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 71–136Google Scholar
- Serra J (1982) Image analysis and mathematical morphology. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Soille P (2003) Morphological image analysis: principles and applications, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Stauffer D (1985) Introduction to percolation theory. Taylor & Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Vogt P (2009) GUIDOS installation. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy, 4 pp. (online) URL: http://forest.jrc.ec.europa.eu/biodiversity/GUIDOS/ (accessed 29 January 2009)
- With KA (2002) Using percolation theory to assess landscape connectivity and effects of habitat fragmentation. In: Gutzwiller KJ (ed) Applying landscape ecology in biological conservation. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 105–130Google Scholar