Advertisement

Landscape Ecology

, Volume 34, Issue 10, pp 2245–2249 | Cite as

Zonal lacunarity analysis: a new spatial analysis tool for geographic information systems

  • Pinliang DongEmail author
  • Fariba Sadeghinaeenifard
  • Jisheng XiaEmail author
  • Shucheng Tan
Short Communication
  • 47 Downloads

Abstract

Context

Lacunarity as a scale-dependent measure of spatial heterogeneity has received great attention in landscape ecology. Most lacunarity measures have been obtained from greyscale or binary (0 and 1) data for an entire study area or fixed rectangular windows, and a zonal lacunarity tool for discrete raster data is still lacking in current geographic information systems.

Objectives

This short communication presents the development of a free zonal lacunarity analysis tool for ArcGIS to support applications involving scale-dependent analysis of spatial heterogeneity, including landscape ecology. The application of the tool is also demonstrated using 2001 and 2011 land cover data from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD).

Methods

Based on the gliding-box algorithm for lacunarity estimation, a tool for zonal lacunarity analysis of discrete raster data is developed using ArcPy and the Python programming language. The tool uses discrete raster data as input, an optional zone feature class as zone data to partition the input raster data into different zones, and a spreadsheet with zonal lacunarity values as output.

Results

As a demonstration, lacunarity measurements of grasslands in Corinth and Lake Dallas, Texas were calculated from the 2001 and 2011 NLCD data using box sizes (scales) of 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. The results show that measures of grassland lacunarity in Lake Dallas were higher than Corinth at all scales, and the measures of grassland lacunarity in 2011 were higher than 2001 for both cities because of the increasing gap sizes in grasslands. The increasing gap sizes in grasslands were caused by converting the grasslands into developed areas.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the zonal lacunarity analysis tool can provide important information on the spatial distribution of gaps in the input discrete raster data at different scales. It is hoped that the zonal lacunarity analysis tool can be further evaluated using different datasets in landscape ecology.

Keywords

GIS Lacunarity Raster data Spatial analysis Zonal analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The first author is supported by summer research grants from Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Imaging Theory and Technology, Capital Normal University, a joint project between the Department of Science and Technology of Yunnan Province and Yunnan University (C176240210019), and the Plateau Mountain Ecology and Earth’s Environment project of Yunnan University (C176240107). The authors would like to thank Reza Nikfal for his technical support and anonymous reviewers for the helpful comments.

References

  1. Allain C, Cloitre M (1991) Characterizing the lacunarity of random and determined fractal set. Phys Rev A44:3552–3558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chun HC, Giménez D, Yoon SW (2008) Morphology, lacunarity and entropy of intra-aggregate pores: aggregate size and soil management effects. Geoderma 145:83–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dong P (2000) Test of a new lacunarity estimation method for image texture analysis. Int J Remote Sens 21:3369–3373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Frazer GW, Wulder MA, Niemann KO (2005) Simulation and quantification of the fine-scale spatial pattern and heterogeneity of forest canopy structure: a lacunarity-based method designed for analysis of continuous canopy heights. For Ecol Manag 214:65–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gefen Y, Aharony A, Mandelbrot BB (1984) Phase transitions on fractals: III. Infinitely ramified lattices. J Phys A 17:1277–1289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hoechstetter S, Walz U, Nguyen XT (2011) Adapting lacunarity techniques for gradient-based analyses of landscape surfaces. Ecol Complex 8:229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lin B, Yang ZR (1986) A suggested lacunarity expression for Sierpinski carpets. J Phys A 19:L49–L52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Malhi Y, Román-Cuesta RM (2008) Analysis of lacunarity and scales of spatial homogeneity in IKONOS images of Amazonian tropical forest canopies. Remote Sens Environ 112:2074–2087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mandelbrot BB (1982) The fractal geometry of nature. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Miranda-Martinez E, Oleschko K, Parrot JF, Castrejon-Vacio F, Hind T, Brambila-Pazl F (2006) Porosity in naturally fractured media: a fractal classification. Rev Mex Cienc Geol 23:199–214Google Scholar
  11. Pasher J, King DJ (2006) Landscape fragmentation and ice storm damage in eastern Ontario forests. Landscape Ecol 21:477–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Plotnick RE, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (1993) Lacunarity indices as measures of landscape texture. Landscape Ecol 8:201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rankey EC (2002) Spatial patterns of sediment accumulation on a Holocene carbonate tidal flat, northwest Andros Island, Bahamas. J Sediment Res 72:591–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. San José Martínez F, Caniego FJ, García-Gutiérrez C (2017) Lacunarity of soil macropore space arrangement of CT images: effect of soil management and depth. Geoderma 287:80–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sui DZ, Wu XB (2006) Changing patterns of residential segregation in a prismatic metropolis: a lacunarity-based study in Houston, 1980–2000. Environ Plan B 33:559–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Vigiak O, van Loon E, Sterk G (2006) Modelling spatial scales of water erosion in the West Usambara Mountains of Tanzania. Geomorphology 76:26–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Voss R (1986) Random fractals: characterization and measurement. In: Pynn R, Skjeltorp A (eds) Scaling phenomena in disordered systems. Plenum, New York, pp 37–48Google Scholar
  18. Wu J (2017) Thirty years of Landscape Ecology (1987–2017): retrospects and prospects. Landscape Ecol 32:2225–2239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wu XB, Sui DZ (2001) An initial exploration of a lacunarity-based segregation measure. Environ Plan B 28:433–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wu XB, Thurow TL, Whisenant SG (2000) Fragmentation and changes in hydrologic function of tiger bush landscapes, south-west Niger. J Ecol 88:790–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wu YG, Wang NM, Rutchey K (2006) An analysis of spatial complexity of ridge and slough patterns in the Everglades ecosystem. Ecol Complex 3:183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Imaging Theory and TechnologyCapital Normal UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of Geography and the EnvironmentUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Information ScienceUniversity of North TexasDentonUSA
  4. 4.Chenggong Campus, School of Resource, Environment and Earth SciencesYunnan UniversityKunmingChina

Personalised recommendations