Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quantifying changes of landscape connectivity based on ecological process simulation in a rapidly urbanized city: Nanjing, China

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The dramatic land use and cover change (LUCC) is one of the major threats to biological conservation as landscape connectivity decreases and necessary ecological process is broken in rapidly urbanized regions. Although most ecological conservation plans aim to restore connectivity based on modeled data or empirical field investigation, few evaluate the changes of landscape connectivity quantitatively, especially from the perspective of regional LUCC analysis and simulation of potential ecological process. We took rapidly urbanized Nanjing in eastern China as the case, simulated potential ecological processes and mapped landscape corridors with minimum cumulative resistance (MCR) model. We then calculated the cumulative resistance values (CRVs) of the indicated corridors to reflect the quantitative changes of landscape connectivity. The potential least-cost paths (LCPs) of MCR model indicated the directions of the landscape corridors and they mostly followed the continuous rivers. Although most LCPs showed similar directions in 2000 and 2015, some significantly changed, especially those to the suburban targets where dramatic LUCCs formed barriers and caused obvious landscape fragmentation. The quantitative results of CRVs on the 2000’s LCPs showed a great increase from 2000 to 2015, indicating the decrease of landscape connectivity related with significant LUCCs from non-construction to construction lands. However, the CRVs of the 2015’s LCPs were mostly lower and did not change too much in 2000 and 2015. From the perspective of LUCCs, most inner buffers of the LCPs were dominated by waters and showed fewer changes comparing with outer buffers, especially those of the 2015’s LCPs. Therefore, it is concluded the 2015’s LCPs can maintain higher and more stable landscape connectivity as more ecologically suitable lands exist there in 2000 and 2015. To be specific, it is of lower cost to design the landscape corridors at the 0–50 m buffers, where limited land use adjustments are required in some new towns or industrial parks.

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
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, De Blust G, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, Matthysen E (2003) The application of ‘least-cost’ modelling as a functional landscape model. Landsc Urban Plan 64(4):233–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beier P, Majka DR, Newell SL (2009) Uncertainty analysis of least-wildlife for designing linkages. Ecol Appl 19:2067–2077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bélisle M (2005) Measuring landscape connectivity: the perspective of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology 86(8):1988–1995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brost BM, Beier P (2012) Comparing linkage designs based on land facets to linkage designs based on focal species. PLoS ONE 7(11):e48965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunn AG, Urban DL, Keitt TH (2000) Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J Environ Manage 59:365–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson C, Canty D, Steiner F, Mack N (1989) A path for the Palouse: an example of conservation and recreation planning. Landsc Urban Plan 17:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chardon JP, Adriaensen F, Matthysen E (2003) Incorporating landscape elements into a connectivity measure: a case study of Speckled wood butterfly. Landsc Ecol 18:561–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen J, Gao J, Chen W (2016) Urban land expansion and the transitional mechanisms in Nanjing China. Habitat Int 53:274–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett ES, Lynch JA, Supper WE (1978) Timber harvesting practices and water quality in the eastern United States. J for 76:484–488

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • DeFries RS, Foley JA, Asner GP (2004) Land-use choices: balancing human needs and ecosystem function. Front Ecol Environ 2(5):249–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupras J, Alam M (2015) Urban sprawl and ecosystem services: a half century perspective in the Montreal Area (Quebec Canada). J Environ Policy Plan 17:180–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupras J, Marull J, Parcerisas L, Coll F, Gonzalez A, Girard M, Tello E (2016) The impacts of urban sprawl on ecological connectivity in the Montreal Metropolitan Region. Environ Sci Policy 58:61–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estoque RC, Murayama Y (2016) Quantifying landscape pattern and ecosystem service value changes in four rapidly urbanizing hill stations of Southeast Asia. Landsc Ecol 31(7):1481–1507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreras P (2001) Landscape structure and asymmetrical inter-patch connectivity in a metapopulation of the endangered Iberian lynx. Biol Conserv 100:125–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2002) The conservation value of paddock trees for birds in a variegated landscape in southern New South Wales. 1. Species composition and site occupancy patterns. Biodivers Conserv 11:807–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman E, Jonsson BG, Sjogren-Gulve P (2000) Focal species modeling for biodiversity conservation. Ecol Bull 48:85–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Foltête J-C, Girardet X, Clauzel C (2014) A methodological framework for the use of landscape graphs in land use planning. Landsc Urban Plan 124:140–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao J, Chen J, Yuan F, Wei YD, Chen W (2014) Patterns functions and underlying mechanisms of urban land expansion in Nanjing. Grogr Res 33(10):1892–1907 (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert-Norton L, Wilson R, Stevens JR, Beard KH (2010) A meta-analytic review of corridor effectiveness. Conserv Biol 24:660–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez JR, Del Barrio G, Duguy B (2008) Assessing functional landscape connectivity for disturbance propagation on regional scales—a cost-surface model approach applied to surface fire spread. Ecol Model 211(1–2):121–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimm NB, Faeth SH, Golubiewski NE, Redman CL, Wu J, Bai X, Briggs JM (2008) Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319:756–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurrutxaga M, Lozano PG, Barrio GD (2010) GIS-based approach for incorporating the connectivity of ecological networks into regional planning. J Nat Conserv 18(8):318–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He C, Tian J, Shi P, Hu D (2011) Simulation of the spatial stress due to urban expansion on the wetlands in Beijing China using a GIS-based assessment model. Landsc Urban Plan 101:269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jelinski DE, Wu JG (1996) The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology. Landsc Ecol 11:129–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juan A, Vassilias AT, Leonardo A (1995) South Florida greenways: a conceptual framework for the ecological reconnectivity of the region. Landsc Urban Plan 33(1–3):247–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Kindlmann P, Burel F (2008) Connectivity measures: a review. Landsc Ecol 23:879–890

    Google Scholar 

  • Knaappen JP, Scheffer M, Harms B (1992) Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning. Landsc Urban Plan 23:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kullenberg G (2002) Regional co-development and security: a comprehensive approach. Ocean Coastal Manage 45(11–12):761–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambin EF, Meyfroidt P (2010) Land use transitions: socio-ecological feedback versus socio-economic change. Land Use Policy 27(2):108–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaRue MA, Nielsen CK (2008) Modelling potential dispersal corridors for cougars in midwestern North America using least-cost path methods. Ecol Model 212:372–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lechner AM, Sprod D, Carter O, Lefroy EC (2017) Characterising landscape connectivity for conservation planning using a dispersal guild approach. Landsc Ecol 32:99–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li P, Cao H (2019) Comprehensive assessment on the ecological stress of rapid land urbanization per proportion intensity and location. Ecosyst Health Sustain 5(1):242–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li T, Li W, Qian Z (2010) Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use changes in Shenzhen. Ecol Econ 69(7):1427–1435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li P, Chen D, Fan J (2011) Research of ecological occupiability based on least-cost distance model: a case study on Xijiang River Economic Belt in Guangxi. J Nat Resour 26(2):227–236 (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Li F, Ye Y, Song B, Wang R (2015) Evaluation of urban suitable ecological land based on the minimum cumulative resistance model: a case study from Changzhou China. Ecol Model 318:194–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li F, Liu X, Zhang X, Zhao D, Liu H, Zhou C, Wang R (2017) Urban ecological infrastructure: an integrated network for ecosystem services and sustainable urban systems. J Clean Prod 163:S12–S18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang J, He X, Zeng G, Zhong M, Gao X, Li X, Li X, Wu H, Feng C, Xing W, Fang Y, Mo D (2018) Integrating priority areas and ecological corridors into national network for conservation planning in China. Sci Total Environ 626:22–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Shu J, Zhang L (2010a) Research on applying minimal cumulative resistance model in urban land ecological suitability assessment: as an example of Xiamen City. Acta Ecol Sin 30(2):421–428 (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Zhang Z, Xu X, Kuang W, Zhou W, Zhang S, Li R, Yang C, Yu D, Wu S (2010b) Jiang N (2010b) Spatial patterns and driving forces of land use change in China during the early 21st century. J Geogr Sci 20(4):483–494 (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Mooney H, Hull V, Davis SJ, Gaskell J, Hertel T, Lubchenco J, Seto KC, Gleick P, Kremen C, Li S (2015) System integration for global sustainability. Science 347(6225):1258832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marull J, Mallarach JM (2005) A GIS methodology for assessing ecological connectivity: application to the Barcelona Metropolitan Area. Landsc Urban Plan 71:243–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michels E, Cottenie K, Neys L, De Gelas K, Coppin P, De Meester L (2001) Geographical and genetic distances among zooplankton populations in a set of interconnected ponds: a plea for using GIS modeling of the effective geographical distance. Mol Ecol 10:1929–1938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J (1999) Ecology and Urban Planning. Biodivers Conserv 8:119–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ning J, Liu J, Kuang W, Xu X, Zhang S, Yan C, Li R, Wu S, Hu Y, Du G, Chi W, Pan T, Ning J (2018) Spatiotemporal patterns and characteristics of land use change in China during 2010–2015. J Geogr Sci 28(5):547–562 (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S (2006) Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landsc Ecol 21:959–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng J, Zhao H, Liu Y (2017) Urban ecological corridors construction: a review. Acta Ecol Sin 37:23–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reba M, Reitsma F, Seto KC (2016) Spatializing 6,000 years of global urbanization from 3700 BC to AD 2000. Sci Data 3:160034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakieh Y, Amiri BJ, Danekar A, Feghhi J, Dezhkam S (2015) Scenario-based evaluation of urban development sustainability: an integrative modeling approach to compromise between urbanization suitability index and landscape pattern. Environ Dev Sustain 17(6):1343–1365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Torné J (2009) Conefor Sensinode 2 2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ Model Softw 24:135–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer SC, Epps CW, Brashares JS (2011) Placing linkages among fragmented habitats: do least-cost models reflect how animals use landscapes? J Appl Ecol 48:668–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schadt S, Knauer F, Kaczensky P, Relilla E, Wieggand T, Trepl L (2002) Rule-based assessment of suitable habitat and patch connectivity for Eurasian Lynx in Germany. Ecol Appl 12:1469–1483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seto KC, Gueneralp B, Hutyrac LR (2012) Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. PNAS 109(40):16083–16088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sieber J, Pons M (2015) An assessment of urban ecosystem services using ecosystem services reviews and GIS-based tools. Procedia Eng 115:53–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer WD, Beier P, Penrod K, Winters K, Paulman C, Rustigian-Romsos H, Strittholt J, Parisi M, Pettler A (2010) California essential habitat connectivity project: a strategy for conserving a connected California. California Department of Transportation Sacramento, California, USA https://consbio.org/products/reports/california-essential-habitat-connectivity-project-a-strategy-for-conservation-a-connected-california. Accessed 12 Feb 2019

  • Su Y, Chen X, Liao J, Zhang H, Wang C, Ye Y, Wang Y (2016) Modeling the optimal ecological security pattern for guiding the urban constructed land expansions. Urban for Urban Green 19:35–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagil S, Gormus S, Cengiz S (2018) The relationship of urban expansion landscape patterns and ecological processes in Denizli Turkey. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 46:1285–1296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian L, Chen J, Yu SX (2014) Coupled dynamics of urban landscape pattern and socioeconomic drivers in Shenzhen, China. Landsc Ecol 29(4):715–727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner BL, Lambin EF, Reenberg A (2007) The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability. PNAS 104(52):20666–20671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNDP (2016) Sustainable urbanization strategy: UNDP’s support to sustainable inclusive and resilient cities in the developing world http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/poverty-reduction/sustainable-urbanization-strategy.html. Accessed 12 Feb 2019

  • Urban D, Keitt T (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graphic-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82(5):1205–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J (2010) Urban sustainability: an inevitable goal of landscape research. Landsc Ecol 25:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Qi Y (2000) Dealing with scale in landscape analysis: an overview. Geogr Inform Sci 6:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiang Y, Meng J (2016) Research into ecological suitability zoning and expansion patterns in agricultural oases based on the landscape process: a case study in the middle reaches of the Heihe River. Environ Earth Sci 75:1355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ye Y, Su Y, Zhang H, Liu K, Wu Q (2015) Construction of an ecological resistance surface model and its application in urban expansion simulations. J Geogr Sci 25(2):211–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu K (1996) Security patterns and surface model in landscape ecological planning. Landsc Urban Plan 36(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Q, Yu K, Li D (2005) The width of ecological corridor in landscape planning. Acta Ecol Sin 25(9):2406–2412 (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank RESDC for providing the land-use data. We are grateful to the editors and the anonymous reviewers for exceptionally helpful comments and suggestions.

Funding

The work was sponsored by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41871209 and 41871119).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Watershed Geographic Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 73, East Beijing Rd, Nanjing, 210008, China

    Ping-xing Li, Chong-gang Liu & Wei Sun

  2. Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 73, East Beijing Rd, Nanjing, 210008, China

    Ping-xing Li, Chong-gang Liu & Wei Sun

Authors
  1. Ping-xing Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chong-gang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wei Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Dr. Ping-xing Li designed the research and wrote the original manuscript, and made modification to the “4.2. Implications of research and practice on sustainable land development”. Dr. Chong-gang Liu re-wrote the whole INTRODUCION and part of the DISCUSSION (i.e. 4.1. Changed LCPs with decreased landscape connectivity and LUCCs’ influence) in the 1st revised version. Dr. Wei Sun helped improve the ANALYSIS METHOD in the 1st revised version and the CONCLUSION in the 2nd revised version. Authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ping-xing Li.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Px., Liu, Cg. & Sun, W. Quantifying changes of landscape connectivity based on ecological process simulation in a rapidly urbanized city: Nanjing, China. Environ Earth Sci 80, 644 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-021-09938-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-021-09938-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation