Advertisement

Community Ecology

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 205–217 | Cite as

Synoptic environmental indicators as image analogs for landscape analysis

  • W. L. Myers
  • G. P. PatilEmail author
  • C. Taillie
  • D. C. Walrath
Article

Abstract

Spatially synoptic multivariate image data implicitly embody information on landscape pattern, for which analytical techniques of explicit pattern extraction are evolving. In parallel, a multiplicity of environmental indicators’ is being generated in the arena of geographic information systems. Landscape ecological analysis offers substantial opportunity for configuring these indicators synoptically as cells over spatial extents and for stacking them into complementary sets of image-structured multiple environmental indicators whereby the values of the indicators become intensity analogs of brightness for spectral bands. As environmental signal analogs of multiband images, these data become available to image portrayal in both graytone and quasi-color renditions to reveal joint properties of pattern for visual interpretation. Likewise, many of the conventional image analysis operations can be conceived more broadly to allow their application in the indicator context. This includes combinatorial approaches such as calculation of an NDVI equivalent from indicator intensities. Similarly, supervised and unsupervised analyses can have meaningful application in the context of multiple environmental indicators. Furthermore, newer techniques of pattern-based image segmentation can also be applied. Application to habitat modeling for vertebrates from Gap Analysis shows the effectiveness of the approach.

Keywords

Change detection Clustering algorithms Environmental indicators Geographic information systems Image analysis Landscape ecology Remote sensing Species habitat Species richness 

Abbreviations

DE

Digital Elevation Model

GIS

Geographic Information System

NDVI

Normalized Difference Vegetation Index

PHASE

Palette Homogeneity Among Segmentation Elements

PSI

Progressively Segmenting Images

RHII

Regional Habitat Importance Index

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Prepared with partial support from NASA Biospheric Sciences Branch, Goddard Space Flight Center, U.S. EPA Star Grant for Atlantic Slope Consortium Cooperative Agreement, and the NSF Digital Government Program, Division of Experimental and Integrative Activities, Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering. The contents have not been subjected to Agency review and therefore do not necessarily reflect the views of the Agencies and no official endorsement should be inferred.

References

  1. Argent, D., J. Bishop, J. Stauffer, R. Carline and W. Myers. 2003. Predicting freshwater fish distributions using landscape-level variables. Fisheries Research 60: 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brauning, D. 1992. Atlas of Breeding Birds in Pennsylvania. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  3. Bruzzone, L. and D. Prieto. 2000. Automatic analysis of the difference image for unsupervised change detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 38: 1171–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, J., P. Gong, C. He, R. Pu and P. Shi. 2003. Land-use/land-cover change detection using improved change vector analysis. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 69: 369–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coppin, P. and M. Bauer. 1996. Digital change detection in forest ecosystems with remote sensing imagery. Remote Sensing Reviews 13: 207–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, F. W., D. M. Stoms, J. E. Estes, J. Scepan and J. M. Scott. 1990. An information systems approach to biological diversity. International Journal of Geographic Information Systems 4: 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fortran, R. T. T. 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. 632 p.Google Scholar
  8. Fortran, R. T. T. and M. Godron. 1986. Landscape Ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Frohn, R. 1998. Remote Sensing for Landscape Ecology: New Metric Indicators for Monitoring, Modeling, and Assessment of Ecosystems. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
  10. Gibson, P. and C. Power. 2000. Introductory Remote Sensing: Principles and Practices. Taylor and Francis, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Gong, P. 1993. Change detection using principal component analysis and fuzzy set theory. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 19: 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Isaaks, E. and R. M. Shrivastava. 1989. An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.Google Scholar
  13. James, M. 1985. Classification Algorithms. John Wiley & Sons, London, UK.Google Scholar
  14. Jensen, J. 2000. Remote Sensing of the Environment: An Earth Resource Perspective. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
  15. Lunetta, R. and C. Elvidge, eds. 1998. Remote Sensing Change Detection: Environmental Monitoring Methods and Applications. Ann Arbor Press, Ann Arbor, Ml.Google Scholar
  16. Mas, J. 1999. Monitoring land-cover changes: a comparison of change detection techniques. International Journal of Remote Sensing 20: 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McGarigal, K. and B. Marks. 1995. FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. General Technical Report PNW 351, U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.Google Scholar
  18. Miller, E. W., Ed. 1995. A Geography of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  19. Myers, W. 2000. Landscape scale ecological mapping of Pennsylvania forests. Research Rept. ER2002, Environmental Resources Research Institute, The Pennsylvania State University, Univ. Park, PA 16802 USA.Google Scholar
  20. Myers, W. 2003. Doubly segmented images for pattern-based approach to change detection. Final report on NASA Research Project NAG5-1054. Research Report PSIE 2003-6, Penn State Institutes of Environment, The Pennsylvania State University, Univ. Park, PA 16802 USA. 90 pp. + CD-ROM.Google Scholar
  21. Myers, W., J. Bishop, R. Brooks, T. O’Connell, D. Argent, G. Storm, J. Stauffer, Jr. and R. Carline. 2000. The Pennsylvania GAP Analysis Final Report. The Pennsylvania State University, Univ. Park, PA 16802.Google Scholar
  22. Myers, W., J. Bishop, R. Brooks and G. P. Patil. 2001. Composite spatial indexing of regional habitat importance. Community Ecology 2: 213–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Myers, W., G. P. Patil and C. Taillie. 1999. Conceptualizing pattern analysis of spectral change relative to ecosystem status. Ecosystem Health 5: 285–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Myers, W., G. P. Patil and C. Taillie. 2003. Doubly segmented proxy images for multi-scale landscape ecology and ecosystem health. Community Ecology 4:163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Olivieri, S. T. and E. H. Backus. 1992. Geographic information systems (GIS) Applications in biological conservation. Biology International 25:10–16.Google Scholar
  26. Rogan, J., J. Miller, D. Stow, J. Franklin, L. Levien and C. Fisher. 2003. Land-cover change monitoring with classification trees using Landsat TM and ancillary data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 69: 793–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Scott, J. M., F. Davis, B. Custi, R. Noss, B. Butterfield, C. Groves, H. Anderson, S. Caicco, F. D’Erchia, T. C. Edwards, Jr., J. Ulliman and R. G. Wright. 1993. Gap analysis: A geographic approach to protection of biological diversity. Wildlife Monographs No. 123.Google Scholar
  28. Singh, A. 1989. Digital change detection techniques using remotely sensed data. International Journal of Remote Sensing 10: 989–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tso, B. and P. Mather. 2001. Classification Methods for Remotely Sensed Data. Taylor and Francis, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Walrath, D. 2000. Multiscale analysis of avian distributions in Pennsylvania. Master of Science Thesis in Ecology, The Pennsylvania State University, Univ. Park, PA 16802 USA.Google Scholar
  31. Wilkie, D. and J. Finn. 1996. Remote Sensing Imagery for Natural Resources Monitoring: A Guide for First-Time Users. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2003

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. L. Myers
    • 1
  • G. P. Patil
    • 2
    Email author
  • C. Taillie
    • 2
  • D. C. Walrath
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Forest Resources and Penn State Institutes of EnvironmentThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.Center for Statistical Ecology and Environmental Statistics, Department of StatisticsThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  3. 3.Penn State Institutes of EnvironmentThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations