Quantitative Methods for Studying Landscape Boundaries

  • Carol A. Johnston
  • John Pastor
  • Gilles Pinay
Part of the Ecological Studies book series (ECOLSTUD, volume 92)

Abstract

The resurgence of interest in ecotones has come at a technologically opportune time. New equipment and methods that have evolved over the past decade have greatly increased our ability to quantitatively study ecotones. This ability is essential to the development and testing of scientific theories pertaining to ecotones.

Keywords

Permeability Phosphorus Petroleum Hydrocarbon Radar 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen TEH, Starr TB (1982) Hierarchy: perspectives for ecological complexity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  2. Beals EW (1969) Vegetational change along altitudinal gradients. Science 165:981–985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berry JK (1987) Computer-assisted map analysis: potential and pitfalls. Photogrammetric Eng and Remote Sensing 53:1405–1410Google Scholar
  4. Bjelm L (1980) Geologic interpretation of SIR data from a peat deposit in northern Sweden. Lund Institute of Technology, Department of Engineering Geology, Lund, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  5. Brunt JW, Conley W (1990) Behavior of a multivariate algorithm for ecological edge detection. Ecol Modelling 49:179–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burrough PA (1983) Multiscale sources of spatial variation in soil: I. The application of fractal concepts to nested levels of soil variation. J Soil Sci 84:577–97Google Scholar
  7. Burrough PA (1986) Principles of geographical information systems for land resources assessment. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark CA, Cate RB, Trenchard MH, Boatright JA, Bizzell RM (1986) Mapping and classifying large ecological units. BioScience 36:476–478Google Scholar
  9. Cliff AD, Haggett P, Ord JK, Bassett KA, Davies RB (1975) Elements of spatial structure: a quantitative approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  10. Curtis JT (1959) The vegetation of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  11. EPPL7 (1987) EPPL7 users guide. Version 7, Release 1.1. Minnesota State Planning Agency, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  12. ERDAS (1987) ERDAS users guide. ERDAS, Inc., Atlanta, GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
  13. Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape Ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Gosz JR, Dahm CN, Risser PG (1988) Long-path FTIR measurement of atmospheric trace gas concentrations. Ecology 69:1326–1330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goward SN, Tucker CJ, Dye DG (1986) North American vegetation patterns observed with meteorological satellite data. In Dyer MI, Crossley DA, Jr (eds) Coupling of ecological studies with remote sensing: potentials at four biosphere reserves in the United States. U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program, Department of State, Washington, D.C., USA, pp 96–115Google Scholar
  16. Gullion GW (1984) Managing northern forests for wildlife. The Ruffed Grouse Society, Corapolis, Pennsylvania, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. Hall FG, Strebel DE, Goetz SJ, Sellers PJ (1988) Linking knowledge among spatial and temporal scales: vegetation, atmosphere, climate, and remote sensing. Landscape Ecology 2:3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hansen AJ, di Castri F, Naiman RJ (1988) Ecotones: what and why? Biology International Special Issue 17:9–45Google Scholar
  19. Hobbs ER (1986) Characterizing the boundary between California annual grassland and Coastal sage scrub with differential profiles. Vegetatio 65:115–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Holland MM (compiler) (1988) SCOPE/MAB technical consultations on landscape boundaries. Biology International Special Issue 17:46–104Google Scholar
  21. Johnson LB, Johnston CA, Pastor J (1988) Raster and vector data in ecological research applications. GIS/LIS ′88 Proc. San Antonio, Texas, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnston CA (1984) Mapping Wisconsin’s wetlands. Wisconsin Natural Resources 8:4–6Google Scholar
  23. Johnston CA, Bonde JP (1989) Quantitative analysis of ecotones using a geographic information system. Photogrammetric Eng and Remote Sensing 55:1643–1647Google Scholar
  24. Johnston CA, Detenbeck NE, Bonde JP, Niemi GJ (1988) Geographic information systems for cumulative impact assessment. Photogrammetric Eng and Remote Sensing 54:1609–1615Google Scholar
  25. Johnston CA, Naiman RJ (1987) Boundary dynamics at the aquatic-terrestrial interface: the influence of beaver and geomorphology. Landscape Ecol 1:47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnston CA, Naiman RJ (1990) The use of a geographic information system to analyze long-term landscape alteration by beaver. Landscape Ecol 4:5–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krige D (1966) Two-dimensional weighted moving average trend surfaces for ore evaluation. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Computer Applications in Ore Valuation. Johannesburg, South Africa, pp 13–38Google Scholar
  28. Krummel JR, Gardner RH, Sugihara G, O’Neill RV, Coleman PR (1987) Landscape patterns in a disturbed environment. Oikos 48:321–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ludwig JA, Cornelius JM (1987) Locating discontinuities along ecological gradients. Ecology 68:448–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Matheron G (1971) The theory of regionalized variables and its applications. Les Cahiers du centre de morphologie mathematique de Fontainebleu. Ecole Nationale Superieure des Mines, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  31. Matson PA, Harriss RC (1988) Prospects for aircraft-based gas exchange measurements in ecosystem studies. Ecology 69:1318–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Milne BT, Johnston KM, Forman RTT (1989) Scale-dependent proximity of wildlife habitat in a spatially-neutral Bayesian model. Landscape Ecol 2:101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mladenoff D (1987) Dynamics of nitrogen mineralization and nitrification in hemlock and hardwood treefall gaps. Ecology 68:1171–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mohler RRJ, Wells GL, Hallum CR, Trenchard MH (1986) Monitoring vegetation of drought environments. BioScience 36:478–483Google Scholar
  35. Naiman RJ, Décamps H, Pastor J, Johnston CA (1988) Potential importance of boundaries to fluvial ecosystems. J N Amer Benthol Soc 7:289–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nellis MD, Briggs JM (1989) The effect of spatial scale on Konza landscape classification using textural analysis. Landscape Ecol 2:93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nwadialo BE, Hole FD (1988) A statistical procedure for partitioning soil transects. Soil Sci 145:58–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Odum EP (1971) Fundamentals of ecology 3rd ed. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  39. Omernik JM (1987) Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Annals Assoc Amer Geog 77:118–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. O’Neill RV, DeAngelis DL, Waide JB, Allen TFH (1986) A hierarchical concept of the ecosystem. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  41. Osborne LL, Wiley MJ (1988) Empirical relationships between land use/cover and stream water quality in an agricultural watershed. J Environ Manage 26:9–27Google Scholar
  42. Pastor J, Aber JD, McClaugherty CA, Melillo J (1984) Aboveground production and N and P cycling along a nitrogen mineralization gradient on Blackhawk Island, Wisconsin. Ecology 65:256–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pastor J, Broschart M (1990) The spatial pattern of a northern conifer—hardwood landscape. Landscape Ecol 4:55–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Perry MJ (1986) Assessing marine primary production from space. BioScience 36:461–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pinay G, Décamps H, Chauvet E, Fustec E (1990) Functions of ecotones in fluvial systems. In Naiman RJ, Décamps H (eds) The Ecology and management of aquaticterrestrial ecotones. Man and the Biosphere Series, Vol. 4. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  46. Ripley BD (1981) Spatial statistics, series in probability and mathematical statistics. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Rock BN, Vogelmann JE, Williams DL, Vogelmann AF, Hoshizaki T (1986) Remote detection of forest damage. BioScience 36:439–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Roller NEG, Colwell JE (1986) Coarse-resolution satellite data for ecological surveys. BioScience 36:468–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sharpe DM, Stearns FW, Burgess RL, Johnson WC (1981) Spatio-temporal patterns of forest ecosystems in man-dominated landscapes of the eastern United States. In Tjallingii SP, de Veer A A (eds) Perspectives on landscape ecology. Centre for Agricultural Publication and Documentation, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp 109–116Google Scholar
  50. Shih SF, Doolittle JA (1984) Using radar to investigate organic soil thickness in the Florida Everglades. J Soil Sci Soc Amer 48:651–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sokal R, Oden NL (1978) Spatial autocorrelation in biology. I. Methodology. Biol J Linnean Soc 10:199–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stenseth NC (1977) On the importance of spatiotemporal heterogeneity for the population dynamics of rodents: toward a theoretical foundation of rodent control. Oikos 29:545–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Telfer ES (1984) Circumpolar distribution and habitat requirements of moose (Alces alces). In Olson R, Hastings R, Geddes F (eds) Northern ecology and resource management. University of Alberta Press, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, pp 145–182Google Scholar
  54. Tucker CJ, Holben BN, Goff TE (1984) Intensive forest clearing in Rondonia, Brazil as detected by satellite remote sensing. Remote Sens Environ 15:255–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tucker CJ, Townshend JRG, Goff TE (1985) African land-over classification using satellite data. Science 227:369–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Turner MG (1987) Spatial simulation of landscape changes in Georgia: a comparison of 3 transition models. Landscape Ecol 1:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Turner SJ, O’Neill RV, Conley W, Conley MR, Humphries HC (1991) Pattern and scale: statistics for landscape ecology. In Turner MG, Gardner RH (eds) Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 17–49Google Scholar
  58. Ulriksen P (1980) Investigation of peat thickness with radar. Professional Paper of the Lund Institute of Technology, Department of Engineering Geology, Lund, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  59. Urban DL, O’Neill RV, Shugart HH (1987) Landscape ecology: a hierarchical perspective can help scientists understand spatial patterns. BioScience 37:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Walther EG, Pitchford AM, Olhoeft GR (1986) A strategy for detecting subsurface organic contaminants. In the Proceedings of the NWWA/API Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic Chemicals in Ground Water— Prevention, Detection and Restoration, Houston, Texas November 12–14 1986, pp 357–381Google Scholar
  61. Waring RH, Aber JD, Melillo JM, Moore B III (1988) Precursors of change in terrestrial ecosystems. BioScience 36:433–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Webster R (1973) Automatic soil-boundary location from transect data. Math Geol 5:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Webster R, Wong IFT (1969) A numerical procedure for testing soil boundaries interpreted from air photographs. Photogrammetria 24:59–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Whittaker RH (1956) Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecol Monogr 26:1–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Whittaker RH (1960) Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and California. Ecol Monogr 30:279–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wierenga PJ, Hendrickx JMH, Nash MH, Ludwig JA, Daugherty LA (1987) Variation of soil and vegetation with distance along a transect in the Chihuahuan Desert. J Arid Environ 13:53–63Google Scholar
  67. Young TN, Eby JR, Allen HL, Hewitt MJ III, Dixon KR (1988) Wildlife habitat analysis using Landsat and radiotelemetry in a GIS with application to spotted owl preference for old growth. In GIS ′87, Proceedings of the 2nd Annual International GIS Conference, San Francisco, California. October 26–30 1987, pp 595–600Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carol A. Johnston
  • John Pastor
  • Gilles Pinay

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations