Literature DB >> 15015696

Landscape trends in Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern United States ecoregions.

Jerry A Griffith1, Stephen V Stehman, Thomas R Loveland.   

Abstract

Landscape pattern and composition metrics are potential indicators for broad-scale monitoring of change and for relating change to human and ecological processes. We used a probability sample of 20-km x 20-km sampling blocks to characterize landscape composition and pattern in five US ecoregions: the Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain, Southeastern Plains, Northern Piedmont, Piedmont, and Blue Ridge Mountains. Land use/and cover (LULC) data for five dates between 1972 and 2000 were obtained for each sample block. Analyses focused on quantifying trends in selected landscape pattern metrics by ecoregion and comparing trends in land cover proportions and pattern metrics among ecoregions. Repeated measures analysis of the landscape pattern documented a statistically significant trend in all five ecoregions towards a more fine-grained landscape from the early 1970s through 2000. The ecologically important forest cover class also became more fine-grained with time (i.e., more numerous and smaller forest patches). Trends in LULC, forest edge, and forest percent like adjacencies differed among ecoregions. These results suggest that ecoregions provide a geographically coherent way to regionalize the story of national land use and land cover change in the United States. This study provides new information on LULC change in the southeast United States. Previous studies of the region from the 1930s to the 1980s showed a decrease in landscape fragmentation and an increase in percent forest, while this study showed an increase in forest fragmentation and a loss of forest cover.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 15015696     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-003-0078-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  3 in total

1.  Development and implementation of the Norwegian monitoring programme for agricultural landscapes.

Authors:  W E Dramstad; W J Fjellstad; G H Strand; H F Mathiesen; G Engan; J N Stokland
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 6.789

2.  Supplementing land-use statistics with landscape metrics: some methodological considerations.

Authors:  F Herzog; A Lausch
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Environmental monitoring in the The Netherlands: past developments and future challenges.

Authors:  G Mol; S P Vriend; P F van Gaans
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.513

  3 in total
  8 in total

1.  Estimating reference nutrient criteria for Maryland ecoregions.

Authors:  Raymond P Morgan; Kathleen M Kline; John B Churchill
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Using an ecoregion framework to analyze land-cover and land-use dynamics.

Authors:  Alisa L Gallant; Thomas R Loveland; Terry L Sohl; Darrell E Napton
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Directions of change in land cover and landscape patterns from 1957 to 2000 in agricultural landscapes in NW Spain.

Authors:  María Silvia Calvo-Iglesias; Urbano Fra-Paleo; Rafael Crecente-Maseda; Ramón Alberto Díaz-Varela
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2006-10-12       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Recent landscape change at the ecoregion scale in Southern Québec (Canada), 1993-2001.

Authors:  Benoît Jobin; Claudie Latendresse; Marcelle Grenier; Charles Maisonneuve; Aïssa Sebbane
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2009-04-28       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Estimation of late twentieth century land-cover change in California.

Authors:  Benjamin M Sleeter; Tamara S Wilson; Christopher E Soulard; Jinxun Liu
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2010-03-09       Impact factor: 2.513

6.  Forest fragmentation predicts local scale heterogeneity of Lyme disease risk.

Authors:  John S Brownstein; David K Skelly; Theodore R Holford; Durland Fish
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2005-10-27       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Using multi-scale behavioral investigations to inform wild pig (Sus scrofa) population management.

Authors:  Jennifer L Froehly; Nathan R Beane; Darrell E Evans; Kevin E Cagle; David S Jachowski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The influence of fish length on tissue mercury dynamics: implications for natural resource management and human health risk.

Authors:  Dana K Sackett; W Gregory Cope; James A Rice; D Derek Aday
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 3.390

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.