Literature DB >> 16328675

Synergistic techniques for better understanding and classifying the environmental structure of landscapes.

Brett A Bryan1.   

Abstract

The desire to capture natural regions in the landscape has been a goal of geographic and environmental classification and ecological land classification (ELC) for decades. Since the increased adoption of data-centric, multivariate, computational methods, the search for natural regions has become the search for the best classification that optimally trades off classification complexity for class homogeneity. In this study, three techniques are investigated for their ability to find the best classification of the physical environments of the Mt. Lofty Ranges in South Australia: AutoClass-C (a Bayesian classifier), a Kohonen Self-Organising Map neural network, and a k-means classifier with homogeneity analysis. AutoClass-C is specifically designed to find the classification that optimally trades off classification complexity for class homogeneity. However, AutoClass analysis was not found to be assumption-free because it was very sensitive to the user-specified level of relative error of input data. The AutoClass results suggest that there may be no way of finding the best classification without making critical assumptions as to the level of class heterogeneity acceptable in the classification when using continuous environmental data. Therefore, rather than relying on adjusting abstract parameters to arrive at a classification of suitable complexity, it is better to quantify and visualize the data structure and the relationship between classification complexity and class homogeneity. Individually and when integrated, the Self-Organizing Map and k-means classification with homogeneity analysis techniques also used in this study facilitate this and provide information upon which the decision of the scale of classification can be made. It is argued that instead of searching for the elusive classification of natural regions in the landscape, it is much better to understand and visualize the environmental structure of the landscape and to use this knowledge to select the best ELC at the required scale of analysis.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16328675     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-004-0058-1

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


  13 in total

1.  Information theory for evaluating environmental classification systems.

Authors:  Jörg Kraft; Jürgen W Einax; Corinna Kowalik
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2004-09-23       Impact factor: 4.142

2.  Identifying ecoregion boundaries.

Authors:  Robert G Bailey
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Topographic, bioclimatic, and vegetation characteristics of three ecoregion classification systems in North America: comparisons along continent-wide transects.

Authors:  Robert S Thompson; Sarah L Shafer; Katherine H Anderson; Laura E Strickland; Richard T Pelltier; Patrick J Bartlein; Michael W Kerwin
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Potential of multivariate quantitative methods for delineation and visualization of ecoregions.

Authors:  William W Hargrove; Forrest M Hoffman
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.266

5.  Delineation and evaluation of hydrologic-landscape regions in the United States using geographic information system tools and multivariate statistical analyses.

Authors:  David M Wolock; Thomas C Winter; Gerard McMahon
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 6.  Ecoregions and ecoregionalization: geographical and ecological perspectives.

Authors:  Thomas R Loveland; James M Merchant
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.266

7.  Primary databases for forest ecosystem management-examples from Ontario and possibilities for Canada: NatGRID.

Authors:  D W McKenney; B G Mackey; R A Sims
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.513

8.  Introduction-global to local: Ecological Land Classification.

Authors:  R A Sims; I G Corns; K Klinka
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.513

9.  A habitat-based microscale forest classification system for zoning wood production areas to conserve a rare species threatened by logging operations in south-eastern Australia.

Authors:  D B Lindenmayer; R B Cunningham
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.513

10.  Forest site-quality estimation using Forest Ecosystem Classification in Northwestern Ontario.

Authors:  W H Carmean
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 2.513

View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparing hydrogeomorphic approaches to lake classification.

Authors:  Sherry L Martin; Patricia A Soranno; Mary T Bremigan; Kendra S Cheruvelil
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2011-08-21       Impact factor: 3.266

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.