Show simple item record

Landscape structure and ecosystem conservation: an assessment using remote sensing

dc.contributor.authorMann, Samuelen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorBenwell, George Len_NZ
dc.contributor.authorLee, William Gen_NZ
dc.date.available2011-04-07T03:05:07Z
dc.date.copyright1997-03en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationMann, S., Benwell, G. L., & Lee, W. G. (1997). Landscape structure and ecosystem conservation: an assessment using remote sensing (Information Science Discussion Papers Series No. 97/02). University of Otago. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10523/833en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10523/833
dc.description.abstractAnalyses of landscape structure are used to test the hypothesis that remotely sensed images can be used as indicators of ecosystem conservation status. Vegetation types based on a classified SPOT satellite image were used in a comparison of paired, reserve (conservation area) and adjacent more human modified areas (controls). Ten reserves (average size 965 ha) were selected from upland tussock grasslands in Otago, New Zealand. While there were equal numbers of vegetation types and the size and shape distribution of patches within the overall landscapes were not significantly different, there was less of ‘target’ vegetation in controls. This was in smaller patches and fewer of these patches contained ‘core areas’. These control ‘target’ patches were also less complex in shape than those in the adjacent reserves. These measures showed that remotely sensed images can be used to derive large scale indicators of landscape conservation status. An index is proposed for assessing landscape change and conservation management issues are raised.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherUniversity of Otagoen_NZ
dc.relation.ispartofseriesInformation Science Discussion Papers Seriesen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshQA76 Computer softwareen_NZ
dc.titleLandscape structure and ecosystem conservation: an assessment using remote sensingen_NZ
dc.typeDiscussion Paperen_NZ
dc.description.versionUnpublisheden_NZ
otago.bitstream.pages18en_NZ
otago.date.accession2011-01-18 20:26:32en_NZ
otago.schoolInformation Scienceen_NZ
otago.openaccessOpen
otago.place.publicationDunedin, New Zealanden_NZ
dc.identifier.eprints1034en_NZ
otago.school.eprintsSpatial Information Research Centreen_NZ
otago.school.eprintsInformation Scienceen_NZ
dc.description.referencesAldridge, C. H.; Benwell, G.L. 1995. Information loss: a hidden cost of digitising maps. AURISA/ 7th Colloquium of the Spatial Information Research Centre, Palmerston North, NZ, 379-387 Arbuckle, C. J. 1995. (unpublished) Applications of remote sensing and geographic information systems to wetland inventory: problems of data acquisition, accuracy and application. Dip. Sci. Dissertation (Zoology). University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. 69 pp. Bowman, D. M. J. S. 1993. Biodiversity, much more than biological inventory. Biodiversity Letters 1: 163. Green, K.; Kempa, D.; Lackey, L. 1994. Using remote sensing to detect and monitor land-cover and land-use change. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 60(3): 331-337. Korner, C. 1994. Scaling from species to vegetation: the usefulness of functional groups. Biodiversity and Ecosystem function Eds. E. D. Schulze and H. A. Mooney. Berlin, Springer-Verlag. 117-140. Marr, A. J.; Bacon, C.J. 1996. Remote sensing and GIS for Forestry Assessment in the Otago Region. 8th Colloquium of the Spatial Information Research Centre, University of Otago, New Zealand, 195-199 McGarigal, K.; Marks B. J. 1994. FRAGSTATS, Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Quantifying Landscape Structure. Corvallis, Oregon, Forest Science Dept, Oregon State University. Meltzer, M. I.; Hastings, H.M. 1992. The use of fractals to assess the ecological impact of increased cattle population: case study from the Runde Communal Land, Zimbabwe. Journal of Applied Ecology 29: 635-646. Pienkowski, M. W.; Bignal,; E.M. Galbraith, C.A.; McCraken, D.I.; Stillman, R.A.; Boobyer, M.G.; Curtis, D.J.; 1996. A simplified classification of land-type zones to assist the integration of biodiversity objectives in land-use policies. Biological Conservation 75(1): 11-25. Ripple, W. J.;. Bradshaw,G.A.; Spies,T.A. 1991. Measuring forest landscape patterns in the Cascade Range of Oregon, USA. Biological Conservation 57: 73-88. Schulze, E. D.;. Gerstberger, P. 1994. Functional aspects of landscape diversity: a Bavarian example. In: Schulze, E.D.; Mooney, H.A. (Editors) Biodiversity and Ecosystem function pp. 453-465 Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany. 525pp. Smith, T. B.; Bruford, M.W; Wayne, R.K. 1994. The preservation of process: the missing element of conservation programmes. Biodiversity Letters 3: 164-167. Stoms, D. M.; Estes, J. E. 1993. A remote sensing research agenda for mapping and monitoring biodiversity. International Journal of Remote Sensing 14: 1839-1860. Swift, M. J.; Anderson, J.M. 1994. Biodiversity and ecosystem function in agricultural systems. In: Schulze, E.D.; Mooney, H.A. (Editors) Biodiversity and Ecosystem function pp. 15-41. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany. 525pp. World Resources Institute (1992). Global Biodiversity Strategy. World Resources Institute, World Conservation Union, United Nations Environment Programme, Food and Agriculture Association, UN Education Scientific and Cultural Organisation, 244pp.en_NZ
otago.relation.number97/02en_NZ
 Find in your library

Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
dp1997-02-online.pdf
Size:
185.7Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Full text
View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record