A comparison of spatially explicit landscape representation methods and their relationship to stream condition

Peterson, Erin E., Sheldon, Fran, Darnell, Ross, Bunn, Stuart E., & Harch, Bronwyn D. (2011) A comparison of spatially explicit landscape representation methods and their relationship to stream condition. Freshwater Biology, 56(3), pp. 590-610.

View at publisher

Abstract

  1. Biodiversity, water quality and ecosystem processes in streams are known to be influenced by the terrestrial landscape over a range of spatial and temporal scales. Lumped attributes (i.e. per cent land use) are often used to characterise the condition of the catchment; however, they are not spatially explicit and do not account for the disproportionate influence of land located near the stream or connected by overland flow.

  2. We compared seven landscape representation metrics to determine whether accounting for the spatial proximity and hydrological effects of land use can be used to account for additional variability in indicators of stream ecosystem health. The landscape metrics included the following: a lumped metric, four inverse-distance-weighted (IDW) metrics based on distance to the stream or survey site and two modified IDW metrics that also accounted for the level of hydrologic activity (HA-IDW). Ecosystem health data were obtained from the Ecological Health Monitoring Programme in Southeast Queensland, Australia and included measures of fish, invertebrates, physicochemistry and nutrients collected during two seasons over 4 years. Linear models were fitted to the stream indicators and landscape metrics, by season, and compared using an information-theoretic approach.

  3. Although no single metric was most suitable for modelling all stream indicators, lumped metrics rarely performed as well as other metric types. Metrics based on proximity to the stream (IDW and HA-IDW) were more suitable for modelling fish indicators, while the HA-IDW metric based on proximity to the survey site generally outperformed others for invertebrates, irrespective of season. There was consistent support for metrics based on proximity to the survey site (IDW or HA-IDW) for all physicochemical indicators during the dry season, while a HA-IDW metric based on proximity to the stream was suitable for five of the six physicochemical indicators in the post-wet season. Only one nutrient indicator was tested and results showed that catchment area had a significant effect on the relationship between land use metrics and algal stable isotope ratios in both seasons.

  4. Spatially explicit methods of landscape representation can clearly improve the predictive ability of many empirical models currently used to study the relationship between landscape, habitat and stream condition. A comparison of different metrics may provide clues about causal pathways and mechanistic processes behind correlative relationships and could be used to target restoration efforts strategically.

Impact and interest:

26 citations in Scopus
Search Google Scholar™
22 citations in Web of Science®

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.

These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.

Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

ID Code: 72831
Item Type: Journal Article
Refereed: Yes
Additional Information: Cited By (since 1996):8
Export Date: 26 May 2014
Source: Scopus
CODEN: FWBLA
Additional URLs:
Keywords: Ecosystem health, GIS, Hydrologic activity, Inverse-distance weighting, Land use, algae, Invertebrata
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2010.02507.x
ISSN: 0046-5070
Divisions: Current > Institutes > Institute for Future Environments
Current > Schools > School of Mathematical Sciences
Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Science & Engineering Faculty
Deposited On: 16 Jun 2014 00:36
Last Modified: 09 Jun 2015 00:57

Export: EndNote | Dublin Core | BibTeX

Repository Staff Only: item control page