Development Of Landscape Ecology Research Articles

How do the surrounding areas of national parks work in the context of landscape fragmentation? A case study of 159 protected areas selected in 11 EU countries

Europe has unique natural values but also has the highest level of ecosystem fragmentation. Evaluating the effectiveness of protected area management is becoming an increasingly common practice. Our main goal was to assess the dynamics of LULC changes in the buffer zones of 159 national parks in 11 selected European countries on the basis of the CORINE Land Cover database in the period from 1990 to 2018. We used five landscape metrics in order to investigate whether high natural and landscape values in the areas surrounding national parks affect the degree and rate of landscape fragmentation and isolation. We checked the statistical significance of the differences in the measured values among different distances to parks (1, 2 and 3 km) in different years and countries using the two-way ANOVA test. Furthermore, the classical principal component analysis method was applied to measure data grouped by country and then averaged by year and distance factor. We showed that high natural and landscape values in the surrounding areas of national parks affect the degree and rate of landscape fragmentation. The patch density index shows an evident increase, both in dynamic terms (1990–2018) and, mainly, in the spatial aspect. In 2018, there was an increasing rate of the patch density index of approximately 5–7% compared to that in 1990. It should be kept in mind that management efforts focused on the buffer zones of national parks may have limited success. Undoubtedly, the obtained results will contribute to the development of landscape ecology and spatial developments in the context of the effective management of national parks and their surroundings.

Landscape Ecology in Mexico: Evolution, Research, Education and Future (Selected Theoretical and Meta-Scientific Aspects)

Abstract Context:The impulse to write this contribution was the effort of co-authors to bring the European landscape ecologist closer to the development, research & didactic approaches and possible future development of landscape ecology in Mexico from the theoretical, metascientific and applied point of view. Purpose: The purpose of the metascientific approach, in this case meta-landscape ecological approach, is to increase the degree of generalization of existing empirical-methodological, theoretical-application and didactic knowledge and results of landscape-ecological research, so that generally valid landscapeecological regularities and principles can be determined The aim was to acquire new generalizing and holistic qualities and perspectives in the field of landscape ecology in Mexico at this level. Methods: The two-step methodical procedure was elaborated, using metascientifically oriented landscape ecological and ecological Mexican literature, complemented by our studies and personal experience. Results: In this way, new knowledge, representing the added value and meaning of landscape ecologicalevolution, research, education and future development in Mexico was gained. It will serve also to Mexican landscap ecologists. Conclusiones: Mexican landscape ecology, lying at the intersection of European and American landscape ecology, can be described as integrative, idiographic-nomothetic at the spatial level of the landscape in the contact zone of European and American research approaches and principles.

Spatial and temporal analysis of landscape ecological quality in Yulin

Yulin is one of the important energy chemical industry area in China, located at the intersection of Loess Plateau and Mu Us Desert, and the vulnerability of ecosystem in this area is extremely prominent. Landscape ecological quality research helps to enhance ecological protection and high quality development in the region. The Remote sensing images in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2018 of Yulin were interpreted to the landscape thematic data by ERDAS and ArcGIS10 and the landscape ecological quality model has been established in terms of the landscape ecological stability and disturbance. This paper aimed to reveal the spatial–temporal characteristics of landscape ecological quality. The results showed that: (1) the trend of landscape ecological quality firstly improve then degrade and enhance again during 2000–2018. (2) the landscape ecological quality improved and the areas with poor and fair landscape ecological quality reduced and the areas with high landscape ecological quality increased from 2000 to 2010. (3) the ecological quality was not optimistic during 2010 and 2015, with the areas with high landscape ecological quality reduced.(4) the ecological quality improved again from 2015 to 2018, and the areas with highest landscape ecological quality reaching 65.201% of total area. The changes of ecological quality were mainly driven by the project of returning farmland to forest, which increased vegetation coverage, reduced soil erosion, and achieved obvious results in ecological benefits, and these results may provide helpful information for the ecological conservation and development. • The topic is novel. Currently, there are few studies on landscape ecological quality. • This paper is taking innovative research methods—stability and disturbance, and constructing a landscape ecological quality evaluation model based on the characteristics of the study area using the landscape ecological index. • The research results are helpful to increase the attention to the quality of landscape ecology which promote the further development of landscape ecology.

Advances in Urban River Landscape Ecology Research

It is an inevitable trend to realize the sustainable development of “natural-human-water” through multi-scale and multi-disciplinary research on urban rivers with the principle of landscape ecology. Firstly, from the viewpoint of landscape ecology, and combined with the characteristics of urban rivers, the paper puts forward urban river landscape ecological theory and research framework. Secondly, the basic problems of urban river landscape ecology are studied. Finally, the theoretical development of urban river landscape ecology is studied, including the theory of urban river landscape ecosystem complexity, classification method of wetland and riverine ecosystem, and modeling of patch age and heteromorphosis. The research results have certain reference value for ecological river construction and river landscape ecology development.

Eighty-year review of the evolution of landscape ecology: from a spatial planning perspective

Sustainable spatial development requires the establishment of a balance between rational land use and the protection of nature, ecosystems and biodiversity on various spatial levels and temporal horizons. The integration of landscape ecology and spatial development planning can help overcome the complex problems of managing landscapes and natural resources and increase the chances of reaching sustainable spatial development. The main goal of this research is to provide insight into the development of landscape ecology from the spatial planning perspective. A chronological systematization and categorization were made of relevant papers, authors and events that are important for an understanding of the discipline’s development. An analysis of their content and interrelationships in the integral chronological overview enabled the identification of landscape ecology’s developmental periods. Research resulted in the elaboration of an integral chronological overview of the scholarly and professional communities’ key activities and achievements, making it possible to monitor the development of theory, key developmental concepts and their corresponding methodological procedures, methods and techniques. The overview enabled the identification of (a) types of “arenas” for professional dialogue, (b) key authors and works, (c) relationships among components within the same, but also between different, categories of components of the chronological overview, and on the basis of all this (d) the establishment of developmental periods. Five developmental periods of the discipline have been established: (1) Landscape Ecology Foundation Period 1939–1979, (2) Landscape Ecology Establishment Period 1980–1987, (3) Landscape Ecology Solidification Period 1988–1991, (4) Period of Retrospection and New Articulation 1992–2005, and (5) Period of Stable Development 2006- present. Research indicated continued development of the theoretical–methodological framework of landscape ecology and its links with spatial planning through the constant reexamination of existing perspectives and the establishment of new ones. The numerous conceptual frameworks selected in the paper unequivocally illustrate a strong conditionality between landscape ecology and spatial planning. However, the systematization of written sources revealed that few papers present a review or perspectives with regard to the link with spatial planning, which is why this research has become an important basis for future research in a form of a curriculum for initial research on the relationship between landscape ecology and spatial planning.

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Estimation of landscape pattern change on stream flow using SWAT-VRR

ABSTRACT With the development of landscape ecology and hydrology, the research in relationship between landscape pattern changes and hydrological process is pushed into a further level, and also to proposed a higher request to the development of related models. The SWAT-VRR model (Soil and Water Assessment Tool with Vegetation Runoff Regulation) is a distributed hydrological model to better show the effect of land use landscape change on hydrological processes. The Qihe watershed in Danjiangkou reservoir area was selected in a case study, and the applicability of SWAT-VRR was verified firstly, then set up two typical water-soil conservation scenario simulations to analyze the response to landscape pattern changes under SWAT-VRR. The results indicate that, the SWAT-VRR model achieved a notable improvement in monthly and daily hydrological simulation comparing to the SWAT model (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) simulation during 2003 to 2006. Compared with the two land use scenarios, the 300 m forest riparian along the Qihe River can adjust the runoff more effectively than the area greater than 15° is forest, and show a strong stability in water-soil conservation effect during different rainfall. The SWAT-VRR provides a more accurate scientific basis to estimate landscape pattern change on stream flow.

Summary of landscape pattern research

With the development of landscape ecology in China, the landscape pattern has been studied as a hot spot and a core issue. The concept of landscape and the development of landscape pattern research reflect the deepening of scholars’ understanding of the relationship between nature and people. This paper first briefly introduces the concept of landscape pattern, and attempts to explore the development history of the concept of landscape from horizontal and vertical. The development of the research on landscape pattern in China is summarized from the publication years, research methods and publications. This paper analyzes and discusses the research progress of landscape pattern theory and its application in different fields, and puts forward its research hotspots and development trends, which provides reference for future research of Chinese scholars.

Landscape ecology of mammals

Recognition of the Anthropocene epoch formally acknowledges the pervasive and increasingly dominant effects of human activities on the world's biomes. A defining characteristic of the Anthropocene is habitat conversion (land-use change) for agricultural and urbanized land uses. Within this context, landscape ecology is of critical importance as it examines the influence of spatial heterogeneity on ecological patterns and processes at spatial and temporal extents that are larger than those traditionally studied in ecology. The application of landscape ecological approaches to mammalian populations, communities, and metacommunities began in and has increased steadily since the 1990s. Non-volant small mammals or bats are often the focus of landscape studies of communities, whereas carnivores or artiodactyls are commonly the focus of population-level studies cast within the domains of conservation or wildlife management. Research on the landscape ecology of mammals has primarily been conducted in Europe and North America, but with increasing frequency has been explored on other continents. Mammalian research has contributed significantly to the development of landscape ecology, demonstrating that responses to landscape structure are often taxon-, scale-, or context-dependent. Future research should consider hierarchical approaches that are scale-sensitive, with explicit linkage to contemporary hypotheses, thereby advancing theoretical understanding and informing management and conservation action.

Considering landscape connectivity and gene flow in the Anthropocene using complementary landscape genetics and habitat modelling approaches

A comprehensive understanding of how rapidly changing environments affect species gene flow is critical for mitigating future biodiversity losses. While recent methodological developments in landscape ecology and genetics have greatly advanced our understanding of biodiversity conservation, they are rarely combined and applied in studies. We merged multifaceted landscape habitat modelling with genetics to detect and design biological corridors, and we evaluated the importance of habitat patches to test corridor efficacy for gene flow in a fragmented landscape. We examined an isolated population of an endangered umbrella species, the capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus), in the Western Carpathians; they have experienced habitat deterioration and accompanying population declines in recent decades. To detect spatial patterns of genetic distances, we combined and optimized resistance surfaces using species distribution modelling, structural and functional connectivity analyses, multivariate regression approaches, and Moran’s eigenvector maps at hierarchical scales. Larger habitat patches had better gene flow among them, and we confirmed a broken metapopulation network characterised by a pattern of isolation by the environment. Distance to human settlements explained landscape genetic patterns better than other environmental and landscape features, MaxEnt resistance, Conefor resistance surfaces, and the pairwise Euclidean distances among individuals. The closer individuals were to settlements, the more pronounced were the effects of logging and other negative factors on their connectivity. Merging multifaceted landscape habitat modelling with genetics can effectively test corridor efficacy for gene flow, and it represents a powerful tool for conservation of endangered species.

Time-Spatial Contextuality, Complexity, and Integrity of the Development and Cognition of Landscape Ecology (Selected Theoretical and Meta-Scientific Aspects)

Abstract The view of the development and cognition of landscape ecology should not be an isolated one. In order to comprehend the connection, complexity and cohesion of natural and social nature which influence the genesis, development and function of landscape ecology should be studied in time-spatial and landscape-ecological contextuality, complexity and integrity. This paper is devoted to the topic of time-spatial contextuality, complexity, and integrity of landscape ecology as a science approached from two points of view: firstly, the potential development of landscape ecology reflecting its object and approach of research and secondly, cognition of landscape ecology by landscape ecologists, i.e. subject of landscape ecological research. The mission of this paper is to at least partially enlighten so far less studied meta-scientific research field by means of selected theoretical and meta-scientific aspects.

Comparison of Ecological Risk among Different Urban Patterns Based on System Dynamics Modeling of Urban Development

AbstractIn this study an urban development model was developed, based on system dynamics, in order to compare four urban layout patterns in terms of their effects on landscape ecology risk and environmental pollution. The four patterns are centralized urban model, green corridor urban model, decentralized urban model (satellite city model), and resource-based city model. Landscape ecology risk assessments based on simulation results show that the decentralized urban model is superior to the centralized urban model in terms of long-term landscape ecological development and environmental protection. The study also analyzed the relationships between the patch spacing index and the evaluation index.

1981-2015年我国大陆地区景观生态学研究文献分析

PDF HTML阅读 XML下载 导出引用 引用提醒 1981-2015年我国大陆地区景观生态学研究文献分析 DOI: 10.5846/stxb201604240775 作者: 作者单位: 北京师范大学,北京师范大学 资源学院 作者简介: 通讯作者: 中图分类号: 基金项目: 国家自然科学基金项目（41390462） A bibliometric analysis of landscape ecology in China mainland between 1981 and 2015 Author: Affiliation: Beijing Normal University,Beijing Normal University Fund Project: 摘要 | 图/表 | 访问统计 | 参考文献 | 相似文献 | 引证文献 | 资源附件 | 文章评论 摘要:在我国大陆地区，景观生态学已走过35周年，国际景观生态学会中国分会已经正式成立20周年。以“景观生态学”为主题词，检索得到1981-2015年我国大陆地区景观生态学学者发表的相关文献，对文献数量、文献期刊分布、文献所属研究机构、文献内容和文献国际影响力5个方面进行统计分析，得到关于我国大陆地区景观生态学研究发展历程和现状的几点认识。（1）我国大陆地区景观生态学研究按发表文献数量状况可划分为3个阶段：1981-1989年，景观生态相关研究较少，学科处于引进、吸收的初始阶段；1990-2006年，文献数量迅猛增长，我国大陆地区景观生态学学科发展成熟并壮大；2007年至今，景观生态学研究平稳发展，在思索中寻求创新。（2）我国大陆地区景观生态学研究文献发表刊物以生态、农业、资源与环境、地理测绘和园林领域刊物为主，刊物影响因子差别明显，景观生态学专业期刊在我国大陆地区有所欠缺。（3）景观生态学研究机构主要为以中国科学院生态环境研究中心和中国科学院沈阳应用生态研究所为代表的中国科学院研究所和以北京大学、北京林业大学和北京师范大学为代表的高校，各研究机构发挥所处地理环境优势和自身学科特色，对不同类型景观展开深入研究。（4）我国大陆地区景观生态学研究内容主要包括学科理论与技术方法、景观格局-生态过程-尺度的相互作用机制、景观生态学的部门应用等，其研究主题包括城市、农业、湿地、园林、气候变化、生物多样性、景观可持续等众多方面，其研究范式正经历着从“格局-过程-尺度”向“格局-过程-服务-可持续性”的变化过程。（5）就英文文献的发文量和被引频次而言，我国大陆地区景观生态学研究是国际景观生态学研究的重要组成部分，但其国际影响力有待于进一步提升。 Abstract:Landscape ecology is an interdisciplinary field that investigates landscape units, spatial patterns, and ecological processes. It can be used to improve landscape protection, management, planning, design, and sustainability at many different scales. The development of landscape ecology in China mainland began 35 years ago in1981 when the subject was introduced into China mainland for the first time. The International Association of Landscape Ecology in China (IALE China) was established in 1995. This study describes the development and status of landscape ecology research in China mainland by analyzing the articles published in the CNKI and Web of Science databases between1981 and 2015. The key term used for the literature search was landscape ecology, and both Chinese and English articles written by scientists in China mainland were included. The analysis of the detailed information was based on the number of related articles, journal names, research institutes, articles content, and international influence. The research results were as follows: (1) The development of landscape ecology in China mainland could be divided into three stages according to the number of related articles per year. Between 1981 and 1989, there was little research on landscape ecology in China mainland and the discipline was in its introduction and early development phase. Between 1990 and 2006, the number of related articles per year increased rapidly and landscape ecology in China mainland developed rapidly. Since 2007, landscape ecology in China mainland has been in a steady development phase where it has always been a challenging task to innovate and develop new ideas. (2) Articles on landscape ecology research in China mainland were published in ecology, agriculture, resources and environment, geographical mapping and architecture journals. There are no specialized journals on landscape ecology in China mainland, and the relative journals have different impact factors. (3) In terms of the number of published papers, the major research institutions for landscape ecology were the Chinese Academy of Sciences, such as the Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences and the Shenyang Institute of Applied Ecology; Peking University; Beijing Forestry University; and Beijing Normal University. They carried out comprehensive studies on landscape ecology by integrating geographical concerns with their own subject characteristics. (4) There were different research priorities at different periods of time; and three Chinese landscape ecology research areas were identified by key words analysis. These were landscape ecology discipline and technology research, the interaction mechanisms between landscape pattern, ecological processes, and scale, and the application of landscape ecology to different areas. Landscape ecology in China mainland included urban areas, agriculture, wetlands, gardens, climate change, biodiversity, and landscape sustainability, etc. The research paradigm for landscape ecology evolved from a “pattern-process-scale” to “pattern-process-service-sustainability”. (5) When the number and citation frequencies of articles included in Web of Science database were taken into account, China mainland’s international status in the field of landscape ecology has improved significantly since the 1990s. The total number of articles from China mainland was ranked 5th in the world. Although China mainland’s landscape ecology research contribution was an important part of international landscape ecology research, the article citation frequencies were low and its international influence may need to improve. The reference searching methods used in this study had serious limitations, and it was difficult to collect all the landscape ecology articles published by the scientists from China mainland. However, the 20th birthday of IALE-China is an appropriate time to review the progress made by the scientists over the last 35 years in the area of landscape ecology. 参考文献 相似文献 引证文献

In memoriam: Paul G. Risser (1939–2014)

We lost a great one in ecology, an important person in the development of landscape ecology in North America and a gem of person on July 10, 2014. Paul continued to work in his office as much as he could throughout his many treatments for the decades-long illness that finally killed him, and was in his office until the week before he died. He leaves behind his wife Les, his twin brother, four sons, two daughters, and 14 grandchildren. Paul G. Risser was born September 14, 1939 in Blackwell, Oklahoma, attended Grinnell College in Iowa (where he was serving as Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees at the time of his death), and earned M.S. (1965) and Ph.D. degrees (1967) from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. From there, he joined the University of Oklahoma, Norman, faculty of Botany, where he served as Director of the Oklahoma Biological Survey for 7 years and Chairman of the Department for 5 (with a stint at NSF as Program

Landscape Disturbance and Lake Response: Temporal and Spatial Perspectives

Lake sediments are natural archives that record the response of a lake to both in-lake processes and catchment disturbance (over a range of timescales). The response (or lack of) of a lake to external forcing is a function of the severity of the disturbance (and its areal extent) but is also strongly mediated by catchment characteristics, such as slope and hydrological connectivity. Many studies of recent lake disturbance have focussed on anthropogenic disruption of geochemical cycles, e.g. acidification and eutrophication, which because of their “ecological” power appear to over-ride catchment filters. Lake sediments also record the variability of natural disturbance regimes themselves (fire, volcanic ash falls, species invasions, and climate) and the consequent lake response but this aspect has received much less attention. The possibility of using lake sediments to address long-term (102 – 103 yr) interactions between e.g., climate, catchment ontogeny and disturbance events (and their synergies) has not been fully explored, largely because of an over-riding emphasis on climate as a direct driver of ecological change.Traditionally, limnology has also focussed on a few key sites (sentinels) but in response to the development of landscape ecology has progressively embraced a regional approach to understanding how lakes respond to external forcing (climate) and disturbance (“lakes in the landscape”). Although the interaction of a lake with its catchment is implicit, i.e. via hydrological and nutrient loading, palaeolimnologists rarely take an explicitly spatial view of this interaction nor have they considered spatial location (i.e. response of a number of lakes within a lake district). Arguably, the inherent spatial variability of terrestrial disturbance has been ignored by palaeolimnologists, largely as a result of focussing on one core from a single lake.This paper reviews the impact of terrestrial disturbance on lakes but also argues for explicit consideration of space and location in determining the resultant temporal variability of the ecological response. The importance of within-lake spatial heterogeneity is also high-lighted (i.e. the major contribution of the littoral zone to both diversity and production). However, any attempt to determine spatially replicated (i.e. at a regional scale), holistic (i.e. whole lake) responses to disturbance will encounter considerable problems associated with dating, loss of temporal resolution and among site comparison. Despite this, it is clear that recent methodological developments in the area of biomarkers, compound specific stable isotopes coupled with progress in dating (age-models), ecological modelling and statistical analysis offer the possibility of undertaking regionally-replicated studies of lake response to natural disturbance, thereby contributing and expanding our understanding of ecosystem dynamics at a range of spatial and temporal scales.

Landscape ecology meets landscape science

Landscape ecology is a broad field in a patchwork of related disciplines. Giving landscape ecology a definition and delimiting it from related research areas is both a challenge and a necessity. Past endeavors have focused on expert opinions, analyses of published papers, and conference proceedings. We used a mix of all three, including a unique keyword analysis in two leading landscape-related journals, to highlight latest developments in landscape ecology between 2010 and 2013. Our analysis confirms the key topics of Wu (Landscape Ecol 28(1):1–11, 2013), and suggests that of those connectivity is dominating in terms of research output. However, we also found evidence that the borders of the journal Landscape Ecology are fuzzier than sketched in recent publications. There is a large overlap with the journal Landscape and Urban Planning, and in general a growing weight of conservation, landscape management, and planning related issues in the landscape ecology community. We conclude by encouraging the continued inclusion and strengthening of socio-ecological hot topics such as urban studies and landscape-human interactions in landscape ecological studies and subsequently in the journal landscape ecology.

中国景观生态学发展历程与未来研究重点

It has been more than 70 years since landscape ecology emerged as a new concept of interdisciplinary research.The development of Chinese landscape ecology also has experienced more than 30 years from the introduction to gradually mature. In this process,Chinese landscape ecologists have carried out many studies in combination with the practical situation of China and important progress has been made in many research fields at tracking the international frontier research,. This paper briefly describes the establishment and development history of the International Association for Landscape Ecology( IALE),and analyzes the development of landscape ecology in China through systematic review of landscape ecology literatures. The development of Chinese landscape ecology is divided into five stages: embryonic and germination phase( before the 1980s),introduction and digestion phase( 1980—1988),practice and rapid development phase( 1989—2000),development and pondering phase( 2001—2010),thinking and creation phase( 2011 —?). And the top ten key research areas of landscape ecology are delineated: the land use patterns and ecological processes and itsscale effect,the urban ecological land use and construction of the landscape security pattern,landscape ecological planning and nature reserve network optimization,forest landscape dynamic simulation and ecosystem management,evolution of oasis landscape and eco-hydrological processes,landscape fragmentation and the genetic diversity protection,the multiple ponds system and wetland landscape pattern design,rice-duck /fish farmland landscape and ecosystem health,terrace fields culture landscape and multi-function maintenance,source-sink landscape pattern analysis and soil-water loss evaluation.Finally,the future research priorities of landscape ecology in China are discussed from three aspects: disciplinary development and theory research,hot research regions,and practical applications.

Thinking spatially: The importance of geospatial techniques for carnivore conservation

Today, 27% of the known mammalian carnivore species are either extinct or threatened, undermining the health of many ecosystems, which provide resources and services that are crucial for human development. Carnivore research and management have been limited by the predominantly cryptic nature of carnivores, sometimes also by their large-scale habitat requirements and their remote distributions. As a consequence, many carnivore species currently remain under-studied. The increased availability and facilitated interpretation of remote-sensing imagery, combined with recent developments in landscape ecology and geographic information systems, have provided a wealth of analytical tools to overcome many of these traditional setbacks. These can be coupled with advances in multivariate statistics and species distribution models to formalise the link between spatial patterns in environmental variables and species occurrence. Such methods allow a greater understanding of the processes shaping habitat use, the effects of poaching and land-cover change, and assist in the design and monitoring of more targeted actions towards carnivores' long-term conservation.

CITYgreen Watershed Analysis of Toby Creek: An American Heritage River Tributary

Applications of geospatial technologies such as geographical information systems (GIS) and remote sensing imagery have been relevant for years for both small-scale and large-scale watershed investigations and assessments (e.g., Bruns et al. 1997a, b, O’Neill et al. 1997, and see reviews in Allan 2004 and Bruns 2005). This watershed perspective originally evolved from a general hierarchical approach to spatial scales in environmental analysis (Allen and Starr 1982, O’Neill et al. 1986) for both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Later, O’Neill et al. (1997) recommended the use of GIS and remote sensing data, along with developments in landscape ecology, to assess biotic diversity, watershed integrity, and landscape stability. A useful geospatial perspective on watershed management and assessment is that of the Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (15 Federal agencies of the U.S.) that developed a manual for applications in stream restoration (Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group 1998) based on a hierarchical approach to watersheds at multiple scales. This team recognized ecosystems at five different spatial scales from regional landscape to local stream reach, stating that watershed units can be delineated at each of these scales, depending on the focus of the analysis and availability of data. We have employed this approach in our GIS environmental plan (Bruns et al. 2001) and related watershed studies (Bruns and Wiersma 2004, Bruns 2005) of the Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna American Heritage River (US-L AHR), considered in more detail below. In 1998, the US-L watershed was designated as one of 14 American Heritage Rivers by President Clinton (Bruns and Wiersma 2004). Previous studies of a selected subset of tributaries in this AHR watershed resulted in an initial GIS data base on land use, mining impacts, and water quality in the region (Bruns et al. 1997a, b), all of which provided an important impetus to the final AHR designation (U.S. Congressman Paul Kanjorski, personal communication). Based on these GIS data sets (Bruns et al. 1997b), a systems approach to environmental monitoring and assessment (Bruns et al. 1997a, Bruns and Wiersma 2004), and the Interagency Watershed Group’s geospatial scaling model (Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group 1998), we initiated a GIS environmental master plan (Bruns et al. 2001) for the US-L AHR watershed including a research plan to address problems of mining, urbanization, combined sewer overflows, and suburban sprawl in this study area, from 1999 to the present. In this paper, we present selected watershed analyses based on CITYgreen (American Forests 2002), and discuss these in the context of geospatial scaling (Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group 1998) and the economic benefits of ecosystem services (Bennett et al. 2005). CITYgreen utilizes GIS data on soils, slopes, and land use to estimate the economic value of natural ecosystems, especially forests (American Forests, 2002); CITYgreen, a software application intended for environmental land use planning by local communities, represents an important tool in environmental planning and management.

Landscape ecology: perspectives based on the 2007 IALE world congress

Sixty-nine years since Carl Troll first coined the term ‘‘landscape ecology’’, 25 years of existence of the International Association for Landscape Ecology (IALE), and 20 years since the first issue of the journal Landscape Ecology, can we now consider landscape ecology a more mature science? This question was discussed at a roundtable during the 2007 IALE World Congress. As one of the invited speakers, I read carefully all 401 abstracts of the open sessions and symposia of the congress, and analysed them in a quantitative way based on the following criteria: country of origin, technologies used for spatial quantification, organizational level (such as population, community, ecosystem), cross-disciplinarity (i.e. multi-, interor transdisciplinarity; for definitions, see Fry et al. 2007), temperate versus tropical landscapes, habitat modification, type of landscape, spatial and temporal scales, kind of human disturbance, main research topics as per Wu and Hobbs’s (2002) classification. Several interesting patterns emerged from this analysis which may help us to identify critical issues in the development of landscape ecology. First, who are doing landscape ecology? Studies from 59 countries were presented at the 2007 IALE World Congress. Half the studies came from researchers in seven countries and four different continents: the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, Australia, Spain, and China (Fig. 1). This distribution is quite different from that of papers published in international journals. A survey in the Thomson Institute for Scientific Information (ISI; http://www.portal.isiknowledge.com/) using the words ‘‘ecology’’ and ‘‘landscape’’ showed that almost half the papers published between 1995 and 2005 came from North American researchers (Fig. 1). The comparison per country between IALE and ISI showed that the international literature is dominated by the USA and then by Canada. This can lead to an unbalanced representation of different approaches in landscape ecology. Among the manuscripts compiled in the ISI database, for example, the frequency of the words ‘‘model’’, ‘‘scale’’, ‘‘conservation’’ and ‘‘ecosystem’’ in abstracts, titles and keywords of North American and Canadian papers is higher than that from other countries, suggesting that the scope of the studies developed in the USA and Canada differs from that of other countries. Since the emphases or approaches of landscape ecology vary among different regions, and even within countries (see for example the Russian school, the more pragmatic Australian perspective, or the Dutch planning and management approach), the development of this science would benefit from a more balanced distribution of publications from different regions/countries, offering the opportunity to discuss a wider range of perspectives in landscape ecology. J. P. Metzger (&) Department of Ecology, Institute of Bioscience, University of Sao Paulo, Rua do Matao, 321, travessa 14, 05508-900 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil e-mail: jpm@ib.usp.br

Expanding the bridging capability of landscape ecology

Landscape ecology has made tremendous progress since the 1980s, which is in part reflected in the rapidly increasing number of publications in the English literature (Fig. 1). For the period of 1991–2007, ten countries from North America, Europe, Oceania, and East Asia were contributed more than 92% to the total number of publications, and about 31 % of all articles were published in ten journals (Table 1). These numbers indicate that landscape ecology has been widely recognized in research and applications, and become a wellestablished scientific field internationally (Wu 2007). Based on our survey, it is clear that the assessment, planning, and modeling of various landscapes are dominant in the literature. The concepts and tools of landscape ecology have been increasingly integrated in biodiversity conservation and ecological restoration. Researchers have become more cautious and critical in using landscape metrics, with new methods such as graph theory and vector based landscape pattern analysis being introduced in landscape studies. Socioeconomic factors are increasingly considered in contemporary landscape ecology that emphasizes the driving mechanisms and environmental impacts of landscape change. Interfacing with other scientific fields has created new growing points of landscape ecology, including landscape genetics, fluvial landscape ecology, multifunctional landscape research, and sustainable landscape design and planning. These new growing points are leading landscape ecology to a more advanced stage. Landscape genetics, for example, combines landscape ecology with population genetics to understand the interactions between landscape characteristics and microevolutionary processes including gene flow, genetic drift, and selection (Holderegger and Wagner 2006). Thus, landscape genetics can help bridge fine-scale genetic studies with broad-scale landscape research and management, which is important in biological conservation and disease control. Landscape ecology has become an increasingly interdisciplinary field which will contribute significantly to the new sustainability science (Wu 2006; Naveh 2007). There is, however, still a long way to go to become a genuinely transdisciplinary enterprise. Landscapes are entities with overwhelming complexity, and the definitions of landscape often have to consider various ecological goods and services, cultural, and aesthetic values. Landscape ecological research, therefore, often requires the involvement of many disciplines from both natural and social sciences. Furthermore, the effective communication and application of scientific findings are dependent largely on the active participation of stakeholders (Luz 2000), which demands a transdisciplinary approach. To facilitate the development of landscape ecology towards a truly transdisciplinary science, it is B. Fu (&) Y. Lu L. Chen State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O. Box 2871, Beijing 100085, China e-mail: bfu@rcees.ac.cn