4.7 Article

Vegetation productivity trends in response to urban dynamics

期刊

URBAN FORESTRY & URBAN GREENING
卷 17, 期 -, 页码 211-216

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.04.005

关键词

MODIS; Time series analysis; Urban expansion; Vegetation productivity

资金

  1. PICT from Argentine Fund for Science and Technology (FONCYT) [2753]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Urbanization is a global phenomenon with still unknown consequences for vegetation dynamics of urban ecosystems, especially in subtropical areas of developing countries. In this paper we analyze the vegetation productivity trend associated to urban densification and urban expansion during the last decade, in twelve cities of northern Argentina. We used time series analysis of MODIS-NDVI images to reconstruct the phenological patterns to retrieve a productivity trend under three spatial classes of urban dynamics: (1) urban, (2) expansion and (3) periphery. Our results show that trends in vegetation productivity are more associated to the environmental characteristics (basal productivity and climate) than to the land cover class. The average trend in productivity in urban areas ranged between -2.54% year(-1) (Metan) and -0.22% year(-1) (Concepcion). In contrast, the range was much tighter between classes; it was -1.37% year(-1) in urban areas and -1.21% in the periphery. In this sense we found significant differences between cities, but no significant differences were observed between classes. Urban growth and urban expansion patterns found in our study suggest the system dynamics is dominated by sprawl patterns rather than by a homogeneous densification. Related to this phenomenon, our results dismissed the idea of urban expansion as the main factor affecting vegetation phenology and supported the hypothesis of regional warming as an explanation for the decrease in vegetation productivity, probably due to the decrease of water balance in arid regions. (C) 2016 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据