4.4 Article

Mapping continuous fields of forest alpha and beta diversity

期刊

APPLIED VEGETATION SCIENCE
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 429-439

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-109X.2009.01037.x

关键词

Diversity gradients; Diversity maps; Kyrgyzstan; Partial least squares regression; Predictive mapping; Species turnover; Walnut-fruit forests

资金

  1. Volkswagen Foundation
  2. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)
  3. University of Bayreuth, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Question How to map continuous fields of forest alpha and beta diversity in remote areas, based on easily accessible spatial data. Location Kyrgyzstan/Central Asia. Methods The study relied on a combination of predictive mapping and remote sensing. Punctual measurements of alpha diversity were linked to topography and reflectance using regression models. For beta diversity, ordination techniques were employed to extract major vegetation gradients. Scores on the ordination axes were regressed against topography as well as reflectance and subsequently mapped. Beta diversity was mapped as spatial turnover rate along these axes. Results The diversity maps quantified species counts and turnover in a spatially contiguous manner while taking into account fuzzy transitions. The variance explained by regression models ranged from 51% to 61% in cross-validation. Many of the observed differences were caused by differences in species shares. The occurrence of walnut, in particular, showed a negative relation to woody species numbers. Conclusion Mapping biodiversity in remote areas can be based on easily accessible spatial data in combination with a set of calibration field samples. With regard to human influence on walnut dominance, a total removal of human land use would be counterproductive in terms of diversity conservation. The results of this study highlight the need for comprehensive analyses of diversity patterns that include spatially contiguous quantifications of species numbers, shares and turnover rates.

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

4.4
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