On the role of spatial stochastic models in understanding landscape indices in ecology

被引:108
|
作者
Fortin, MJ [1 ]
Boots, B
Csillag, F
Remmel, TK
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Dept Zool, Toronto, ON M5S 3G5, Canada
[2] Wilfrid Laurier Univ, Dept Geog & Environm Studies, Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Dept Geog, Mississauga, ON L5L 1C6, Canada
关键词
D O I
10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12447.x
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Spatial stochastic models play an important role in understanding and predicting the behaviour of complex systems. Such models may be implemented with explicit knowledge of only a limited number of parameters relating to spatial relationships among locations. Consequently, they are often used instead of deterministic-mechanistic models, which may potentially require an unrealistically large number of parameters. Currently, in contrast to spatial stochastic models, the parameterization of the joint spatial distribution of objects in landscape models is more often implicit than explicit. Here, we investigate the similarities and differences between bona fide spatial stochastic models and landscape models by focusing mostly on the relationships between processes, their realizations (patterns), representation and measurement, and their use in exploratory as well as confirmatory data analysis. One of the most important outcomes of recognizing the importance of stochastic processes is the acknowledgement that the spatial pattern observed in a landscape is only one realization of that process. Hence, while ecologists have been using landscape pattern indices (LPIs) to characterize landscape heterogeneity and/or make inferences about processes shaping the landscape, no stochastic modelling framework has been developed for their proper statistical elucidation. Consequently, several (mis)uses of LPIs draw conclusions about landscapes which are suspect. We show that several reports about sensitivities of LPIs to measurements have common roots that can be made explicitly manageable by adopting stochastic models of spatial structure. The key parameters of these stochastic models are composition and configuration, which, in general, cannot be estimated independently from each other. We outline how to develop the stochastic framework to interpret observations and make some recommendations to practitioners about everyday usage. The conceptual linkages between patterns and processes are particularly important in light of recent efforts to bridge the static-structural and the dynamic-analytic traditions of ecology.
引用
收藏
页码:203 / 212
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The use and misuse of neutral landscape models in ecology
    With, KA
    King, AW
    OIKOS, 1997, 79 (02) : 219 - 229
  • [22] Important dynamic indices in spatial models
    Kelejian, Harry H.
    Mukerji, Purba
    PAPERS IN REGIONAL SCIENCE, 2011, 90 (04) : 693 - U216
  • [23] Spatial models: Stochastic and deterministic
    Krone, SM
    MATHEMATICAL AND COMPUTER MODELLING, 2004, 40 (3-4) : 393 - 409
  • [24] Improving Student Understanding of Spatial Ecology Statistics
    Hopkins, Robert, II
    Alberts, Halley
    AMERICAN BIOLOGY TEACHER, 2015, 77 (04): : 289 - 293
  • [25] COEXISTENCE IN STOCHASTIC SPATIAL MODELS
    Durrett, Rick
    ANNALS OF APPLIED PROBABILITY, 2009, 19 (02): : 477 - 496
  • [26] Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology
    Lichstein, JW
    Simons, TR
    Shriner, SA
    Franzreb, KE
    ECOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS, 2002, 72 (03) : 445 - 463
  • [27] Spatial resilience: integrating landscape ecology, resilience, and sustainability
    Graeme S. Cumming
    Landscape Ecology, 2011, 26 : 899 - 909
  • [28] Spatial resilience: integrating landscape ecology, resilience, and sustainability
    Cumming, Graeme S.
    LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY, 2011, 26 (07) : 899 - 909
  • [29] LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY - SPATIAL HETEROGENEITY IN ECOLOGICAL-SYSTEMS
    PICKETT, STA
    CADENASSO, ML
    SCIENCE, 1995, 269 (5222) : 331 - 334
  • [30] Recent Progress on Spatial and Thematic Resolution in Landscape Ecology
    Alex Mark Lechner
    Jonathan R. Rhodes
    Current Landscape Ecology Reports, 2016, 1 (2) : 98 - 105