4.7 Article

Modeling α- and β-diversity in a tropical forest from remotely sensed and spatial data

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2012.04.002

关键词

Image texture; PCNM analysis; Regression kriging, Remote sensing; Species richness; Species turnover; Tropical dry forest

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Comprehensive information on species distribution and species composition patterns of plant communities is required for effective conservation and management of biodiversity. Remote sensing offers an inexpensive means of attaining complete spatial coverage for large areas, at regular time intervals, and can therefore be extremely useful for estimating both species richness and spatial variation of species composition (alpha- and beta-diversity). An essential step to map such attributes is to identify and understand their main drivers. We used remotely sensed data as a surrogate of plant productivity and habitat structure variables for explaining alpha- and beta-diversity, and evaluated the relative roles of productivity-habitat structure and spatial variables in explaining observed patterns of alpha- and beta-diversity by using a Principal Coordinates of Neighbor Matrices analysis. We also examined the relationship between remotely sensed and field data, in order to map alpha- and beta-diversity at the landscape-level in the Yucatan Peninsula, using a regression kriging procedure. These two procedures integrate the relationship of species richness and spatial species turnover both with remotely sensed data and spatial structure. The empirical models so obtained can be used to predict species richness and variation in species composition, and they can be regarded as valuable tools not only for identifying areas with high local species richness (alpha-diversity), but also areas with high species turnover (beta-diversity). Ultimately, information obtained in this way can help maximize the number of species preserved in a landscape. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V 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