4.5 Article

Recognising fuzzy vegetation pattern: the spatial prediction of floristically defined fuzzy communities using species distribution modelling methods

期刊

JOURNAL OF VEGETATION SCIENCE
卷 25, 期 2, 页码 323-337

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12092

关键词

Classification; Ecotone; Gradient; Boosted regression trees; Continuum

资金

  1. University of Melbourne
  2. Department of Sustainability and Environment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Question Plant communities are not necessarily spatially exclusive; a point in space can exhibit properties of multiple communities. Such variation can be described using floristically defined 'fuzzy' units, however these may not be easily delineated using standard remote sensing methods. Is there value in considering communities as fuzzy? Can species distribution modelling methods be used to represent fuzzy communities spatially? Location Western Victoria, Australia. Methods Fuzzy communities were objectively identified from vegetation census quadrats with a cluster analysis of ordinated species data. Boosted regression trees were used to create models that defined relationships between the sampled communities and environmental predictor variables. These were applied to the mapped predictors to create maps of estimated fuzzy community membership for the entire study area. Results Four separate fuzzy communities were identified from the sampled vegetation data. Models were created for each community and these were effectively used to generate maps of fuzzy community membership. Individual fuzzy community maps illustrated vegetation variation that could not be discerned on a discretely classified map. Conclusions Fuzzy communities were found to represent a greater proportion of species variation than discretely classified units. Species distribution modelling methods were effective in creating independent spatial maps of each floristically defined fuzzy community; however the interpretation of these maps is more complex than with a single discrete community map.

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

4.5
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