Kevin J. Kleiner | Search USGS

USGS2016

Prioritizing landscapes for longleaf pine conservation

We developed a spatially explicit model and map, as a decision support tool (DST), to aid conservation agencies creating or maintaining open pine ecosystems. The tool identified areas that are likely to provide the greatest benefit to focal bird populations based on a comprehensive landscape analysis. We used NLCD 2011, SSURGO, and SEGAP data to map the density of desired resources for open pine ecosystems and six focal species of birds and 2 reptiles within the historic range of longleaf pine east of the Mississippi River. Binary rasters were created of sites with desired characteristics such as land form, hydrology, land use and land cover, soils, potential habitat for focal species, and putative source populations of focal species. Each raster was smoothed using a kernel density estimator. Rasters were combined and scaled to map priority locations for the management of each focal species. Species’ rasters were combined and scaled to provide maps of overall priority for birds and for birds and reptiles. The spatial data can be used to identify high priority areas for conservation or to compare areas under consideration for maintenance or creation of open pine ecosystems.

Cooperator Science Series↗

USGS2012

Modeling habitat dynamics accounting for possible misclassification

Land cover data are widely used in ecology as land cover change is a major component of changes affecting ecological systems. Landscape change estimates are characterized by classification errors. Researchers have used error matrices to adjust estimates of areal extent, but estimation of land cover change is more difficult and more challenging, with error in classification being confused with change. We modeled land cover dynamics for a discrete set of habitat states. The approach accounts for state uncertainty to produce unbiased estimates of habitat transition probabilities using ground information to inform error rates. We consider the case when true and observed habitat states are available for the same geographic unit (pixel) and when true and observed states are obtained at one level of resolution, but transition probabilities estimated at a different level of resolution (aggregations of pixels). Simulation results showed a strong bias when estimating transition probabilities if misclassification was not accounted for. Scaling-up does not necessarily decrease the bias and can even increase it. Analyses of land cover data in the Southeast region of the USA showed that land change patterns appeared distorted if misclassification was not accounted for: rate of habitat turnover was artificially increased and habitat composition appeared more homogeneous. Not properly accounting for land cover misclassification can produce misleading inferences about habitat state and dynamics and also misleading predictions about species distributions based on habitat. Our models that explicitly account for state uncertainty should be useful in obtaining more accurate inferences about change from data that include errors.

Landscape Ecology↗