...
首页> 外文期刊>Mountain Research & Development >Comparison of Surface and Planimetric Landscape Metrics for Mountainous Land Cover Pattern Quantification in Lancang Watershed, China
【24h】

Comparison of Surface and Planimetric Landscape Metrics for Mountainous Land Cover Pattern Quantification in Lancang Watershed, China

机译:澜沧江流域山区土地覆盖格局量化的地表与平面景观指标比较。

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Abstract Landscape pattern structure can be quantified by landscape pattern indices (LPIs). One major drawback of the commonly used LPIs is that the landscape is represented by a planar map, which depicts the projection of a nonflat surface into a 2-dimensional Cartesian space. As a result, ecologically meaningful terrain structures like terrain shape or elevation are not taken into account and valuable information is lost for further analysis. A method to compute LPIs in a surface structure has been developed by Hoechstetter et al, who calculated landscape patch surface area and surface perimeter from digital elevation models. In this paper, Hoechstetter's set of LPIs was used and extended. A parametric t-test was used to assess the differences between the commonly used planimetric metrics and the surface landscape metrics for quantification of a mountain vegetation pattern at 3 levels (patch, category, and landscape) and for natural and anthropogenic categories in the Lancang (Mekong) watershed in China. The results show that the surface-based metrics for area, perimeter, shape, and distance to nearest-neighbor metrics were significantly larger than the same metrics derived by a planimetric approach for patch, category, and landscape levels in 2 different mountainous areas. However, diversity and evenness metrics did not feature significant differences between the surface-based landscape and the landscape represented in the planar maps. When comparing the area metrics for natural and for anthropogenic categories, significantly larger differences between these categories were found when the surface approach was used. The common planimetric method may underestimate the differences between natural and anthropogenic categories on areas and mean patch area in steep mountain areas.
机译:摘要景观格局结构可以通过景观格局指数(LPI)进行量化。常用LPI的一个主要缺点是,景观由平面图表示,该图描绘了非平坦表面在二维笛卡尔空间中的投影。结果,没有考虑到具有生态意义的地形结构,例如地形形状或高程,并且丢失了有价值的信息以进行进一步分析。 Hoechstetter等人开发了一种计算表面结构中LPI的方法,他从数字高程模型计算了景观斑块的表面积和表面周长。在本文中,使用并扩展了Hoechstetter的LPI集。参数t检验用于评估常用的平面度量与地表景观度量之间的差异,以量化3个级别(斑块,类别和景观)的山地植被格局以及澜沧江的自然和人为类别(湄公河)在中国的分水岭。结果表明,基于面积,周长,形状和到最近邻居的距离的基于表面的度量标准明显大于通过平面方法针对2个不同山区的斑块,类别和景观水平得出的相同度量标准。但是,多样性和均匀性指标在基于表面的景观与平面地图中表示的景观之间没有显着差异。当比较自然类别和人为类别的面积指标时,使用地面方法时会发现这些类别之间的差异更大。普通的平面方法可能会低估自然和人为类别之间的差异以及陡峭山区的平均斑块面积。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号