Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics

Jianguo Wu, Weijun Shen, Weizhong Sun, Paul T. Tueller

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

352 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

While ecologists are well aware that spatial heterogeneity is scale-dependent, a general understanding of scaling relationships of spatial pattern is still lacking. One way to improve this understanding is to systematically examine how pattern indices change with scale in real landscapes of different kinds. This study, therefore, was designed to investigate how a suite of commonly used landscape metrics respond to changing grain size, extent, and the direction of analysis (or sampling) using several different landscapes in North America. Our results showed that the responses of the 19 landscape metrics fell into three general categories: Type I metrics showed predictable responses with changing scale, and their scaling relations could be represented by simple scaling equations (linear, power-law, or logarithmic functions); Type II metrics exhibited staircase-like responses that were less predictable; and Type III metrics behaved erratically in response to changing scale, suggesting no consistent scaling relations. In general, the effect of changing grain size was more predictable than that of changing extent. Type I metrics represent those landscape features that can be readily and accurately extrapolated or interpolated across spatial scales, whereas Type II and III metrics represent those that require more explicit consideration of idiosyncratic details for successful scaling. To adequately quantify spatial heterogeneity, the metric-scalograms (the response curves of metrics to changing scale), instead of single-scale measures, seem necessary.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)761-782
Number of pages22
JournalLandscape Ecology
Volume17
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - 2002

Fingerprint

scaling
agricultural product
grain size
power law
effect
Law
sampling

Keywords

  • Anisotropy
  • Extent
  • Grain
  • Landscape metric scalograms
  • Landscape pattern analysis
  • Scale effect

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Ecology
  • Geography, Planning and Development

Cite this

Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics. / Wu, Jianguo; Shen, Weijun; Sun, Weizhong; Tueller, Paul T.

In: Landscape Ecology, Vol. 17, No. 8, 2002, p. 761-782.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wu, Jianguo ; Shen, Weijun ; Sun, Weizhong ; Tueller, Paul T. / Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics. In: Landscape Ecology. 2002 ; Vol. 17, No. 8. pp. 761-782.
@article{8e3d4926db0a4c9c96b6172565cf8fb3,
title = "Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics",
abstract = "While ecologists are well aware that spatial heterogeneity is scale-dependent, a general understanding of scaling relationships of spatial pattern is still lacking. One way to improve this understanding is to systematically examine how pattern indices change with scale in real landscapes of different kinds. This study, therefore, was designed to investigate how a suite of commonly used landscape metrics respond to changing grain size, extent, and the direction of analysis (or sampling) using several different landscapes in North America. Our results showed that the responses of the 19 landscape metrics fell into three general categories: Type I metrics showed predictable responses with changing scale, and their scaling relations could be represented by simple scaling equations (linear, power-law, or logarithmic functions); Type II metrics exhibited staircase-like responses that were less predictable; and Type III metrics behaved erratically in response to changing scale, suggesting no consistent scaling relations. In general, the effect of changing grain size was more predictable than that of changing extent. Type I metrics represent those landscape features that can be readily and accurately extrapolated or interpolated across spatial scales, whereas Type II and III metrics represent those that require more explicit consideration of idiosyncratic details for successful scaling. To adequately quantify spatial heterogeneity, the metric-scalograms (the response curves of metrics to changing scale), instead of single-scale measures, seem necessary.",
keywords = "Anisotropy, Extent, Grain, Landscape metric scalograms, Landscape pattern analysis, Scale effect",
author = "Jianguo Wu and Weijun Shen and Weizhong Sun and Tueller, {Paul T.}",
year = "2002",
doi = "10.1023/A:1022995922992",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "761--782",
journal = "Landscape Ecology",
issn = "0921-2973",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics

AU - Wu, Jianguo

AU - Shen, Weijun

AU - Sun, Weizhong

AU - Tueller, Paul T.

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - While ecologists are well aware that spatial heterogeneity is scale-dependent, a general understanding of scaling relationships of spatial pattern is still lacking. One way to improve this understanding is to systematically examine how pattern indices change with scale in real landscapes of different kinds. This study, therefore, was designed to investigate how a suite of commonly used landscape metrics respond to changing grain size, extent, and the direction of analysis (or sampling) using several different landscapes in North America. Our results showed that the responses of the 19 landscape metrics fell into three general categories: Type I metrics showed predictable responses with changing scale, and their scaling relations could be represented by simple scaling equations (linear, power-law, or logarithmic functions); Type II metrics exhibited staircase-like responses that were less predictable; and Type III metrics behaved erratically in response to changing scale, suggesting no consistent scaling relations. In general, the effect of changing grain size was more predictable than that of changing extent. Type I metrics represent those landscape features that can be readily and accurately extrapolated or interpolated across spatial scales, whereas Type II and III metrics represent those that require more explicit consideration of idiosyncratic details for successful scaling. To adequately quantify spatial heterogeneity, the metric-scalograms (the response curves of metrics to changing scale), instead of single-scale measures, seem necessary.

AB - While ecologists are well aware that spatial heterogeneity is scale-dependent, a general understanding of scaling relationships of spatial pattern is still lacking. One way to improve this understanding is to systematically examine how pattern indices change with scale in real landscapes of different kinds. This study, therefore, was designed to investigate how a suite of commonly used landscape metrics respond to changing grain size, extent, and the direction of analysis (or sampling) using several different landscapes in North America. Our results showed that the responses of the 19 landscape metrics fell into three general categories: Type I metrics showed predictable responses with changing scale, and their scaling relations could be represented by simple scaling equations (linear, power-law, or logarithmic functions); Type II metrics exhibited staircase-like responses that were less predictable; and Type III metrics behaved erratically in response to changing scale, suggesting no consistent scaling relations. In general, the effect of changing grain size was more predictable than that of changing extent. Type I metrics represent those landscape features that can be readily and accurately extrapolated or interpolated across spatial scales, whereas Type II and III metrics represent those that require more explicit consideration of idiosyncratic details for successful scaling. To adequately quantify spatial heterogeneity, the metric-scalograms (the response curves of metrics to changing scale), instead of single-scale measures, seem necessary.

KW - Anisotropy

KW - Extent

KW - Grain

KW - Landscape metric scalograms

KW - Landscape pattern analysis

KW - Scale effect

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036968138&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036968138&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/A:1022995922992

DO - 10.1023/A:1022995922992

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 761

EP - 782

JO - Landscape Ecology

JF - Landscape Ecology

SN - 0921-2973

IS - 8

ER -