Assessing Floodplain Forests: Using Flow Modeling and Remote Sensing to Determine the Best Places for Conservation

Anderson, Mark; Ferree, Charles E.; Olivero, Arlene P.; Zhao, Feng

doi:10.3375/043.030.0105

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The additional advantages of such measures include maintaining water supplies during periods of drought, enhancing biodiversity, and contributing to carbon storage and sequestration. Reforestation can both sequester carbon and have benefits for adaptation, including increased rainfall infiltration into soil (45,46), floodwater impedance (44), and provision of shade (31). Restoring savannas, by removing trees, reseeding grasslands, and reinstating natural fire regimes (47), increases resilience, supports carbon storage in soils (48), protects water resources (49), and reduces the risk of catastrophic fires (50).…”

Section: Synergiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the success of climate change adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems

Morecroft

Duffield

Harley³

et al. 2019

Science

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural and seminatural ecosystems must be at the forefront of efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change. In the urgency of current circumstances, ecosystem restoration represents a range of available, efficient, and effective solutions to cut net greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change. Although mitigation success can be measured by monitoring changing fluxes of greenhouse gases, adaptation is more complicated to measure, and reductions in a wide range of risks for biodiversity and people must be evaluated. Progress has been made in the monitoring and evaluation of adaptation and mitigation measures, but more emphasis on testing the effectiveness of proposed strategies is necessary. It is essential to take an integrated view of mitigation, adaptation, biodiversity, and the needs of people, to realize potential synergies and avoid conflict between different objectives.

show abstract

Section: Synergiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the success of climate change adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems

Morecroft

Duffield

Harley³

et al. 2019

Science

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the distribution of sites was broad and across river types, it targeted major floodplain areas that were identified previously by state natural heritage programs (Bechtel and Sperduto, 1998;Sorenson et al, 1998;Kearsley, 1999;Metzler and Barrett, 2006) and a basin wide study combining a topography-based GIS model with remote sensing (Anderson et al, 2010). For more details on the individual sites please refer to Table S1 in the appendix.…”

Section: Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying flooding regime in floodplain forests to guide river restoration

Marks

Nislow

2014

Elem. Sci. Anth.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Determining the flooding regime needed to support distinctive floodplain forests is essential for effective river conservation under the ubiquitous human alteration of river flows characteristic of the Anthropocene Era. At over 100 sites throughout the Connecticut River basin, the largest river system in New England, we characterized species composition, valley and channel morphology, and hydrologic regime to define conditions promoting distinct floodplain forest assemblages. Species assemblages were dominated by floodplain-associated trees on surfaces experiencing flood durations between 4.5 and 91 days/year, which were generally well below the stage of the two-year recurrence interval flood, a widely-used benchmark for floodplain restoration. These tree species rarely occurred on surfaces that flooded less than 1 day/year. By contrast abundance of most woody invasive species decreased with flooding. Such flood-prone surfaces were jointly determined by characteristics of the hydrograph (high discharges of long duration) and topography (low gradient and reduced valley constraint), resulting in increased availability of floodplain habitat with increasing watershed area and/or decreasing stream gradient. Downstream mainstem reaches provided the most floodplain habitat, largely associated with low-energy features such as back swamps and point bars, and were dominated by silver maple (Acer saccharinum). However, we were able to identify a number of suitable sites in the upper part of the basin and in large tributaries, often associated with in-channel islands and bars and frequently dominated by sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) and flood disturbance-dependent species. Our results imply that restoring flows by modifying dam operations to benefit floodplain forests on existing surfaces need not conflict with flood protection in some regional settings. These results underscore the need to understand how flow, geomorphology, and species traits interact to produce characteristic patterns of floodplain vegetation, and that these interactions should form the basis of effective river restoration and conservation.

show abstract

“…Although far less used in forestry than the LME, the CART method has been successfully applied for modeling tree mortality (Dobbertin & Biging 1998) and for the regionalization of global models of the volume of tally trees (Räty & Kangas 2008) or of floodplain forest occurrences (Anderson et al 2010). Therefore, an accurate evaluation its advantages and disadvantages in comparison with the widely used LME method is required.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of parametric and nonparametric methods for modeling height-diameter relationships

Adamec¹,

Drápela²

2017

iForest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the problem of regionalization of the height-diameter model at the stand level. To this purpose, we selected two different modeling techniques. As a parametric method, we chose a linear mixed effects model (LME) with calibrated conditional prediction, whose calibration was carried out on randomly selected trees either close to mean diameter or within three diameter intervals throughout the diameter range. As a nonparametric method, the technique of classification and regression trees (CART) was chosen. These two methods were also compared with the local model created by ordinary least squares regression. The results show that LME with calibrated conditional prediction based on measurements of height at three diameter intervals provided results very close to the local model, especially when six to nine trees are measured. We recommend this technique for the regionalization of the global model. The CART method provided worse results than LME, with the exception of parameters of the residual distribution. Nevertheless, the latter approach is very user-friendly, as the regression tree creation and especially its interpretation are relatively simple, and could be recommended when larger deviations are allowed.

show abstract

Assessing Floodplain Forests: Using Flow Modeling and Remote Sensing to Determine the Best Places for Conservation

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

Measuring the success of climate change adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems

Measuring the success of climate change adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems

Quantifying flooding regime in floodplain forests to guide river restoration

Comparison of parametric and nonparametric methods for modeling height-diameter relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About