Riparian habitat changes across the continental United States (1972–2003) and potential implications for sustaining ecosystem services

Jones, K. Bruce; Slonecker, E. Terrence; Nash, Maliha S.; Neale, Anne C.; Wade, Timothy G.; Hamann, Sharon

doi:10.1007/s10980-010-9510-1

Cited by 98 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Readily available, full coverage data on the location of linear elements at a resolution of 1 km or smaller are however not yet available, despite efforts in this direction for the UK and Scotland (Barr and Gillespie 2000;Brown et al 2014). Riparian habitats are another example of important landscape features capable of providing multiple ESs (Jones et al 2010). The area of riparian forest is suggested as main indicator to map ES capacity for nutrient retention at the European scale (Maes et al 2016).…”

Section: Mapping Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The area of riparian forest is suggested as main indicator to map ES capacity for nutrient retention at the European scale (Maes et al 2016). For the UK, the combination of land cover data at 25-m resolution with flow accumulation maps provides opportunities for the assessment of ESs in riparian zones and the impact of management and land cover change in riparian zones on future ES supply (Jones et al 2010). …”

Section: Mapping Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Humans structure landscapes for the production of food, fibre and fuel, commonly resulting in declines of non-provisioning ecosystem services (ESs). Heterogeneous landscapes are capable of providing multiple ESs, and landscape configuration-spatial arrangement of land cover in the landscape-is expected to affect ES capacity. However, the majority of ES mapping studies have not accounted for landscape configuration. Objectives Our objective is to assess and quantify the relevance of configuration for mapping ES capacity. A review of empirical evidence for configuration effects on the capacity of ten ESs reveals that for four ESs configuration is relevant but typically ignored in ES quantification. For four ESs we quantify the relevance of configuration for mapping ESs using Scotland as a case study. Methods Each ES was quantified through modelling, respectively ignoring or accounting for configuration. The difference in ES capacity between the two ES models was determined at multiple spatial scales. Results Configuration affected the capacity of all four ESs mapped, particularly at the cell and watershed scale. At the scale of Scotland most local effects averaged out. Flood control and sediment retention responded strongest to configuration. ESs were affected by different aspects of configuration, thus requiring specific methods for mapping each ES. Conclusions Accounting for configuration is important for the assessment of certain ESs at the cell and watershed scale. Incorporating configuration in landscape management provides opportunities for spatial optimization of ES capacity, but the diverging response of ESs to configuration suggests that accounting for configuration involves trade-offs between ESs.

show abstract

Section: Mapping Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mapping Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Jones et al [45] studied riparian land cover change across the continental United States at the catchment and riparian scales and they found the decline of natural land cover (e.g., forest) as well as the increase of agricultural and urban land. Since floodplain biotopes are rather small and dynamic, studies at a finer scale are needed to enable a more detailed and accurate understanding of land cover change in the floodplain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land Cover Changes (1963–2010) and Their Environmental Factors in the Upper Danube Floodplain

Otte

Ludewig

et al. 2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:To analyze the changes in the Upper Danube Floodplain, we used aerial photos to quantify the change of landscape pattern from 1963 to 2010. We focused on typical floodplain habitats, i.e., riparian forest and floodplain grassland. We used landscape metrics and transformation matrix to explore changes in land cover structure and composition. The active floodplain experienced increasing fragmentation from 1963 to 2010. Despite an increase of aggregation, riparian forest suffered a 2.3% area loss from 1995 to 2010. Arable land in the active floodplain declined by 28.5%, while its patch size significantly increased. Elevation, distance to river and soil quality were the most relevant environmental factors for the land cover change in the floodplain. Higher soil quality or longer distance to river led to an increase of conversion from grassland into arable land; grassland patches with poorer soil quality were likely to change into riparian forest; riparian forest closer to the river and with a lower height above mean water level tended to remain stable. This comprehensive understanding of historical land cover change and environmental factors is needed for the enhancement of landscape functions and sustainable development in the floodplain.

show abstract

“…The ecological water use of the river, which is essential for the conservation of native aquatic biodiversity and protection of natural ecosystem functions , is also seriously occupied. Consequently, the river system degrades under severe interference (Jones et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing ecological land use and water demand of river systems: a case study in Luanhe River, North China

Yan

Wang

et al. 2012

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Economic and social development has greatly increased ecological water demand and modified land use of river systems worldwide, causing overall degradation of many of these systems. In this study, theoretical and technical frameworks for regionalization on the eco-environmental function of river systems are formulated and applied to the Luanhe River system. Based on its eco-environmental functions, this river can be regionalized into four types of firstclass functional areas: ecological preservation areas, habitat restoration areas, ecological buffer areas and development and utilization areas. Considering the overall ecoenvironmental functions, we assessed the ecological land use of the Luanhe River system. The total area of basic ecological land use is 876.98 km 2 ; the restrictive ecological land use is 1745.52 km 2 ; ecological land use of the river system returned from farmland is 284.25 km 2 ; and that returned from construction land is 17.35 km 2 . The average minimum ecological flow of mainstreams in upper and middle reaches of the Luanhe River is 4.896 m 3 s −1 based on the habitat method. And the recommended minimum and suitable annual ecological water demand of channels in the lower reaches are 391 million m 3 and 819.5 million m 3 , respectively. The evaporation and seepage consumption and vegetation consumption in riparian zones of the Luanhe River system are approximately 132.6 million m 3 and 145.3 million m 3 per year, respectively. Our results suggest that is crucial to regulate the instream ecological water use of the Luanhe River's mainstream starting from the Panjiakou-Daheiting Reservoir system. We recommend accelerating ecological land-use planning and strengthening the regulation of ecological water use on this river system focusing on important lower reaches under the condition of competitive water demand.

show abstract

Riparian habitat changes across the continental United States (1972–2003) and potential implications for sustaining ecosystem services

Cited by 98 publications

References 58 publications

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

Effects of landscape configuration on mapping ecosystem service capacity: a review of evidence and a case study in Scotland

Land Cover Changes (1963–2010) and Their Environmental Factors in the Upper Danube Floodplain

Assessing ecological land use and water demand of river systems: a case study in Luanhe River, North China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About