Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T04:14:35.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - The promise of landscape modeling: successes, failures, and evolution

from PART II - Theory, experiments, and models in landscape ecology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2009

By
David J. Mladenoff
Edited by
John A. Wiens  and
Michael R. Moss
David J. Mladenoff
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Ecology and Management University of Wisconsin–Madison USA
John A. Wiens
Affiliation:
The Nature Conservancy, Washington DC
Michael R. Moss
Affiliation:
University of Guelph, Ontario
Get access

Summary

In 1990, Fred Sklar and Robert Costanza began their review of spatial models in landscape ecology with this statement:

We are at the dawn of a new era in the mathematical modeling of ecological systems. The advent of supercomputers and parallel processing, together with the ready accessibility of time series of remote sensing images, have combined with the maturing of ecology to allow us to finally begin to realize some of the early promise of the mathematical modeling of ecosystems. The key is the incorporation of space as well as time into the models at levels of resolution that are meaningful to the myriad ecosystem management problems we now face. This explicitly spatial aspect is what motivates landscape ecology.

They went on to describe a host of environmental and global issues that, because of their complexity, require spatial analysis and modeling to solve. While their introduction suggests the beginning of Star Trek, a popular television and movie series on another type of space exploration, there was a great deal of truth in what they said. The timing of their statement was also prescient. It is now over a decade since Sklar and Costanza and several other papers reviewed the status of landscape change models. Baker (1989) also laid out a useful framework for classifying and thinking about different landscape modeling approaches.

Type
Chapter
Information
Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology , pp. 90 - 100
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aber, J. D. (1997). Why don't we believe the models?Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 78, 232–233.Google Scholar
Baker, W. L. (1989). A review of models of landscape change. Landscape Ecology, 2, 111–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, W. L. and Mladenoff, D. J. (1999). Progress and future directions in spatial modeling of forest landscapes. In Spatial Modeling of Forest Landscape Change: Approaches and Applications, ed. Mladenoff, D. J. and Baker, W. L.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 333–349.Google Scholar
Bastian, O. (2001). Landscape ecology: towards a unified discipline?Landscape Ecology, 16, 757–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, V. H. and Winkle, W. V. (1998). Models provide understanding, not belief. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 79, 169–170.Google Scholar
Gardner, R. H. and Urban, D. L. (2003). Model validation and testing: past lessons, present concerns, future prospects. In Models in Ecosystem Science, ed. Canham, C. D., Cole, J. C., and Lauenroth, W. K.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 184–203.Google Scholar
Hobbs, R. (1997). Future landscapes and the future of landscape ecology. Landscape and Urban Planning, 37, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, H. S. and Mladenoff, D. J. (1999). Dynamics of fire disturbance and succession on a heterogeneous forest landscape: a spatially explicit and stochastic simulation approach. Ecology, 80, 81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mladenoff, D. J. and He, H. S. (1998). Dynamics of fire disturbance and succession on a heterogeneous forest landscape. US–International Association of Landscape Ecology, Annual Meeting, March 1998, E. Lansing, MI. Abstracts: 121.
Mladenoff, D. J., and He, H. S. (1999). Design and behavior of LANDIS, an object oriented model of forest landscape disturbance and succession. In Spatial Modeling of Forest Landscape Change: Approaches and Applications, ed. Mladenoff, D. J. and Baker, W. L.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 125–162.Google Scholar
Mladenoff, D. J., Host, G. E., Boeder, J., and Crow, T. R. (1993). LANDIS: a model of forest landscape succession and management at multiple scales. Proceedings of the Annual US Landscape Ecology Symposium, Oak Ridge, TN, March 1993. Abstracts: 77.
Mladenoff, D. J., Host, G. E., Boeder, J., and Crow, T. R. (1996). LANDIS: a spatial model of forest landscape disturbance, succession, and management. In GIS and Environmental Modeling: Progress and Research Issues, ed. Goodchild, M. F.., Steyaert, L. T., and Parks, B. O.. Fort Collins, CO: GIS World Books, pp. 75–180.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. W. (1996). Modeling forest dynamics with vital attributes and fuzzy systems theory. Ecological Modeling, 90, 161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheller, R. M. and Mladenoff, D. J. (2004). A forest growth and biomass module for a landscape simulation model, LANDIS: design, validation, and application. Ecological Modelling, 180, 211–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sklar, F. and Costanza, R. (1990). The development of dynamic spatial models for landscape ecology: a review and synthesis. In Quantitative Methods in Landscape Ecology, ed. Turner, M. G. and Gardner, R. H.. New York, NY: Springer, pp. 239–288.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. H. (2001). What is “dangerous” climate change?Nature, 411, 17–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Urban, D. L., Acevedo, M. F., and Garman, S. L. (1999). Scaling up fine-scale processes to large-scale patterns using models derived from models: meta-models. In Spatial Modeling of Forest Landscape Change: Approaches and Applications, eds. Mladenoff, D. J. and Baker, W. L.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 70–98.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×