Emma C Underwood | PubMed Health

PubMed2006

A comparison of spatial and spectral image resolution for mapping invasive plants in coastal california.

We explored the potential of detecting three target invasive species: iceplant (Carpobrotus edulis), jubata grass (Cortaderia jubata), and blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. We compared the accuracy of mapping six communities (intact coastal scrub, iceplant invaded coastal scrub, iceplant invaded chaparral, jubata grass invaded chaparral, blue gum invaded chaparral, and intact chaparral) using four images with different combinations of spatial and spectral resolution: hyperspectral AVIRIS imagery (174 wavebands, 4 m spatial resolution), spatially degraded AVIRIS (174 bands, 30 m), spectrally degraded AVIRIS (6 bands, 4 m), and both spatially and spectrally degraded AVIRIS (6 bands, 30 m, i.e., simulated Landsat ETM data). Overall success rates for classifying the six classes was 75% (kappa 0.7) using full resolution AVIRIS, 58% (kappa 0.5) for the spatially degraded AVIRIS, 42% (kappa 0.3) for the spectrally degraded AVIRIS, and 37% (kappa 0.3) for the spatially and spectrally degraded AVIRIS. A true Landsat ETM image was also classified to illustrate that the results from the simulated ETM data were representative, which provided an accuracy of 50% (kappa 0.4). Mapping accuracies using different resolution images are evaluated in the context of community heterogeneity (species richness, diversity, and percent species cover). Findings illustrate that higher mapping accuracies are achieved with images possessing high spectral resolution, thus capturing information across the visible and reflected infrared solar spectrum. Understanding the tradeoffs in spectral and spatial resolution can assist land managers in deciding the most appropriate imagery with respect to target invasives and community characteristics.

California↗

PubMed2006

Conservation planning for ecosystem services.

Despite increasing attention to the human dimension of conservation projects, a rigorous, systematic methodology for planning for ecosystem services has not been developed. This is in part because flows of ecosystem services remain poorly characterized at local-to-regional scales, and their protection has not generally been made a priority. We used a spatially explicit conservation planning framework to explore the trade-offs and opportunities for aligning conservation goals for biodiversity with six ecosystem services (carbon storage, flood control, forage production, outdoor recreation, crop pollination, and water provision) in the Central Coast ecoregion of California, United States. We found weak positive and some weak negative associations between the priority areas for biodiversity conservation and the flows of the six ecosystem services across the ecoregion. Excluding the two agriculture-focused services-crop pollination and forage production-eliminates all negative correlations. We compared the degree to which four contrasting conservation network designs protect biodiversity and the flow of the six services. We found that biodiversity conservation protects substantial collateral flows of services. Targeting ecosystem services directly can meet the multiple ecosystem services and biodiversity goals more efficiently but cannot substitute for targeted biodiversity protection (biodiversity losses of 44% relative to targeting biodiversity alone). Strategically targeting only biodiversity plus the four positively associated services offers much promise (relative biodiversity losses of 7%). Here we present an initial analytical framework for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in conservation planning and illustrate its application. We found that although there are important potential trade-offs between conservation for biodiversity and for ecosystem services, a systematic planning framework offers scope for identifying valuable synergies.

Biodiversity↗