Download 2nd: Agricultural Fields Reverted to Forest

Predicting species distributions
for New England invasives
Explanatory data layers:
• Field collected information: habitat/community type, canopy closure,
slope aspect, soil moisture regime
• Climate variables: Mean annual precipitation, Mean annual snow fall,
Mean annual min & max temperatures, Annual record extreme
min & max temperature, Mean annual temperature, Mean length of
frost free period, Mean number of growing degree days, Mean annual
number of heating degree days: 2 km grid scale.
• Topographic variables: DEM - average elevation for 2km grid cell, DEM –
range, high and low values for 2km grid cell.
• Road influences: Distance to Road (for each IPANE plot point), Length of
Roads within each 2km grid cell.
• Landuse – landcover: percent land cover of each of 9 classes resampled
from 30m resolution to 2 km.
IPANE data are used for predictive
modeling. Here is the predicted spread
of Celastrus orbiculatus (from dark areas
to light areas) in New England.
Celastrus orbiculatus
Oriental bittersweet
The uncertainty (variance) is also
measured in the predictive model
(darker areas are most uncertain).
Example of modeled invasive distribution at the regional scale:
Oriental bittersweet
Local to landscape patterns
C. orbiculatus: 251 out of 603 - 41.6 %
Is there an effects of land-use
or land-use change on the
distribution of invasive
species in the New England
landscape?
Land-use change in a local landscape
2000
1970
Quantifying land-use
change in the landscape
over the past 70 years
from aerial photography in
Connecticut
1951
1934
Procedure
• Process historical aerial photographs – create geocorrected mosaic images of 5 different time
periods.
• Digitize land use features - visual interpretation of
aerial mosaics using a suite of LULC categories.
• Create a stratified random sampling scheme Generate 50+ random points for each change
category.
• Sampling - based upon the IPANE plot protocols
Digitizing Example
LULC Change Categories
1.
2.
3.
4.
Forest - No Change
Cultivated Fields - No change
Pasture/Meadow - No change
Residential/Commercial - No change
No Change
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Abandoned fields to Forest
Cultivated fields to Forest
Pasture/Meadow to Forest
Cultivated Fields to Abandoned to Forest
Pasture/Meadow to Abandoned to Forest
Agricultural Fields
Reverted to Forest
10. Cultivated fields to Abandoned fields
11. Pasture/Meadow to Abandoned fields
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Abandoned Fields
as of 2003
Forest to Residential/Commercial
Cultivated fields to Residential/Commercial
Pasture to Residential/Commercial
Abandoned fields to Residential/Commercial
Abandoned fields to Forest to Residential/Commercial
Conversion to
Residential/
Commercial
Final Plot Points
603 in Total: 507 Random, 96 Opportunistic
Presence of One or More Invasive Species
All Plots:
363 / 603
or
60.2%
Random Plots:
288 / 507
or
55.4%
C. orbiculatus: 251 out of 603 - 41.6 %
Random:
186 / 507
36.7%
1000+ : 3
100 - 999: 53
20 - 99: 100
B. thunbergii: 199 out of 603 - 33.0 %
Random:
140 / 507
27.6%
1000+: 2
100 - 999: 31
20 - 99: 47
Presence/Absence
Individual Species by LULC Groups
(From Random Plots: N = 507)
Hierarchy of Invasion
( Abundance of all species combined)
1st: Abandoned Fields as of 2003
(p = .005)
2nd: Agricultural Fields Reverted to Forest
(p < .0001)
3rd: Conversion to Residential / Commercial
(p < .0001)
4th: Categories with No Change
Regression models
Invasive species abundance = f(environmental explanatory variables)
Explanatory variables:
Community type (24 IPANE categories),
Habitat class (4),
Canopy closure,
Slope aspect,
Soil moisture,
LULC (12 or 5),
Distance to Road, Road density,
Distance to nearest building, Building density,
Edge Distance (and type),
Elevation,
Geology,
Soil type and Soil drainage class.
Explaining spatial patterns in Oriental bittersweet
abundance using regression models
Community type: + Aspen/birch, old fields, forest/field edge, roadsides.
- Oak/pine forests.
LULC type:
+ conversion to residental/commercial, abandoned
fields, fields reverting to forest.
- agricultural fields, no change, especially forest.
Canopy closure: - [moderate to dense canopies]
Edge distance:
-
Minor contribution: soils, building distance, prior vegetation cover
Explaining spatial patterns in Japanese barberry
abundance using regression models
Canopy closure: - [for densest canopy closure]
Community type: + upland red maple, northern hardwoods, birch/aspen, old
fields, open fields
- agricultural fields, coniferous forests, oak/pine forests.
LULC:
+ field reverting to forests
- agricultural fields, forests
Edge distance:
-
Mid-Spring ADAR:A Possible Remote
Sensing Search Tool for Invasives?