Evaluating empirical scaling relations of pattern metrics with simulated landscapes

72 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A new approach for rescaling land cover data (2008, background): “Issues associated with rescaling have been broadly considered and reviewed (Riitters 2005; Wu et al. 2006) showing that landscape pattern changes as a function of map grain and extent (Shen et al. 2004) and that many metrics exhibit power law changes with changing grain size (Wu 2004).”
Landscape metric performance in analyzing two decades of deforestation in the Amazon Basin of Rondonia, Brazil (2006, background): “PSSD, PSCoV, and LPI have been reported to be stable metrics with respect to spatial resolution by other researchers contrary to the results of this study (Saura, 2002, 2004; Shen et al., 2004; Wu, 2004; Wu et al., 2000, 2002).”
Evaluating the effectiveness of landscape metrics in quantifying spatial patterns (2010, background): “In recent decades, more focus has been paid to scale relations (Wu et al., 2000, 2002; Saura and Martinez-Millan, 2001; Lausch and Herzog, 2002; Shen et al., 2004; Wu, 2004; Uuemaa et al., 2005; Saura and Castro, 2007), the accuracy of source data (Shao et al.”
On the accuracy of landscape pattern analysis using remote sensing data (2008, background): “The sensitivity of landscape metrics to changing scale of analysis is now fairly well understood (Shen et al. 508 Landscape Ecol (2008) 23:505–511”