Behavior of class-level landscape metrics across gradients of class aggregation and area

By M. Neel, K. McGarigal, Samuel A. Cushman. Landscape Ecology, 2004

359 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/881c1808682461325edcc30961954c95af1eee3b

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Parsimony in landscape metrics: Strength, universality, and consistency (2008, background): “Most metrics calculated for real landscapes confound different aspects of composition and configuration (Neel et al., 2004), yet there have been few attempts to quantitatively separate these effects (e.g., McGarigal and McComb, 1995; Villard et al., 1999).”
Landscape patterns from mathematical morphology on maps with contagion (2009, methodology): “In any case, like With (2002) we can define 'index values' for comparisons, and like Neel et al. (2004) we can make inferences about the effects of contagion on MSPA pattern classes by examining the trends of order parameters in relation to P and H. Knowledge of such effects on neutral maps is…”
Assessing Habitat Fragmentation Effects on Primates: The Importance of Evaluating Questions at the Correct Scale (2013, background): “…total amount of edge, number of fragments) are strongly related in a nonlinear manner to the amount of habitat within a landscape, in such a way that below a certain threshold of habitat area, small changes in the extent of the habitat lead to big changes in these measures (Neel et al. 2004 ).”
Scale dependent inference in landscape genetics (2010, positive): “Several well known papers have evaluated the sensitivity and consistency of landscape metrics to variation in landscape pattern using controlled empirical sampling and neutral models (e.g. Riitters et al. 1995; Hess and Bay 1997; Hargis et al. 1998; Neel et al. 2004; Cushman et al. 2008a).”
Surface metrics: an alternative to patch metrics for the quantification of landscape structure (2009, methodology): “We selected a suite of commonly used metrics with the aim of capturing a broad suite of landscape structure components (Neel et al. 2004; Cushman et al. 2008).”
Range-wide analysis of wildlife habitat: Implications for conservation (2010, background): “The most relevant characteristic of this metric for this study is that it is independent of habitat area (Neel et al., 2004), making it suitable for comparing the degree of habitat connectivity in different mountain regions that differ in the amount of habitat they contain.”
Mapping Spatial Patterns with Morphological Image Processing (2007, background): “However, indicators at landscape level provide only a single value and are difficult to interpret independently of composition (Neel et al. 2004).”