探索加拿大大草原农业景观中多种生态系统服务相互作用的功能连接方法

IF 6.1 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Ehsan Pashanejad , Ali Kharrazi , Zuelclady M.F. Araujo-Gutierrez , Brian E. Robinson , Brian D. Fath , Lael Parrott
{"title":"探索加拿大大草原农业景观中多种生态系统服务相互作用的功能连接方法","authors":"Ehsan Pashanejad ,&nbsp;Ali Kharrazi ,&nbsp;Zuelclady M.F. Araujo-Gutierrez ,&nbsp;Brian E. Robinson ,&nbsp;Brian D. Fath ,&nbsp;Lael Parrott","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Land-use and land-cover patterns, including their spatial heterogeneity and configuration, are fundamental in shaping landscape-level ecological processes, functions, and services. Despite growing recognition of the importance of these patterns, gaps remain in our understanding of how they influence the functional connectivity of ecosystem services (ES)—a crucial aspect for ecosystem resilience and sustainability. This research aims to bridge this gap by investigating the functional connectivity among multiple ES, such as pollination, carbon storage, soil erosion control, wetland-based ES such as habitat provisioning and water storage capacity from marshes, swamps, and open water wetlands, and agricultural food production within a complex landscape. We define functional connectivity as the extent to which the landscape facilitates or impedes the interactions and interdependencies of ecological processes that combine to create distinct ecosystem services. This definition encompasses the dynamics within a spatially interconnected mosaic of land use and land cover, exemplified by connections such as those from pollination provisioning areas to croplands. The primary goal of this research is to develop an empirical framework that encapsulates ‘network topological’ interactions— essentially, the complex interplay among various components of the ecosystem — specific to agricultural landscapes and then to apply this framework to the Canadian prairies. Our methodology uses the spatial tools including InVEST, ARIES, and GIS to map diverse ES. An ecological network is then constructed for these ES at the landscape scale, designating network nodes based on high-value ES provisioning areas and defining links between pairs of ES according to their functional connections (overlapping and proximal in physical space). These functional connections effectively delineate areas of the landscape where the majority of ES flows occur. Mapping ES connectivity and network building revealed that around 29% of the studied landscape lies within functional connectivity zones for the selected ES, representing hotspots of significant ES interactions. Our findings reveal that although soil erosion-control spans just 1.36% of the total area, a substantial 72.59% of its spatial extent was identified as functionally connected. Land cover analysis in functional connectivity zones revealed that natural habitats such as shrublands, broadleaf forests, wetlands, and grasslands are vital mediators of ES. The variability in ES interconnectivity in the landscape was evident both in the intensity of interactions and observed connections. Our findings, informed by Ecological Network Analysis (ENA), emphasize the need for integrating connectivity and systems thinking in conservation sciences to achieve sustainability and ecosystem resilience. The insights offer a foundation to explore optimal ES provisioning scenarios at the landscape scale.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000469/pdfft?md5=2bf25e9552c80b298e349843cf15581c&pid=1-s2.0-S2212041624000469-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A functional connectivity approach for exploring interactions of multiple ecosystem services in the context of agricultural landscapes in the Canadian prairies\",\"authors\":\"Ehsan Pashanejad ,&nbsp;Ali Kharrazi ,&nbsp;Zuelclady M.F. Araujo-Gutierrez ,&nbsp;Brian E. Robinson ,&nbsp;Brian D. Fath ,&nbsp;Lael Parrott\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101639\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Land-use and land-cover patterns, including their spatial heterogeneity and configuration, are fundamental in shaping landscape-level ecological processes, functions, and services. Despite growing recognition of the importance of these patterns, gaps remain in our understanding of how they influence the functional connectivity of ecosystem services (ES)—a crucial aspect for ecosystem resilience and sustainability. This research aims to bridge this gap by investigating the functional connectivity among multiple ES, such as pollination, carbon storage, soil erosion control, wetland-based ES such as habitat provisioning and water storage capacity from marshes, swamps, and open water wetlands, and agricultural food production within a complex landscape. We define functional connectivity as the extent to which the landscape facilitates or impedes the interactions and interdependencies of ecological processes that combine to create distinct ecosystem services. This definition encompasses the dynamics within a spatially interconnected mosaic of land use and land cover, exemplified by connections such as those from pollination provisioning areas to croplands. The primary goal of this research is to develop an empirical framework that encapsulates ‘network topological’ interactions— essentially, the complex interplay among various components of the ecosystem — specific to agricultural landscapes and then to apply this framework to the Canadian prairies. Our methodology uses the spatial tools including InVEST, ARIES, and GIS to map diverse ES. An ecological network is then constructed for these ES at the landscape scale, designating network nodes based on high-value ES provisioning areas and defining links between pairs of ES according to their functional connections (overlapping and proximal in physical space). These functional connections effectively delineate areas of the landscape where the majority of ES flows occur. Mapping ES connectivity and network building revealed that around 29% of the studied landscape lies within functional connectivity zones for the selected ES, representing hotspots of significant ES interactions. Our findings reveal that although soil erosion-control spans just 1.36% of the total area, a substantial 72.59% of its spatial extent was identified as functionally connected. Land cover analysis in functional connectivity zones revealed that natural habitats such as shrublands, broadleaf forests, wetlands, and grasslands are vital mediators of ES. The variability in ES interconnectivity in the landscape was evident both in the intensity of interactions and observed connections. Our findings, informed by Ecological Network Analysis (ENA), emphasize the need for integrating connectivity and systems thinking in conservation sciences to achieve sustainability and ecosystem resilience. The insights offer a foundation to explore optimal ES provisioning scenarios at the landscape scale.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecosystem Services\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000469/pdfft?md5=2bf25e9552c80b298e349843cf15581c&pid=1-s2.0-S2212041624000469-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecosystem Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000469\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000469","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

土地利用和土地覆被模式,包括其空间异质性和配置,是塑造景观级生态过程、功能和服务的基础。尽管人们越来越认识到这些模式的重要性,但对于它们如何影响生态系统服务(ES)的功能连通性--这是生态系统复原力和可持续性的一个关键方面--的理解仍然存在差距。本研究旨在通过调查多种生态系统服务(如授粉、碳储存、土壤侵蚀控制)之间的功能连通性,以湿地为基础的生态系统服务(如沼泽、沼泽和开阔水域湿地的栖息地供应和蓄水能力),以及复杂景观中的农业粮食生产,来弥补这一差距。我们将功能连通性定义为景观促进或阻碍生态过程相互作用和相互依存的程度,这些生态过程共同创造了独特的生态系统服务。这一定义包括土地利用和土地植被在空间上相互连接的动态,例如从授粉供应区到耕地之间的连接。本研究的主要目标是建立一个经验框架,囊括 "网络拓扑 "互动--本质上是生态系统各组成部分之间复杂的相互作用--农业景观所特有的互动,然后将此框架应用于加拿大大草原。我们的方法使用 InVEST、ARIES 和 GIS 等空间工具来绘制不同的生态系统服务图。然后在景观尺度上为这些生态系统构建生态网络,根据高价值的生态系统供应区域指定网络节点,并根据生态系统的功能联系(在物理空间上重叠和接近)定义成对生态系统之间的联系。这些功能连接有效地划定了大部分生态系统服务流动的景观区域。绘制生态系统连通性和网络构建图显示,所研究的地貌中约有 29% 位于所选生态系统的功能连通区内,这代表了生态系统之间重要相互作用的热点区域。我们的研究结果表明,尽管土壤侵蚀控制的面积仅占总面积的 1.36%,但其空间范围的 72.59% 被确定为功能连接区。功能连接区的土地覆盖分析表明,灌木林、阔叶林、湿地和草地等自然栖息地是生态系统服务的重要媒介。景观中生态系统相互连接的差异性在相互作用的强度和观察到的连接方面都很明显。生态网络分析(ENA)为我们的研究结果提供了信息,强调了在保护科学中整合连通性和系统思维以实现可持续性和生态系统复原力的必要性。这些见解为探索景观尺度上的最佳生态系统服务方案奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A functional connectivity approach for exploring interactions of multiple ecosystem services in the context of agricultural landscapes in the Canadian prairies

Land-use and land-cover patterns, including their spatial heterogeneity and configuration, are fundamental in shaping landscape-level ecological processes, functions, and services. Despite growing recognition of the importance of these patterns, gaps remain in our understanding of how they influence the functional connectivity of ecosystem services (ES)—a crucial aspect for ecosystem resilience and sustainability. This research aims to bridge this gap by investigating the functional connectivity among multiple ES, such as pollination, carbon storage, soil erosion control, wetland-based ES such as habitat provisioning and water storage capacity from marshes, swamps, and open water wetlands, and agricultural food production within a complex landscape. We define functional connectivity as the extent to which the landscape facilitates or impedes the interactions and interdependencies of ecological processes that combine to create distinct ecosystem services. This definition encompasses the dynamics within a spatially interconnected mosaic of land use and land cover, exemplified by connections such as those from pollination provisioning areas to croplands. The primary goal of this research is to develop an empirical framework that encapsulates ‘network topological’ interactions— essentially, the complex interplay among various components of the ecosystem — specific to agricultural landscapes and then to apply this framework to the Canadian prairies. Our methodology uses the spatial tools including InVEST, ARIES, and GIS to map diverse ES. An ecological network is then constructed for these ES at the landscape scale, designating network nodes based on high-value ES provisioning areas and defining links between pairs of ES according to their functional connections (overlapping and proximal in physical space). These functional connections effectively delineate areas of the landscape where the majority of ES flows occur. Mapping ES connectivity and network building revealed that around 29% of the studied landscape lies within functional connectivity zones for the selected ES, representing hotspots of significant ES interactions. Our findings reveal that although soil erosion-control spans just 1.36% of the total area, a substantial 72.59% of its spatial extent was identified as functionally connected. Land cover analysis in functional connectivity zones revealed that natural habitats such as shrublands, broadleaf forests, wetlands, and grasslands are vital mediators of ES. The variability in ES interconnectivity in the landscape was evident both in the intensity of interactions and observed connections. Our findings, informed by Ecological Network Analysis (ENA), emphasize the need for integrating connectivity and systems thinking in conservation sciences to achieve sustainability and ecosystem resilience. The insights offer a foundation to explore optimal ES provisioning scenarios at the landscape scale.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem Services ECOLOGYENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES&-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
14.90
自引率
7.90%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly. Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信