牧场状态与过渡模型的开发与应用。

B. Bestelmeyer, Joel R. Brown, K. Havstad, R. Alexander, G. Chavez, J. Herrick
{"title":"牧场状态与过渡模型的开发与应用。","authors":"B. Bestelmeyer, Joel R. Brown, K. Havstad, R. Alexander, G. Chavez, J. Herrick","doi":"10.2458/AZU_JRM_V56I2_BESTELMEYER","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"State-and-transition models have received a great deal of attention since the introduction of the concept to range management in 1989. Nonetheless, only recently have sets of state-and-transition models been produced thatcan be used by agency personnel and private citizens, and there is little guidance available for developing and interpreting models. Based upon our experiences developing models for the state of New Mexico, we address the following questions: 1) how is information assembled to create site-specific models for entire regions, 2) what ecological issues should be considered in model development and classification, and 3) how should models be used? We review the general structure of state-and-transition models, emphasizing the distinction between changes among communities within states (pathways) that are reversible with changes in climate and \"facilitating practices\" (e.g. grazing management), and changes among states (transitions) that are reversible only with \"accelerating practices\" such as seeding, shrub control, or the recovery of soil stability and historical hydrologic function. Both pathways and transitions occur, so these models are complementary. Ecological sites and the climatically-defined regions within which they occur (land resource units) serve as a framework for developing and selecting models. We illustrate the importance of clearly delineating ecological sites to produce models and describe how we have dealt with poorly-delineated sites. Producing specific models requires an understanding of the multiple ecological mechanisms underlying transitions. We show how models can represent and distinguish alternative and complementary hypotheses for transitions. Although there may be several mechanisms underlying transitions, they tend to fall within discrete categories based upon a few, fundamental ecological processes and their relation-ships can be readily understood. A knowledge of mechanisms is closely related to the use of ecological indicators to anticipate transitions. We conclude that models should include 1) reference values for quantitative indicators, 2) lists of key indicators and descriptions of changes in them that suggest an approach to a transition, and 3) a rigorous documentation of the theory and assumptions (and their alternatives) underlying the structure of each model.","PeriodicalId":16918,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Range Management","volume":"16 1","pages":"114-126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"293","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and use of state-and-transition models for rangelands.\",\"authors\":\"B. Bestelmeyer, Joel R. Brown, K. Havstad, R. Alexander, G. Chavez, J. Herrick\",\"doi\":\"10.2458/AZU_JRM_V56I2_BESTELMEYER\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"State-and-transition models have received a great deal of attention since the introduction of the concept to range management in 1989. Nonetheless, only recently have sets of state-and-transition models been produced thatcan be used by agency personnel and private citizens, and there is little guidance available for developing and interpreting models. Based upon our experiences developing models for the state of New Mexico, we address the following questions: 1) how is information assembled to create site-specific models for entire regions, 2) what ecological issues should be considered in model development and classification, and 3) how should models be used? We review the general structure of state-and-transition models, emphasizing the distinction between changes among communities within states (pathways) that are reversible with changes in climate and \\\"facilitating practices\\\" (e.g. grazing management), and changes among states (transitions) that are reversible only with \\\"accelerating practices\\\" such as seeding, shrub control, or the recovery of soil stability and historical hydrologic function. Both pathways and transitions occur, so these models are complementary. Ecological sites and the climatically-defined regions within which they occur (land resource units) serve as a framework for developing and selecting models. We illustrate the importance of clearly delineating ecological sites to produce models and describe how we have dealt with poorly-delineated sites. Producing specific models requires an understanding of the multiple ecological mechanisms underlying transitions. We show how models can represent and distinguish alternative and complementary hypotheses for transitions. Although there may be several mechanisms underlying transitions, they tend to fall within discrete categories based upon a few, fundamental ecological processes and their relation-ships can be readily understood. A knowledge of mechanisms is closely related to the use of ecological indicators to anticipate transitions. We conclude that models should include 1) reference values for quantitative indicators, 2) lists of key indicators and descriptions of changes in them that suggest an approach to a transition, and 3) a rigorous documentation of the theory and assumptions (and their alternatives) underlying the structure of each model.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16918,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Range Management\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"114-126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"293\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Range Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2458/AZU_JRM_V56I2_BESTELMEYER\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Range Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2458/AZU_JRM_V56I2_BESTELMEYER","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 293

摘要

自1989年将状态和过渡模型引入范围管理以来,该模型受到了极大的关注。尽管如此,直到最近才产生了一套可供机构人员和个人使用的状态和过渡模型,而且几乎没有关于开发和解释模型的指导。根据我们为新墨西哥州开发模型的经验,我们解决了以下问题:1)如何收集信息以创建整个地区的特定地点模型;2)在模型开发和分类中应考虑哪些生态问题;3)如何使用模型?我们回顾了状态和过渡模型的一般结构,强调了状态(路径)内群落之间的变化与气候变化和“促进措施”(如放牧管理)之间的区别,以及只有“加速措施”(如播种、灌木控制或土壤稳定性和历史水文功能的恢复)才能逆转的状态(过渡)之间的变化。途径和转变都有,所以这些模型是互补的。生态地点和它们所在的由气候定义的区域(土地资源单位)是开发和选择模式的框架。我们说明了明确划定生态地点以产生模型的重要性,并描述了我们如何处理划定不佳的地点。建立特定的模型需要了解潜在的多种生态机制。我们展示了模型如何表示和区分过渡的替代和互补假设。虽然可能有几种潜在的转变机制,但它们往往属于基于几个基本生态过程的离散类别,它们之间的关系很容易理解。对机制的了解与利用生态指标预测过渡密切相关。我们得出的结论是,模型应该包括:1)定量指标的参考值;2)关键指标的列表和它们的变化描述,以建议过渡的方法;3)每个模型结构背后的理论和假设(及其替代方案)的严格文档。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development and use of state-and-transition models for rangelands.
State-and-transition models have received a great deal of attention since the introduction of the concept to range management in 1989. Nonetheless, only recently have sets of state-and-transition models been produced thatcan be used by agency personnel and private citizens, and there is little guidance available for developing and interpreting models. Based upon our experiences developing models for the state of New Mexico, we address the following questions: 1) how is information assembled to create site-specific models for entire regions, 2) what ecological issues should be considered in model development and classification, and 3) how should models be used? We review the general structure of state-and-transition models, emphasizing the distinction between changes among communities within states (pathways) that are reversible with changes in climate and "facilitating practices" (e.g. grazing management), and changes among states (transitions) that are reversible only with "accelerating practices" such as seeding, shrub control, or the recovery of soil stability and historical hydrologic function. Both pathways and transitions occur, so these models are complementary. Ecological sites and the climatically-defined regions within which they occur (land resource units) serve as a framework for developing and selecting models. We illustrate the importance of clearly delineating ecological sites to produce models and describe how we have dealt with poorly-delineated sites. Producing specific models requires an understanding of the multiple ecological mechanisms underlying transitions. We show how models can represent and distinguish alternative and complementary hypotheses for transitions. Although there may be several mechanisms underlying transitions, they tend to fall within discrete categories based upon a few, fundamental ecological processes and their relation-ships can be readily understood. A knowledge of mechanisms is closely related to the use of ecological indicators to anticipate transitions. We conclude that models should include 1) reference values for quantitative indicators, 2) lists of key indicators and descriptions of changes in them that suggest an approach to a transition, and 3) a rigorous documentation of the theory and assumptions (and their alternatives) underlying the structure of each model.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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