Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Neutral models for testing landscape hypotheses

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Neutral landscape models were originally developed to test the hypothesis that human-induced fragmentation produces patterns distinctly different from those associated with random processes. Other uses for neutral models have become apparent, including the development and testing of landscape metrics to characterize landscape pattern. Although metric development proved to be significant, the focus on metrics obscured the need for iterative hypothesis testing fundamental to the advancement of the discipline. We present here an example of an alternative neutral model and hypothesis designed to relate the process of landscape change to observed landscape patterns. The methods and program, QRULE, are described and options for statistical testing outlined. The results show that human fragmentation of landscapes results in a non-random association of land-cover types that can be describe by simple statistical methods. Options for additional landscape studies are discussed and access to QRULE described in the hope that these methods will be employed to advance our understanding of the processes that affect the structure and function in human dominated landscapes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Thompson WL (2000) Null hypothesis testing: problems, prevalence, and an alternative. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:912–923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson GS, Danielson BJ (1997) The effects of landscape composition and physiognomy on metapopulation size: the role of corridors. Landscape Ecology 12:261–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andow DA, Kareiva PM, Levin SA, Okubo A (1990) Spread of invading organisms. Landscape Ecology 4:177–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett AF, Henein K, Merriam G (1994) Corridor use and the elements of corridor quality—Chipmunks and fencerows in a farmland mosaic. Biological Conservation 68:155–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (1998) Model selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Copeland JH, Pielke RA, Kittel TGF (1996) Potential climatic impacts of vegetation change: a regional modeling study. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres 101:7409–7418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Maxwell T (1994) Resolution and predictability: an approach to the scaling problem. Landscape Ecology 9:47–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dale VH, Pearson SM, Offerman HL, O’Neill RV (1994) Relating patterns of land-use change to faunal biodiversity in the central Amazon. Conservation Biology 8:1027–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delcourt HR, Delcourt PA, Webb T III (1983) Dynamic plant ecology: the spectrum of vegetational change in space and time. Quaternary Science Reviews 1:153–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Stephano J (2004) A confidence interval approach to data analysis. Forest Ecology Management 187:173–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan WE, Cantrell RS, Cosner C (1999) How habitat edges change species interactions. American Naturalist 153:165–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauth PT, Gustafson EJ, Rabenold KN (2000) Using landscape metrics to model source habitat for Neotropical migrants in the midwestern US. Landscape Ecology 15:621–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS et al (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–574

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortin M-J, Boots B, Csillag F, Remmel TK (2003) On the role of spatial stochastic simulation models in understanding landscape metrics. Oikos 102:203–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster DR, Motzkin G, Slater B (1998) Land-use history as long-term broad-scale disturbance: regional forest dynamics in Central New England. Ecosystems 1:96–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner RH (1999) RULE: A program for the generation of random maps and the analysis of spatial patterns. In: Klopatek JM, Gardner RH (eds) Landscape ecological analysis: issues and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 280–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner RH, Forester JD, Plotnick RE (in press) Determining pattern-process relationships in heterogeneous landscapes. In: J. Wu, Hobbs RJ (eds) Key topics and perspectives in landscape ecology, Cambridge University Press

  • Gardner RH, Milne BT, Turner MG, O’Neill RV (1987) Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology 1:19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (1990) Pattern, process and predictability: The use of neutral models for landscape analysis. In: Turner MG, Gardner RH (eds) Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. The analysis and interpretation of landscape heterogeneity. Ecological studies series. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 289–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetz SJ, Jantz CA, Prince SD, Smith AJ, Wright R, Varyguin D (2004) Integrated analysis of ecosystem interactions with land use change: The Chesapeake Bay watershed. In: Asner GP, DeFries RS, Houghton RA (eds) Ecosystem interactions with land use change. American Geophysical Union. Geophysical monograph series, Washington, DC, pp 263–275

  • Gotelli NJ, Graves GR (1996) Null models in ecology. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson EJ, Gardner RH (1996) The effect of landscape heterogeneity on the probability of patch colonization. Ecology 77:94–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (2005) Landscape fragmentation, biodiversity loss and the societal response—the long-term consequences of our use of natural resources may be surprising and unpleasant. Embo Reports 6:388–392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson DH (2002) The role of hypothesis testing in wildlife management. Journal of Wildlife Management 66:272–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson NL, Kotz S (1970a) Continuous univariate distributions-1. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson NL, Kotz S (1970b) Continuous univariate distributions-2. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Krummel JR, Gardner RH, Sugihara G, O’Neill RV, Coleman PR (1987) Landscape patterns in a disturbed environment. Oikos 48:321–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langlois JP, Fahrig L, Merriam G, Artsob H (2001) Landscape structure influences continental distribution of hantavirus in deer mice. Landscape Ecology 16:255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavorel S, O’Neill RV, Gardner RH (1994) Spatio-temporal dispersal strategies and annual plant species coexistence in a structured landscape. Oikos 71:75–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindborg R, Eriksson O (2004) Historical landscape connectivity affects present plant species diversity. Ecology 85:1840–1845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddox J (1992) Forest fires, sandpiles and the like. Nature 359:35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manly BFJ (1997) Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo Methods in biology. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • McCay DH (2001) Spatial patterns of sand pine invasion into longleaf pine forests in the Florida Panhandle. Landscape Ecology 16:89–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer WB, Turner BL (1992) Human-population growth and global land-use cover change. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23:39–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mladenoff DJ, Baker WM (eds) (1999) Spatial modeling of forest landscape change: approaches and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Motzkin G, Wilson P, Foster DR, Allen A (1999) Vegetation patterns in heterogeneous landscapes: the importance of history and environment. Journal of Vegetation Science 10:903–920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassauer JI (1997) Placing nature: culture and landscape ecology. Island Press, Washington, DC, 180 p

  • Neel MC, McGarigal K, Cushman SA (2004) Behavior of class-level landscape metrics across gradients of class aggregation and area. Landscape Ecology 19:435–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NRC (2001) Grand challenges in environmental sciences, National Research Council. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC (2003) NEON: addressing the nation’s environmental challenges, National Research Council. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV, Gardner RH, Turner MG (1992) A hierarchical neutral model for landscape analysis. Landscape Ecology 7:55–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orwig DA, Abrams MD (1994) Land-use history (1720–1992), composition, and dynamics of oak-pine forests within the Piedmont and Coastal Plain of northern Virginia. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 24:1216–1225

    Google Scholar 

  • Osher LJ, Matson PA, Amundson R (2003) Effect of land use change on soil carbon in Hawaii. Biogeochemistry 65:213–232

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson SM, Gardner RH (1997) Neutral models: useful tools for understanding landscape patterns. In: Bisonnette JA (ed) Wildlife and landscape ecology: effects of pattern and scale. Springer Verlag, New York, pp 215–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt JR (1964) Strong inference. Science 146:347–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Plotnick RE, Gardner RH (1993) Lattices and landscapes. In: Gardner RH (ed) Lectures on mathematics in the life sciences: predicting spatial effects in ecological systems. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, pp 129–157

  • Plotnick RE, Gardner RH, Hargrove WW, Prestegaard K, Perlmutter M (1996) Lacunarity analysis: a general technique for the analysis of spatial patterns. Physical Review E 53:5461–5468

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Plotnick RE, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (1993) Lacunarity indexes as measures of landscape texture. Landscape Ecology 8:201–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pyke CR (2004) Habitat loss confounds climate change impacts. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2:178–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riitters KH, Coulston JW (2005) Hot spots of perforated forest in the eastern United States. Environmental Management 35:483–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Riitters KH, O’Neill RV, Hunsaker CT, Wickham JD, Yankee DH, Timmins SP, Jones KB et al (1995) A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics. Landscape Ecology 10:23–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riitters KH, Wickham JD, O’Neill RV, Jones KB, Smith ER, Coulston JW, Wade TG et al (2002) Fragmentation of continental United States forests. Ecosystems 5:815–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riley RH, Phillips DL, Schuft MJ, Garcia MC (1997) Resolution and error in measuring land-cover change: effects on estimating net carbon release from Mexican terrestrial ecosystems. International Journal of Remote Sensing 18:121–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson DH, Wainer H (2002) On the past and future of null hypothesis significance testing. Journal of Wildlife Management 66:263–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romme WH, Everham EH, Frelich LE, Moritz MA, Sparks RE (1998) Are large, infrequent disturbances qualitatively different from small, frequent disturbances? Ecosystems 1:524–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stauffer D, Aharony A (1992) Introduction to percolation theory. Taylor & Francis, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Stohlgren TJ, Chase TN, Pielke RA, Kittel TGF, Baron JS (1998) Evidence that local land use practices influence regional climate, vegetation, and stream flow patterns in adjacent natural areas. Global Change Biology 4:495–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taverna K, Urban DL, McDonald RI (2005) Modeling landscape vegetation pattern in response to historic land-use: a hypothesis-driven approach for the North Carolina Piedmont, USA. Landscape Ecology 20:689–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tischendorf L, Bender DJ, Fahrig L (2003) Evaluation of patch isolation metrics in mosaic landscapes for specialist vs. generalist dispersers. Landscape Ecology 18:41–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. Springer Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Romme WH, Gardner RH (1994) Landscape disturbance models and the long-term dynamics of natural areas. Natural Areas Journal 14:3–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL (2005) Modeling ecological processes across scales. Ecology 86:1996–2006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL, Miller C, Halpin PN, Stephenson NL (2000) Forest gradient response in Sierran landscapes: the physical template. Landscape Ecology 15:603–620

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL, O’Neill RV, Shugart HH (1987) Landscape ecology. BioScience 37:119–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM (1997) Human domination of earth’s ecosystems. Science 277:494–499

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vogelmann JE, Howard SM, Yang L, Larson CR, Wylie BK, Van Driel N (2001) Completion of the 1990s National land cover data set for the conterminous United States from Landsat Thematic Mapper data and ancillary data sources. Programmetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 67:650–662

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickham JD, O’Neill RV, Jones KB (2000) Forest fragmentation as an economic indicator. Landscape Ecology 15:171–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickham JD, O’Neill RV, Riitters KH, Wade TG, Jones KB (1997) Sensitivity of selected landscape pattern metrics to land-cover misclassification and differences in land-cover composition. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 63:397–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams MR, Filoso S, Lefebvre P (2004) Effects of land-use change on solute fluxes to floodplain lakes of the central Amazon. Biogeochemistry 68:259–275

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • With KA, King AW (1997) The use and misuse of neutral landscape models in ecology. Oikos 79:219–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu JG, Hobbs R (2002) Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: an idiosyncratic synthesis. Landscape Ecology 17:355–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zar JH (1996) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The assistance of Clayton Kingdon and Carol Garner with the NCLD data sets is much appreciated. Comments by Todd Lookingbill on an early draft of this manuscript are much appreciated as are the corrections by Helene Wagner concerning the χ2 degrees of freedom for the symmetrical association matrix. Funding was provided by the National Park Service, NCR I&M Network through Chesapeake Watershed Cooperative Ecosystems Studies Unit (CW CESU), Task Agreement H3097C1200.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Appalachian Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Frostburg, MD, 21532, USA

    Robert H. Gardner

  2. Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27708, USA

    Dean L. Urban

Authors
  1. Robert H. Gardner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dean L. Urban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert H. Gardner.

Appendix

Appendix

The development of RULE (Gardner 1999) has been an evolutionary process. The current incarnation of this program, QRULE, involves extensive changes to the format of the output, data files for statistical summaries, and the inclusion of the neutral model described in this manuscript. Program documentation, example input and output files, and the Fortran source code for QRULE may be obtained from http://www.al.umces.edu/Qrule. It is hoped that the release of the source code will allow alternative neutral models to be suggested and tested to better understand the relationship between pattern and process at landscape scales. The Open Software License (http://www.opensource.org/ licenses/index.php) applies to the distribution, use, and possible alteration of QRULE.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gardner, R.H., Urban, D.L. Neutral models for testing landscape hypotheses. Landscape Ecol 22, 15–29 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-006-9011-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-006-9011-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation