If you are experiencing problems downloading PDF or HTML fulltext, our helpdesk recommend clearing your browser cache and trying again. If you need help in clearing your cache, please click here . Still need help? Email email@example.com
Modern ecological models often account for the influence of the surrounding environment by using landscape pattern indices (LPIs) as measures of landscape structure. Ideally, the landscape samples from which these LPIs are extracted should be centered on the locations where the response
variable was measured. However, in situations where this is not possible due to a lack of adequate full-coverage landcover data, the question arises as to what degree this circumstance creates a bias in the value of the LPIs, thereby obscuring their relation with the response variable. To
address this question, we extracted four representative LPIs from 30 rectangular (3 × 6 km) landscape samples evenly distributed across a 10 000 km2 boreal forest study area. These rectangles were subjected to systematic displacements across a range of distances
(0.5 to 2.5 km) and directions, after which we recomputed the LPIs. We found that a 1 km spatial offset led to an average of 15% deviation of original LPI values. Unfortunately, as the offset increased, the range of resulting deviations also widened, making it difficult to predict this
effect. Our findings fill a gap in the literature on landscape pattern analysis and suggest that researchers should avoid LPIs extracted from spatially offset landscape samples.
Published since 1971, this monthly journal features articles, reviews, notes and commentaries on all aspects of forest science, including biometrics and mensuration, conservation, disturbance, ecology, economics, entomology, fire, genetics, management, operations, pathology, physiology, policy, remote sensing, social science, soil, silviculture, wildlife and wood science, contributed by internationally respected scientists. It also publishes special issues dedicated to a topic of current interest.