Investigating species-environment relationships at multiple scales: Differentiating between intrinsic scale and the modifiable areal unit problem

In ecology, multi-scale analyses are commonly performed to identify the scale at which a species interacts with its environment (intrinsic scale). This is typically carried out using multi-scale species–environment models that compare the relationship between ecological attributes (e.g., species diversity) measured with point data to environmental data (e.g. vegetation cover) for the surrounding area within buffers of multiple sizes. The intrinsic scale is identified as the buffer size at which the highest correlation between environmental and ecological variables occurs. We present the first investigation of how the spatial resolution of remote sensing environmental data can influence the identification of the intrinsic scale using multi-scale species–environment models. Using the virtual ecologist approach we tested this influence using vegetation cover spatial data and a simulated species–environment relationship derived from the same spatial data. By using a simulation model there was a known truth to use as a benchmark to measure accuracy. Our findings indicate that by varying the spatial resolution of the environmental data, the intrinsic scale may be incorrectly identified. In some cases, the errors in the intrinsic scale identified were close to the maximum value possible that could be measured by this experiment. Consequently, multi-scale ecological analyses may not be suitable for distinguishing scale patterns caused by the relationship between an organism and its environment from scale patterns caused by the effect of changing spatial resolution: a phenomenon referred to as the modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP). Thus, observed scale-dependent ecological patterns may be an artefact of the observation of ecological data, not the ecological phenomenon. This study concludes with some suggestions for future work to quantify the effect of the MAUP on multi-scale studies and develop generalisations that can be used to assess when multi-scale analyses have the potential to produce spurious results.

[1]  Stan Openshaw,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[2]  Peter Kareiva,et al.  Assessing the Data Requirements of Spatially Explicit Dispersal Models , 1997 .

[3]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  Multiscale Analysis of Landscape Heterogeneity: Scale Variance and Pattern Metrics , 2000, Ann. GIS.

[4]  Vincent B. Robinson,et al.  Issues and Challenges of Incorporating Fuzzy Sets in Ecological Modeling , 2007 .

[5]  Tomas Pärt,et al.  Influence of Landscape Scale on Farmland Birds Breeding in Semi‐Natural Pastures , 2000 .

[6]  Robert Gilmore Pontius,et al.  Range of Categorical Associations for Comparison of Maps with Mixed Pixels , 2009 .

[7]  Peter M. Atkinson,et al.  Resolution Manipulation and Sub-Pixel Mapping , 2004 .

[8]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  CONCEPTS OF SCALE AND SCALING , 2006 .

[9]  Marc Antrop,et al.  Reflecting upon 25 years of landscape ecology , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[10]  M. Turner,et al.  LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY : The Effect of Pattern on Process 1 , 2002 .

[11]  D. Padilla,et al.  Ecological neighborhoods: scaling environmental patterns , 1987 .

[12]  Denis White,et al.  The effects of habitat resolution on models of avian diversity and distributions: a comparison of two land-cover classifications , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[13]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  Effects of thematic resolution on landscape pattern analysis , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[14]  L. Fahrig,et al.  Determining the Spatial Scale of Species' Response to Habitat , 2004 .

[15]  Jane Elith,et al.  Fauna habitat modelling and mapping: A review and case study in the Lower Hunter Central Coast region of NSW , 2005 .

[16]  R. O'Neill,et al.  Landscape Ecology Explained@@@Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice: Pattern and Process , 2001 .

[17]  G. Hay,et al.  Remote Sensing Contributions to the Scale Issue , 1999 .

[18]  Hao Chen,et al.  Components of information for multiple resolution comparison between maps that share a real variable , 2008, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[19]  P. Fisher The pixel: A snare and a delusion , 1997 .

[20]  Philip D. Taylor,et al.  Changing importance of habitat structure across multiple spatial scales for three species of insects , 2003 .

[21]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology , 1996, Landscape Ecology.

[22]  P. Pearman THE SCALE OF COMMUNITY STRUCTURE: HABITAT VARIATION AND AVIAN GUILDS IN TROPICAL FOREST UNDERSTORY , 2002 .

[23]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  Ecography 25: 601 -- 615, 2002 , 2022 .

[24]  Thomas Blaschke,et al.  Landscape connectivity studies on segmentation based classification and manual interpretation of remote sensing data , 2002 .

[25]  S. Levin The problem of pattern and scale in ecology , 1992 .

[26]  Wei Gao,et al.  Effects of Changing Spatial Scale on the Results of Statistical Analysis with Landscape Data: A Case Study , 1997, Ann. GIS.

[27]  Jean-Louis Martin,et al.  Multi-scale study of bird species distribution and of their response to vegetation change: a Mediterranean example , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[28]  Jan Bogaert,et al.  The influence of forest definition on landscape fragmentation assessment in Rondônia, Brazil , 2009 .

[29]  A. Comber,et al.  You know what land cover is but does anyone else?…an investigation into semantic and ontological confusion , 2005 .

[30]  Alan R. Gillespie,et al.  Remote Sensing of Landscapes with Spectral Images: A Physical Modeling Approach , 2004 .

[31]  A. Cracknell Review article Synergy in remote sensing-what's in a pixel? , 1998 .

[32]  Danielle J. Marceau,et al.  Remote sensing and the measurement of geographical entities in a forested environment. 1. The scale and spatial aggregation problem , 1994 .

[33]  Orie L. Loucks,et al.  Scaling with known uncertainty: a synthesis , 2006 .

[34]  R. Gardner,et al.  A new approach for rescaling land cover data , 2008, Landscape Ecology.

[35]  P. Kevan,et al.  Landscape effects of forest loss in a pollination system , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[36]  Jian-guo Wu,et al.  Key Topics in Landscape Ecology: Scale and scaling: a cross-disciplinary perspective , 2007 .

[37]  M. Kuitunen,et al.  Thresholds in selection of breeding habitat by the Eurasian treecreeper (Certhia familiaris) , 2005 .

[38]  Damaris Zurell,et al.  The virtual ecologist approach: simulating data and observers , 2010 .

[39]  Alexis J. Comber,et al.  The separation of land cover from land use using data primitives , 2008 .

[40]  Kevin McGarigal,et al.  Patterns in the species–environment relationship depend on both scale and choice of response variables , 2004 .

[41]  Robert I. McDonald,et al.  Uncertainty in spatially explicit population models , 2008 .

[42]  Beverley J. Evans,et al.  Dynamic display of spatial data-reliability: does it benefit the map user? , 1997 .

[43]  J. Wiens Spatial Scaling in Ecology , 1989 .

[44]  Thomas G. Dietterich,et al.  Map Misclassification Can Cause Large Errors in Landscape Pattern Indices: Examples from Habitat Fragmentation , 2006, Ecosystems.

[45]  Chris J. Johnson,et al.  Factors limiting our understanding of ecological scale , 2009 .

[46]  Alex M. Lechner,et al.  Remote sensing of small and linear features: Quantifying the effects of patch size and length, grid position and detectability on land cover mapping , 2009 .

[47]  G. Shao,et al.  On the accuracy of landscape pattern analysis using remote sensing data , 2008, Landscape Ecology.

[48]  M. Luoto,et al.  Modelling the spatial distribution of a threatened butterfly: Impacts of scale and statistical technique , 2007 .

[49]  Jennifer L. Dungan,et al.  A balanced view of scale in spatial statistical analysis , 2002 .

[50]  Arthur D Chapman,et al.  Environmental Information: Placing Biodiversity Phenomena in an Ecological and Environmental Context , 2005 .

[51]  A. R. Johnson,et al.  A hierarchical framework for the analysis of scale , 1989, Landscape Ecology.

[52]  L. Belbin,et al.  Evaluation of statistical models used for predicting plant species distributions: Role of artificial data and theory , 2006 .

[53]  Mark Rounsevell,et al.  The limitations of spatial land use data in environmental analysis , 2006 .

[54]  G. Foody Sharpening fuzzy classification output to refine the representation of sub-pixel land cover distribution , 1998 .

[55]  B. Danielson,et al.  Local and landscape effects on the butterfly community in fragmented Midwest USA prairie habitats , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[56]  Richard Teeuw,et al.  Quantitative accuracy assessment of contextually filtered classified images , 2001 .

[57]  Andrew Nelson,et al.  Analysing data across geographic scales in Honduras: detecting levels of organisation within systems , 2001 .