Research Unpacked

1. Linking long-term patterns of landscape heterogeneity to changing ecosystem processes in the Kruger National Park, South Africa Sandra MacFadyen11 PhD student and GeoSpatial Analyst, South African National Parks (sandra.macfadyen@sanparks.org) Hui C 2 and Verburg P 3 2 Supervisor, Stellenbosch University, Department of Botany & Zoology (chui@sun.ac.za)3 Co-supervisor, Vrije University, Amsterdam, Environmental Studies (peter.verburg@ivm.vu.nl)

2. Research Unpacked • Linking long-term patterns of landscape heterogeneity to changing ecosystem processes in the Kruger National Park, South Africa

3. Landscape Heterogeneity • Landscape heterogeneity is the cause and consequence of interactions between spatial patterns and ecological processes (Turner et al 2001).

4. < > < > 1composition (type) + 2function (process) = 3structure (pattern) @ different scales 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 MacFadyen 2010

5. Functional Importance • Spatial heterogeneity at a variety of scales is functionally important (Pickett et al 1999) • Without an adequate understanding of natural pattern and process, protected area managers are flying blind (Olson 2010)

6. ….Pattern = Process = Pattern…. • Spatial pattern affect ecological processes, which in response affects spatial patterns. • Natural spatial patterns should guide management decisions not unnatural administrative boundaries (Leitão et al 2006) Use pattern to decipher process Bailey 2009

7. Research Objectives • ID patterns of heterogeneity at different scales. • ID processes responsible for these patterns. • Investigate dynamics of pattern and process. • Management implications.

8. OBJECTIVE 2 ID processes <=> Patterns OBJECTIVE 1 ID landscape heterogeneity patterns ∆ scales OBJECTIVE 3 Dynamics of Pattern & process OBJECTIVE 4 Management Implications 1972 2010

9. INTRODUCTION South African National Parks Mabunda et al. 2003

10. INTRODUCTION Kruger National Park

11. INTRODUCTION History of Change

12. CHAPTER 1 Chapter 1 Landscape Metrics Band Combination spectral variance Ancillary Data topography geology rainfall Image Classification Spectral Heterogeneity Inter-calibrated MSS TM ETM+ object spectral entropy

13. CHAPTER 1 What constitutes a Landscape

14. What constitutes a Landscape Landform (geology + topographic elements) +> climate <=> ecological processes <=> vegetation and animal response <=+> disturbance Wiens (1999)

15. Landscape Schematic HABITAT SOIL MOVEMENT OF WATER elevation regime slope + CLIMATE local weather LANDFORM aspect microclimate geology HABITAT

16. FLORA FAUNA HABITAT HABITAT SOIL MOVEMENT OF WATER elevation regime slope + CLIMATE local weather LANDFORM aspect microclimate geology HABITAT HABITAT

17. DISTURBANCES FLORA FAUNA HABITAT HABITAT HABITAT SOIL MOVEMENT OF WATER elevation regime slope + CLIMATE local weather LANDFORM aspect microclimate geology HABITAT HABITAT

18. CHAPTER 1 • Topography • Geology • Soil • Rainfall • Temperature • Flora • Fauna

19. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 False-color composite

20. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 False-color composite

21. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 False-color composite

22. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 True-color composite

23. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 Panchromatic

24. Data Acquisition

25. CHAPTER 1 Limitations of Data • Scale: Extent and Resolution • Horizontal and Vertical structure

30. CHAPTER 1 Difference of Scale Elephant Elephant Shrew VS.

31. CHAPTER 1 Horizontal and Vertical

32. CHAPTER 2 Chapter 2 Landscape Metrics Drivers and/or Responders Ecological Processes animal movement population distribution fire frequency rainfall Spectral Heterogeneity

33. CHAPTER 2 Exclusion Experiments Inside vs. Outside: What is different/missing?

34. CHAPTER 3 Chapter 3 1972 Landscape Metrics diversify Spectral Heterogeneity Kruger National Park Landscapes homogenize 2010 greatest change

35. LANDSAT ETM+ False-color composite 2000

36. LANDSAT TM False-color composite 1984

37. CHAPTER 4 Chapter 4 ? areas which have diversified over 38yrs ? Kruger National Park Landscapes areas which have homogenized over 38yrs ? areas which have under gone greatest change over 38yrs

38. CHAPTER 4 Application of Results • Philosophically • Theoretically • Practically •  KNP management plan

39. Schedule / Timeline

40. Thank you Questions?

41. Notes to myself • Be clear about what elements of landscape heterogeneity are being measured • What metrics and why. How will I decide what indices prove useful and how will I know if a changed index is important to ecosystem functioning. • Develop causal diagram to explain how factors interact, how will I investigate relationships and what data to use • Be clear about auto-correlation and spatial variability (e.g. within satellite image) • Be more specific about scale (explain extent vs. grain) • Stress natural systems when talking about ecological importance of heterogeneity (e.g. fragmentation=bad) • Be clear about what aspects of function will be addressed • NB to explain and defend image classification technique and add sensitivity tests • Can I test the validity of the statement, “ greater landscape heterogeneity provides increased ecosystem resilience and higher species richness”? • Add general explanation of landscape trend analysis • NB to explain why each time I describe how i.e why a certain technique/statistic