VEGETATION DIVERSITY IN THE SANTIAGO DE CHILE URBAN ECOSYSTEM

Arboricultural Journal

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 347-357

  Luz de la Maza, Carmen ^a   Hernández, Jaime ^a   Bown, Horacio ^a   Rodríguez, Manuel ^a   Escobedo, Francisco ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^b USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Economic status; Social status

Indexed keywords

GREENSPACE; SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS; SPECIES DIVERSITY; URBAN PLANNING; VEGETATION;

CHILE;

EID: 0037003807     PISSN: 03071375     EISSN: 21681074     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03071375.2002.9747349     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Gotzmark, F. (1992). Naturalness as an evaluation criterion in nature conservation: a response to Anderson. Conservation Biology, 6,455-460.
2. Iccom Nov action (2000). Información estadística poblacional básica. Censo Nacional 1992 con proyección al 2000 y estimaciones ICCOM para el 2000, Chile.
3. Janson, S. and Vegelius, J. (1981). Measures of ecological association. Oecologia, 49, 371-376.
4. Lovejoy, T. (1996). The quantification of biodiversity: an esoteric quest or a vital component of sustainable development? In Biodiversity, measurement and estimation, ed. D. Hawksworth, pp. 81-88.
5. Magurran, A. (1988). Ecological biodiversity and its measurements. Princeton University Press. 179 p.
6. Nowak, D., Crane, D. and Stevens, J. (2001). The Urban Forest Effects (UFORE) Model: Field data collection procedures. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. 50 p.
7. Quattrochi, D. and Rowntree, R. (1988). Potential of thermal infrared multispectral scanner (MSS) data for measurement of urban vegetation characteristics. In: Remote Sensing for Resource Inventory, Planning and Monitoring, ed. J.D. Greer, pp. 344-51.
8. Southwood, T. (1978). Ecological Methods. Chapman and Hall, London.