Transformation of the oak forest spatial structure in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area, Minnesota, USA over 7 years

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 81, Issue 1-2, 2007, Pages 27-33

  Ward, Kathleen ^a   Kromroy, Kathryn ^a   Juzwik, Jennifer ^a  

^a Department of Agriculture   (United States)

Author keywords

Attrition; Fragmentation; Landsat; Quercus; Remote sensing

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; REMOTE SENSING; WATER QUALITY;

LAND CONVERSION IMPACT; LANDSAT; OAK FOREST PATCHES; WILDLIFE HABITAT;

FORESTRY;

DECIDUOUS FOREST; FOREST HEALTH; GIS; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; LAND USE CHANGE; LANDSAT; REMOTE SENSING;

COMMINUTION; FORESTRY; FRAGMENTATION; GIS; QUERCUS; REMOTE SENSING; WATER QUALITY;

MINNEAPOLIS; MINNESOTA; NORTH AMERICA; SAINT PAUL; UNITED STATES;

QUERCUS;

EID: 34247476720     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Albers, J., 2001. Controlling oak wilt. Forest Insect & Disease Newsletter. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fid/july01/feature.html. September 2006.
2. Al-Khudhairy D.H.A., Caravaggi I., and Giada S. Structural damage assessments from Ikonos data using change detection, object-oriented segmentation, and classification techniques. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 71 (2005) 825-837
3. Anderson, J.R., Hardy, E.E., Roach, J.T., Witmer, R.E., 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964.
4. Civco D.L., Hurd J.D., Wilson E.H., Arnold C.L., and Prisloe Jr. M.P. Quantifying and describing urbanizing landscapes in the Northeast United States. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 68 (2002) 1083-1090
5. Doyle, J.K., 2004. Impervious surface area classification of the Twin Cities using tasseled cap transformation and regression estimation. M.S. Thesis. University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota.
6. Forman R.T.T. Land Mosaic: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions (1995), University Press, Cambridge
7. Garcia-Gigorro S., and Saura S. Forest fragmentation estimated from remotely sensed data: is comparison across scales possible?. For. Sci. 51 (2005) 51-63
8. Hobbs E.R. Species richness of urban forest patches and implications for urban landscape diversity. Landsc. Ecol. 1 (1988) 141-152
9. Hobbs E.R. Using ordination to analyze the composition and structure of urban forest islands. For. Ecol. Manage. 23 (1988) 139-158
10. Juzwik J. An Oak Wilt Primer vol. 11 (2000), International Oaks 14-20
11. Keys Jr. J., Carpenter C., Hooks S., Koenig F., McNab W.H., Russell W., and Smith M.L. Ecological Units of the Eastern United States-First approximation (1995), USDA Forest Service Tech. Publ. R8-21
12. Kromroy K., Ward K., Castillo P., and Juzwik J. Relationships between urbanization and the oak resource of the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area from 1991 to 1998. Landsc. Urban Plann. 80 (2007) 375-385
13. Land Management Information Center, 2003. Annual Population and Household Estimates. http://www.lmic.state.mn.us/datanetweb/pop.html. September 2006.
14. Leitao A.B., and Ahern J. Applying landscape ecological concepts and metrics in sustainable landscape planning. Landsc. Urban Plan. 59 (2002) 65-93
15. Loeffelholz, B., 2003. Quantifying the effects of urbanization on oak forests. M.S. Thesis, University of Minnesota.
16. Lofman S., and Kouki J. Scale and dynamics of a transforming forest landscape. Forest Ecol. Manage. 175 (2003) 247-252
17. Marschner, F., 1974. The original vegetation of Minnesota (map). Technical Report, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, MN.
18. McGarigal K., and Marks B.J. FRAGSTATS spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-351 (1995)
19. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 2006. Ecological Classification System. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/index.html/. September 2006.
20. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 2001. Ecological Subsections of Minnesota. http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us/. September 2006.
21. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 2002. GAP Land Cover, Raster. http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us/. September 2006.
22. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 2003. Land Cover-Minnesota Land Cover Classification System. http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us/. September 2006.
23. Pauleit S., and Duhme F. GIS assessment of Munich's urban forest structure for urban planning. J. Arbor. 26 (2000) 133-141
24. Pedroni L. Improved classification of Landsat Thematic Mapper data using modified prior probabilities in large and complex landscapes. Int. J. Remote Sens. 24 (2004) 91-113
25. Puric-Mladenovic D., Kenney W.A., and Csillag F. Land development pressure on peri-urban forests: a case study in the Regional Municipality of York. Forest Chronicle 76 (2000) 247-250
26. Saunders D.A., Hobbs R.J., and Margules C.R. Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv. Biol. 5 (1991) 18-32
27. Saunders S.C., Misleivets M.R., Chen J., and Cleland D.T. Effects of roads on landscape structure within nested ecological units of the Northern Great Lakes Region, USA. Biol. Conserv. 103 (2002) 209-225
28. Ward, K., Juzwik, J., 2005. Change in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area oak forest resource from 1991 to 1998. Research Note NC-389. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN.
29. Ware, G.H., 1982. Decline in oaks associated with urbanization. In: Proceedings, Urban and Suburban Trees-Pest Problems, Needs, Prospects, and Solutions. Department of Resource Development, Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, April 18-20, 1982, pp. 61-64.
30. Wilson A.D. Oak wilt: a potential threat to Southern and Western oak forests. J. For. 99 (2001) 4-11
31. With K.A. Assessing the risk of invasive spread in fragmented landscapes. Risk Anal. 24 (2004) 803-815
32. Yuan F., Sawaya K.E., Loeffelholz B.C., and Bauer M.E. Land cover classification and change analysis of the Twin Cities (Minnesota) Metropolitan Area by multitemporal Landsat remote sensing. Remote Sens. Environ. 98 (2005) 317-328