Multi-temporal analysis reveals that predictors of mountain pine beetle infestation change during outbreak cycles

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 302, Issue , 2013, Pages 308-318

  Walter, Jonathan A ^a   Platt, Rutherford V ^a  

^a GETTYSBURG COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Mountain pine beetle; Outbreak; Red attack; Remote sensing; Time series

Indexed keywords

HIGH RESOLUTION SATELLITE IMAGERY; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ALGORITHM; MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE; MULTI-TEMPORAL ANALYSIS; NORMALIZED DIFFERENCE MOISTURE INDICES; NORMALIZED DIFFERENCE VEGETATION INDEX; OUTBREAK; RED ATTACK;

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; POPULATION STATISTICS; REMOTE SENSING; SATELLITE IMAGERY; TIME SERIES;

FORESTRY;

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY; ALGORITHM; BEETLE; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DISPERSAL; HOST PLANT; LANDSAT THEMATIC MAPPER; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ANALYSIS; MORTALITY; NDVI; PEST DAMAGE; PEST OUTBREAK; POPULATION GROWTH; REMOTE SENSING; TEMPORAL ANALYSIS; TIME SERIES;

BIOLOGICAL POPULATIONS; FORESTRY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INSECTS; REMOTE SENSING; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS;

ARAPAHO-ROOSEVELT NATIONAL FOREST; COLORADO; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

COLEOPTERA; HEXAPODA; PINUS MUGO;

EID: 84876815773     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.03.038     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Amman G.D. Mountain pine beetle brood production in relation to thickness of lodgepole pine phloem. J. Econ. Entomol. 1972, 65(1):138-140.
2. Amman G.D. Population changes of the mountain pine beetle in relation to elevation. Environ. Entomol. 1973, 2:541-547.
3. Aukema B.H., Carroll A.L., Zhu J., Raffa K.F., Sickley T.A., Taylor S.W. Landscape level analysis of mountain pine beetle in British Columbia, Canada: spatiotemporal development and spatial synchrony within the present outbreak. Ecography 2006, 29(3):427-441.
4. Bentz B.J., Régnière J., Fettig C.J., Hansen E.M., Hayes J.L., Hicke J.A., Kelsey R.G., Negrón J.F., Seybold S.J. Climate change and bark beetles of the western United States and Canada: direct and indirect effects. Bioscience 2010, 60:602-613.
5. Carroll, A.L. Taylor, S.W., Régnière, J., Safranyik, L., 2004. Effects of climate change on range expansion by the mountain pine beetle in British Columbia. In: Shore, T.L., Brooks, J.E., Stone, J.E. (Eds.), Mountain Pine Beetle Symposium: Challenges and Solutions, 30-31 October 2003, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria, British Columbia, Information, Report BC-X-399, pp. 223-232.
6. Chander G.B., Markham B. Revised Landsat-5 TM radiometric calibration procedures and postcalibration dynamic ranges. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2003, 41:2674-2677.
7. Chander G.B., Markham B., Helder D. Summary of current radiometric calibration coefficients for Landsat MSS, TM, ETM+, and EO-1 ALI Sensors. Remote Sens. Environ. 2009, 113:893-903.
8. Coops N.C., Wulder M.A., White J.C. Integrating remotely sensed and ancillary data sources to characterize a mountain pine beetle infestation. Remote Sens. Environ. 2006, 105:83-97.
9. De'ath G., Fabricius K.E. Classification and regression trees: a powerful yet simple technique for ecological data analysis. Ecology 2000, 81:3178-3192.
10. Dillman R.D., White W.B. Estimating mountain pine beetle-killed ponderosa pine over the front range of Colorado with high altitude panoramic photography. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 1982, 48:741-747.
11. Fettig C.J., Klepzig K.D., Billings R.F., Munson A.S., Nebeker T.E., Negón J.F., Nowak J.T. The effectiveness of vegetation management practices for prevention and control of bark beetle infestations in coniferous forests of the western and southern United States. For. Ecol. Manage. 2007, 238:24-53.
12. Fielding A.H., Bell J.F. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ. Conserv. 1997, 24:38-49.
13. Goodwin N.R., Coops N.C., Wulder M.A., Gillanders S., Schroeder T.A., Nelson T. Estimation of insect infestation dynamics using a temporal sequence of Landsat data. Remote Sens. Environ. 2008, 112:3680-3689.
14. Hothorn T., Hornik K., Zeileis A. Unbiased recursive partitioning: a conditional inference framework. J. Comput. Graph. Sci. 2006, 15:574-651.
15. Jenkins M.J., Hebertson E., Page W., Jorgensen C.A. Bark beetles, fuels, fires and implications for forest management in the Intermountain West. For. Ecol. Manage. 2008, 254:16-34.
16. Jenkins M.J., Page W.G., Hebertson E.G., Alexander M.E. Fuels and fire behavior dynamics in bark beetle-attacked forests in Western North America and implications for fire management. For. Ecol. Manage. 2012, 275:23-34.
17. Jin S., Sader S.A. Comparison if time series tasseled cap wetness and the normalized difference moisture index in detecting forest disturbances. Remote Sens. Environ. 2005, 94:364-372.
18. Jolly W.M., Parsons R.A., Hadlow A.M., Cohn G.M., McAllister S.S., Popp J.B., Hubbard R.M., Negrón J.F. Relationships between moisture, chemistry, and ignition of Pinus contorta needles during the early stages of mountain pine beetle attack. For. Ecol. Manage. 2012, 269:52-59.
19. Klein W.H. Estimating bark beetle-killed lodgepole pine with high-altitude panoramic photography. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 1982, 48:733-737.
20. Klutsch J.G., Battaglia M.A., West D.R., Costello S.L., Negrón J.F. Evaluating potential fire behavior in lodgepole pine-dominated forests after a mountain pine beetle epidemic in north-central Colorado. Western J. Appl. For. 2011, 26:101-109.
21. Landsat 7 Science Data Users Handbook, 2007. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. (accessed 03.13). http://landsathandbook.gsfc.nasa.gov/handbook.
22. Larsson S., Oren R., Waring R.H., Barrett J.W. Attacks of mountain pine beetle as related to tree vigor of ponderosa pine. For Sci. 1983, 29(2):395-402.
23. Liebhold A.M., Elkinton J.S. Characterizing spatial patterns of gypsy moth regional defoliation. For. Sci. 1989, 35(2):557-568.
24. Logan J.A., White P., Bentz B.J., Powell J.A. Model analysis of spatial patterns in mountain pine beetle outbreaks. Theor. Popul. Biol. 1998, 53:236-255.
25. MacQueen, J.B., 1967. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, University of California Press, pp. 281-297.
26. Marr, J.W., 1961. Ecosystems of the east slope of the Front Range in Colorado. University of Colorado Studies Series in Biology 8. University of Colorado Press, Boulder, CO.
27. Meddens A.J.H., Hicke J.A., Vierling L.A. Evaluating the potential of multispectral imagery to map multiple stages of tree mortality. Remote Sens. Environ. 2011, 115:1632-1642.
28. Mitchell R.G., Preisler H.K. Analysis of spatial patterns of lodgepole pine attacked by outbreak populations of the mountain pine beetle. For. Sci. 1991, 37(5):1390-1408.
29. Nelson T.A., Boots B., Wulder M.A., Carroll A.L. Environmental characteristics of mountain pine beetle infestation hot spots. BC J. Ecosyst. Manage. 2007, 8(1):91-108.
30. Peet R.K. Forest vegetation of the Colorado front range: composition and dynamics. Vegetatio 1981, 45:3-75.
31. Pontius R.G., Millones M. Death to Kappa: birth of quantity disagreement and allocation disagreement for accuracy assessment. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2011, 32(15):4407-4429.
32. R Core Team, 2012. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria http://www.R-project.org/.
33. Safranyik L., Carroll A.L. The biology and epidemiology of the mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine forests. The Mountain Pine Beetle: A Synthesis of Biology, Management, and Impacts on Lodgepole Pine 2006, 3-66. Canadian Forest Service, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. L. Safranyik, B. Wilson (Eds.).
34. Safranyik, L., Shrimpton, D.M., Whitney, H.S., 1974. Management of lodgepole pine to reduce losses from the mountain pine beetle. Environment Canada, Canadian Forestry Service, Pacific Forest Research Centre, Victoria, BC. Forestry Technical, Report 1.
35. Schoennagel T., Veblen T.T., Negron J.F., Smith J.M. Effects of mountain pine beetle on fuels and expected fire behavior in lodgepole pine forests, Colorado, USA. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e30002.
36. Shore, T.L., Safranyik, L., 1992. Susceptibility and risk rating systems for the mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine stands. Forestry Canada Information, Report BC-X-336.
37. Shore T.L., Safranyik L., Lemieux J.P. Susceptibility of lodgepole pine stands to the mountain pine beetle: testing of a rating system. Can. J. For. Res. 2000, 30:44-49.
38. Shore T.L., Safranyik L., Whitehead R.J. Principles and concepts of management. The Mountain Pine Beetle: A Synthesis of Biology, Management, and Impacts on Lodgepole Pine 2006, 117-121. Canadian Forest Service, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. L. Safranyik, B. Wilson (Eds.).
39. Simard M., Romme W.H., Griffin J.M., Turner M.G. Do mountain pine beetle outbreaks change the probability of active crown fire in lodgepole pine forests?. Ecol. Monogr. 2011, 81:3-24.
40. Sims C., Aadland D., Finoff D. A dynamic bioeconomic analysis of mountain pine beetle epidemics. J. Econ. Dynam. Control 2010, 34:2407-2419.
41. Sing T., Sander O., Beerenwinkel N., Lengauer T. ROCR: visualizing classifier performance in R. Bioinformatics 2005, 21:3940-3941.
42. Song C., Woodcock C.E., Seto K.C., Lenney M.P., Macomber S.A. Classification and change detection using Landsat TM data: when and how to correct atmospheric effects?. Remote Sens. Environ. 2001, 75:230-244.
43. Strobl C., Boulesteix A.L., Kneib T., Augustin T., Zeileis A. Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinformatics 2008, 9. 10.1186/1471-2105-9-307.
44. Strobl C., Tutz G., Malley J. An introduction to recursive partitioning: rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. Psychol. Method 2009, 14:323-348.
45. Taylor, S.W., Carroll, A.L., 2004. Disturbance, forest age, and mountain pine beetle outbreak dynamics in BC: a historical perspective. In: Shore, T.L., Brooks, J.W., Stone, J.E. (Eds.), Mountain Pine Beetle Symposium: Challenges and Solutions, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria, British Columbia, Information, Report BC-X-399, October 2003, pp. 30-31 (pages 41-51).
46. USDA Forest Service, 2009. R2veg. Online. (accessed 12.03.13). http://www.mpcer.nau.edu/sage/SJPLC/r2veg.htm#6.
47. USDA Forest Service, 2012. Forest Health Management. Online. (accessed 15.03.13). http://fs.usda.gov/main/barkbeetle/barkbeetlemanagement/foresthealthmanagement.
48. USDA Forest Service, 2013. Aerial Detection Survey: Data Download. Online (accessed 15.03.13). http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r2/forest-grasslandhealth.
49. Westfall J. 2006 Summary of forest health conditions in British Columbia 2007, Ministry of Forests, Forest Practices Branch, Victoria, BC.
50. Wiens J.A. Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct. Ecol. 1989, 3:297-385.
51. Williams D.W., Liebhold A.M. Spatial synchrony of spruce budworm outbreaks in eastern North America. Ecology 2000, 81(10):2753-2766.
52. White J.C., Wulder M.A., Grills D. Detection and mapping mountain pine beetle red-attack damage with SPOT-5 10-m multispectral imagery. BC J. Ecosyst. Manage. 2006, 7:105-118.
53. Wulder M.A., White J.C., Bentz B., Alvarez M.F., Coops N.C. Estimating the probability of mountain pine beetle red attack damage. Remote Sens. Environ. 2006, 101:150-155.
54. Wulder M.A., Dymond C.C., White J.C., Erickson B. Detection, mapping, and monitoring of the mountain pine beetle. The Mountain Pine Beetle: A Synthesis of Biology, Management, and Impacts on Lodgepole Pine 2006, 123-154. Canadian Forest Service, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. L. Safranyik, B. Wilson (Eds.).