Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Miscellanea Geographica

Regional Studies on Development

4 Issues per year

CiteScore 2016: 0.40

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.227
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.404

Covered by e.g. Web of Science Core Collection by Clarivate Analytics, and SCOPUS by Elsevier
14 points in the Ministerial journal value rating scale

Open Access
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Application of landscape metrics in the evaluation of geodiversity

Ewa Malinowska
  • Department of Geoecology Institute of Physical Geography Faculty of Geography and Regional Studies University of Warsaw
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Iwona Szumacher
  • Department of Geoecology Institute of Physical Geography Faculty of Geography and Regional Studies University of Warsaw
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2013-12-27 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10288-012-0045-y


The purpose of this study is to present opportunities for using landscape metrics to evaluate geodiversity on individual landscape levels. The research area is located to the west of the Płock Urban and Industrial Agglomeration in Poland. Within this area, hierarchically organized regional units were delimited (Richling, Malinowska, Szumacher 2013). The area is divided into 87 first-level regions, 36 second-level regions and 9 third-level regions. The units have been treated as basic fields for geodiversity analysis purposes using selected landscape measures and metrics, to include area, density, size, edges and diversity (among others, Shannon’s Diversity Index (SDI), Shannon’s Evenness Index (SEI), domination (D) and redundancy (R)) generated in Patch Analyst v. 5, Fragstats v. 4.0, ArcGIS v.10 and Statistica v. 10 software.

Keywords: Geodiversity; landscape metrics

  • Alhamad, MN, Alrababah, MA, Feagin, RA & Gharaibeh, A 2011, ‘Mediterranean drylands: The effect of grain size and domain of scale on landscape metrics’, Ecological Indicators, vol. 11, pp. 611–621.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ares, J, Bertiller, M & del Valle, H 2001, ‘Functional and structural landscape indicators of intensification, resilience and resistance in agroecosystems in southern Argentina based on remotely sensed data’, Landscape Ecology, vol. 16, pp. 221–234.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bailey, B, Billeter, R, Aviron, S, Schweiger O. & Herzog F 2007, ‘The influence of thematic resolution on metric selection for biodiversity monitoring in agricultural landscapes’, Landscape Ecology, vol. 22, pp. 461–473.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Benito-Calvo, A, Pérez-González, A, Magri, O & Meza, P 2009, ‘Assessing regional geodiversity: the Iberian Peninsula’, Earth Surf. Process. Landforms, vol. 34, pp: 1433–1445.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Constible, JM, Chamberlain, MJ & Leopols, BD 2006, ‘Relationships Between Landscape Pattern and Space Use of Three Mammalian Carnivores in Central Mississippi’, Am. Midi. NaL, vol. 155, pp. 352–362.Google Scholar

  • Cushman, SA, McGarigal, K & Neel, MC 2008, ‘Parsimony in landscape metrics: Strength, universality, and consistency’, Ecological Indicators, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 691–703.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • DiBari, JN 2007, ‘Evaluation of five landscape-level metrics for measuring the effects of urbanization on landscape structure: the case of Tucson, Arizona, USA’, Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 79, pp. 308–313.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Elkie, PC, Rempel, RS & Carr, AP 1999, ‘Patch Analyst User’s Manual. A Tool for Quantifying Landscape Structure. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour. Northwest Sci. & Technol. Thunder Bay, Ont. TM–002. 16 pp + Append. Available from: http://www.rocchini.net/ecopae/mat_did/pa_manual.pdf [on line: 17.07.2012]Google Scholar

  • Gallardo, B, Gascón, S, Quintana, X & Comín FA 2011, ‘How to choose a biodiversity indicator – Redundancy and complementarity of biodiversity metrics in a freshwater ecosystem’, Ecological Indicators, vol. 11, pp. 1177–1184.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Herzog, F & Lausch, A 2001, ‘Supplementing land-use statistic with landscape metrics: some methodological considerations’, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, vol.72, pp. 37–50.Google Scholar

  • Huang, C, Geiger, EL & Kupfer, JA 2006, ‘Sensitivity of landscape metrics to scheme’, International Journal of Remote Sensing, vol. 27, no. 14, pp. 2927–2948.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jones, KB, Neale, AC, Nash, MS, Van Remortel, RD, Wickham, JD, Riitters, KH & O’Neill, RV 2001, ‘Predicting nutrient and sediment loadings to streams from landscape metrics: A multiple watershed study from the United States Mid-Atlantic Region’, Landscape Ecology, vol. 16, pp. 301–312.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kim, K-H & Pauleit, S 2007, ‘Landscape character, biodiversity and land use planning: The case of Kwangju City Region, South Korea’, Land Use Policy, vol. 24, pp. 264–274.Google Scholar

  • Kot, R & Leśniak, K 2006, Ocena georóżnorodności za pomocą miar krajobrazowych – podstawowe trudności metodyczne [Geodiversity valuation with the aid of landscape indices – basic methodological obstructions], Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 25–45.Google Scholar

  • Kumar, S, Stohlgren, TJ & Chong, GW 2006, ‘Spatial Heterogeneity Influences Native and Nonnative Plant Species Richness’, Ecology, vol. 87, no. 12, pp. 3186–3199.Google Scholar

  • Kupfer, JA 2012, ‘Landscape ecology and biogeography: Rethinking landscape metrics in a post-FRAGSTATS landscape’, Progress in Physical Geography, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 400–420.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Mander, Ü, Müller, F & Wrbka, T 2005, ‘Functional and structural landscape indicators: Upscaling and downscaling problems’. Ecological Indicators, vol.5, pp. 267–272.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Massada, AB, Carmel, Y, Koniak, G & Noy-Meir, I 2009, ‘The effects of disturbance based management on the dynamics of Mediterranean vegetation: A hierarchical and spatially explicit modeling approach’, Ecological Modelling, vol. 220, pp. 2525–2535.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • McGargial, K & Marks, BJ 1995, ‘Spatial pattern analysis for quantifying landscape structure’. Available from: h t t p : // w w w.u m a s s . e d u /l a n d e c o /p u b s /m c g a r i g a l . marks.1995.pdf [online:16.04.2012]Google Scholar

  • McGarigal, K, Tagil, S & Cushman, SA 2009, ‘Surface metrics: an alternative to patch metrics for the quantification of landscape structure’, Landscape Ecology, vol. 24, pp. 433–450.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Nagendra, H 2002, ‘Opposite trends in response for the Shannon and Simpson indices of landscape diversity’, Applied Geography, vol. 22, pp. 175–186.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Onaindia, M, Dominguez, I, Albitu, I, Garbisu, C & Amezaga, I 2004, ‘Vegetation diversity and vertical structure as indicators of forest disturbance’, Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 195, pp. 341–354.Google Scholar

  • Pellitero, R, González-Amuchastegui, MJ, Ruiz-Flańo, P & Serrano, E 2011, ‘Geodiversity and Geomorphosite Assessment Applied to a Natural Protected Area: the Ebro and Rudron Gorges Natural Park (Spain)’, Geoheritage, vol. 3, pp. 163–174.Google Scholar

  • Pietrzak, M 2010, Podstawy i zastosowania ekologii krajobrazu [Foundations and applications of landscape ecology], Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa im. J.A. Komeńskiego w Lesznie.Google Scholar

  • Richling, A & Lechnio, J (ed.) 2005, Z problematyki funkcjonowania krajobrazów nizinnych. WGiSR UW, Warszawa.Google Scholar

  • Richling, A & Solon J 2011, Ekologia krajobrazu [Landscape ecology], Państwowe Wydawnictwo PWN, Warszawa.Google Scholar

  • Richling, A, Malinowska, E & Szumacher, I 2013, ‘ Delimitation of the landscape units treated as estimation fields in the modeling of landscape system’, Miscellanea Geographica– Regional Studies on Development, vol. 17, no. 4.Google Scholar

  • Rocchini, D, Perry, GLP, Salerno, M, Maccherini, S & Chiarucci, A 2006, ‘Landscape change and the dynamics of open formations in a natural reserve’, Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 77, pp. 167–177.Google Scholar

  • Schindler, S, Poirazidis, K & Wrbka, T 2008, ‘Towards a core set of landscape metrics for biodiversity assessments: A case study from Dadia National Park, Greece’, Ecological Indicators, vol. 8, pp. 502–514.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Serrano, E & Ruiz-Flaño, P 2007, ‘Geodiversity. A theoretical and applied concept’, Geographica Helvetica Jg, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 140–147.Google Scholar

  • Solon, J 2002, ‘Ocena różnorodności krajobrazu na podstawie analizy struktury przestrzennej roślinności’ [The Assessment of Diversity of Landscape on the Basis of Analysis of Spatial Structure of Vegetation], Prace Geograficzne, vol. 185, pp. 1– 233.Google Scholar

  • Urbański, J 2008, ‘GIS w badaniach przyrodniczych’, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.Google Scholar

  • Uuemaa, E, Antrop, M, Roosaare, J, Marja, R & Mander, Ü 2009, ‘Landscape Metrics and Indices: An Overview of Their Use in Landscape Research’, Living Reviews in Landscape Research, vol. 3, pp. 5–28.Google Scholar

  • Uuemaa, E, Roosaare, J, Kanal, A & Mander Ü 2008, ‘Spatial correlograms of soil cover as an indicator of landscape heterogeneity’, Ecological Indicators, vol. 8, pp. 783–794.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Uuemaa, E, Roosaare, J, & Mander Ü 2005, ‘Scale dependence of landscape metrics and their indicatory value for nutrient and organic matter losses from catchments’, Ecological Indicators, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 350–369.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Uuemaa, E, Roosaare, J, Oja, T & Mander, Ü 2011, ‘Analysing the spatial structure of the Estonian landscapes: which landscape metrics are the most suitable for comparing different landscapes?’, Estonian Journal of Ecology, vol. 60, no.1, pp. 70–80.Google Scholar

  • Van Eetvelde, V & Antrop, M 2009, ‘A stepwise multi-scaled landscape typology and characterisation for trans-regional integration, applied on the federal state of Belgium’, Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 91, pp. 160–170.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Yue, TX, Liu, JY, Li, ZQ, Chen, SQ, Ma, SN, Tian, YZ & Ge, F 2005, ‘Considerable effects of diversity indices and spatial scales on conclusions relating to ecological diversity’, Ecological Modelling, vol. 188, pp. 418–431. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2013-12-27

Citation Information: Miscellanea Geographica - Regional Studies on Development, Volume 17, Issue 4, Pages 28–33, ISSN (Print) 2084-6118, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10288-012-0045-y.

Export Citation

This content is open access.

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in