Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling Spatial Dynamics of Ecosystem Processes and Services

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Learning Landscape Ecology

Abstract

Understanding and predicting rates of ecosystem processes (e.g., soil erosion, nutrient flux) across large heterogeneous landscapes is an enduring challenge in ecosystem and landscape ecology and underpins the knowledge base for managing ecosystem services. Many current problems in ecosystem services management (e.g., maintenance of water quality and reduction of soil erosion) occur over broad spatial scales and across ecosystem boundaries and thus are influenced by landscape pattern (Ecol indic 21:80–88, 2012). When scaling up, ecosystem ecologists and watershed hydrologists have often used fine-scale plot experiments to infer rates of ecosystem processes at broader scales (Science 195:260–262, 2012). This approach can present difficulties as the results of fine-scale studies may not reflect the heterogeneity evident in a larger area (Ecosystems 6:301–312, 2003). Because collection of ecosystem data at broad scales is often difficult and costly and many ecosystem services are difficult to measure directly, modeling is a vital tool for addressing both basic and applied questions in this realm. In this lab, you will examine several fundamental issues of modeling landscape-level ecosystem processes and services in order to.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note: An asterisk preceding the entry indicates that it is a suggested reading.

References and Recommended Readings

Note: An asterisk preceding the entry indicates that it is a suggested reading.

  • *Bennett EM, Peterson GD, Gordon LJ (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Lett 12(12):1394–1404. A carefully considered framework for examining interactions among ecosystem services, with examples from a variety of landscape types.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR (2008) Phosphorus control is critical to mitigating eutrophication. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(32):11039–11040

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR, Caraco NF, Correll D et al (1998) Non-point pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Ecol Appl 8(3):559–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correll DL, Jordan TE, Weller DE (1999) Effects of precipitation and air temperature on phosphorus fluxes from Rhode River watersheds. J Environ Qual 28:144–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • *Costanza R (2008) Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biol Conserv 141:350–352. A practical, brief overview of why and spatial characteristics of ecosystem services matter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily G (1997) Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC, p 392

    Google Scholar 

  • de Groot R, Wilson MA, Boumans RM (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol Econ 41(3):393–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Escobedo FJ, Kroeger T, Wagner JE (2011) Urban forests and pollution mitigation: analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environ Pollut 159(8):2078–2087

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2010) The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: Raffaelli DG, Frid CLJ (eds) Ecosystem ecology: a new synthesis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 110–139

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann CC, Kjaergaard C, Uusi-Kämppä J et al (2009) Phosphorus retention in riparian buffers: review of their efficiency. J Environ Qual 38(5):1942–1955

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Howarth R, Paerl HW (2008) Coastal marine eutrophication: control of both nitrogen and phosphorus is necessary. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(49):103. A review of eutrophication problems globally with an emphasis on nitrogen fluxes with an emphasis on terrestrial, aquatic and marine interactions, as well as contrasts between N and P.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman L (1993) Catastrophic change in species-rich freshwater ecosystems. Bioscience 42:846–858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeler BL, Polasky S, Brauman KA et al (2012) Linking water quality and well-being for improved assessment and valuation of ecosystem services. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(45):18619–18624

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lathrop RC, Carpenter SR, Stow CA et al (1998) Phosphorus loading reductions needed to control blue-green algal blooms in Lake Mendota. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55(5):1169–1178

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • *Likens GE, Bormann RH (1995) Biogeochemistry of a forested ecosystem. Springer, New York. The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study, began in 1963, has been foundational to the study of ecosystem processes at the scale of large watersheds and was been a pioneering scientific acheivement in broad-scale whole ecosystem experiments.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Lovett GM, Jones CG, Turner MG et al (eds) (2005) Ecosystem function in heterogeneous landscapes. Springer, New York, p 489. Consider the very helpful book review by Carol Wessman describing the chapters and flow and of this exceptionally synthetic volume. Ecology, 88(3), 2007, pp. 803–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • *McClain ME, Boyer EW, Dent CL et al (2003) Biogeochemical hot spots and hot moments at the interface of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Ecosystems 6(4):301–312. Highly-cited classic paper examining spatial and temporal heterogeneity in ecosystem processes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman EI (1997) Phosphorus balance of contrasting farm systems, past and present. Can food production be sustainable? J Appl Ecol 34:1334–1347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak P, Shepard S, Weiland C (1996) Utilizing a needs assessment in water quality program implementation for the Lake Mendota watershed. The Farm Practices Inventory (FPI) Report #2. Available via Environmental Resources Center, University of Wisconsin

    Google Scholar 

  • Omernick JM, Abernathy AR, Male LM (1991) Stream nutrient levels and proximity of agricultural and forest land to streams: some relationships. J Soil and Water Conserv 36:227–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne LL, Kovacic DA (1993) Riparian vegetated buffer strips in water quality restoration and stream management. Freshw Biol 29:243–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne LL, Wiley MJ (1988) Empirical relationships between land use/landcover and stream water quality in an agricultural watershed. J Environ Manage 26:9–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterjohn WT, Correll DL (1984) Nutrient dynamics in an agricultural watershed: observations on the role of a riparian forest. Ecology 65:1466–1475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu J, Turner MG (2013) Spatial interactions among ecosystem services in an urbanizing agricultural watershed. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(29):12149–12154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Renard D, Rhemtulla JM, Bennett EM (2015) Historical dynamics in ecosystem service bundles. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112(43):13411–13416

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • *Running SW, Nemani RR, Peterson DL et al (1989) Mapping regional forest evapotranspiration and photosynthesis by coupling satellite data with ecosystem simulation. Ecology 70:1090–1101. Landscape-level simulation model of annual evapotranspiration and net photosynthesis in a mountainous region by some of the original leaders in developing spatial ecosystem models linked to remotely-sensed data.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindler DW (1977) Evolution of phosphorus limitation in lakes. Science 195:260–262

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schindler DW (2012) The dilemma of controlling cultural eutrophication of lakes. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 283(1827):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • *Sklar FH, Costanza R (1991) The development of dynamic spatial models for landscape ecology: a review and prognosis. In: Turner MG, Gardner RH (eds) Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. Springer, New York, pp 239–288. A classic overview of spatial modeling as approached by both the social and natural sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland I, Bennett EB, Gergel SE (2016) Recovery trends for multiple ecosystem services reveal non-linear responses and long-term tradeoffs from temperate forest harvesting. For Ecol Manage 374:61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Syrbe RU, Walz U (2012) Spatial indicators for the assessment of ecosystem services: providing, benefiting and connecting areas and landscape metrics. Ecol Indic 21:80–88. Extremely thoughtful piece exploring how ecosystem services flow across large regions. Also introduces exciting ideas about how to link landscape metrics to ecosystem service provisioning.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Tallis H, Polasky S (2009) Mapping and valuing ecosystem services as an approach for conservation and natural‐resource management. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1162(1):265–283. Overview of one of the earliest spatial models of ecosystem services, InVest, with some example applications. Further development of this software continues at a rapid pace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomscha SA, Gergel SE (2016) Ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies misunderstood without landscape history. Ecol Soc 21(1):43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (1990) The quality of our nation’s water. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 440/4-90-005. Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (1997) Index of watershed indicators. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency -841-R-97-010. Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeven JT, Arheimer B, Yin C et al (2006) Regional and global concerns over wetlands and water quality. Trends Ecol Evol 21(2):96–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Sarah E. Gergel

  2. University of Wisconsin - Green Bay, Green Bay, WI, USA

    Tara Reed

Authors
  1. Sarah E. Gergel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tara Reed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of British Columbia, Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

    Sarah E. Gergel

  2. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Zoology, Madison, Wisconsin, USA

    Monica G. Turner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer-Verlag New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gergel, S.E., Reed, T. (2017). Modeling Spatial Dynamics of Ecosystem Processes and Services. In: Gergel, S., Turner, M. (eds) Learning Landscape Ecology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6374-4_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation