Preliminary ecological land classification of the Chauga Ridges Region of South Carolina

Ecosystem classification in a flat, highly fragmented region of Indiana, USA

“…The results and subsequent classification agree with classifications in Ohio, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina, where landforms were important factors in plant community composition (Hix and Pearcy, 1997;Hix, 1988;McNab, 1996;McNab et al, 1999;Goebel et al, 2001;Carter et al, 1999;Hutto et al, 1999). Because of the consistency across the classifications, including those found in more heterogeneous topographies (e.g.…”

“…Ecological classification systems (ECS) have been developed throughout the United States for national forests, nature preserves, recreation areas, and other public lands (Spies and Barnes, 1985;Hix, 1988;VanKley, 1993;Hix and Pearcy, 1997;Baker and Barnes, 1998;Carter et al, 1999;Hutto et al, 1999;McNab et al, 1999;Goebel et al, 2001;Abella et al, 2003). These ECSs, which follow the classification system developed by the USDA Forest Service (Cleland et al, 1997), organize landscapes hierarchically from global to site level scales, with the highest levels following Bailey's (1996) ecoregion model.…”

“…An integral factor in the development of an ecological classification system is the identification of environmental characteristics that affect the composition of plant communities. The most common predictor of plant communities is the moisture regime, which is often controlled by, or related to aspect, (percent slope, position, and shape), depth of the soil solum, depth of the A-horizon, soil drainage, mottling depth, and less frequently, soil texture (Spies and Barnes, 1985;Hix, 1988;VanKley, 1993;Hix and Pearcy, 1997;Baker and Barnes, 1998;Carter et al, 1999;Hutto et al, 1999;McNab et al, 1999;Goebel et al, 2001;Abella et al, 2003). Through the identification of these characteristics, it is possible to generalize landscapes and classify sites into groups with similar plant species composition or relative abundance within a hierarchical framework.…”

Changes in soil bacterial community profiles associated with deforestation in the Sakaerat Environmental Research Station, Thailand: comparisons between soils of the original forest and bare ground

“…RDA integrates environmental and biotic data sets, and then, directly relates the biotic profiles to the environmental factors. The computation found significant environmental factors based on variation of plant (e.g., Bubier, 1995;Hutto et al, 1999;Lyon & Sagers, 2002;Stohlgren & Bachand, 1997;Wali, 1999) and other communities (e.g., Bird et al, 2000;Hemerik & Brassaard, 2002;van den Brink et al, 1996) that reflected various environmental changes.…”

A Classification Procedure for Mapping Topo-climatic Conditions for Strategic Vegetation Planning

“…With regard to quantitative methods, a wide range of new techniques have been applied to classify landscapes and environmental data. These include fuzzy logics [26][27][28][29], neural networks [30], information theory [31], and multivariate cluster analysis [32,33].…”