1. Linking long-term patterns of landscape heterogeneity to changing ecosystem processes in the Kruger National Park, South Africa Sandra MacFadyen 1 1 PhD student and GeoSpatial Analyst, South African National Parks (sandra.macfadyen@sanparks.org) Hui C 2 and Verburg P 3 2 Supervisor, Stellenbosch University, Department of Botany & Zoology (chui@sun.ac.za) 3 Co-supervisor, Vrije University, Amsterdam, Environmental Studies (peter.verburg@ivm.vu.nl)

2. Research Unpacked Linking long-term patterns of landscape heterogeneity to changing ecosystem processes in the Kruger National Park, South Africa

3. Landscape Heterogeneity Landscape heterogeneity is the cause and consequence of interactions between spatial patterns and ecological processes (Turner et al 2001).

4. MacFadyen 2010 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 composition (type) + 2 function (process) = 3 structure (pattern) @ different scales 3 3 3

5. Functional Importance Spatial heterogeneity at a variety of scales is functionally important (Pickett et al 1999) Without an adequate understanding of natural pattern and process, protected area managers are flying blind (Olson 2010)

6. ….Pattern = Process = Pattern…. Spatial pattern affect ecological processes, which in response affects spatial patterns. Natural spatial patterns should guide management decisions not unnatural administrative boundaries (Leitão et al 2006) Use pattern to decipher process Bailey 2009

7. Research Objectives 1.ID patterns of heterogeneity at different scales. 2.ID processes responsible for these patterns. 3.Investigate dynamics of pattern and process. 4.Management implications.

8. OBJECTIVE 1 ID landscape heterogeneity patterns ∆ scales 1972 2010 OBJECTIVE 3 Dynamics of Pattern & process OBJECTIVE 4 Management Implications OBJECTIVE 2 ID processes Patterns

9. South African National Parks Mabunda et al. 2003 INTRODUCTION

10. Kruger National Park INTRODUCTION

11. History of Change INTRODUCTION

12. Chapter 1 Inter-calibrated TM MSS ETM + Band Combination spectral variance Image Classification spectralobjectentropy Ancillary Data topography geology rainfall Spectral Heterogeneity Landscape Metrics CHAPTER 1

13. What constitutes a Landscape CHAPTER 1

14. What constitutes a Landscape Landform (geology + topographic elements) +> climate ecological processes vegetation and animal response disturbance Wiens (1999)

15. LANDFORM CLIMATE + elevation slope aspect geology regime local weather microclimate MOVEMENT OF WATERSOIL HABITAT Landscape Schematic

16. LANDFORM CLIMATE + elevation slope aspect geology regime local weather microclimate MOVEMENT OF WATERFLORAFAUNASOIL HABITAT

17. LANDFORM CLIMATE + elevation slope aspect geology regime local weather microclimate MOVEMENT OF WATERFLORAFAUNASOILDISTURBANCES HABITAT

18. Topography Geology Soil Rainfall Temperature Flora Fauna CHAPTER 1

19. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 False-color composite

20. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 False-color composite

21. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 False-color composite

22. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 True-color composite

23. LANDSAT ETM+ 10 May 2000 Panchromatic

24. Data Acquisition

25. Limitations of Data Scale: Extent and Resolution Horizontal and Vertical structure CHAPTER 1

30. Difference of Scale Elephant VS. Elephant Shrew CHAPTER 1

31. Horizontal and Vertical CHAPTER 1

32. Chapter 2 Drivers and/or Responders Spectral Heterogeneity Landscape Metrics CHAPTER 2 Ecological Processes animal movement population distribution fire frequency rainfall

33. Exclusion Experiments Inside vs. Outside: What is different/missing? CHAPTER 2

34. Chapter 3 diversify homogenize greatest change Spectral Heterogeneity Landscape Metrics CHAPTER 3 2010 1972 Kruger National Park Landscapes

35. LANDSAT ETM+ False-color composite 2000

36. LANDSAT TM False-color composite 1984

37. Chapter 4 CHAPTER 4 Kruger National Park Landscapes areas which have diversified over 38yrs ? areas which have homogenized over 38yrs ? areas which have under gone greatest change over 38yrs ?

38. Application of Results Philosophically Theoretically Practically  KNP management plan CHAPTER 4

39. Schedule / Timeline

40. Thank you

41. Notes to myself Be clear about what elements of landscape heterogeneity are being measured What metrics and why. How will I decide what indices prove useful and how will I know if a changed index is important to ecosystem functioning. Develop causal diagram to explain how factors interact, how will I investigate relationships and what data to use Be clear about auto-correlation and spatial variability (e.g. within satellite image) Be more specific about scale (explain extent vs. grain) Stress natural systems when talking about ecological importance of heterogeneity (e.g. fragmentation=bad) Be clear about what aspects of function will be addressed NB to explain and defend image classification technique and add sensitivity tests Can I test the validity of the statement, “ greater landscape heterogeneity provides increased ecosystem resilience and higher species richness”? Add general explanation of landscape trend analysis NB to explain why each time I describe how i.e why a certain technique/statistic