Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-07T07:41:06.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Incorporating geographical (biophysical) principles in studies of landscape systems

from PART I - Introductory perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2009

By
Jerzy Solon
Edited by
John A. Wiens  and
Michael R. Moss
Jerzy Solon
Affiliation:
Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization Poland
John A. Wiens
Affiliation:
The Nature Conservancy, Washington DC
Michael R. Moss
Affiliation:
University of Guelph, Ontario
Get access

Summary

The geographical and biological roots of landscape ecology are in Central and Eastern Europe. Here landscape has always been treated in a holistic manner, starting from von Humboldt (1769–1859), who defined landscape as a holistic characterization of a region of the earth. In 1850 Rosenkranz defined landscapes as hierarchically organized local systems of all the kingdoms of nature. The term “landscape ecology” was introduced by Troll in the late 1930s. He proposed that the fundamental task of this discipline be the functional analysis of landscape content as well as the explanation of its multiple and varying interrelations. Later he modified the definition by referring to Tansley's concept of the ecosystem. In this approach, landscape ecology is the science dealing with the system of interconnections between biocenoses and their environmental conditions in definite segments of space (Richling and Solon, 1996).

A further impulse to the development of landscape ecology was provided by the concepts drawn up in the 1950s within vegetation science. Particularly worthy of emphasis here is the work of Tüxen (1956), which introduced the concept of potential natural vegetation, as well giving rise to that of dynamic circles of plant communities; of Dansereau (1951), who was the first to apply the landscape concept in biogeography; and of Whittaker (1956), whose gradient analysis approach remains as important as ever.

Type
Chapter
Information
Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology , pp. 11 - 20
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, T. F. H. and Starr, T. B. (1982). Hierarchy: Perspectives for Ecological Complexity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Barthlott, W., Lauer, W., and Placke, A. (1996). Global distribution of species diversity in vascular plants: towards a world map of phytodiversity. Erdkunde, 50, 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barthlott, W., Biedinger, N., Braun, G., Feig, F., Kier, G., and Mutke, J. (1999). Terminological and methodological aspects of the mapping and analysis of global biodiversity. Acta Botanica Fennica, 162, 103–110.Google Scholar
Cousins, S. H. (1993). Hierarchy in ecology: its relevance to landscape ecology and geographic information systems. In Landscape Ecology and Geographic Information Systems, ed. Haines-Young, R., Green, D. R., and Cousins, S.. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis, pp. 75–86.Google Scholar
Dansereau, P. (1951). The scope of biogeography and its integrative levels. Review of Canadian Biology, 10, 8–32.Google Scholar
Farina, A. (1998). Principles and Methods in Landscape Ecology. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farina, A. (2000). The cultural landscape as a model for the integration of ecology and economics. BioScience, 50, 313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forman, R. T. T. and Godron, M. (1986). Landscape Ecology. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Haase, G. (1964). Landschaftsökologische Detailuntersuchung und naturräumliche Gliederung. Petermanns Geographische Mitteilungen, 108, 8–30.Google Scholar
Hansson, L. (1979). On the importance of landscape heterogeneity in northern regions for the breeding population densities of homeotherms: a general hypothesis. Oikos, 33, 182–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kostrowicki, A. S. (1976). A system-based approach to research concerning the geographical environment. Geographia Polonica, 33, 27–37.Google Scholar
Leser, H. and Rodd, H. (1991). Landscape ecology: fundamentals, aims and perspectives. In Modern Ecology: Basic and Applied Aspects, ed. Esser, G and Overdieck, O. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 831–844.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R. H. and Wilson, E. O. (1967). The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Neef, E. (1984). Applied landscape research. Applied Geography and Development, 24, 38–58.Google Scholar
Odum, E. P. (1971). Fundamentals of Ecology. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders.Google Scholar
Perez-Trejo, F. (1993). Landscape response units: process-based self-organising systems. In Landscape Ecology and Geographic Information Systems, ed. Haines-Young, R., Green, D. R., and Cousins, S.. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis, pp. 87–98.Google Scholar
Perry, D. A. (1995). Self-organizing systems across scales. Trends in Evolution and Ecology, 10, 241–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richling, A. and Solon, J. (1996). Ekologia Krajobrazu [Landscape ecology], 2nd edn. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
Sochava, V. B. (1978). Vviedenie v ucenie o geosistemakch [Introduction to Geosystem Science]. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Google Scholar
Solon, J. (2000). Persistence of landscape spatial structure in conditions of change in habitat, land use and actual vegetation: Vistula Valley case study in Central Poland. In Consequences of Land Use Changes: Advances in Ecological Sciences 5, ed. Mander, U. and Jongman, R. H. G.. Southampton; Boston: WIT Press, pp. 163–184.Google Scholar
Tüxen, R. (1956). Die heutige potentielle natürliche Vegetation als Gegenstand der Vegetationskartierung. Angewandte Pflanzensoziologie, 13, 5–42.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R. H. (1956). Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecological Monographs, 26, 1–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfram, S. (1984). Cellular automata as models of complexity. Nature, 311, 419–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zonneveld, I. S. (1982). Principles of indication of environment through vegetation. In Monitoring of Air Pollutants by Plants: Methods and Problems, ed. Steubing, L. and Jager, H.-J.. The Hague: Junk, pp. 3–17.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×