Landscape water potential as a new indicator for monitoring macrostructural landscape changesby J. Skaloš, K. Berchová, J. Pokorný, T. Sedmidubský, E. Pecharová, I. Trpáková

Ecological Indicators


Decision Sciences (all) / Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics / Ecology


Water Landscapes


The Ever-Changing Legal Landscape

Lynn S. Muller

The Changing Physical Landscape of Britain

S. W. Wooldridge


Ecological Indicators 36 (2014) 80– 93

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Indicators jou rn al hom epage: www.elsev ier .com

Original article

Landsc for macros

J. Skalosˇ ∗ arov

Department of rague,

Czech Republic a r t i c l

Article history:

Received 24 January 2013

Received in revised form 6 June 2013

Accepted 27 June 2013


Sokolov Regio

Land use/cove

Landscape wa


Many studies have recently been published on changes in land use/land cover, but only a few have been concerned with landscape functional changes. The studies that have been made in this field have focused on only a limited time period. Our study attempts to partly fill in this research gap by analysing long-term landscape changes, through differentiating landscape elements according to land use/cover (LULC) and newly developed landscape water potential (LWP) criteria. LWP seems to be an important characteristic 1. Introdu

Informa standing th of human a an input da 2003; Bürg

Engstová, 2 2012). Rece considerabl ularly at the

Williams, 2 ∗ Correspon

E-mail add 1470-160X/$ – http://dx.doi.on (Czech Republic) r changes ter potential ation of landscape functionality. The study was undertaken on the post-mining landscape of Sokolov (210 km2).

Landscape elements were classified according to land use/cover (LULC) and according to LWP. LWP is a characteristic, based on the average potential landscape element evapotranspiration, which is affected mainly by the biotope character, and type of management. Information about the LULC and LWP has been read from Stable Cadastre maps (1842) and based on the field mapping of the present state of the landscape (2010). The data were elaborated using GIS and statistical analysis. In the study the Coefficient of LWP was developed as a new quantitative indicator to monitor landscape macrostructural change.

Changes in the abundance of the arable land, barren land, built-up areas, forest land, grasslands, orchards and wetlands LULC categories were found to be statistically significant with trends very similar to the national statistics. The results led to the conclusion that mining has had a statistically significant effect on changes in the LULC categories mentioned above, not only in terms of mining but also of reclamations.

As for the LWP categories, changes in LWP categories No. 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, and 14 were found to be statistically significant. Coefficient of LWP calculated for the total study area has increased very slightly from 1.3 to 1.4 taking into account many different and contradictory trends (increasing area of mining areas and urban areas, and increasing area of woody stands on the other hand). The study provides a valuable methodological conclusion, however the concept of LWP will need to be corrected by further measurements. Nevertheless, the different and methodically new way that we analysed landscape changes forms the basis for analysing landscape functional changes in the future. This may help us to better evaluate historic effects of anthropogenic activities on the landscape. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. ction tion about landscape changes is important for undere patterns of landscape development and also the effects ctivities on landscape. This information can be used as ta for making landscape planning decisions (Lannér, i and Schuler, 2003; Sklenicˇka et al., 2004; Skalosˇ and 010; Skalosˇ, 2006; Skalosˇ et al., 2012a,b; Plieninger, nt investigations of landscape changes have yielded e information about landscape transformation, particnational level (Kienast, 1993; Bürgi and Russell, 2001; 003; Mander et al., 2004; Brabyn, 2005; Pelorosso et al., ding author. Tel.: +420 739 001 117; fax: +420 203697500. resses:, (J. Skalosˇ). 2009; Calvo-Iglesias et al., 2009; Verburg et al., 2009; El-Kawy et al., 2011; Campos et al., 2012; Delahuntya et al., 2012; Echeverría et al., 2012; Fox et al., 2012). Many recent studies have evaluated individual aspects of landscape development (Teng et al., 2009; Kuskova et al., 2008; Romero-Ruiz et al., 2012; Siciliano, 2012; Skalosˇ and

Engstová, 2010; Skalosˇ et al., 2012a; York et al., 2011). The results of analyses of changes in land cover and land use can be applied in various ways, for example for evaluating the impact of land use/cover on soil erosion development (Erdogan et al., 2011).

Our study analyses historic landscape change in a territory disturbed by mining (Pecharová et al., 2011). Surface mining for this study is the human activity that has had the greatest influence on the structure and functioning of the landscape. This influence, together with land recovery and landscape revitalisation has been studied, e.g., by Häge (1996), Menegaki and Kaliampakos (2012),

Sklenicˇka and Charvátová (2003), Svobodová et al. (2011), Toomik see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. rg/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.06.027ape water potential as a new indicator tructural landscape changes , K. Berchová, J. Pokorny´, T. Sedmidubsky´, E. Pech

Applied Ecology, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences P e i n f o a b s t r a c t/ locate /eco l ind monitoring á, I. Trpáková

Kamycka 1176, 165 21, Prague 6, Suchdol,

J. Skalosˇ et al. / Ecological Indicators 36 (2014) 80– 93 81

Table 1

Categories of landscape water potential (LWP) and the criteria influencing classification of LWP. P.ET–evapotranspiration according the literature sources (for details see the text of Section 2), the habitat type and management categories were based on the map operate in the Stable Cadastre maps for historical LWP and on field observation for recent LWP, habitat types were distinguished following categories of Smaragd and Natura 2000 programmes.