Journal of Ecology and Environment

The Ecological Society of Korea (한국생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Consequences of land use change on bird distribution at Sakaerat Environmental Research Station

  • Received : 2011.01.26
  • Accepted : 2011.03.15
  • Published : 2011.06.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The objectives of this research were to predict land-use/land-cover change at the Sakaerat Environmental Research Station (SERS) and to analyze its consequences on the distribution for Black-crested Bulbul (Pycnonotus melanicterus), which is a popular species for bird-watching activity. The Dyna-CLUE model was used to determine land-use allocation between 2008 and 2020 under two scenarios. Trend scenario was a continuation of recent land-use change (2002-2008), while the integrated land-use management scenario aimed to protect 45% of study area under intact forest, rehabilitated forest and reforestation for renewable energy. The maximum entropy model (Maxent), Geographic Information System (GIS) and FRAGSTATS package were used to predict bird occurrence and assess landscape fragmentation indices, respectively. The results revealed that parts of secondary growth, agriculture areas and dry dipterocarp forest close to road networks would be converted to other land use classes, especially eucalyptus plantation. Distance to dry evergreen forest, distance to secondary growth and distance to road were important factors for Black-crested Bulbul distribution because this species prefers to inhabit ecotones between dense forest and open woodland. The predicted for occurrence of Black-crested Bulbul in 2008 covers an area of 3,802 ha and relatively reduces to 3,342 ha in 2020 for trend scenario and to 3,627 ha for integrated-land use management scenario. However, intact habitats would be severely fragmented, which can be noticed by total habitat area, largest patch index and total core area indices, especially under the trend scenario. These consequences are likely to diminish the recreation and education values of the SERS to the public.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson RP, Gomez-Laverde M, Peterson AT. 2002. Geographical distributions of spiny pocket mice in South America: insights from predictive models. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 11: 131-141. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1466-822X.2002.00275.x
  2. Angkapreechaset P, Kritanuch S. 2003. Birds of Sakaerat. Thailand Institute of Science and Technology, Bangkok.
  3. Brannstrom C, Jepson W, Filippi AM, Redo D, Xu Z, Ganesh S. 2008. Land change in the Brazilian Savanna (Cerrado), 1986-2002: comparative analysis and implications for land-use policy. Land Use Policy 25: 579-595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2007.11.008
  4. Carpenter SR, Folke C. 2006. Ecology for transformation. Trends Ecol Evol 21: 309-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.02.007
  5. CIDA Forestry Advisers Network. 2005. Deforestation: tropical forests in decline. CIDA Forestry Advisers Network. http://www.rcfa-cfan.org/english/issues.12-3.html. Accessed 2 February 2008.
  6. Corlett RT. 2009. The Ecology of Tropical East Asia. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
  7. Cuesta-Camocho F, Ganzenmuller A, Peralvo M, Novoa J, Riofrio G. 2006. Predicting Species’s Niche Distribution Shifts and Biodiversity Change within Climate Change Scenarios: A Regional Assessment for Bird and Plant Species in the Northern Tropical Andes. Nacional Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Lima.
  8. Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudík M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, Hijmans RJ, Huettmann F, Leathwick JR, Lehmann A, Li J, Lohmann LG, Loiselle BA, Manion G, Moritz C, Nakamura M, Nakazawa Y, Overton JM, Peterson AT, Phillips SJ, Richardson K, Scachetti-Pereira R, Schapire RE, Soberon J, Williams S, Wisz MS, Zimmermann NE. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29: 129-151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04596.x
  9. Forestry Research Center. 2009. The Utilization of Fast Growing Tree Species for Renewable Energy to Produce Electricity and Fuel Gas. Final Report Submitted to the National Research Council of Thailand. Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, Bangkok.
  10. Forman RTT. 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  11. Gavashelishvili A, Javakhishvili Z. 2010. Combining radio-telemetry and random observations to model the habitat of near threatened Caucasian grouse Tetrao mlokosiewiczi. Oryx 44: 491-500. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605310000979
  12. Graham CH, Elith J, Hijmans RJ, Guisan A, Peterson AT, Loiselle BA. 2008. The influence of spatial errors in species occurrence data used in distribution models. J Appl Ecol 45: 239-247.
  13. Guisan A, Zimmermann NE. 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135: 147-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00354-9
  14. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. 2000. Applied Logistic Regression. 2nd ed. Wiley, Chichester and New York.
  15. International Union for Conservation of Nature. 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Gland.
  16. Khemnark C. 1994. Rehabilitation of degraded tropical forest land through agroforestry practices: a case study in Thailand. J Trop For Sci 7: 128-135.
  17. Land Development Department. 2001. Soil Map of Nakhon Ratchasima Province. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Bangkok.
  18. Land Development Department. 2005a. Land Resource Management for Economic Crop Plantation Directed by Soil Group. Vol. 1. Land in Lowland. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Bangkok.
  19. Land Development Department. 2005b. Land Resource Management for Economic Crop Plantation Directed by Soil Group. Vol. 1. Land in Upland. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Bangkok.
  20. Lehouck V, Spanhove T, Vangestel C, Cordeiro NJ, Lens L. 2009. Does landscape structure affect resource tracking by avian frugivores in a fragmented Afrotropical forest? Ecography 32: 789-799. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05666.x
  21. Lekagul B, Round PD. 2005. A Guide to the Birds of Thailand. 2nd ed. Saha Karn Bhaet Co., Ltd, Bangkok.
  22. Liu C, Berry PM, Dawson TP, Pearson RG. 2005. Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions. Ecography 28: 385-393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.03957.x
  23. Maninan C, Kaeoniam P, Khoorat P, Sunthornsan W, Issareeya M, Cherdchun C, Buachum W. 1976. A Study of Illegal Deforestation in the Reserved Forest Area of the Sakaerat Environmental Research Station. Environmental and Ecological Research Department, Applied Scientific Research Corporation of Thailand (ASRCT), Bangkok.
  24. Marod D. 2009. Ecosystem and Dynamics of Seasonal Tropical Forest at Sakaerat Biosphere Reserve. Final Report submitted to Kasetsart University Research and Development Institute, Kasetsart University, Bangkok.
  25. McClure HE. 1974. Some bionomics of the birds of KhaoYai National Park, Thailand. Nat Hist Bull Siam Soc 25: 99-194.
  26. McGarigal K, Marks B. 1995. FRSGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Quantifying Landscape Structure. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-351. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR.
  27. Ongsomwang S. 1986. Application of natural color and color infrared aerial photographs in evaluation of land use: its change and impact of Sakaerat Environmental Research Station, Amphoe Pakthongchai, Nakorn Ratchasima Province. MS Thesis. Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  28. Peralvo MF. 2004. Identification of biodiversity conservation priorities using predictive modeling: an application for the tropical dry forests of western Ecuador and northern Peru. MSc Thesis. University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
  29. Peterson AT, Papes M, Eaton M. 2007. Transferability and model evaluation in ecological niche modeling: a comparison of GARP and Maxent. Ecography 30: 550-560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.05102.x
  30. Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE. 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190: 231-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.03.026
  31. Phillips SJ, Dudik M. 2008. Modeling of species distributions with Maxent: new extensions and a comprehensive evaluation. Ecography 31: 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0906-7590.2008.5203.x
  32. Pinkasorn S. 1990. The need for supplementary occupations for the farmers in the villages nearby Sakaerat Environmental Research Station, Amphoe Pakthongchai, Changwat Nakhon Ratchasima. MSc Thesis. Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  33. Poonswad P, Sukkasem C, Phataramata S, Hayeemuida S, Plongmai K, Chuailua P, Thiensongrusame P, Jirawatkavi N. 2005. Comparison of cavity modification and community involvement as strategies for hornbill conservation in Thailand. Biol Conserv 122: 385-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.08.002
  34. Priess JA, Schaldach R. 2008. Integrated models of the land system: a review of modelling approaches on the regional to global scale. Living Reviews in Landscape Research Vol. 2. http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2008-1. Accessed 15 September 2009.
  35. Raabova J, Munzbergova Z, Fischer M. 2007. Ecological rather than geographic or genetic distance affects local adaptation of the rare perennial herb, Aster amellus.Biol Conserv 139: 348-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.07.007
  36. Robinson C. 2002. A Field Guide of the Birds of Thailand. Asia Book. Co. Ltd., Bangkok.
  37. Royal Forest Department. 2005. Forest Statistics Year 2004. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Bangkok.
  38. Royal Thai Survey Department. 2002. Topographic Map at Scale 1: 50,000. Ministry of Defense, Bangkok.
  39. Sahunalu P, Dhanmamomda P, Jamroenpruksa M, Khemnak C. 1993. Effects of Reforestation, Abandoned Areas and Natural Forests on Sakaerat Environment. Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, Bangkok.
  40. Sanguansombat W. 2005. Thailand Red List Status: Birds. Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning, Bangkok.
  41. Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ, Margules CR. 1991. Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv Biol 5: 18-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.1991.tb00384.x
  42. Tangkitjavisuth V. 1979. Relationship between economic factors and rate of deforestation in Sakaerat Environmental Research Station area. MS Thesis. Kasetsat University, Bangkok, Thailand.
  43. Thailand Institute of Science and Technology. 2000. Mammals in Sakerat Environmental Research Station. O.S. Printing Ltd., Bangkok.
  44. Tognelli MF, Roig-Junent SA, Marvald AE, Flores GE, Lobo JM. 2009. An evaluation of mrethods for modeling distribution of Patagonian insects. Rev Chil Hist Nat 82: 347-360.
  45. Trisurat Y. 2010. Land use and forested landscape changes at Sakaerat Environmental Research Station in Nakhon Ratchasima Province, Thailand. Ekologia (Bratisl) 29: 99-109. https://doi.org/10.4149/ekol_2010_01_99
  46. Trisurat Y, Alkemade R, Arets E. 2009. Projecting forest tree distributions and adaptation to climate change in northern Thailand. J Ecol Nat Environ 1: 55-63.
  47. Trisurat Y, Alkemade R, Verburg PH. 2010. Projecting land-use change and its consequences for biodiversity in Northern Thailand. Environ Manag 45: 626-639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9438-x
  48. Trisurat Y, Marod D, Duengkae P, Tasaen W. 2006. Long-term Ecological Research at Sakaerat Environmental Research Station. Final Report Submitted to Kasetsart University Research and Development Institute. Kasetsart University, Bangkok.
  49. Turner IM, Corlett RT. 1996. The conservation value of small, isolated fragments of lowland tropical rain forest. Trends Ecol Evol 11: 330-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(96)10046-X
  50. Verburg PH, Eickhout B, van Meijl H. 2008. A multi-scale, multi-model approach for analyzing the future dynamics of European land use. Ann Reg Sci 42: 57-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-007-0136-4
  51. Verburg PH, Overmars KP. 2009. Combining top-down and bottom-up dynamics in land use modeling: exploring the future of abandoned farmlands in Europe with the Dyna-CLUE model. Landsc Ecol 24: 1167-1181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-009-9355-7
  52. Verburg PH, Schot PP, Dijst MJ, Veldkamp A. 2004. Land use change modelling: current practice and research priorities. Geojournal 61: 309-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-004-4946-y
  53. Wisz MS, Hijmans RJ, Li J, Peterson AT, Graham CH, Guisan A, NCEAS Predicting Species Distributions Working Group. 2008. Effects of sample size on the performance of species distribution models. Divers Distrib 14: 763-773. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00482.x

Cited by

  1. Evaluation on Landscape Change Using Remote Sensing and Landscape Metrics: A Case Study of Sakaerat Biosphere Reserve (SBR), Thailand vol.6, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7763/IJESD.2015.V6.586
  2. Land-Use/Land-Cover Change from Socio-Economic Drivers and Their Impact on Biodiversity in Nan Province, Thailand vol.11, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030649