FOLIA GEOGRAPHICA

Menu

FOLIA GEOGRAPHICA 2012 (20), LIV., pp. 97-110

Hodnotenie Heterogenity Krajiny Prípadová Štúdia Katastrálneho Územia Medzilaboriec

Landscape Heterogeneity Assessment Case Study of Cadastral Territory of the Medzilaborce Town

Monika Ivanová A*, Eva Michaeli B, Ivana Roháčová C

Received: June 15, 2012 | Revised: September 14, 2012 | Accepted: October 5, 2012

A* University of Prešov, 17. novembra 1, 080 01 Prešov, Slovakia monika.ivanova@unipo.sk (corresponding author)
B University of Prešov, 17. novembra 1, 080 01 Prešov, Slovakia eva.michaeli@unipo.sk
C University of Prešov, 17. novembra 1, 080 01 Prešov, Slovakia rohac.ivana@gmail.com

PDF FULL TEXT

Abstract

The paper deals with the evaluation the heterogeneity of the landscape on the example of the cadastral territory of the Medzilaborce town by means of the grid squares method. Underlying layers have become land cover maps from the years 1952 and 2009, which we have overlapped regular grid. In each square of the grid we then watched the incidence of selected land cover classes, as well as overall frequency at the squares of the grid. Contribution shows the possibility of using geographic information systems in research, the disadvantages method of the squares of grid and points to the forms of its improvements. It also emphasizes the need to follow the same frequencies as well as different land cover classes in the squares of the grid. The spatial arrangement of land cover classes in the squares of the grid is expressed in the maps (images) that are part of the contribution.

Key words: Landscape heterogeneity, land cover, land cover classes, GIS, assessment

Summary

Landscape Heterogeneity Assessment Case Study of Cadastral Territory of the Medzilaborce Town

Aim of this study was to evaluate the evolution of landscape heterogeneity over a period 1952-2009. The model area became the cadastral area of the Medzilaborce. After georeferencing and vectorization of the underlying layers in the geographical informational system (GIS) software Arc View 3.2, we started to identify land cover classes in terms of methodology, Corine Land Cover further specified work Feranec, Oťaheľ, 2001. Land cover layers are then overlaid regular grid of squares of real size 650 x 650 m, in which we studied the frequency of land cover classes. The evaluation of the development of landscape heterogeneity on the basis of different land cover classes in the square grid for the year 1952 and 2009 is clearly the trend of increasing homogeneity of the territory. Increase in the number of squares with the representation of land cover classes one or two types the number of squares with the representation of land cover classes three and four types have decreased. Most dominant land cover classes in the two years is the class of forests, which cover about 59% of the total area of cadastral territory of the Medzilaborce. The evaluation of landscape heterogeneity with respect to repeatability land cover classes in the grid have represented land cover classes in both years has balanced character (in 1952, 75.3% of squares with the number of 1-8 classes in the squares of grid in the year 2009 73 3%). If we researched the development of heterogeneity of landscape in relation for the diversity of the types land cover classes on the second a hierarchical level, in the throughout the studied area, the trend was reversed. Compared to year 1952, were created in the analyzed region, new classes of land cover: areas of mining, areas of landfill and areas of green, areas of scrubs and of grasslands.

References

  1. ARAÚJO, M. B. et al. 2008. Exposure of European biodiversity to changes in human – induced pressures. In: Environmental Science and Policy, Vol. 11, 2008, No. 1, p. 38-45.
  2. BEDNÁR, J. 2010. Územný plán mesta Medzilaborce: Návrh, Textová časť. Medzilaborce: 2010. 98s.
  3. BOLTIŽIAR, M. 2007. Štruktúra vysokohorskej krajiny Tatier. Nitra: UKF, 2007. 248 s. ISBN 978-80-8094-197-0.
  4. DIBARI, J. N., 2007. Evaluation of five landscape-level metrics for measuring the effects of urbanization on landscape structure: the case of Tucson, Arizona, USA. In: Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 79, 2007, Issues. 3-4, p. 308-313.
  5. FORMAN, R. T. T., GODRON, M. 1993. Krajinná ekologie. Praha: Academia v spolupráci s ministerstvom životného prostredia Českej republiky, 1993. 571 p. ISBN 80-200-0464-5.
  6. HERZOG, F. et al. 2001. Landscape Metrics for Assessment of Landscape Destruction and Rehabilitation. In: Environmental Management, roč. 27, 2001, č. 1, s. 91 – 107.
  7. HLÁSNY, T. 2003. Landscape heterogenity as a measure of landscape system entropy. In: Ekológia, roč. 22, 2003, Supplement 2, s. 130 – 140.
  8. HRNČIAROVÁ, T. 2007. Diversity of landscape ecological conditions at the development of urban environment. In: ENVIRO Nitra 2007. 12 th International Scientific Conference. Sklenár, Š., Halászová, K., Maslanka, K., Kliment, M. (Eds.). Nitra: SPU, 2007, s. 13 – 14.
  9. CHUMAN, T., ROMPORTL, D. 2006. Hodnocení krajinné struktury jako podkladu pro vytváření typologie krajiny. In: Venkovská krajina 2006: sborník příspěvků z mezinárodní konference. Slavičín – Hostětín: ZO ČSOP, Veronica, 2006, s. 72 – 75. ISBN 80-239-7166-2.
  10. KRCHO, J. 1976. Vyjadrenie miery priestorovej diferenciácie krajiny ako systému SFG a priestorovej diferenciácie reliéfu pomocou miery entropie. In: Geografický časopis, roč. 28, 1976, č. 4, s. 256 – 291.
  11. LAPIN, M. et al. (2002). Klimatické oblasti 1:1 000 000. In Miklós, L. et al. eds. Atlas krajiny SR. Bratislava (MŽP SR).
  12. MAHEĽ, M. (1986): Gaologická stavba československých Karpát. Paleoalpínske jednotky. VEDASAV, Bratislava, 479 s.
  13. MAZÚR, E., ČINČURA, J., KVITKOVIČ, J. (1980): Geomorfológia. Atlas SSR SAV, SUGK, Bratislava, mapa č.
  14. MAZÚR, E., LUKNIŠ, M. 1980. Geomorfologické jednotky 1:500 000, č. mapy 16. In: Atlas SSR, Bratislava: SAV a SÚGK, 1980, s. 54 – 55.
  15. McGARIGAL, K. 2002. Landscape pattern metrics. In: Encyklopedia of Environmentrics. Volume 2. El-Shaarawi, A. H., W. W. Piegorsch, W. W. (Eds.). England: John Wiley&Sons, Sussex, 2002, p. 1135-1142.
  16. McGARIGAL, K., MARKS, B., J., 1995. FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program quantifying landscape structure. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-351. Portland: U. S. department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Station, 2002, 122 s. [Citované 4. októbra 2010]. Dostupné na: http://fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr351.pdf.
  17. MICHAELI, E., HOFIERKA, J., IVANOVÁ, M. 2008a. Landscape diversity evaluation according to land cover classes in the northen hinterland of the Zemplínska Šírava water reservoir. In: Acta Facultatis Studiorum Humanitatis et Naturae Universitatis Prešoviensis, Prírodné vedy, Folia Geographica, roč. 47, 2008, č. 12, s. 225 – 236.
  18. MICHALKO, J. et al. (1986): Geobotanická mapa ČSSR. Slovenská socialistická republika. VEDA SAV, Textová časť, 147 s.
  19. MIMRA, M. 1995. Hodnocení prostorové heterogenity krajiny z hlediska její biotické rozmanitosti. In: Geografický časopis, roč. 47, 1995, č. 2, s. 131 – 143.
  20. MORAVČÍKOVÁ, Z., RUŽIČKOVÁ, J. 2006. Hodnotenie diverzity krajiny z pohľadu historického vývoja v katastrálnom území Dúbravka (Bratislava). In: Acta Environmentalistica Universitatis Comenianae, Vol. 14, 2006, No. 1, č. 85 – 96.
  21. OŤAHEĽ, J. et al. 2000. Prírodná (rekonštruovaná) a súčasná krajinná štruktúra Slovenska hodnotená využitím bázy údajov CORINE land cover. In: Geographica Slovaca 16. Bratislava: GÚ SAV, 2000, 73 s.
  22. OŤAHEĽ, J. et al. 2002. Diverzita krajiny Slovenska. In: Geografický časopis, roč.54, 2002, č. 2, s. 131 – 150. ISSN 0016-7193.
  23. OŤAHEĽ, J. et al. 2004. Krajinná štruktúra okresu Skalica. In: Geographia Slovaca 19. Bratislava: GÚ SAV, 2004, 123 s. ISSN 1210-3519.
  24. PLESNÍK, P. 2002. Fytogeograficko – vegetačné členenie, Mapa č. 86 1: 1 000 000. In Atlas krajiny Slovenskej republiky kapitola IV – Prvotná KŠ. 1. Vydanie. Bratislava: Ministerstvo Ž P SR, BB: SA ŽP, 2002, s.113. ISBN 80 – 88833 – 27 – 2.
  25. PUCHEROVÁ, Z. 2004. Vývoj využitia krajiny na rozhraní Zobora a Žitavskej pahorkatiny (na príklade vybraných obcí). Nitra: FPV UKF, 2004. 147 s.
  26. SUNDELL-TURNER, N.M., RODEWALD, A.D. (2008). A comparison of landscape metrics for conservation planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86, p. 219-225.