EcoService Models Library (ESML)
loading
View Runs
: Pollinating insects on landfill sites, East Midlands, United Kingdon (EM-709)
Back
EM Identity and Description
EM Identification (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
EM Short Name
em.detail.shortNameHelp
?
|
Community flowering date, Central French Alps | Pollinators on landfill sites, United Kingdom | Recreational fishery index, USA | CommunityViz, Albany county, Wyoming |
|
EM Full Name
em.detail.fullNameHelp
?
|
Community weighted mean flowering date, Central French Alps | Pollinating insects on landfill sites, East Midlands, United Kingdon | Recreational fishery index for streams and rivers, USA | Wyoming Community Viz TM Partnership Phase I Pilot: Aquifer Protection and Community Viz TM in Albany County, Wyoming. |
|
EM Source or Collection
em.detail.emSourceOrCollectionHelp
?
|
EU Biodiversity Action 5 | None | US EPA | * |
|
EM Source Document ID
|
260 | 389 | 414 |
479 ?Comment:Published as a report by the University of Wyoming, but no record of peer review. |
|
Document Author
em.detail.documentAuthorHelp
?
|
Lavorel, S., Grigulis, K., Lamarque, P., Colace, M-P, Garden, D., Girel, J., Pellet, G., and Douzet, R. | Tarrant S., J. Ollerton, M. L Rahman, J. Tarrant, and D. McCollin | Lomnicky. G.A., Hughes, R.M., Peck, D.V., and P.L. Ringold | Lieske, S. N., Mullen, S., Knapp, M., & Hamerlinck, J. D. |
|
Document Year
em.detail.documentYearHelp
?
|
2011 | 2013 | 2021 | 2003 |
|
Document Title
em.detail.sourceIdHelp
?
|
Using plant functional traits to understand the landscape distribution of multiple ecosystem services | Grassland restoration on landfill sites in the East Midlands, United Kingdom: An evaluation of floral resources and pollinating insects | Correspondence between a recreational fishery index and ecological condition for U.S.A. streams and rivers. | Wyoming Community Viz TM Partnership Phase I Pilot: Aquifer Protection and Community Viz TM in Albany County, Wyoming |
|
Document Status
em.detail.statusCategoryHelp
?
|
* | Peer reviewed and published | * | Not peer reviewed but is published (explain in Comment) |
|
Comments on Status
em.detail.commentsOnStatusHelp
?
|
* | Published journal manuscript | * | Published report |
Software and Access (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
| * | Not applicable | * | https://communityviz.com/ | |
|
Contact Name
em.detail.contactNameHelp
?
|
Sandra Lavorel | Sam Tarrant | Gregg Lomnicky | Scott Lieske |
|
Contact Address
|
Laboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine, UMR 5553 CNRS Université Joseph Fourier, BP 53, 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France | RSPB UK Headquarters, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG19 2DL, U.K. | 200 SW 35th St., Corvallis, OR, 97333 | Department of Agricultural & Applied Economics University of Wyoming, Laramie WY 82071 |
|
Contact Email
|
sandra.lavorel@ujf-grenoble.fr | sam.tarrant@rspb.org.uk | lomnicky.gregg@epa.gov | lieske@uwyo.edu |
EM Description (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
Summary Description
em.detail.summaryDescriptionHelp
?
|
ABSTRACT: "Here, we propose a new approach for the analysis, mapping and understanding of multiple ES delivery in landscapes. Spatially explicit single ES models based on plant traits and abiotic characteristics are combined to identify ‘hot’ and ‘cold’ spots of multiple ES delivery, and the land use and biotic determinants of such distributions. We demonstrate the value of this trait-based approach as compared to a pure land-use approach for a pastoral landscape from the central French Alps, and highlight how it improves understanding of ecological constraints to, and opportunities for, the delivery of multiple services." AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "Community-weighted mean date of flowering onset was modelled using mixed models with land use and abiotic variables as fixed effects (LU + abiotic model) and year as a random effect…and modelled for each 20 x 20 m pixel using GLM estimated effects for each land use category and estimated regression coefficients with abiotic variables." | ABSTRACT: "...Restored landfill sites are a significant potential reserve of semi-natural habitat, so their conservation value for supporting populations of pollinating insects was here examined by assessing whether the plant and pollinator assemblages of restored landfill sites are comparable to reference sites of existing wildlife value. Floral characteristics of the vegetation and the species richness and abundance of flower-visiting insect assemblages were compared between nine pairs of restored landfill sites and reference sites in the East Midlands of the United Kingdom, using standardized methods over two field seasons. …" AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "The selection criteria for the landfill sites were greater than or equal to 50% of the site restored (to avoid undue influence from ongoing landfilling operations), greater than or equal to 0.5 ha in area and restored for greater than or equal to 4 years to allow establishment of vegetation. Comparison reference sites were the closest grassland sites of recognized nature conservation value, being designated as either Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) or Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)…All sites were surveyed three times each during the fieldwork season, in Spring, Summer, and Autumn. Paired sites were sampled on consecutive days whenever weather conditions permitted to reduce temporal bias. Standardized plant surveys were used (Dicks et al. 2002; Potts et al. 2006). Transects (100 × 2m) were centered from the approximate middle of the site and orientated using randomized bearing tables. All flowering plants were identified to species level…In the first year of study, plants in flower and flower visitors were surveyed using the same transects as for the floral resources surveys. The transect was left undisturbed for 20 minutes following the initial plant survey to allow the flower visitors to return. Each transect was surveyed at a rate of approximately 3m/minute for 30 minutes. All insects observed to touch the sexual parts of flowers were either captured using a butterfly net and transferred into individually labeled specimen jars, or directly captured into the jars. After the survey was completed, those insects that could be identified in the field were recorded and released. The flower-visitor surveys were conducted in the morning, within 1 hour of midday, and in the afternoon to sample those insects active at different times. Insects that could not be identified in the field were collected as voucher specimens for later identification. Identifications were verified using reference collections and by taxon specialists. Relatively low capture rates in the first year led to methods being altered in the second year when surveying followed a spiral pattern from a randomly determined point on the sites, at a standard pace of 10 m/minute for 30 minutes, following Nielsen and Bascompte (2007) and Kalikhman (2007). Given a 2-m wide transect, an area of approximately 600m2 was sampled in each | ABSTRACT: [Sport fishing is an important recreational and economic activity, especially in Australia, Europe and North America, and the condition of sport fish populations is a key ecological indicator of water body condition for millions of anglers and the public. Despite its importance as an ecological indicator representing the status of sport fish populations, an index for measuring this ecosystem service has not been quantified by analyzing actual fish taxa, size and abundance data across the U.S.A. Therefore, we used game fish data collected from 1,561 stream and river sites located throughout the conterminous U.S.A. combined with specific fish species and size dollar weights to calculate site-specific recreational fishery index (RFI) scores. We then regressed those scores against 38 potential site-specific environmental predictor variables, as well as site-specific fish assemblage condition (multimetric index; MMI) scores based on entire fish assemblages, to determine the factors most associated with the RFI scores. We found weak correlations between RFI and MMI scores and weak to moderate correlations with environmental variables, which varied in importance with each of 9 ecoregions. We conclude that the RFI is a useful indicator of a stream ecosystem service, which should be of greater interest to the U.S.A. public and traditional fishery management agencies than are MMIs, which tend to be more useful for ecologists, environmentalists and environmental quality agencies.] | The Wyoming Community VizTM Partnership was established in 2001 to promote the use of geographic information system-based planning support systems and related decision support technologies in community land-use planning and economic development activities in the State of Wyoming. Partnership members include several state agencies, local governments and several nongovernment organizations. Partnership coordination is provided by the Wyoming Rural Development Council. Research and technical support is coordinated by the Wyoming Geographic Information Science Center’s Spatial Decision Support System Research Program at the University of Wyoming. In June 2002, the Partnership initiated a three-phase plan to promote Community VizTM based planning support systems in Wyoming. Phase I of the Partnership plan was a “proof of concept” pilot project set in Albany County in southeastern Wyoming. The goal of the project was to demonstrate the application of Community VizTM to a Wyoming-specific issue (in this case, aquifer protection) and to determine potential challenges for broader adoption in terms of data requirements, computing infrastructure and technological expertise. The results of the Phase I pilot project are detailed in this report. Efforts are currently underway to secure funding for Phase II of the plan, which expands the use of Community VizTM into four additional Wyoming communities. Specific Phase II objectives are to expand the type and number of issues addressed by Community VizTM and increase the use of Community VizTM in the planning process. As a part of Phase II the Partnership will create a technical assistance network aimed at assisting communities with the technical challenges in applying the software to their planning issues. The third phase will expand the program to more communities in the state, maintain the technical assistance network, and monitor the impact of Community VizTM on the planning process. |
|
Specific Policy or Decision Context Cited
em.detail.policyDecisionContextHelp
?
|
* | None identified | * | None provided |
|
Biophysical Context
|
Elevation ranges from 1552 to 2442 m, on predominantly south-facing slopes | No additional description provided | None | Groundwater recharge area, City of Laramie |
|
EM Scenario Drivers
em.detail.scenarioDriverHelp
?
|
* | No scenarios presented | N/A | Continuation of trends |
EM Relationship to Other EMs or Applications
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
Method Only, Application of Method or Model Run
em.detail.methodOrAppHelp
?
|
Method + Application | Method + Application (multiple runs exist) | Method + Application | Model Run Associated with a Specific EM Application |
|
New or Pre-existing EM?
em.detail.newOrExistHelp
?
|
New or revised model | New or revised model | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
Related EMs (for example, other versions or derivations of this EM) described in ESML
em.detail.relatedEmHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
Document ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmDocumentIdHelp
?
|
Doc-260 | Doc-269 | Doc-389 | None | Doc-473 |
|
EM ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmEmIdHelp
?
|
EM-65 | EM-66 | EM-68 | EM-69 | EM-70 | EM-79 | EM-80 | EM-81 | EM-82 | EM-83 | EM-697 | None | None |
EM Modeling Approach
EM Relationship to Time (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
EM Temporal Extent
em.detail.tempExtentHelp
?
|
* | 2007-2008 | 2013-2014 | 2050 |
|
EM Time Dependence
em.detail.timeDependencyHelp
?
|
* | time-stationary | time-dependent | * |
|
EM Time Reference (Future/Past)
em.detail.futurePastHelp
?
|
* | Not applicable | past time | * |
|
EM Time Continuity
em.detail.continueDiscreteHelp
?
|
* | Not applicable | discrete | * |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Value
em.detail.tempGrainSizeHelp
?
|
* | Not applicable | 1 | * |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Unit
em.detail.tempGrainSizeUnitHelp
?
|
* | Not applicable | Year | * |
EM spatial extent (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
Bounding Type
em.detail.boundingTypeHelp
?
|
Physiographic or Ecological | Multiple unrelated locations (e.g., meta-analysis) | Geopolitical | Watershed/Catchment/HUC |
|
Spatial Extent Name
em.detail.extentNameHelp
?
|
Central French Alps | East Midlands | United States | Laramie City's aquifer protection area |
|
Spatial Extent Area (Magnitude)
em.detail.extentAreaHelp
?
|
10-100 km^2 | 1000-10,000 km^2. | >1,000,000 km^2 | 10-100 km^2 |
Spatial Distribution of Computations (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
EM Spatial Distribution
em.detail.distributeLumpHelp
?
|
* | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | * | spatially lumped (in all cases) |
|
Spatial Grain Type
em.detail.spGrainTypeHelp
?
|
area, for pixel or radial feature | other (specify), for irregular (e.g., stream reach, lake basin) | length, for linear feature (e.g., stream mile) | Not applicable |
|
Spatial Grain Size
em.detail.spGrainSizeHelp
?
|
20 m x 20 m | multiple unrelated locations | stream reach (site) | Not applicable |
EM Structure and Computation Approach (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
EM Computational Approach
em.detail.emComputationalApproachHelp
?
|
* | Analytic | * | Numeric |
|
EM Determinism
em.detail.deterStochHelp
?
|
* | deterministic | * | * |
|
Statistical Estimation of EM
em.detail.statisticalEstimationHelp
?
|
* |
|
* | * |
Model Checking Procedures Used (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
Model Calibration Reported?
em.detail.calibrationHelp
?
|
No | Not applicable | No | Unclear |
|
Model Goodness of Fit Reported?
em.detail.goodnessFitHelp
?
|
Yes | Not applicable | No | No |
|
Goodness of Fit (metric| value | unit)
em.detail.goodnessFitValuesHelp
?
|
|
None | * | * |
|
Model Operational Validation Reported?
em.detail.validationHelp
?
|
No | Not applicable | No | Unclear |
|
Model Uncertainty Analysis Reported?
em.detail.uncertaintyAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | Not applicable | No | Unclear |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Reported?
em.detail.sensAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | Not applicable | No | Unclear |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Include Interactions?
em.detail.interactionConsiderHelp
?
|
* | Not applicable | * | * |
EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
Location of EM Application (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
Terrestrial location (Classification hierarchy: Continent > Country > U.S. State [United States only])
em.detail.relationToSpaceTerrestrialHelp
?
| New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
|
|
|
Marine location (Classification hierarchy: Realm > Region > Province > Ecoregion)
em.detail.relationToSpaceMarineHelp
?
| New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
| * | None | * | * |
Centroid Lat/Long (Decimal Degree)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
Centroid Latitude
em.detail.ddLatHelp
?
|
45.05 | 52.22 | 36.21 | 41.31 |
|
Centroid Longitude
em.detail.ddLongHelp
?
|
6.4 | -0.91 | -113.76 | -105.46 |
|
Centroid Datum
em.detail.datumHelp
?
|
* | WGS84 | * | * |
|
Centroid Coordinates Status
em.detail.coordinateStatusHelp
?
|
Provided | Estimated | * | * |
Environments and Scales Modeled (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
EM Environmental Sub-Class
em.detail.emEnvironmentalSubclassHelp
?
|
Agroecosystems | Grasslands | Created Greenspace | Grasslands | Rivers and Streams | Ground Water | Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) |
|
Specific Environment Type
em.detail.specificEnvTypeHelp
?
|
Subalpine terraces, grasslands, and meadows. | restored landfills and grasslands | reach | watershed |
|
EM Ecological Scale
em.detail.ecoScaleHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | * |
Organisms modeled (* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left)
Scale of differentiation of organisms modeled
em.detail.nameOfOrgsOrGroupsHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
EM Organismal Scale
em.detail.orgScaleHelp
?
|
Community | Individual or population, within a species | Guild or Assemblage | Not applicable |
Taxonomic level and name of organisms or groups identified
taxonomyHelp
?
| New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
| * |
|
* | * |
EnviroAtlas URL
em.detail.enviroAtlasURLHelp
?
| New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
| None Available | GAP Ecological Systems | None Available | Dasymetric Allocation of Population, Total Annual Reduced Nitrogen Deposition, Employment Rate |
EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
* Note that run information is shown only where run data differ from the "parent" entry shown at left
CICES v 4.3 - Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (Section > Division > Group > Class)
em.detail.cicesHelp
?
| New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
| * |
|
|
|
(Environmental Subclass > Ecological End-Product (EEP) > EEP Subclass > EEP Modifier)
fegs2Help
?
| New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
| * | None |
|
|
EM Variable Names (and Units)
* Note that for runs, variable name is displayed only where data for that variable differed by run AND those differences were reported in the source document. Where differences occurred but were not reported, the variable is not listed. Click on variable name to view details.
Predictor
em.detail.variablesPredictorHelp
?
Intermediate
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
New or revised model | EM-709 | New or revised model | Continuation of trends |
|
Intermediate (Computed) Variables (and Units)
em.detail.intermediateVariableHelp
?
|
None | None | * |
Response
em.detail.variablesResponseHelp
?
Home
Search EMs
My
EMs
Learn about
ESML
Collapse All
Expand All