EcoService Models Library (ESML)
Home
Search EMs
My
EMs 
Learn about
ESML
View ESML Data Maploading
Compare EMs
Which comparison is best for me?EM Variables by Variable Role
One quick way to compare ecological models (EMs) is by comparing their variables. Predictor variables show what kinds of influences a model is able to account for, and what kinds of data it requires. Response variables show what information a model is capable of estimating.
This first comparison shows the names (and units) of each EM’s variables, side-by-side, sorted by variable role. Variable roles in ESML are as follows:
- Predictor Variables
- Time- or Space-Varying Variables
- Constants and Parameters
- Intermediate (Computed) Variables
- Response Variables
- Computed Response Variables
- Measured Response Variables
EM Variables by Category
A second way to use variables to compare EMs is by focusing on the kind of information each variable represents. The top-level categories in the ESML Variable Classification Hierarchy are as follows:
- Policy Regarding Use or Management of Ecosystem Resources
- Land Surface (or Water Body Bed) Cover, Use or Substrate
- Human Demographic Data
- Human-Produced Stressor or Enhancer of Ecosystem Goods and Services Production
- Ecosystem Attributes and Potential Supply of Ecosystem Goods and Services
- Non-monetary Indicators of Human Demand, Use or Benefit of Ecosystem Goods and Services
- Monetary Values
Besides understanding model similarities, sorting the variables for each EM by these 7 categories makes it easier to see if the compared models can be linked using similar variables. For example, if one model estimates an ecosystem attribute (in Category 5), such as water clarity, as a response variable, and a second model uses a similar attribute (also in Category 5) as a predictor of recreational use, the two models can potentially be used in tandem. This comparison makes it easier to spot potential model linkages.
All EM Descriptors
This selection allows a more detailed comparison of EMs by model characteristics other than their variables. The 50-or-so EM descriptors for each model are presented, side-by-side, in the following categories:
- EM Identity and Description
- EM Modeling Approach
- EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
- EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
EM Descriptors by Modeling Concepts
This feature guides the user through the use of the following seven concepts for comparing and selecting EMs:
- Conceptual Model
- Modeling Objective
- Modeling Context
- Potential for Model Linkage
- Feasibility of Model Use
- Model Certainty
- Model Structural Information
Though presented separately, these concepts are interdependent, and information presented under one concept may have relevance to other concepts as well.
Compare Criteria:
Show Criteria
Hide CriteriaEM Identity and Description
EM Identification
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349 
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
EM Short Name
em.detail.shortNameHelp
?
|
InVEST (v1.004) Carbon, Indonesia | CRPI, St. Croix, USVI | InVEST fisheries, lobster, South Africa | WESP: Urban Stormwater Treatment, ID, USA | C sequestration in grassland restoration, England | Predicting ecosystem service values, Bangladesh |
|
EM Full Name
em.detail.fullNameHelp
?
|
InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Environmental Services and Tradeoffs version 1.004) carbon storage and sequestration, Sumatra, Indonesia | CRPI (Coral Reef Protection Index, St. Croix, USVI | Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs Fisheries, rock lobster, South Africa | WESP: Urban Stormwater Treament, ID, USA | Carbon sequestration in grassland diversity restoration, England | Future ecosystem service value modeling with land cover dynamics by using machine learning based Artificial Neural Network model for Jashore city, Bangladesh |
|
EM Source or Collection
em.detail.emSourceOrCollectionHelp
?
|
InVEST | US EPA | InVEST | None | None | None |
|
EM Source Document ID
|
309 | 335 |
349 ?Comment:Supplemented with the InVEST Users Guide fisheries. |
393 ?Comment:Additional data came from electronic appendix provided by author Chris Murphy. |
396 | 457 |
|
Document Author
em.detail.documentAuthorHelp
?
|
Bhagabati, N. K., Ricketts, T., Sulistyawan, T. B. S., Conte, M., Ennaanay, D., Hadian, O., McKenzie, E., Olwero, N., Rosenthal, A., Tallis, H., and Wolney, S. | Yee, S. H., Dittmar, J. A., and L. M. Oliver | Ward, Michelle, Hugh Possingham, Johathan R. Rhodes, Peter Mumby | Murphy, C. and T. Weekley | De Deyn, G. B., R. S. Shiel, N. J. Ostle, N. P. McNamara, S. Oakley, I. Young, C. Freeman, N. Fenner, H. Quirk, and R. D. Bardgett | Morshed, S. R., Fattah, M. A., Haque, M. N., & Morshed, S. Y. |
|
Document Year
em.detail.documentYearHelp
?
|
2014 | 2014 | 2018 | 2012 | 2011 | 2022 |
|
Document Title
em.detail.sourceIdHelp
?
|
Ecosystem services reinforce Sumatran tiger conservation in land use plans | Comparison of methods for quantifying reef ecosystem services: A case study mapping services for St. Croix, USVI | Food, money and lobsters: Valuing ecosystem services to align environmental management with Sustainable Development Goals | Measuring outcomes of wetland restoration, enhancement, and creation in Idaho-- Assessing potential functions, values, and condition in a watershed context. | Additional carbon sequestration benefits of grassland diversity restoration | Future ecosystem service value modeling with land cover dynamics by using machine learning based Artificial Neural Network model for Jashore city, Bangladesh |
|
Document Status
em.detail.statusCategoryHelp
?
|
Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published |
|
Comments on Status
em.detail.commentsOnStatusHelp
?
|
Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript | Published report | Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript |
Software and Access
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
| https://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/invest/ | Not applicable | https://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/invest/ | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | |
|
Contact Name
em.detail.contactNameHelp
?
|
Nirmal K. Bhagabati | Susan H. Yee | Michelle Ward | Chris Murphy | Gerlinde B. De Deyn | Syed Riad Morshed |
|
Contact Address
|
The Nature Conservancy, 1107 Laurel Avenue, Felton, CA 95018 | US EPA, Office of Research and Development, NHEERL, Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze, FL 32561, USA | ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia | Idaho Dept. Fish and Game, Wildlife Bureau, Habitat Section, Boise, ID | Dept. of Terrestrial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology, P O Box 40, 6666 ZG Heteren, The Netherlands | Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Khulna University of Engineering and Technology, Khulna, Bangladesh |
|
Contact Email
|
nirmal.bhagabati@wwfus.org | yee.susan@epa.gov | m.ward@uq.edu.au | chris.murphy@idfg.idaho.gov | g.dedeyn@nioo.knaw.nl; gerlindede@gmail.com | riad.kuet.urp16@gmail.com |
EM Description
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
Summary Description
em.detail.summaryDescriptionHelp
?
|
Please note: This ESML entry describes a specific, published application of an InVEST model. Different versions (e.g. different tiers) or more recent versions of this model may be available at the InVEST website. ABSTRACT: "...Here we use simple spatial analyses on readily available datasets to compare the distribution of five ecosystem services with tiger habitat in central Sumatra. We assessed services and habitat in 2008 and the changes in these variables under two future scenarios: a conservation-friendly Green Vision, and a Spatial Plan developed by the Indonesian government..." AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "We used a modeling tool, InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Environmental Services and Tradeoffs version 1.004; Tallis et al., 2010), to map and quantify tiger habitat quality and five ecosystem services. InVEST maps ecosystem services and the quality of species habitat as production functions of LULC using simple biophysical models. Models were parameterized using data from regional agencies, literature surveys, global databases, site visits and prior field experience (Table 1)... We mapped biomass carbon by assigning carbon values (in ton ha_1) for aboveground, belowground, and dead organic matter to each LULC class based on values from literature, as described in Tallis et al. (2010). We mapped soil carbon separately, as large quantities of carbon are stored in peat soil (Page et al., 2011). We estimated total losses in peat carbon over 50 years into the future scenarios, using reported annual emission rates for specific LULC transitions on peat (Uryu et al., 2008)...Although InVEST reports ecosystem services in biophysical units, its simple models are best suited to understanding broad patterns of spatial variation (Tallis and Polasky, 2011), rather than for precise quantification. Additionally, we lacked field measurements against which to calibrate our outputs. Therefore, we focused on relative spatial distribution across the landscape, and relative change to scenarios." | ABSTRACT: "...We investigated and compared a number of existing methods for quantifying ecological integrity, shoreline protection, recreational opportunities, fisheries production, and the potential for natural products discovery from reefs. Methods were applied to mapping potential ecosystem services production around St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. Overall, we found that a number of different methods produced similar predictions." AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "A number of methods have been developed for linking biophysical attributes of reef condition, such as reef structural complexity, fish biomass, or species richness, to provisioning of ecosystem goods and services (Principe et al., 2012). We investigated the feasibility of using existing methods and data for mapping production of reef ecosystem goods and services. We applied these methods toward mapping potential ecosystem goods and services production in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI)...For each of the five categories of ecosystem services, we chose a suite of models and indices for estimating potential production based on relative ease of implementation, consisting of well-defined parameters, and likely availability of input data, to maximize potential for transferability to other locations. For each method, we assembled the necessary reef condition and environmental data as spatial data layers for St. Croix (Table1). The coastal zone surrounding St. Croix was divided into 10x10 m grid cells, and production functions were applied to quantify ecosystem services provisioning in each grid cell...Shoreline protection as an ecosystem service has been defined in a number of ways including protection from shoreline erosion, storm damage, or coastal inundation during extreme events (UNEP-WCMC (United Nations Environment Programme, World Conservation Monitoring Centre), 2006; WRI (World Resources Institute), 2009), but is often quantified as wave energy attenuation, an intermediate service that contributes to shoreline protection by reducing rates of erosion or coastal inundation (Principeet al., 2012)...An alternative index has been developed specifically for coral reefs, the Coral Reef Protection Index (CRPI), that accounts for the continuity of the reef and distance from shore in addition to reef habitat type (Burke et al., 2008): CRPI = ((Reef type + Reef distribution + Reef distance)/10) x 4 where the scaled magnitude of coastal protection due to each factor ranges from 0 (no protection) to 4 (very high protection; Table 2)." | AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "Here we develop a method for assessing future scenarios of environmental management change that improve coastal ecosystem services and thereby, support the success of the SDGs. We illustrate application of the method using a case study of South Africa’s West Coast Rock Lobster fishery within the Table Mountain National Park (TMNP) Marine Protected Area...We calculated the retrospective and current value of the West Coast Rock Lobster fishery using published and unpublished data from various sources and combined the market worth of landed lobster from recreational fishers, small-scale fisheries (SSF), large-scale fisheries (LSF) and poachers. Then using the InVEST tool, we combined data to build scenarios that describe possible futures for the West Coast Rock Lobster fishery (see Table 1). The first scenario, entitled ‘Business as Usual’ (BAU), takes the current situation and most up-to-date data to model the future if harvest continues at the existing rate. The second scenario is entitled ‘Redirect the Poachers’ (RP), which attempts to model implementation of strict management, whereby poaching is minimised from the Marine Protected Area and other economic and nutritional sources are made available through government initiatives. The third scenario, entitled ‘Large Scale Cutbacks’ (LSC), excludes large-scale fisheries from harvesting West Coast Rock Lobster within the TMNP Marine Protected Area." | A wetland restoration monitoring and assessment program framework was developed for Idaho. The project goal was to assess outcomes of substantial governmental and private investment in wetland restoration, enhancement and creation. The functions, values, condition, and vegetation at restored, enhanced, and created wetlands on private and state lands across Idaho were retrospectively evaluated. Assessment was conducted at multiple spatial scales and intensities. Potential functions and values (ecosystem services) were rapidly assessed using the Oregon Rapid Wetland Assessment Protocol. Vegetation samples were analyzed using Floristic Quality Assessment indices from Washington State. We compared vegetation of restored, enhanced, and created wetlands with reference wetlands that occurred in similar hydrogeomorphic environments determined at the HUC 12 level. | ABSTRACT: "A major aim of European agri-environment policy is the management of grassland for botanical diversity conservation and restoration, together with the delivery of ecosystem services including soil carbon (C) sequestration. To test whether management for biodiversity restoration has additional benefits for soil C sequestration, we investigated C and nitrogen (N) accumulation rates in soil and C and N pools in vegetation in a long-term field experiment (16 years) in which fertilizer application and plant seeding were manipulated. In addition, the abundance of the legume Trifolium pratense was manipulated for the last 2 years. To unravel the mechanisms underlying changes in soil C and N pools, we also tested for effects of diversity restoration management on soil structure, ecosystem respiration and soil enzyme activities…" AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "Measurements were made on 36 plots of 3 x 3 m comprising two management treatments (and their controls) in a long-term multifactorial grassland restoration experiment which have successfully increased plant species diversity, namely the cessation of NPK fertilizer application and the addition of seed mixtures…" | Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) provides provisional, supporting, cultural, and regulating ecosystem services that contribute to ecological environments, enhance human health and living, have economic advantages for sustaining living organisms. LULC transformation due to enormous urban expansion diminishing Ecosystem Services Values (ESVs) and discouraging sustainability. Though unplanned LULC transformation practice became more prevalent in developing countries, comprehensive assessment of LULC changes and their influences in ESVs are rarely attempted. This study aimed to illustrate and forecast the LULC changes and their influences on ESVs change in Jashore using remote sensing technologies. ESVs estimation and change analysis were conducted by utilizing -derived LULC data of the year 2000, 2010, and 2020 with the corresponding global value coefficients of each LULC type which are previously published. For simulating future LULC and ESVs, Land Change Modeler of TerrSet Geospatial Monitoring and Modeling Software was used in Multi-Layer Perceptron-Markov Chain and Artificial Neural Network method. The decline of agricultural land by 13.13% and waterbody by 5.79% has resulted in the reduction of total ESVs US$0.23 million (24.47%) during 2000–2020. The forecasted result shows that the built-up area will be dominant LULC in the future, and ESVs of provisioning and cultural services will be diminished by $0.107 million, $63400.3 by 2050 with the declination of agricultural, waterbody, vegetation, and vacant land covers. The study signifies the importance of a strategic rational land-use plan to strictly monitor and control the encroachment of built-up areas into vegetation, waterbodies, and agricultural land in addition to scientific mitigative policies for ensuring ecological sustainability. |
|
Specific Policy or Decision Context Cited
em.detail.policyDecisionContextHelp
?
|
This analysis provided input to government-led spatial planning and strategic environmental assessments in the study area. This region contains some of the last remaining forest habitat of the critically endangered Sumatran tiger, Panthera tigris sumatrae. | None identified | Future rock lobster fisheries management | None identified | None identified | N/A |
|
Biophysical Context
|
Six watersheds in central Sumatra covering portions of Riau, Jambi and West Sumatra provinces. The Barisan mountain range comprises the western edge of the watersheds, while peat swamps predominate in the east. | No additional description provided | No additional description provided | restored, enhanced and created wetlands | Lolium perenne-Cynosorus cristatus grassland; The soil is a shallow brown-earth (average depth 28 cm) over limestone of moderate-high residual fertility. | Jashore city, Bangladesh |
|
EM Scenario Drivers
em.detail.scenarioDriverHelp
?
|
Baseline year 2008, future LULC Sumatra 2020 Roadmap (Vision), future LULC Government Spatial Plan | No scenarios presented | Fisheries exploitation; fishing vulnerability (of age classes) | Sites, function or habitat focus | Additional benefits due to biodiversity restoration practices | No scenarios presented |
EM Relationship to Other EMs or Applications
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
Method Only, Application of Method or Model Run
em.detail.methodOrAppHelp
?
|
Method + Application (multiple runs exist) View EM Runs | Method + Application | Method + Application (multiple runs exist) View EM Runs | Method + Application (multiple runs exist) View EM Runs | Method + Application (multiple runs exist) View EM Runs | Method + Application |
|
New or Pre-existing EM?
em.detail.newOrExistHelp
?
|
Application of existing model | Application of existing model | Application of existing model | WESP - Urban Stormwater Treatment | New or revised model | New or revised model |
Related EMs (for example, other versions or derivations of this EM) described in ESML
em.detail.relatedEmHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
Document ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmDocumentIdHelp
?
|
Doc-315 | None | None | Doc-390 | None | None |
|
EM ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmEmIdHelp
?
|
EM-374 | None | None | EM-718 | EM-734 | None | None |
EM Modeling Approach
EM Relationship to Time
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
EM Temporal Extent
em.detail.tempExtentHelp
?
|
2008-2020 | 2006-2007, 2010 | 1986-2115 | 2010-2011 | 1990-2007 | 2000-2050 |
|
EM Time Dependence
em.detail.timeDependencyHelp
?
|
time-stationary | time-stationary | time-dependent | time-dependent | time-stationary | time-dependent |
|
EM Time Reference (Future/Past)
em.detail.futurePastHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | future time | past time | Not applicable | both |
|
EM Time Continuity
em.detail.continueDiscreteHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | discrete | Not applicable | Not applicable | discrete |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Value
em.detail.tempGrainSizeHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | 1 | Not applicable | Not applicable | 10 |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Unit
em.detail.tempGrainSizeUnitHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Year | Not applicable | Not applicable | Year |
EM Spatial Extent
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
Bounding Type
em.detail.boundingTypeHelp
?
|
Watershed/Catchment/HUC | Physiographic or ecological | Geopolitical | Multiple unrelated locations (e.g., meta-analysis) | Other | Geopolitical |
|
Spatial Extent Name
em.detail.extentNameHelp
?
|
central Sumatra | Coastal zone surrounding St. Croix | Table Mountain National Park Marine Protected Area | Wetlands in idaho | Colt Park meadows, Ingleborough National Nature Reserve, northern England | Jashore city, Bangladesh |
|
Spatial Extent Area (Magnitude)
em.detail.extentAreaHelp
?
|
100,000-1,000,000 km^2 | 100-1000 km^2 | 100-1000 km^2 | 100,000-1,000,000 km^2 | <1 ha | 1000-10,000 km^2. |
Spatial Distribution of Computations
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
EM Spatial Distribution
em.detail.distributeLumpHelp
?
|
spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | spatially lumped (in all cases) | spatially lumped (in all cases) | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) |
|
Spatial Grain Type
em.detail.spGrainTypeHelp
?
|
area, for pixel or radial feature | area, for pixel or radial feature | Not applicable | Not applicable | area, for pixel or radial feature | map scale, for cartographic feature |
|
Spatial Grain Size
em.detail.spGrainSizeHelp
?
|
30 m x 30 m | 10 m x 10 m | Not applicable | Not applicable | 3 m x 3 m | 30m |
EM Structure and Computation Approach
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
EM Computational Approach
em.detail.emComputationalApproachHelp
?
|
Analytic | Analytic | Numeric | Numeric | Analytic | Analytic |
|
EM Determinism
em.detail.deterStochHelp
?
|
deterministic | deterministic | deterministic | deterministic | stochastic | deterministic |
|
Statistical Estimation of EM
em.detail.statisticalEstimationHelp
?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Model Checking Procedures Used
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
Model Calibration Reported?
em.detail.calibrationHelp
?
|
No | Yes | No | No | Not applicable | Yes |
|
Model Goodness of Fit Reported?
em.detail.goodnessFitHelp
?
|
No | No | No | No | Not applicable | Yes |
|
Goodness of Fit (metric| value | unit)
em.detail.goodnessFitValuesHelp
?
|
None | None | None | None | None |
|
|
Model Operational Validation Reported?
em.detail.validationHelp
?
|
No | Yes |
Yes ?Comment:A validation analysis was carried out running the model using data from 1880 to 2001, and then comparing the output for the adult population with the 2001 published data. |
No | No | Yes |
|
Model Uncertainty Analysis Reported?
em.detail.uncertaintyAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | No | No | No | No | Unclear |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Reported?
em.detail.sensAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | No | No | No | No | Unclear |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Include Interactions?
em.detail.interactionConsiderHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable |
EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
Location of EM Application
Terrestrial location (Classification hierarchy: Continent > Country > U.S. State [United States only])
em.detail.relationToSpaceTerrestrialHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
None | None |
|
|
|
Marine location (Classification hierarchy: Realm > Region > Province > Ecoregion)
em.detail.relationToSpaceMarineHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
| None |
|
|
None | None | None |
Centroid Lat/Long (Decimal Degree)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
Centroid Latitude
em.detail.ddLatHelp
?
|
0 | 17.73 | -34.18 | 44.06 | 54.2 | 23.95 |
|
Centroid Longitude
em.detail.ddLongHelp
?
|
102 | -64.77 | 18.35 | -114.69 | -2.35 | 89.12 |
|
Centroid Datum
em.detail.datumHelp
?
|
WGS84 | WGS84 | WGS84 | WGS84 | WGS84 | other |
|
Centroid Coordinates Status
em.detail.coordinateStatusHelp
?
|
Provided | Estimated | Provided | Estimated | Provided | Provided |
Environments and Scales Modeled
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
EM Environmental Sub-Class
em.detail.emEnvironmentalSubclassHelp
?
|
Inland Wetlands | Lakes and Ponds | Forests | Agroecosystems | Created Greenspace | Grasslands | Scrubland/Shrubland | Barren | Near Coastal Marine and Estuarine | Near Coastal Marine and Estuarine | Inland Wetlands | Agroecosystems | Grasslands | Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) |
|
Specific Environment Type
em.detail.specificEnvTypeHelp
?
|
104 land use land cover classes | Coral reefs | Rocky coast, mixed coast, sandy coast, rocky inshore, sandy inshore, rocky shelf and unconsolidated shelf | created, restored and enhanced wetlands | fertilized grassland (historically hayed) | Urban city |
|
EM Ecological Scale
em.detail.ecoScaleHelp
?
|
Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class |
Scale and taxa of organisms modeled
Scale of differentiation of organisms modeled
em.detail.nameOfOrgsOrGroupsHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
EM Organismal Scale
em.detail.orgScaleHelp
?
|
Community | Community | Individual or population, within a species | Not applicable | Community | Not applicable |
Taxonomic level and name of organisms or groups identified
taxonomyHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
| None Available | None Available |
|
None Available | None Available | None Available |
EnviroAtlas URL
EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
CICES v 4.3 - Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (Section > Division > Group > Class)
em.detail.cicesHelp
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/national-ecosystem-services-classification-system-nescs-plus">National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Plus</a>
fegs1Help
?
(Environmental Subclass > Ecological End-Product (EEP) > EEP Subclass > EEP Modifier)
fegs2Help
?
|
EM-349
|
EM-446 |
EM-541
|
EM-729
|
EM-735
|
EM-979 |
| None |
|
|
None | None |
|