Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Applications of Ecoregional Patterns

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ecoregions

  • 1910 Accesses

Abstract

This method of understanding processes and resultant patterns provides important design inspiration for sampling networks and managed landscapes that are sustainable, as well as their relevance to ecosystem management and research. These applications are reviewed here; see the author’s Ecoregion-Based Design for Sustainability (Bailey 2002) and Research Applications of Ecosystem Patterns (Bailey 2009a) for details, as well as Dranstad et al. (1996), Knight and Reiners (2000), Thayer (2003), van der Ryn and Cowan (1996), and Woodward (2000). A new geography text of the United States and Canada by Chris Mayda (2012) explores sustainability within the framework of ecological regions

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Hancock et al. (2010) found that ecoregions contribute to geographic patterns of genetic variation and adaptation of humans.

  2. 2.

    See the National Wildlife Federation’s website “Ecoregions” at https://www.nwf.org/Wildlife/Wildlife-Conservation/Ecoregions.aspx .

  3. 3.

    Along similar lines, the U.S. Army has developed a ecoregion-based map to identify environments across the globe that are analogous to Army installations where training and testing of soldiers and equipment take place (Doe et al. 2000). Comparing this map with the locations of current installations allows Army planners to assess the ability of the Army to conduct pre-deployment activities in similar environments, which is critical to mission success.

  4. 4.

    This is one of the emissions scenarios developed in 1992 under the sponsorship of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IS92a has been widely adopted as a standard scenario for use in impact assessments.

References

  • Agricultural Research Service (2012) USDA plant hardiness zone map. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Available online: http://planthardiness.ars.usda.gov

  • Bailey RG (1974) Land capability classification of the Lake Tahoe Basin, California-Nevada: a guide for planning. USDA Forest Service in cooperation with the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, South Lake Tahoe, CA. With separate map at three-quarter in. equal 1 mile

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (1976) Map: ecoregions of the United States. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, UT. Scale 1:7,500,000

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (1984) Testing an ecosystem regionalization. J Environ Manage 19:239–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (1988) Problems with using overlay mapping for planning and their implications for geographic information systems. Environ Manage 12:11–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (1991) Design of ecological networks for monitoring global change. Environ Conserv 18:173–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (1995) Description of the ecoregions of the United States, 2nd edn rev. and expanded (1st edn 1980). Miscellaneous Publication No. 1391 (rev.). USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC. 108 pp with separate map at 1:7,500,000

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (2002) Ecoregion-based design for sustainability. Springer, New York, 222 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (2009a) Research applications of ecosystem patterns. In: McRoberts RE, Reams GA, Van Deuse PC, McWilliams WH (eds) Proceedings of the eighth annual forest inventory and analysis symposium. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC, pp 83–90, 16–19 Oct 2006, Monterey, CA. General Technical Report WO-79

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG (2009b) Ecosystem geography: from ecoregions to sites, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, 251 pp

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett DL, Browning WD [illustrations by Uncapher JL] (1995) A primer on sustainable building. Rocky Mountain Institute, Snowmass, CO, 135 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckinsale RP (1971) River regimes. In: Chorley RJ (ed) Introduction to physical hydrology. Methuen, London, pp 176–192

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger D (1976) The concept of ecosystem region in site classification. In: Proceedings, International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO) XVI World Congress, Division I: 20 June-2 July 1776; Oslo, Norway, pp 213–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Casler MD (2012) Switchgrass breeding, genetics, and geonomics. In: Monti A (ed) Switchgrass: a valuable biomass crop for energy. Springer, New York, pp 29–53

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cathey HM (1990) USDA plant hardiness zone map. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USDA miscellaneous publication no. 1475

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleland DT, Freeouf JA, Keys JE et al (2007) Map: ecological subregions: sections and subsections for the conterminous United States. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC. General Technical Report WO-76. Scale 1:3,500,000

    Google Scholar 

  • Cock MJW, Kuhlmann U, Schaffner U, Bigler F, Babendreier D (2006) The usefulness of the ecoregion concept for safer import of invertebrate biological control agents. In: Bigler F, Babendreier D, Kuhlmann U (eds) Environmental impact of invertebrates for biological control of arthropods: methods and risk assessment. CABI Publishing, Switzerland, pp 202–221

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Conkling BL, Coulston JW, Ambrose MJ (eds) (2005) Forest health monitoring, 2001 national technical report. General Technical Report SRS-81. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC, 204 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Corace RG, Shartell LM, Schulte LA et al (2012) An ecoregional context for forest management on National Wildlife Refuges of the Upper Midwest, USA. Environ Manage 49:359–371

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cordell HK (2012) The diversity of wilderness: ecosystems represented in the U.S. National Wilderness Preservation System. Int J Wilderness 18(2):15–25, 38

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin LM, Carter V, Golet FC, LaRoe ET (1979) Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, 103 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Dey DC, Spetich MA, Weigel DR et al (2009) A suggested approach for design of oak (Quercus L.) regeneration research considering regional differences. New Forests 37:123–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doe WW, Shaw RB, Bailey RG, Jones DS, Macia TE (2000) U.S. Army training and testing lands: an ecoregional framework for assessment. In: Palka EJ, Galgano FA (eds) The scope of military geography: across the spectrum from peacetime to war. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 373–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Dranstad WE, Olson JD, Forman RTT (1996) Landscape ecology principles in landscape architecture and land-use planning. Island Press, Washington, DC, 80 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregg RE (1964) Distribution of the ant genus Formica in the mountains of Colorado. In: Rodeck HG (ed) Natural history of the Boulder area, vol 12. Leaflet, University of Colorado Museum, Boulder, CO, pp 59–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock AM, Witonsky DB, Ehler E et al (2010) Human adaptations to diet, subsistence, and ecoregion are due to subtle shifts in allele frequency. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:8924–8930

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huang S, Prince C, Titus SJ (2000) Development of ecoregion-based height-diameter models for white spruce in boreal forests. For Ecol Manage 129:125–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inkley DB, Anderson SH (1982) Wildlife communities and land classification systems. In: Sabol K (ed) Transactions 47th North American wildlife and natural resource conference. Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, DC, pp 73–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Iverson LR, Prasad AM (2001) Potential changes in tree species richness and forest community types following climate change. Ecosystems 4:186–199

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jepson P, Whittaker RJ, Lourie AA (2011) The shaping of the global protected area estate. In: Ladle RJ, Whittaker RJ (eds) Conservation biogeography. Blackwell Publishing, London, pp 93–125

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones TA (2005) Genetic principles and the use of native seeds. Native Plants J 6:14–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Jovan S (2008) Lichen bioindication of biodiversity, air quality, and climate: baseline results from monitoring in Washington, Oregon, and California. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-737. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 115 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight DH, Reiners WA (2000) Natural patterns in southern Rocky Mountain landscapes and their relevance to forest management. In: Knight DH, Smith FW, Buskirk SW, Romme WH, Baker WL (eds) Forest fragmentation in the Southern Rocky Mountains. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, CO, pp 15–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessard VC, McRoberts RE, Holdaway MR (2000) Diameter growth models using FIA data from the Northeastern, Southern, and North Central Research Stations. In: McRoberts RE, Reams GA, Van Deusen PC (eds) Proceedings of the first annual forest inventory and analysis symposium. General Technical Report NC-213. USDA Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN, pp 37–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J, Echohawk JC (1999) Using GIS to identify under-represented ecosystems in the National Wilderness Preservation System in the USA. Environ Conserv 26(1):53–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lugo AE, Brown SL, Dodson R, Smith TS, Shugart HH (2006) Long-term research at the USDA Forest Service’s Experimental Forests and Ranges. Bioscience 56(1):39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marston RA (2006) President’s column. Ecoregions: a geographic advantage in studying environmental change. Assoc Am Geogr Newslett 41(3):3–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayda C (2012) A regional geography of the United States and Canada: toward a sustainable future. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, 603 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • McNab WW, Keyser CE (2011) Revisions to the 1995 map of ecological subregions that affect users of the southern variant of the Forest Vegetation Simulator. e-Research Note SRS-21. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC, 3 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • McNab WH, Lloyd FT (2009) Testing ecoregions in Kentucky and Tennessee with satellite imagery and forest inventory data. In: McWilliam W et al (comps.) 2008 Forest inventory and analysis (FIA) symposium; 21–23 Oct 2008: Park City, UT. Proceedings RMRS-P-56CD. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 1 CD.

    Google Scholar 

  • McRoberts RE, Nelson MD, Wendt DG (2002) Stratified estimation of forest area using satellite imagery, inventory data, and the k-Nearest Neighbors technique. Remote Sens Environ 82:457–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller SA, Bartow A, Gisler M et al (2011) Can an ecoregion serve as a seed transfer zone? Evidence from a common garden study with five native species. Restor Ecol 19(201):268–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller RA, Oberlander TM (1978) Physical geography today: a portrait of a planet, 2nd edn. Random House, New York, 590 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Neilson RP (1995) A model for predicting continental-scale vegetation distribution and water balance. Ecol Appl 5:362–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunez M, Civit B, Munoz P et al (2010) Assessing potential desertification environmental impact in life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15:67–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien RA (1996) Forest resources of northern Utah ecoregions. Resource Bulletin INT-RB-87. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT, 43 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Odom RH, McNab WH (2000) Using digital terrain modeling to predict ecological types in the Balsam Mountain of western North Carolina. Research Note SRS-8. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC, 11 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson DM, Dinerstein E (1998) The Global 200: a representation approach to conserving the Earth’s most biologically valuable ecoregions. Conserv Biol 12:502–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson RJ, Kumar KD, Burgess RL (1982) Analysis of ecoregions utilizing the geoecology data base. In: Brann TB et al (eds) In-place resource inventories: principles and practices—proceedings of a national workshop. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD, pp 149–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Omernik JM (1987) Ecoregions of the conterminous United States (map supplement). Ann Assoc Am Geogr 77:118–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parks CG, Radosevich SR, Endress BA, Naylor BJ, Anzinger D, Rew LJ, Maxwell BD, Dwire KA (2005) Natural and land-use history of the Northwest mountain ecoregions (USA) in relation to patterns of plant invasions. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 7:137–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peet RK (1981) Forest vegetation of the Colorado front range. Vegetatio 45:3–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pflieger WL (1971) A distributional study of Missouri fishes. University of Kansas Publication Museum of Natural History, vol 20, pp 225–570

    Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon AM, Radeloff VC, Flather CH et al (2007) Associations of forest bird species richness with housing and landscape patterns across the USA. Ecol Appl 17(7):1989–2010

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Poff NL, Bledsoe BP, Cuhaciyan CO (2006) Hydrologic variation with land use across the contiguous United States: geomorphic and ecological consequences for stream ecosystems. Geomorphology 79:264–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post LS, Schlarbaum SE, van Manen F et al (2003) Development of hardwood seed zones for Tennessee using a geographic information system. South J Appl For 27(3):172–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Radbruch-Hall DH, Colton RG, Davies WE, Lucchitta I, Skipp BA, Varmes DJ (1982) Landslide overview map of the conterminous United States. Professional Paper 1183. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC. 25 pp with separate map at 1:7,500,000

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramage BS, Roman LA, Dukes JS (2012) Relationships between urban tree communities and the biomes in which they reside. Appl Veg Sci 16(1):8–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson JK, Wilson JW (1985) Design of the national trends network for monitoring the chemistry of atmospheric precipitation. Circular 964. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC, 46 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez J, Hortal J, Nieto M (2006) An evaluation of the influence of environment and biogeography on community structure: the case of Holarctic mammals. J Biogeogr 33:291–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers P, Atkins D, Frank M, Parker D (2001) Forest health monitoring of the interior West. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-75. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, 40 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudis VA (1998) Regional forest resource assessment in an ecological framework: the southern United States. Nat Areas J 18:319–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Sala OE, Chapin FS III, Armesto JJ et al (2000) Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2011. Science 287:1770–1774

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders RA, Rowntree RA (1983) Classification of American metropolitan areas by ecoregion and potential natural vegetation. Research Paper NE-516. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Broomall, PA, 15 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider DM, Godschalk DR, Axler N (1978) The carrying capacity concept as a planning tool. American Planning Association, Chicago, 26 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein BA, Kutner LS, Adams JS (eds) (2000) Precious heritage: the status of biodiversity in the United States. New York, Oxford University Press, 399 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner JJ, Greene SL (1996) Proposed ecological descriptors and their utility for plant germplasm collections. Crop Sci 36:439–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thayer RL (2003) Life place: bioregional thought and practice. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 300 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Troendle CA, Leaf CF (1980) Hydrology. Chapter III. In: An approach to water resources evaluation of non-point silvicultural sources. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 1980. EPA-600/8-8-012 Athens, GA, III.1–III.173

    Google Scholar 

  • Troendle CA, MacDonald LH, Luce CH, Larsen IJ (2010) Fuel management and water yield (Chapter 7). In: Elliot WJ, Miller IS, Audin L (eds) Cumulative watershed effects of fuel management in the western United States. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-231. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp 126–148

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Geological Survey (1979) Accounting units of the national water data network. Washington, DC, 1:7,500,000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vale TR (1982) Plants and people: vegetation change in North America. Association of American Geographers Press, Washington, DC, 88 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Valutis L, Mullen R (2000) The Nature Conservancy’s approach to prioritizing conservation action. Environ Sci Policy 3:341–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Ryn S, Cowan S (1996) Ecological design. Island Press, Washington, DC, 201 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan TA, Ryan JM, Czaplewski NJ (2000) Mammalogy, 4th edn. Brooks/Cole, 565 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel KP, Schmer MR, Mitchell RB (2005) Plant adaptation regions: ecological and climatic classification of plant materials. Rangel Ecol Manage 58:351–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Will-Wolf S, Neitlich P (2010) Development of lichen response indexes using a regional gradient modeling approach for large-scale monitoring of forests. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-807. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 65 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward J (2000) Waterstained landscapes: seeing and shaping regionally distinctive places. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 221 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziswiler V (1967) Extinct and vanishing animals: a biology of extinction and survival. Vol. 2 of the Heidelberg Science Library, revised English edition by F Bunnell, P Bunnell. Springer, New York, 133 pp

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Robert G. Bailey

Authors
  1. Robert G. Bailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bailey, R.G. (2014). Applications of Ecoregional Patterns. In: Ecoregions. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0524-9_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation