EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues No 402 (2011) Knowl. Managt. Aquatic Ecosyst., 402 (2011) 21 References
Open Access
Issue
Knowl. Managt. Aquatic Ecosyst.
Number 402, 2011
Eco-Hydro 2010
SER 2010
Article Number 21
Number of page(s) 12
Section SER 2010
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2011074
Published online 24 November 2011
  • Aguiar F.C. and Ferreira M.T., 2005. Human-disturbed landscapes: effects on composition and integrity of riparian woody vegetation in Tagus river basin, Portugal. Environ. Cons., 32, 30–41. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Aguiar F.C., Moreira I. and Ferreira M.T., 2001. Exotic and native vegetation establishment following channelization of a western Iberian river. Regul. Rivers Res. Manage., 17, 509–526. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Aguiar F.C., Ferreira M.T., Albuquerque A., Rodríguez-González P. and Segurado P., 2009. Structural and functional responses of riparian vegetation to human disturbance: performance and spatial-scale dependence. Fund. App. Lim., 175, 249–267. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Aguiar F.C., Feio M.J. and Ferreira M.T., 2011. Choosing the best method for stream bioassessment using macrophyte communities: indices and predictive models. Ecological Indicators, 11, 379–388. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Allan J.D., 2004. Landscapes and Riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 35, 257–284. [Google Scholar]
  • Apan A.A., Raine S.R. and Paterson M.S., 2002. Mapping an analysis of changes in the riparian landscape structure of Lockyer Valley catchment Queensland, Australia. Landscape Urban Plan., 59, 43–57. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Congalton R.G., Birch K., Jones R. and Schriever J., 2002. Evaluating remotely sensed techniques for mapping riparian vegetation. Comput. Electron. Agr., 37, 113–126. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • DeKeyser E.S., Kirby D.R. and Ell M.J., 2003. An index of plant community integrity: development of the methodology for assessing prairie wetland plant communities. Ecological Indicators, 3, 119–133. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • European Council, 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal, L327, 1–73. [Google Scholar]
  • Fernandes M.R., Aguiar F.C. and Ferreira M.T., 2011. Assessing riparian vegetation structure and the influence of land-use using landscape metrics and geostatistical tools. Landscape Urban Plan., 99, 166–177. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ferreira M.T., Aguiar F.C. and Nogueira C., 2005. Changes of riparian woods over space and time: influence of environment and land use. For. Ecol. Manage., 212, 145–159. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Forman R.T.T., 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Forman R.T.T. and Godron M., 1981. Patches and structural components for landscape ecology. BioScience, 31, 733–740. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Franklin J.F., 1993. Preserving biodiversity: species, ecosystems, or landscape? Ecol. Appl., 3, 202–205. [Google Scholar]
  • Goetz S. and Fiske G., 2008. Linking the diversity and abundance of stream biota to landscapes in the mid-Atlantic USA. Rem. Sens. Environ., 112, 4075–4085. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • González-del-Tánago M. and Garcia-Jalón D., 2006. Attributes for assessing the environmental quality of riparian zones. Limnetica, 25, 389–402. [Google Scholar]
  • Hering D., Feld C.K., Moog O. and Ofenböck T., 2006. Cook book for the development of a multimetric index for biological condition of aquatic ecosystems: Experiences from the European AQEM and STAR projects and related initiatives. Hydrobiologia, 566, 311–324. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hooke J.M., 2006. Human impacts on fluvial systems in the Mediterranean region. Geomorphology, 79, 311–335. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hyatt T.L., Waldo T.Z. and Beechie T.J., 2004. A watershed scale assessment of riparian forests with implications for restoration. Restor. Ecol., 12, 175–183. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • INAG IP, 2008a. Tipologia de Rios em Portugal Continental no âmbito da Implementação da Directiva Quadro da Água, I. Caracterização abiótica, Ministério do Ambiente, do Ordenamento do Território e do Desenvolvimento Regional, Instituto da Água IP, Lisboa, 32 p. [Google Scholar]
  • INAG IP, 2008b. Manual para a avaliação biológica da qualidade da água em sistemas fluviais segundo a Directiva Quadro da Água, Protocolo de amostragem e análise para os macrófitos, Ministério do Ambiente, do Ordenamento do Território e do Desenvolvimento Regional, Instituto da Água IP, Lisboa, 18 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Ivits E., Cherlet M., Mehl W. and Sommer S., 2009. Estimating the ecological status and change of riparian zones in Andalusia assessed by multi-temporal AVHHR datasets. Ecological Indicators, 9, 422–431. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jenks G.F., 1967. The data model concept in statistical mapping. International Yearbook of Cartography, 7, 186–190. [Google Scholar]
  • Johansen K. and Phinn S., 2006. Mapping structural parameters and species composition of riparian vegetation using IKONOS and Landsat ETM+ Data in Australian Tropical Savannahs. Photogramm. Eng. Rem. S., 72, 71–80. [Google Scholar]
  • Johansen K., Coops N.C., Gergel S.E. and Stange Y., 2007. Application of high spatial resolution satellite imagery for riparian and forest ecosystem classification. Rem. Sens. Environ., 110, 29–44. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Karr J.R., 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries, 6, 1–27. [Google Scholar]
  • Karr J.R. and Chu E.W., 1999. Restoring Life in Running Waters: Better Biological Monitoring, Inland Press, Washington DC, US. [Google Scholar]
  • Lake P.S., Bond N. and Reich P., 2007. Linking ecological theory with stream restoration. Freshw. Biol., 52, 597–602. [Google Scholar]
  • Mas J.-F., Gao Y. and Pacheco J.A.N., 2010. Sensitivity of landscape pattern metrics to classification approaches. For. Ecol. Manage., 259, 1215–1224. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Moser T.J., Lindeman D.R., Wigington P.J. Schuft, M. and Van Sickle J., 2000. Methods for multi-spatial scale characterization riparian corridors, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Laboratory, 7 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Naiman R.J. and Décamps H., 1997. The ecology of interfaces: riparian zones. Annu. Ver. Ecol. Syst., 28, 621–658. [Google Scholar]
  • Naiman R.J., Décamps H. and McClain M., 2005. Riparia. Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Streamside Communities, Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego- USA, 430 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Nakamura F., Inahara S. and Kaneko M., 2005. A hierarchical approach to ecosystem assessment of restoration planning at regional, catchment and local scales in Japan. Landscape Ecol. Eng., 1, 43–52. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pont D., Hugueny B., Beier U., Goffaux D., Melcher A., Noble R., Rogers C., Roset N. and Schmutz S., 2006. Assessing river biotic condition at a continental scale: a European approach using functional metrics and fish assemblages. J. Appl. Ecol., 43, 70–80. [Google Scholar]
  • Rothrock P.E., Simon T.P. and Stewart P.M., 2008. Development, calibration, and validation of a littoral zone plant index of biotic integrity (PIBI) for lacustrine wetlands. Ecological Indicators, 8, 79–88. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Schuft M.J., Moser T.J., Wigington P.J., Stevens D.L., McAllister L.S., Chapman S.S. and Ernst T.L., 1999. Development of landscape metrics for characterizing riparian-stream networks. Photogramm. Eng. Rem. S., 65, 1157–1167. [Google Scholar]
  • Simon T.P., Stewart P.M. and Rothrock P.E., 2001. Development of multimetric indices of biotic integrity for riverine and palustrine wetland plant communities along Southern Lake Michigan. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Health Manage., 4, 293–309. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Tormos T., Kosuth P., Durrieu S.Villeneuve B. and Wasson J.G., 2011. Improving the quantification of land cover pressure on stream ecological status at the riparian scale using high spatial resolution imagery. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C, 36, 549–559. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • von Schiller D., Martí E., Riera J.L., Ribot M., Marks J.C. and Sabater F., 2008. Influence of land use on stream ecosystem function in a Mediterranean catchment. Freshw. Biol., 53, 2600–2612. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wallin M., Wiederholm T. and Johnson K.R., 2003. REFCOND. Development of a protocol for identification of reference conditions, and boundaries between high, good and moderate status in lakes and watercourses, Working Group 2.3, EU Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) for the Water Framework Directive, 7th version. [Google Scholar]
  • Ward T.A., Tate K.W. and Atwill E.R., 2003. Visual assessment of riparian health. Rangeland 546 Monitoring Series, Publication 8089, University of California, 23 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Yang X., 2007. Integrated of remote sensing and geographic information systems in riparian vegetation delineation and mapping. Int. J. Remote Sens., 28, 353–370. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.