Fechar

%0 Journal Article
%4 urlib.net/www/2022/02.09.19.16
%2 urlib.net/www/2022/02.09.19.16.59
%@issn 1146-609X
%T Scale and representation of landscapes in mammal studies in Brazil
%D 2022
%9 journal article
%A Assis, Tainá Oliveira,
%A Cáceres, Nilton Carlos,
%A Passamani, Marcelo,
%A Amaral, Silvana,
%@affiliation Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE)
%@affiliation Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
%@affiliation Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)
%@affiliation Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE)
%@electronicmailaddress taina.oliveira.assis@gmail.com
%@electronicmailaddress
%@electronicmailaddress
%@electronicmailaddress silvana.amaral@inpe.br
%B Acta Oecologica
%V 114
%P e103817
%K Landscape ecology, Scale of effect, Heterogeneity, Granularity, Spatial resolution, Extent.
%X When studying landscapes, defining the scale implies gains and losses of information associated with the choices of resolution and extent needed to understand a given phenomenon. Whereas the local scale is able to provide a more accurate understanding of local dynamics, the global scale able to provide a broader understanding of regional dynamics, yet is more susceptible to suppressing certain localized elements. Is there a common approach to defining the scale and representation of landscapes when studying a specific group? Specifically, for mammalian landscape ecology studies in Brazil, what would this approach be? We carried out a literature review to examine how previous studies have addressed scale and landscape representations and discuss best practices based on Landscape Ecology concepts. We searched in Scopus and Scielo using the keywords: landscape, Brazil, and mammal in the titles, abstracts, and keywords sections. We analyzed every paper that was carried out at the landscape scale. From the 182 articles found and analyzed, only 24 of them justified why they had adopted the chosen scale. All 24 articles justified the spatial scale by explaining the spatial extent they had adopted, however, only three papers justified the adopted resolution. Moreover, among the 24 studies, only 13 covered heterogeneous landscapes. We found that the majority of landscape and mammal studies in Brazil do not justify their choice of scale and landscape representation. This can lead to misinterpretations and omissions about events, such as habitat movement, that are not noticeable in the chosen scale. The systematic directions presented here can serve as a guide to appropriate landscape scale and representation choices in future studies on landscape ecology.
%@language en
%3 1-s2.0-S1146609X22000078-main.pdf


Fechar