SHADING OF TREE CANOPIES ON INTERTOWN ROADS THROUGHOUT FOREST LANDSCAPES: ABDİPAŞA-OVACUMA GREENWAY OF TURKEY

Year 2023, , 124 - 134, 31.12.2023

Melih Öztürk , Turgay Biricik , Kamil Çakıroğlu , Ahmed Cemal Çakmak

https://doi.org/10.55930/jonas.1331412

Abstract

Greenways are the systems that link both the urban and rural landscapes. Thus, they establish cultural and natural corridors between these landscapes. Being one of the major rural landscapes, forests supply ecosystem services by their recreation potential as well as wood and oxygen production. Hence, forest ecosystems that include roads constitute rural greenways. The canopies of the trees and shrubs supply shading on these road surfaces. These greenways play a significant recreational and safety role within the overall forest landscapes. They provide shading, recreation, and safety for both the drivers and passengers. Thereby, tree and shrub canopy parameters such as the closure and coverage are the determining factors on the safety, shading and recreation potential. Amongst those tree and shrub canopy parameters, the Leaf Area Index (LAI), Light Transmission (LT), Gap Fraction (GF) and Canopy Openness (CO) are the prominent ones. Therefore, the greenway route along the road between Ulus Subprovince (Bartın) and Safranbolu Subprovince (Karabük) at the northwestern Turkey, was chosen as the study and research field in this study. The oriental planes (Platanus orientalis L.) are the immediate roadside trees with their canopies shading on the surface of that road. Along 14 km road route, 71 different points were defined for the hemispherical photographing during the summer of 2021. Based on the analyses of these hemispherical photographs using the version 3.2 of the Hemisfer program, the LAI values ranged between 1.89 m2 m-2 and 2.79 m2 m-2, being 2.34 m2 m-2 on average. However, the average LT and CO percentages were 17.9% and 18.2%, whereas the average GF percentage was 7.7%. According to the overall results of this study, the canopy parameters indicated relatively high canopy closure and coverage values even though with alternating values and percentages for the different sections of the greenway route.

Keywords

Tree Canopy, Rural Landscape, Forest Ecosystem, Road Route, Greenway, Ecosystem Services

References

• 1. Ahern J. (1995). Greenway as a planning strategy. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33: 131-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)02039-V
• 2. Antonson H., Mårdh S., Wiklund M. & Blomqvist G. (2009). Effect of surrounding landscape on driving behavior: A driving simulator study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29: 493-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.03.005
• 3. Atalay İ. (2011). Climate Atlas of Turkey (in Turkish). İnkılâp Bookstore Press, İstanbul, Turkey. 4. Cackowski J.M. & Nasar J.L. (2003). The restorative effects of roadside vegetation: Implications for automobile driver anger and frustration. Environment and Behavior, 35(6): 736-751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916503256267
• 5. Chen J.M. & Cihlar J. 1995. Quantifying the effect of canopy architecture on optical measurements of leaf area index using two gap size analysis methods. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 33: 777-787. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.387593
• 6. Fitzpatrick C.D., Samuel S. & Knodler Jr. M.A. (2016). Evaluating the effect of vegetation and clear zone width on driver behavior using a driving simulator. Transportation Research Part F, 42: 80-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.07.002
• 7. Forman R.T.T. & Godron M. (1986). Landscape Ecology. John Wiley & Sons. Inc., USA.
• 8. Forman R.T.T. &Alexander L.E. (1998). Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 29: 207-231+C2. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207
• 9. Kucharik C.J., Norman J.M. & Gower S.T. (1999). Characterization of radiation regimes in nonrandom forest canopies: theory, measurements, and a simplified modeling approach. Tree Physiology, 19: 695-706. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/19.11.695
• 10. Marsh, W.M. (2010). Landscape Planning; Environmental Applications. Fifth Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New Jersey, USA.
• 11. Mok J.H., Landphair H.C. & Naderi J.R. (2006). Landscape improvement impacts on roadside safety in Texas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78: 263-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.09.002
• 12. Nobis M. & Hunziker U. (2005). Automatic thresholding for hemispherical canopy-photographs based on edge detection. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 128: 243-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2004.10.002
• 13. Öztürk M. & Gökyer E. (2015). Seasonal variation in light transmission and canopy gaps of deciduous roadside vegetation: Assessment within forest landscape. Eurasian Journal of Forest Science, 3(2): 1-11.
• 14. Öztürk M. & Gökyer E. (2016). Spatio-temporal characteristics of roadside landscape components along the coastal zone between Amasra and Kurucaşile Cities of Bartın Province, Turkey. pp. 293-302. 5th Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning. Volume: Landscapes and Greenways of Resilience. 30 June-3 July, 2016. Budapest, Hungary.
• 15. Öztürk M. (2017). Driver and passenger perception along the roadside landscapes: Safety and recreation. In: Sustainable Landscape Planning and Design (Ed. Murat Özyavuz). Peter Lang Publications. Frankfurt, Germany. https://doi.org/10.3726/b11768
• 16. Öztürk M., Gökyer E. & Palta Ş. (2019). Role of roadside vegetation canopy on trekking comfort along Karakışla-Uluyayla route of highland forest landscape in Western Black Sea Region of Turkey. pp. 103-108. III. International Mediterranean Forest and Environment Symposium. 03-05 October, 2019. Kahramanmaraş, Turkey.
• 17. Schleppi P., Conedera M., Sedivy I. & Thimonier A. 2007. Correcting non-linearity and slope effects in the estimation of the leaf area index of forests from hemispherical photographs. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 144: 236-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2007.02.004
• 18. TGDF (Turkish General Directorate of Forestry). (2011). Forest Management Plans of Bartın, Amasra, Kurucaşile and Ulus Forest Administrations. Ankara, Turkey.
• 19. TSMS (Turkish State Meteorological Service). (2013). Daily meteorological data. Ankara.
• 20. Turner M.G. & Gardner R.H. (2015). Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice; Pattern and Process. Second Edition. Springer Science + Business Media LLC, New York, USA.