Detection of ecological networks and connectivity with analyzing their effects on sustainable urban development

Abstract

Rapid urbanization is a leading process for the global environmental problems such as climate change, massive loss of natural habitats, an increase of air, water, soil quality and social troubles. Within the scope of elimination of these effects, detecting, preserving and managing a strategically planned ecological network can provide ecological, economic, social and cultural benefits. Specially, connectivity of landscape patches in urban areas is an important factor for urban ecosystem cycle. Ecological studies under these circumstances are concentrated in urban areas and strategies are being developed to create green systems by establishing links between green areas. In this study, a method based on the graph theory has been proposed to create ecological links between important landscape patches in the Chennai City and the effects of the created system on the city has been discussed. Firstly, a comprehensive database is created for Chennai in the GIS. And then, important urban landscape patches and connectivity are detected with use of Conefor software that enhances the quality of landscape patches and ensures that landscape connectivity is sustainable. With this scope, we used integral index of connectivity (IIC) index and the probability of connectivity (PC) index that have been known to show an enhanced performance for urban habitat conservation planning and change monitoring applications. Ultimately, the resulting findings are mapped in the GIS environment, and the ecological, social and cultural impacts of the system are discussed based on international literature.

Keywords

• Urban ecology
• Landscape connectivity
• Green infrastructure
• GIS

References

1. Akar, A , Gökalp, E. (2018). Designing A Sustainable Rangeland Information System For Turkey. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences 3 (3), 87-97. DOI: 10.26833/ijeg.412222.
2. Baranyi, G., Saura, S., Podani, J., Jordan, F. (2011). Contribution of habitat patches to network connectivity: Redundancy and uniqueness of topological indices, Ecological Indicators 11, 1301–1310.
3. Bhaskar, A., Rao, G.B., Vencatesan, J. (2011). Characterization and Management Concerns of Water resources around Pallikaranai Marsh, South Chennai. A Volume in the Advances in Environmental Engineering and Green Technologies Book Series. Chapter 7, 102- 121.
4. Bodin, Ö., Saura, S. (2010). Ranking individual habitat patches as connectivity providers: Integrating network analysis and patch removal experiments. Ecological Modelling 221,2393–2405.
5. Bogyó, D., Magura, T., Simon, E., Tothmeresz, B. (2015) Millipede (Diplopoda) assemblages alter drastically by urbanisation. Landscape and Urban Planning133, 118–126.
6. Forman, R.T.T. (1995). Land Mosaics, The Ecology of Landscape and Regions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 656p.
7. Gergel, S.E., Turner, M.G. (2017). Learning Landscape Ecology: A Practical Guide to Concepts and Techniques,Springer, 340 p.
8. Gubta, A.K., Nair, S.S. (2011) Urban floods in Bangalore and Chennai: risk management challenges and lessons for sustainable urban ecology. Current Science 100(11),1638-1645.

9. Govindarajulu, D. (2014). Urban green space planning for the climate adaptation in Indian cities, Urban Climate, 10(1), 35-41.
10. Hüse, B., Szabo, S., Deak, B., Tothmeresz, B. (2016). Mapping an ecological network of green habitat patches and their role in maintaining urban biodiversity in and around Debrecen city (Eastern Hungary). Land Use Policy 57, 574-581
11. IMD (2010). Indian Meteorological Department, Ever Recorded Maximum Temperature, Minimum Temperature and 24 Hours Heaviest Rainfall up to 2010, 67p.
12. Janakiraman, A., Naveed, M. S., Muthupriya, P., Sugumaran, J., Sheriff, M. A., Altaff, K. (2013). Studies on the zooplankton biodiversity and density in Adyar estuary, Chennai, India. Journal of Environmental Biology 34(2) ,273-275.
13. Kong, F., Yin, H., Nakagoshi, N., Zong, Y. (2010). Urban green space network development for biodiversity conservation: identification based on graph theory and gravity modeling. Landscape and Urban Planning 95 (1– 2), 16–27.
14. Kuşçu Şimşek, Ç , Türk, T , Ödül, H , Çelik, M. (2018). Detection Of Paragliding Fields by GIS. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences 3 (3), 119-125. DOI: 10.26833/ijeg.413833
15. Lopez, A,X. (2011). More winged visitors flock to Adyar Poonga. The Hindu, Online edition of India’s National Newspaper.
16. Majka, D., Jenness, J., Beier, P. (2007). Corridor Designer: ArcGIS tools for designing and evaluating corridors. http://corridordesign.org/downloads (Access date: 04.01.2017).
17. Memduhoglu, A , Basaraner, M . (2018). Possible Contributions of Spatial Semantic Methods And Technologies to Multi-Representation Spatial Database Paradigm. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences 3 (3), 108-118. DOI: 10.26833/ijeg.413473.
18. MUB (2011). Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India. India Smart City Profile report, 5p.
19. Neel, M., Tumas, H. R., & Marsden, B. W. (2014). Representing connectivity: quantifying effective habitat availability based on area and connectivity for conservation status assessment and recovery. PeerJ, 2,e622.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.622
20. Oppili, P. (2004). Looking for exotic species at the Guindy National Park. The Hindu, Online edition of India’s National Newspaper.
21. Padmanabhan, G. (2016). Chennai’s eco spots. The Hindu, Online edition of India’s National Newspaper.
22. Pascual-Hortal, L. and Saura, S. (2006). Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landscape Ecology 21 (7), 959-967.
23. Pascual-Hortal, L. and Saura, S. (2008). Integrating landscape connectivity in broad-scale forest planning through a new graph-based habitat availability methodology: application to capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) in Catalonia (NE Spain). European Journal of Forest Research 127, 23-31.
24. Saura, S., Estreguil, C., Mouton, C., Rodríguez-Freire, M. (2011). Network analysis to assess landscape connectivity trends: application to European forests (1990-2000), Ecological Indicators 11, 407-416.
25. Saura, S., Pascual-Hortal, L. (2007). A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landscape Urban Plan. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.03.005.
26. Saura, S., Rubio, L. (2010). A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape”. Ecography 33, 523-537.
27. Saura, S., Torné, J. (2009). Conefor Sensinode 2.2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environmental Modelling & Software 24,135-139.
28. Talley, T.S., Fleishman, E., Holyoak, M., Murphy, D.D., Ballard, A. (2007). Rethinking a rare-species conservation strategy in an urban landscape: the case study of a valley elderberry longhorn beetle. Journal of Biological Conservation 135, 21–32.
29. The Economist (2015). Next time by water. Flood and India’s Coromandel Coast, http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21679822-floodsshould-be-warning-those-building-state-capital-scratchnext-time-water. (access date: 02.01.2017).
30. Thompson, C.W. (2002). Urban open space in the 21st century, Landscape Urban Planning., 60 (1), 59–72. Urban Green Belt, (2016). http://edugreen.teri.res.in/explore/forestry/urban.htm (access date: 10.07.2018).
31. Wikipedia, (2016). Chennai. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chennai (access date: 04.01.2017)
32. Williams, N.S.G., Schwartz, M.W., Vesk, P.A., McCarthy, M.A., Hahs, A.K., Clemants, S.E., Corlett, R.T., Duncan, R.P., Norton, B.A., Thompson, K., McDonnell, M.J. (2009). A conceptual framework for predicting the effects of urban environments on floras. Journal of Ecology 97, 4–9.
33. Zipkin, E.F., DeWan, A., Royle, J.A. (2009). Impacts of forest fragmentation on species richness: a hierarchical approach to community modeling. Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 815–822.