Forgot your password?
Document Actions
Path Analysis Overview_Irit Altman
Steps of EBM
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Steps of EBM
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Example: Monterey Bay Kelp Habitat
PISCO Data
8 Sites within Monterey Bay
1999-2005
Methods
Fish surveys (densities)
Swath surveys (densities)
Universal point counts (% cover)
Functional Groups
AUTOTROPHS
Fleshy algae/ Understory kelp (Eisenia arborea, Laminaria setchellii, Pterygophora californica)
Giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera)
INVERTEBRATES
Herbivorous invertebrates
Algae grazers: Strongylocentrotus franciscanus, Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (potentially incorporating lag time t-1)
Other herbivores: (Haliotis rufescens, Lithopoma gibberosum, Megathura crenulata,)
Omnivorous/scavenger invertebrates (Asterina miniata, Parastichopus parvimensis)
Sessile planktivorous invertebrates (Crassedoma giganteum, Tethya aurantia, Urticina lofotensis, Urticina piscivora, Astrangiala jollaensis, Balanophyllia elegans, Corynactis californica, Diopatra/Chaetopterus ornata/spp., Phragmatopoma californica, Stylaster californicus)
Predator invertebrates (Kelletia kelletii, Pisaster giganteus, Pisaster ochraceous, Pycnopodia helianthoides)
FISHES
Planktivorous fish (Chromis punctipinnis, Sebastes mystinus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Mobile small-invertebrate-eating fish (Damalichthys vacca, Embiotoca jacksoni, Embiotoca lateralis, Oxyjulisc alifornica)
Invertebrate-eating fish/piscivores (Sebastes atrovirens, Sebastes serranoides, Sebastes flavidus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Fishbase piscivorous fish* (Sebastes carnatus, Sebastes melanops, Sebastes chrysomelas, Sebastes rastrelliger, Sebastes caurinus)
Sebastes species not included: Sebastes miniatus, Sebastes paucispinis, Sebastes serriceps
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Bottom up model where prey populations support predator populations
Arrows directed from the resource base to the organisms that consume the resources
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Top down model where predators drive prey populations
Arrows directed from the predator to prey
Correlations between fish groups incorporated
Habitat driven model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Use fleshy algae and giant kelp to distinguish two habitats and associated communities
Arrows are directed from functional groups that represent habitat types to species dependent on associated habitats
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Next Steps
Modeling Issue
Consider which directed ecological relationships best explain the natural system
Data Issues
Continue working to incorporate human activity variables into models
Incorporation of additional Sebastes sp into functional groups
Link this step to flanking steps in EBM framework:
Identifying key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
.06
-.01
-.16
.24
.23
.43
.03
.30
.15
.33
.16
.16
.06
.13
-.13
-.25
.28
.04
Temporal autocorrelation removed
.10
.22
.94
.06
-.01
-.16
.24
.23
.43
.03
.30
.15
.33
.16
.16
.06
.13
-.13
-.25
.28
.04
Strongest indirect effect: predatory inverts ïƒ pisc fish = 0.10
Temporal autocorrelation removed
.22
.10
.94
-.03
-.21
.09
-.41
-.34
.20
-.02
.26
.54
.20
-.20
.43
.06
.18
-.09
.37
-.05
.02
Temporal autocorrelation NOT removed
.37
.16
-.19
-.03
-.21
.09
-.41
-.34
.20
-.02
.26
.54
.20
-.20
.43
.06
.18
-.09
.37
-.05
.02
Temporal autocorrelation NOT removed
.37
.16
Strongest indirect effect: kelp ïƒ fish_invert_pisc = 0.13
-.19
Species 2
Species 3
Species 1
Ecosystem Service A
Ecosystem Service B
+
+
+
_
+
Most site sampled for all methods 1999-2005
Some sites not consistently sampled over this time period (site 1, 6, 8)
* From Fish Base
Strong positive, Weak positive
.45
.44
.38
.51
.20
.20
.09
.01
-.59
-.34
-.40
-.32
-.37
-.41
-.05
-.19
-.12
-.01
-.10
Strong negative, Weak negative
-.59
-.34
-.40
-.32
-.37
-.41
.45
.44
.38
.51
.20
.20
Strong positive
Strong negative
-.25
-.36
-.25
-.35
-.11
-.10
-.04
-.05
Strong negative, Weak negative
.24
.31
.40
.48
.26
.53
.14
Strong positive, Weak positive
.24
.31
.40
.48
.26
.53
Strong positive
Strong negative
-.25
-.36
-.25
-.35
Indirect effect = - 0.17
Indirect pathways
-.36
-.25
.40
.26
.53
Strong positive, Weak positive
.14
.04
.24
.53
.59
.41
.25
.41
.21
-.32
-.28
-.27
-.28
Strong negative, Weak negative
-.14
-.32
-.28
-.27
-.28
Strong positive
Strong negative
.24
.53
.59
.41
.25
.41
.21
Indirect effect = 0.24
Indirect pathways
.59
.41
Indirect effect = - 0.17
Indirect pathways
.59
.41
.25
-.28
-.27
Note: Ecological averaged across sites
-.67
.71
.36
.79
.43
-.57
-.81
-.67
.71
.79
-.74
.21
-.68
.05
Note: Ecological averaged across sites
Note: Did not average across sites, instead repeated landings data for each site/year combination
-.32
.21
.42
-.25
.37
-.25
-.23
.04
-.19
Steps of EBM
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Steps of EBM
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Example: Monterey Bay Kelp Habitat
PISCO Data
8 Sites within Monterey Bay
1999-2005
Methods
Fish surveys (densities)
Swath surveys (densities)
Universal point counts (% cover)
Functional Groups
AUTOTROPHS
Fleshy algae/ Understory kelp (Eisenia arborea, Laminaria setchellii, Pterygophora californica)
Giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera)
INVERTEBRATES
Herbivorous invertebrates
Algae grazers: Strongylocentrotus franciscanus, Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (potentially incorporating lag time t-1)
Other herbivores: (Haliotis rufescens, Lithopoma gibberosum, Megathura crenulata,)
Omnivorous/scavenger invertebrates (Asterina miniata, Parastichopus parvimensis)
Sessile planktivorous invertebrates (Crassedoma giganteum, Tethya aurantia, Urticina lofotensis, Urticina piscivora, Astrangiala jollaensis, Balanophyllia elegans, Corynactis californica, Diopatra/Chaetopterus ornata/spp., Phragmatopoma californica, Stylaster californicus)
Predator invertebrates (Kelletia kelletii, Pisaster giganteus, Pisaster ochraceous, Pycnopodia helianthoides)
FISHES
Planktivorous fish (Chromis punctipinnis, Sebastes mystinus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Mobile small-invertebrate-eating fish (Damalichthys vacca, Embiotoca jacksoni, Embiotoca lateralis, Oxyjulisc alifornica)
Invertebrate-eating fish/piscivores (Sebastes atrovirens, Sebastes serranoides, Sebastes flavidus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Fishbase piscivorous fish* (Sebastes carnatus, Sebastes melanops, Sebastes chrysomelas, Sebastes rastrelliger, Sebastes caurinus)
Sebastes species not included: Sebastes miniatus, Sebastes paucispinis, Sebastes serriceps
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Bottom up model where prey populations support predator populations
Arrows directed from the resource base to the organisms that consume the resources
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Top down model where predators drive prey populations
Arrows directed from the predator to prey
Correlations between fish groups incorporated
Habitat driven model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Use fleshy algae and giant kelp to distinguish two habitats and associated communities
Arrows are directed from functional groups that represent habitat types to species dependent on associated habitats
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Next Steps
Modeling Issue
Consider which directed ecological relationships best explain the natural system
Data Issues
Continue working to incorporate human activity variables into models
Incorporation of additional Sebastes sp into functional groups
Link this step to flanking steps in EBM framework:
Identifying key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Created with pptHtml
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Steps of EBM
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Example: Monterey Bay Kelp Habitat
PISCO Data
8 Sites within Monterey Bay
1999-2005
Methods
Fish surveys (densities)
Swath surveys (densities)
Universal point counts (% cover)
Functional Groups
AUTOTROPHS
Fleshy algae/ Understory kelp (Eisenia arborea, Laminaria setchellii, Pterygophora californica)
Giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera)
INVERTEBRATES
Herbivorous invertebrates
Algae grazers: Strongylocentrotus franciscanus, Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (potentially incorporating lag time t-1)
Other herbivores: (Haliotis rufescens, Lithopoma gibberosum, Megathura crenulata,)
Omnivorous/scavenger invertebrates (Asterina miniata, Parastichopus parvimensis)
Sessile planktivorous invertebrates (Crassedoma giganteum, Tethya aurantia, Urticina lofotensis, Urticina piscivora, Astrangiala jollaensis, Balanophyllia elegans, Corynactis californica, Diopatra/Chaetopterus ornata/spp., Phragmatopoma californica, Stylaster californicus)
Predator invertebrates (Kelletia kelletii, Pisaster giganteus, Pisaster ochraceous, Pycnopodia helianthoides)
FISHES
Planktivorous fish (Chromis punctipinnis, Sebastes mystinus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Mobile small-invertebrate-eating fish (Damalichthys vacca, Embiotoca jacksoni, Embiotoca lateralis, Oxyjulisc alifornica)
Invertebrate-eating fish/piscivores (Sebastes atrovirens, Sebastes serranoides, Sebastes flavidus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Fishbase piscivorous fish* (Sebastes carnatus, Sebastes melanops, Sebastes chrysomelas, Sebastes rastrelliger, Sebastes caurinus)
Sebastes species not included: Sebastes miniatus, Sebastes paucispinis, Sebastes serriceps
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Bottom up model where prey populations support predator populations
Arrows directed from the resource base to the organisms that consume the resources
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Top down model where predators drive prey populations
Arrows directed from the predator to prey
Correlations between fish groups incorporated
Habitat driven model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Use fleshy algae and giant kelp to distinguish two habitats and associated communities
Arrows are directed from functional groups that represent habitat types to species dependent on associated habitats
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Next Steps
Modeling Issue
Consider which directed ecological relationships best explain the natural system
Data Issues
Continue working to incorporate human activity variables into models
Incorporation of additional Sebastes sp into functional groups
Link this step to flanking steps in EBM framework:
Identifying key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
.06
-.01
-.16
.24
.23
.43
.03
.30
.15
.33
.16
.16
.06
.13
-.13
-.25
.28
.04
Temporal autocorrelation removed
.10
.22
.94
.06
-.01
-.16
.24
.23
.43
.03
.30
.15
.33
.16
.16
.06
.13
-.13
-.25
.28
.04
Strongest indirect effect: predatory inverts ïƒ pisc fish = 0.10
Temporal autocorrelation removed
.22
.10
.94
-.03
-.21
.09
-.41
-.34
.20
-.02
.26
.54
.20
-.20
.43
.06
.18
-.09
.37
-.05
.02
Temporal autocorrelation NOT removed
.37
.16
-.19
-.03
-.21
.09
-.41
-.34
.20
-.02
.26
.54
.20
-.20
.43
.06
.18
-.09
.37
-.05
.02
Temporal autocorrelation NOT removed
.37
.16
Strongest indirect effect: kelp ïƒ fish_invert_pisc = 0.13
-.19
Species 2
Species 3
Species 1
Ecosystem Service A
Ecosystem Service B
+
+
+
_
+
Most site sampled for all methods 1999-2005
Some sites not consistently sampled over this time period (site 1, 6, 8)
* From Fish Base
Strong positive, Weak positive
.45
.44
.38
.51
.20
.20
.09
.01
-.59
-.34
-.40
-.32
-.37
-.41
-.05
-.19
-.12
-.01
-.10
Strong negative, Weak negative
-.59
-.34
-.40
-.32
-.37
-.41
.45
.44
.38
.51
.20
.20
Strong positive
Strong negative
-.25
-.36
-.25
-.35
-.11
-.10
-.04
-.05
Strong negative, Weak negative
.24
.31
.40
.48
.26
.53
.14
Strong positive, Weak positive
.24
.31
.40
.48
.26
.53
Strong positive
Strong negative
-.25
-.36
-.25
-.35
Indirect effect = - 0.17
Indirect pathways
-.36
-.25
.40
.26
.53
Strong positive, Weak positive
.14
.04
.24
.53
.59
.41
.25
.41
.21
-.32
-.28
-.27
-.28
Strong negative, Weak negative
-.14
-.32
-.28
-.27
-.28
Strong positive
Strong negative
.24
.53
.59
.41
.25
.41
.21
Indirect effect = 0.24
Indirect pathways
.59
.41
Indirect effect = - 0.17
Indirect pathways
.59
.41
.25
-.28
-.27
Note: Ecological averaged across sites
-.67
.71
.36
.79
.43
-.57
-.81
-.67
.71
.79
-.74
.21
-.68
.05
Note: Ecological averaged across sites
Note: Did not average across sites, instead repeated landings data for each site/year combination
-.32
.21
.42
-.25
.37
-.25
-.23
.04
-.19
Steps of EBM
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Steps of EBM
Defining boundaries of the system
Identifying threats
Identifying key ecosystem services
Exploring interactions among key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Developing generating functions for ecosystem services
Evaluating policy options
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Example: Monterey Bay Kelp Habitat
PISCO Data
8 Sites within Monterey Bay
1999-2005
Methods
Fish surveys (densities)
Swath surveys (densities)
Universal point counts (% cover)
Functional Groups
AUTOTROPHS
Fleshy algae/ Understory kelp (Eisenia arborea, Laminaria setchellii, Pterygophora californica)
Giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera)
INVERTEBRATES
Herbivorous invertebrates
Algae grazers: Strongylocentrotus franciscanus, Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (potentially incorporating lag time t-1)
Other herbivores: (Haliotis rufescens, Lithopoma gibberosum, Megathura crenulata,)
Omnivorous/scavenger invertebrates (Asterina miniata, Parastichopus parvimensis)
Sessile planktivorous invertebrates (Crassedoma giganteum, Tethya aurantia, Urticina lofotensis, Urticina piscivora, Astrangiala jollaensis, Balanophyllia elegans, Corynactis californica, Diopatra/Chaetopterus ornata/spp., Phragmatopoma californica, Stylaster californicus)
Predator invertebrates (Kelletia kelletii, Pisaster giganteus, Pisaster ochraceous, Pycnopodia helianthoides)
FISHES
Planktivorous fish (Chromis punctipinnis, Sebastes mystinus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Mobile small-invertebrate-eating fish (Damalichthys vacca, Embiotoca jacksoni, Embiotoca lateralis, Oxyjulisc alifornica)
Invertebrate-eating fish/piscivores (Sebastes atrovirens, Sebastes serranoides, Sebastes flavidus, Semicossyphus pulcher)
Fishbase piscivorous fish* (Sebastes carnatus, Sebastes melanops, Sebastes chrysomelas, Sebastes rastrelliger, Sebastes caurinus)
Sebastes species not included: Sebastes miniatus, Sebastes paucispinis, Sebastes serriceps
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Bottom up model where prey populations support predator populations
Arrows directed from the resource base to the organisms that consume the resources
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Prey Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Top down model where predators drive prey populations
Arrows directed from the predator to prey
Correlations between fish groups incorporated
Habitat driven model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Predator Driven Model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Exploratory Path Analysis
Prey driven model
Predator driven model
Habitat driven model
Use fleshy algae and giant kelp to distinguish two habitats and associated communities
Arrows are directed from functional groups that represent habitat types to species dependent on associated habitats
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Habitat Driven Model
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Monterey Bay Example
Can we use path analysis to understand the ecological relationships within the kelp community ?
Can we add human activity data into the model to understand how ecosystem services are dependent upon ecological relationships?
Can we use the model to understand how human activity alters ecological relationships and ultimate changes the availability of ecosystem services?
Habitat Driven w/ Human Activity
Next Steps
Modeling Issue
Consider which directed ecological relationships best explain the natural system
Data Issues
Continue working to incorporate human activity variables into models
Incorporation of additional Sebastes sp into functional groups
Link this step to flanking steps in EBM framework:
Identifying key ecosystem services
Valuing ecosystem services
Created with pptHtml