Landscape‐scale predictions of future grassland conversion to cropland or development

Grassland conservation planning often focuses on high-risk landscapes, but many grassland conversion models are not designed to optimize conservation planning because they lack multidimensional risk assessments and are misaligned with ecological and conservation delivery scales. To aid grassland conservation planning, we developed landscape-scale models at relevant scales that predict future (2021-2031) total and proportional loss of unprotected grassland to cropland or development. We developed models for 20 ecoregions across the contiguous United States by relating past conversion (2011-2021) to a suite of covariates in random forest regression models and applying the models to contemporary covariates to predict future loss. Overall, grassland loss models performed well, and explanatory power varied spatially across ecoregions (total loss model: weighted group mean R<sup>2</sup> = 0.89 [range: 0.83-0.96], root mean squared error [RMSE] = 9.29 ha [range: 2.83-22.77 ha]; proportional loss model: weighted group mean R<sup>2</sup> = 0.74 [range: 0.64-0.87], RMSE = 0.03 [range: 0.02-0.06]). Amount of crop in the landscape and distance to cities, ethanol plants, and concentrated animal feeding operations had high variable importance in both models. Total grass loss was greater when there were moderate amounts of grass, crop, or development (∼50%) in the landscape. Proportional grass loss was greater when there was less grass (∼<30%) and more crop or development (∼>50%). Some variables had a large effect on only a subset of ecoregions, for example, grass loss was greater when ∼>70% of the landscape was enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program. Our methods provide a simple and flexible approach for developing risk layers well suited for conservation that can be extended globally. Our conversion models can support conservation planning by enabling prioritization as a function of risk that can be further optimized by incorporating biological value and cost.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conservation Biology
Published
2024-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14346
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.22

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Landscape‐scale predictions of future grassland conversion to cropland or development

Kevin W. Barnes, Rich Iovanna, Neal D. Niemuth
9 citations
Conservation Biology
Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
6.22
article

Landscape‐scale predictions of future grassland conversion to cropland or development

Kevin W. Barnes, Rich Iovanna, Neal D. Niemuth
article en
9 citations

Abstract

Grassland conservation planning often focuses on high-risk landscapes, but many grassland conversion models are not designed to optimize conservation planning because they lack multidimensional risk assessments and are misaligned with ecological and conservation delivery scales. To aid grassland conservation planning, we developed landscape-scale models at relevant scales that predict future (2021-2031) total and proportional loss of unprotected grassland to cropland or development. We developed models for 20 ecoregions across the contiguous United States by relating past conversion (2011-2021) to a suite of covariates in random forest regression models and applying the models to contemporary covariates to predict future loss. Overall, grassland loss models performed well, and explanatory power varied spatially across ecoregions (total loss model: weighted group mean R<sup>2</sup> = 0.89 [range: 0.83-0.96], root mean squared error [RMSE] = 9.29 ha [range: 2.83-22.77 ha]; proportional loss model: weighted group mean R<sup>2</sup> = 0.74 [range: 0.64-0.87], RMSE = 0.03 [range: 0.02-0.06]). Amount of crop in the landscape and distance to cities, ethanol plants, and concentrated animal feeding operations had high variable importance in both models. Total grass loss was greater when there were moderate amounts of grass, crop, or development (∼50%) in the landscape. Proportional grass loss was greater when there was less grass (∼<30%) and more crop or development (∼>50%). Some variables had a large effect on only a subset of ecoregions, for example, grass loss was greater when ∼>70% of the landscape was enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program. Our methods provide a simple and flexible approach for developing risk layers well suited for conservation that can be extended globally. Our conversion models can support conservation planning by enabling prioritization as a function of risk that can be further optimized by incorporating biological value and cost.

Conservation BiologyVol. 39(1)
Natural Resources Conservation Service (US), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (US)
U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Farm Service Agency
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
6.22
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.