<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">GEP</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2327-4336</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/gep.2022.102005</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">GEP-115409</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  An Approach to Verify Naturalness Loss and Its Relation with Ecosystems Services in Brazilian Cerrado: Implications to Management
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fabio</surname><given-names>Leandro da Silva</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Flor</surname><given-names>Magali Aguiar López</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Raphael</surname><given-names>Machado</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Erica</surname><given-names>Zanardo Oliveira-Andreoli</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ângela</surname><given-names>Terumi Fushita</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Marcela</surname><given-names>Bianchessi da Cunha-Santino</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Irineu</surname><given-names>Bianchini Júnior</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Laboratory of Bioassays and Mathematics Modeling, Department of Hydrobiology, Universidade Federal de S&amp;amp;#227;o Carlos, S&amp;amp;#227;o Carlos, Brazil</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Post-Graduate Program in Ecology and Natural Resources, Universidade Federal de S&amp;amp;#227;o Carlos, S&amp;amp;#227;o Carlos, Brazil</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Universidade Federal do ABC, Alameda da Universidade, S&amp;amp;#227;o Bernardo, Brazil</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>08</day><month>02</month><year>2022</year></pub-date><volume>10</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>55</fpage><lpage>74</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>20,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2022</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>21,</day>	<month>Februaryy</month>	<year>2022</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>24,</day>	<month>Februaryy</month>	<year>2022</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Recent evidence suggests that Brazilian Cerrado has been largely converted, mainly due to agribusiness activities and urbanization. Thus, the present work aimed to obtain the diagnosis of a watershed characterized by the expansion of sugar cane fields in the Brazilian Cerrado (Southeastern), employing integrity landscape indicators (Hemeroby, Urbanity Index, Landscape Vulnerability Index, and Water Quality Index) to verify the landscape naturalness, and the consequences of these actions to the ecosystem services provision. Remote sensing data for the years 1998, 2008, and 2018 were employed to verify the land-use changes in the Feij
  &amp;#227;o River watershed (southeastern Brazil), as well as a matrix that considers the land use typologies and their capability to provide ecosystem services. The study area is classified as mixed land use, with the main categories related to agribusiness (sugar cane, pasture, bare soil). The Hemeroby and Urban Index denote naturalness declines over the years, and the observed patterns negatively impact ecosystem service provision. Landscape Vulnerability Index and Water Quality Index demonstrated that remaining vegetation cannot effectively retain pollutants, and severe impairments in the resilience of natural components of key ecosystem service providers (i.e. water and native vegetation) were observed. The results allowed the identification of priority areas for recovery and the maintenance of ecosystem services in agricultural lands.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Tropical Forest</kwd><kwd> Hotspot</kwd><kwd> Land Use</kwd><kwd> Landscape Indicators</kwd><kwd> Watershed</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Currently, transformation in land use caused many changes in the natural ecosystems (Vitousek et al., 1997; Wrbka et al., 2004; Zhao et al., 2006; Rockstr&#246;m et al., 2009; Costa et al., 2017). In Brazil, this scenario is marked by some aggravating factors, as national policies that do not protect the native vegetation effectively (Ribeiro et al., 2019).</p><p>Brazilian Cerrado has been facing area loss and undergoes great anthropogenic pressures due to the human activities’ development and the implementation of the Native Vegetation Protection Law—NVPL (Federal Law 12.651/2012), which became more permissive than the previous one, the Forest Code from 1965 (Soares-Filho et al., 2014; Brancalion et al., 2016; Metzger et al., 2019; Grande et al., 2020). The Brazilian Cerrado is considered a hotspot of biodiversity and provides many ecosystem services at the landscape scale, however, there is a high deforestation risk, and “anti-deforestation” policies must be implemented, given the fragile surveillance (Brooks et al., 2002; Stefanes et al., 2018).</p><p>Furthermore, the Brazilian Cerrado is a phytogeographic domain that includes tropical grassland, savanna, seasonal forest, and other vegetational groups (e.g. riparian forests, seasonal semideciduous forest) (Batalha, 2011). The Brazilian Cerrado occurs in the central portion of Brazil, is responsible for supplying the eight largest Brazil’s watersheds and recharging three aquifers; although, deforestation has been compromising the water cycle, due to reduction in infiltration, groundwater recharge decrease, and evapotranspiration losses (Noojipady et al., 2017; Rekow, 2019). In this sense, deforestation compromises the ecosystem services provision in the Brazilian Cerrado watersheds.</p><p>Notwithstanding its great importance for society, the Brazilian Cerrado has been largely converted into other land uses, mainly due to agribusiness activities (Garcia et al., 2017). Agribusiness is the main driver of Brazilian Cerrado conversion, from 1985 to 2019, the agricultural area increased 3.4&#215; (MapBiomas, 2020). The agricultural matrix (e.g. pastures, sugar cane fields, soybean) generates impacts for the natural systems, due to hydro-chemical changes, pesticide input, and the erosion occasioned by marginal vegetation degradation, a situation that directly reduces the provision of water ecosystem services (Mello et al., 2020). Another implication of land-use change is the loss of the landscape’s naturalness and, consequently, the biodiversity loss (Fonseca &amp; Venticinque, 2018; Hidasi-Neto et al., 2019). Areas with intensive agricultural use, for example, tend to have a lower degree of landscape naturalness and ecological stability (R&#252;disser et al., 2012; Silva et al., 2017).</p><p>Recent estimates indicate that by 2050, the deforestation allowed by the NVPL could result in the suppression of 14 million hectares (ha) of Brazilian Cerrado (Soterroni et al., 2018), affecting directly the watershed’s integrity and ecological process maintenance. Vieira et al. (2018) point out that compliance with this normative mechanism does not protect biodiversity and ecosystem services. Thus, it can be inferred that the Brazilian Cerrado is subjected to a reduction in ecosystem services due to these and other factors (Resende et al., 2019).</p><p>Worth to be mentioned that, in some localities, the situation is even alarming. For example, 32.7% (8,106,085 ha) of the S&#227;o Paulo State area were originally covered by Brazilian Cerrado, but only 3% (239,312 ha) of the native vegetation remain, surrounded by an agricultural matrix composed of pasture and croplands (MapBiomas, 2020; S&#227;o Paulo, 2020), mainly sugar cane fields. Besides the tendency of Brazilian Cerrado areas recovery in S&#227;o Paulo State (S&#227;o Paulo, 2020), the potential negative impacts of the NVPL require strategies to safeguard the ecosystem services and improve the environmental policy (Guidotti et al., 2020).</p><p>Thus, it is essential to develop approaches to verify changes in land use and assess the ecosystem services. Such action can provide information for decision-making and allow the management of the natural ecosystem, especially those in the Brazilian Cerrado. Moreover, an analysis that considers watersheds contribute to verifying the influence of the (in)direct drivers on ecosystem services provision and the assessment of the natural system functioning (Periotto &amp; Tundisi, 2018).</p><p>We hypothesize that the direct drivers linked to Brazilian Cerrado at the State scale are capable to promote the conversion of the natural area in small watersheds, a situation that aggravates with the approval of NVPL, given the increase of artificial surfaces and reduction of ecosystem services provision due to the normative permissiveness. Therefore, we evaluated the land use of a watershed characterized by the expansion of sugar cane fields in a Brazilian Cerrado area (Costa et al., 2017) over 20 years, employing structural landscape indicators to verify naturalness and a matrix to verify the main structures that provide ecosystem services.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Material and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Characterization of the Study Area</title><p>The Brazilian Cerrado is the second-largest biome in South America, extending over more than 2 &#215; 10<sup>6</sup> km<sup>2</sup> and hosts some of the most intensive agricultural activities for grain and beef production in the world (Del-Claro &amp; Torezan-Silingardi, 2019). This phytogeographic domain is considered one of the hotspots for biodiversity conservation because of its biological richness and high endemism levels (Fran&#231;oso et al., 2015; Oliveira et al., 2019; Sano et al., 2019). The Brazilian Cerrado occupies a large tropical ecoregion located at the center of Brazil.</p><p>In S&#227;o Paulo State, the Brazilian Cerrado presents low indexes of the remaining vegetation, distributed as fragments surrounding agricultural activities (S&#227;o Paulo, 2020), a situation also observed in the study area. The remaining vegetation in the municipalities drained by the Feij&#227;o River Watershed (southeastern Brazil), is Brazilian Cerrado (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). A tendency of native vegetation recovery is evident in the region, as well as the strong influence of sugar cane fields and</p><p>pasture on natural ecosystems (Costa et al., 2017). The Feij&#227;o River is the main hydric body in the study unit and the principal source of water supply for the S&#227;o Carlos city. Therefore, the watershed requires constant monitoring for water quality and biotic diversity maintenance. The main river reaches the fifth-order and drains three municipalities: Anal&#226;ndia, Itirapina, and S&#227;o Carlos.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Methods</title><p>Land use dynamics were obtained based on Landsat-5 (TM) and Landsat-8 (OLI) images (path: 200/raw: 75), provided by the United States Geological Service (USGS) and the National Institute of Spatial Research (INPE) for the following years: 1998, 2008 and 2018. A multispectral composite of three bands (5R4G3B or 6R5G4B) was carried out to classify the land use typologies based on the texture and tone of the image. The processing and georeferencing were carried out using the software ArcMap 10.2, adopting the projection system Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), the SIRGAS2000 Datum, and Fuse 23S.</p><p>This study was guided by the analysis of naturalness, which was based on the following indicators: Hemeroby, Urbanity Index, Landscape Vulnerability Index, and Water Quality Index (Wrbka et al., 2004; Fushita et al., 2016; Fushita et al., 2017). Hemeroby is an index that classifies the landscape according to the naturalness degree, therefore, it is classified from the natural to the cultural. Furthermore, landscapes with a lower level of hemeroby have a greater capacity for self-regulation, as well as promoting social welfare (Sukopp, 1972; Barbara et al., 2014; Walz &amp; Stein, 2014; Artmann et al., 2017) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). Sukopp (1972) defines hemeroby as an integral measurement of human interventions over the ecosystem, that is, the total result of the impacts on a particular area based on land use.</p><p>The condition of the Feij&#227;o River Watershed was obtained utilizing the Urbanity Index and Hemeroby during the analyzed period (1998, 2008, and 2018). The Urbanity Index is an indicator able to reflect the landscape’s naturalness and reflect the extension of the area strongly altered by humans (O’Neill et al., 1988). The following equation was employed (Equation (1)):</p><p>UrbanityIndex = log 10 [ A + U / ( F + W ) ] (1)</p><p>where: U: urban area; A: agricultural area; F: vegetation and natural area; W: aquatic and wetland areas.</p><p>The spatial representation of the Urbanity Index was obtained by basing on the RASTER VECTOR, AREA, and fuzzy logic in the software ArcGIS 10.2, transformed by a linear function with a minimum value of 0 and a maximum value of 1; considering IB = 0 (maximum degree of naturalness), IB = 1 (minimum degree of naturalness).</p><p>The Landscape Vulnerability Index shows the susceptibility of a landscape to environmental impacts, like the loss of biodiversity and habitats due to the fragmented condition of the natural and semi-natural vegetation (Fushita et al., 2016).</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Hemeroby description regarding its influence on biodiversity and land use</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Hemeroby levels</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Degree of naturalness</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Description</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ahemerobiotic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Natural</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Natural systems with no or only minimal anthropogenic influence (e.g. global pollution)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Oligohemerobiotic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Near-natural</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >The structure and type of the ecosystem is the same as naturally expected, but some characteristics (e.g. species composition) are altered due to anthropogenic influences</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mesohemerobiotic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Semi-natural</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >The natural ecosystem is no longer present but has been transformed into a new ecosystem due to anthropogenic activities</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Euhemerobiotic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Agricultural</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >The landscape is disturbed by anthropogenic activities (e.g. intense fertilization, water management) and the main uses are related to agribusiness</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Polihemerobiotic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cultural</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Intense and regular impacts lead to the destruction of the naturally occurring edaphon.</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Metahemerobiotic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Artificial</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Artificial systems or structures, soil sealing over 30%</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Source: Fushita et al. (2016) and R&#252;disser, Tasser and Tappeiner (2012).</p><p>This index was obtained by two metrics: Vegetation Quality Index and the Water Quality Index. Such index reflects the landscape susceptibility to degradation, indicating the resilience and vulnerability front of human impacts. Values around 0 indicate a high capacity of the landscape to absorb the human impacts; on the other hand, values around 1 reflect a low capacity to absorb those impacts, due to fragmentation, connectivity loss, the compromising of landscape, and artificialization.</p><p>The Water Quality Index was estimated from the values of the three metrics of vegetation patches: Area (AREA), shape (SHAPE), and distance (DISTANCE) between patches, which were obtained from the land use reclassification of the Feij&#227;o River Watershed for 1998, 2008, and 2018. This environmental indicator reflects the susceptibility of aquatic systems, considering the distance between water resources and the source of impact represented by anthropogenic land use. It was transformed by fuzzy logic. Values around 0 indicate the maximum degree of quality and a distance of 1 km from water resources to anthropogenic areas; although, values around 1 reflect eventual effects from anthropogenic activities (e.g. farming, pesticides, effluents) on water resources due to the proximity (Fushita et al., 2016).</p><p>The ecosystem services were evaluated based on the assessment matrix proposed by Burkhard et al. (2009), this matrix considers the land use typologies and their capability to provide ecosystem services. Values were attributed considering the ecological processes that occur in the land use and based on scientific knowledge, as the literature suggests (Burkhard et al., 2009, 2014; Periotto &amp; Tundisi, 2018). The follow ing scale was applied: 1) 0 = no relevant capacity; 2) 1 = low relevant capacity; 3) 2 = relevant capacity; 4) 3 = medium relevant capacity; 5) 4 = high relevant capacity; and 6) 5 = very high relevant capacity.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><p>During the evaluated period, nine land uses were identified (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). Although the watershed is categorized as mixed land use, the main categories are related to agribusiness, which corresponds to a high fraction of the total study area, followed by native vegetation and anthropogenic non-agricultural areas. At the same time, it was possible to observe changes in land use, especially the increase of anthropogenic areas and the decrease of the natural ones. This typology decreased massively during the last 10 years, the remaining fragments are associated with hydric bodies.</p><p>Bare soil demonstrated loss (from 1998 to 2008) and gain (from 2008 to 2018) in the area. The changes in agricultural activities reflect the increase of natural areas conversion in other land uses. All the modifications resulted in the pasture appearance during the last 10 years, and expansion of sugar cane, which can be associated with harvest periods. Silviculture demonstrated a similar pattern, considering the last 10 years (2008-2018), areas were deforested.</p><p>The sealed areas also showed an increase, but these spaces are not the major</p><p>driver of changes in the studied areas. Country houses and rural infrastructure doubled during the two decades. The urban area demonstrated a small increase, reflecting minimal changes in S&#227;o Carlos’s urban growth in the Feij&#227;o River Watershed, which is one of the expansion vectors considered by the municipality. We stand out that a local normative dispositive of S&#227;o Carlos Municipality (Law n˚ 13,944/06—&#193;rea de Prote&#231;&#227;o e Recupera&#231;&#227;o dos Mananciais, “Area of Protection and Recovery of Springs” in English) contributes to control the urban expansion in the Feij&#227;o River Watershed.</p><p>Minimal changes were observed in aquatic environments. The water bodies increased from 1998 to 2008; however, a reduction could be observed during 2018. The mosaic plot elaborated for the assessment of the ecosystem’s services provided by the study area demonstrated that environments highly anthropized (i.e. urbanized areas, country houses) have a lower capacity of ecosystem services provision than natural spaces, especially the artificial areas (i.e. country houses, rural infrastructure, and urban areas). Agricultural typologies (i.e. pasture, sugar cane, and silviculture) had the relevant capacity to provision and support services, mainly silviculture. However, the greatest capacities to ecosystem services correspond to native vegetation and water bodies, the higher scores reflect the importance of those areas for the ecosystem’s services maintenance. Considering the reduction of natural areas from 1998 to 2018, is evident the loss of the ecosystem services, given the direct impact on the provisioning services maintenance.</p><p>The general panorama of the land use classes and the ecosystem services (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>) reinforce the importance of the natural ecosystems (aquatic bodies and native vegetation) in the provision of the regulating services and support services. Stand out that, the non-anthropogenic (country houses and urban areas) uses do not provide a diversity of ecosystem services. On the other hand, anthropogenic agricultural uses had higher values for provision, regulation, and support services, when compared to non-anthropogenic uses. The cultural services were higher in aquatic bodies and native vegetation.</p><p>Considering the Urbanity Index (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>), it was observed the predominance of intervals that indicates low naturalness (values from 0.6 to 1.0). During the</p><p>evaluated period, the class corresponding to a high naturalness (0 - 0.2) increase from 1998 to 2008, but declined in the last 10 years, remained quantitatively less than 19% of the Feij&#227;o River Watershed. On the other hand, the low naturalness areas demonstrated an expansion. The worst situation was verified during 2018, those areas amount to almost 71% of the territory. The intermediary class (0.4 - 0.6) remained linear, small changes were verified. Concerning the fourth class (0.2 - 0.4), a considerable reduction occurred, mainly from 2008 to 2018.</p><p>The Urbanity Index demonstrated the predominance of areas with high anthropogenic interference, indicating that the systems are highly altered by human activities. This situation was related to the agribusiness areas and natural cover reduction. The high naturalness levels are concentrated in the superior region of the basin, given the direct relation with native vegetation and associated hydric bodies. According to <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>, a dynamic process can also be detected around the Feij&#227;o river’s headspring. Despite the gains from 1998 to 2008 in the superior area, the naturalness decreased during the last 10 years. Areas with high urbanity levels and human interference were concentrated in the Feij&#227;o River middle course, where major changes were observed. Also, low naturalness levels were constated in the middle course; however, an improvement can be observed in 2018.</p><p>The hemeroby degrees for Feij&#227;o River Watershed are presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>. Variations were constated during the period, but the eumerobiotic environments are predominant and occupied more than 60% of the unit during the two initial periods and almost 76% of the total area in 2018. This category is represented by agribusiness activities, indicating that the landscape is characterized by being artificial and dependent on anthropogenic control.</p><p>Likewise, categories that indicate higher anthropogenic interference and dependence (i.e. polihemerobiotic and metahemerobiotic) demonstrated a small increase during the analysis. Although the amount is inferior to 3% of the territory, metahemerobiotic class expanded more than twice as much from 1998 to 2018.</p><p>Oligohemerobiotic areas suffered reductions, especially during the period from 2008 to 2018. Portions of the landscape with self-regulation are losing area because of the anthropization that is associated with agricultural and non-agricultural uses expansion.</p><p>The semi-natural areas (i.e. mesohemerobiotic) demonstrated a small variation in their area, but a loss can be observed from 1998 to 2018. These areas are categorized by reservoirs and categorized by limited self-regulation.</p><p>As shown for the Urbanity Index, the results revealed similar patterns in the longitudinal gradient of the Feij&#227;o River. Strong human dependence and influence are related to agribusiness activities and consolidated areas, which are the main contributors to low watershed self-regulation. The major anthropogenic interference can be verified both in the middle and the low course of the Feij&#227;o river. Considering the headspring, a better situation was observed during 2008, but a loss of oligohemerobiotic areas occurred.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref> illustrates the Landscape Vulnerability Index and the Water Quality Index obtained for the study area. In general, the hydric resources in the Feij&#227;o</p><p>River Watershed are characterized by the proximity of impacting sources (e.g. sugar cane fields, bare soil, sealed areas), given the low environmental quality. The proximity with impacting sources contributes to substances input into the aquatic systems. The remaining vegetation cannot effectively retain pollutants and sediment because of their small area and fragmentation process. The better scenario was spotted during 1998, but a tendency of quality loss was verified during the evaluated period. Higher impact and anthropogenic interference were verified in the inferior region of the watershed, as well as in the spring showed a better quality concerning environmental risks from impacting sources.</p><p>The Landscape Vulnerability Index demonstrates the quantitative and qualitative conditions of vegetation, water compromising, and biodiversity loss according to land use. The scenario reflects a high compromising of the resilience of the natural components (i.e. water, vegetation, and biodiversity) and the main driver corresponds to the agribusiness. The areas characterized by a low vulnerability are correspondent to native vegetation. During 1998, the watershed demonstrated a better situation when compared to 2008 and 2018, the low vulnerability areas were distributed in the watershed. However, the pattern found in 2018 indicates an increase in the element’s vulnerability (values from 0.6 - 1), mainly for deforestation, connectivity loss, and agricultural activity intensification.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Different human activities can generate a significant threat to water quality in anthropogenic areas (Costa et al., 2018; Fushita et al., 2016; Liyanage &amp; Yamada, 2017). Considering the study area, there was an increase both in agricultural activity, specifically in the area of sugar cane cultivation, and silviculture due to the economic growth associated with these crops (Sousa et al., 2019; Vieira et al., 2016). This type of production, as part of the agribusiness, does not apply conservation techniques in rural properties, which causes accelerated erosion (Souza et al., 2013). An agricultural expansion on the areas of native vegetation contributes to the commitment of ecosystem services, such as water provision (Stefanoski et al., 2013; Vieira et al., 2018).</p><p>Indeed, in the Feij&#227;o River Watershed, agribusiness and urbanization are the main drivers responsible for natural area conversion, as observed on a national scale. Furthermore, the high deforestation occurred in the period that succeeds the NVPL approvals, probably linked to the flexibilization concerning rural owner’s obligations and the deforestation incentives, which implies in landscape artificialization and naturalness reduction, and directly reduce the ecosystem services provided by natural structures. Artificial elements and agribusiness have a lower capacity to provide ecosystem services when compared to natural ecosystems (Burkhard et al., 2009, 2014; Periotto &amp; Tundisi, 2018). In the study area, such a situation is observed, given that native vegetation and water are the main structures that provide ecosystem services. On the other hand, the artificial elements are marked by the low capacity of ecosystem services provision. There is a need to promote the adequate management of the natural elements in the watershed, aiming at the benefits provided for social and ecological processes maintenance.</p><p>Furthermore, the remaining vegetation is essential for ecosystem services in agricultural areas, but the managing of the agricultural landscape contributes to ecosystem disservices (Zhang et al., 2007). Alterations caused by anthropogenic actions can compromise the homeostasis of the natural system (Kikuchi et al., 2018). Natural capital reduction generates adverse impacts for ecosystem services, many services are irreplaceable, situations of stress increase the value of ecosystem services (Costanza et al., 1997).</p><p>The Landscape Vulnerability Index denotes a reduction in natural conditions. Some studies show that different anthropogenic actions, as well as, the absence of conservation actions, can lead to impairment of ecosystem services, generating risky situations for the natural systems (e.g. loss of riparian vegetation, erosive process, siltation, physical change on soil structure) (Fern&#225;ndez-Raga et al., 2019; Gomes et al., 2018; Narducci et al., 2019) and population. Such disruptions endanger native species because of eventual invasive organisms (Zanzarini et al., 2019) and confer onus for all society.</p><p>Anthropogenic inappropriate actions intensify events related to climate change (Mahmoud &amp; Gan, 2018; Ramalho &amp; Guerra, 2018) and confer risks to ecosystem services provided by water (Mello et al., 2020). The forms of land use influence the intensity changes in the local microclimate (Penereiro et al., 2018), the primary sector has a direct dependence on natural resources and contributes to Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Singh &amp; Singh, 2017).</p><p>Furthermore, the Brazilian legal system provides elements for water use and vegetation maintenance, but the lack of regional planning and the no integration of the legal framework compromise the ecosystem services provided by the Feij&#227;o River Watershed (Oliveira-Andreoli et al., 2019). In this sense, landscape indicators can collaborate with conservation and biomes maintenance through public policy formulation, especially in a scenario of natural ecosystem conversion and normative dispositive failures. The construction of public policy must have a holistic vision and be elaborated adopting an interdisciplinary manner, especially in watersheds that are marked by man-managed areas predominance (Sterner et al., 2019; Guidotti et al., 2020).</p><p>There is a clear association between the inadequate use of natural resources, notably water resources, and anthropogenic activities in Brazil (Ribeiro &amp; Johnsson, 2018). In addition to social tensions, there are conflicts between landowners and urban activities involving protected areas and agricultural lands (Gomes et al., 2018; Pereira et al., 2016). For example, in Mato Grosso do Sul there was a 111% increase in farmland and, and 14.9% of the planted grazing areas in the Brazilian Cerrado from 2000 to 2016 (Bonanomi et al., 2019). Another aspect to be considered in the absence of practices aimed at the conservation of native vegetation is the permissiveness of the NVPL (e.g. the inclusion of permanently protected areas in the legal reserves) with the purpose of agricultural expansion as well as economic finalities (Brancalion et al., 2016; Metzger et al., 2019).</p><p>Despite the significant progress in the field of water resources management, there is a deficiency in the establishment of connections among the instruments (e.g. Master Plan, Zoning, Hydrographic Basins Plans), and the strategic environmental planning can be effective to assist the development of Brazilian Cerrado and contribute to the ecosystem services provision in the evaluated hydrographic basin (Oliveira-Andreoli et al., 2019; Silva et al., 2019). The landscape indicators employed in the analysis (i.e. Urbanity Index, Hemeroby, Landscape Vulnerability Index, Water Quality Index) were successfully adopted by other studies conducted in another watershed in Brazilian Cerrado areas (Fushita et al., 2016; Costa et al., 2017; Mazzuco et al., 2017; Silva et al., 2017; Ferreira et al., 2018). The results provide bases for management and demonstrate the human interference on natural systems, as well as the anthropogenic interference and the risk involving the ecosystem services provisions.</p><p>Pastures, sugar cane fields, and crops are the main activities related to the Brazilian Cerrado conversion (Arruda et al., 2019). Brazil is an agricultural country that has been facing an increase in production across the years, as well as is responsible for 34% of the sugar and the 22% of the meat consumed in the world (https://www.abagrp.org.br/numeros-do-agro). The increased production inevitably results in a decrease in native vegetation, aggravating the situation because of the Brazilian government’s “death agenda” that threaten the natural environment (Ferrante &amp; Fearnside, 2019).</p><p>In this view, the employed approach provides elements for the sustainability in the watershed level, concerning the elaboration of environmental public policies aiming at the maintenance of ecosystem services in Brazilian Cerrado, improving the quality of the population, and giving bases for promoting ecosystem functioning and negative externalities mitigation (Schaefer et al., 2015; Karam-Gemael et al., 2018; Roque et al., 2018).</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>In Feij&#227;o River Watershed, the direct drivers (i.e. urbanization and agribusiness) linked to Brazilian Cerrado conversion on a national scale are observed in the study area, a situation aggravated by NPVL. The provision of ecosystem services by natural elements demonstrated reductions due to agricultural matrix and artificialization. The Feij&#227;o River Watershed is characterized by the predominance of anthropogenic agricultural uses, a situation favored by the economic dynamics of the region, which implies the expansion of these activities to the detriment of the natural areas. The Urbanity Index and Hemeroby reflect the landscape naturalness loss during the evaluated period, given the increasing anthropogenic pressure on the protected and natural areas. Consequently, the low naturalness levels are reflected in a greater commitment of the water resources, due to the proximity of the impacting sources and the no effective protection conferred by the remaining vegetation. Such a situation can not only affect the connectivity of the landscape but can also lead to biodiversity loss, which is responsible for ecosystem services maintenance. Thus, the observed patterns generated negative effects in the ecosystem services provided by natural systems, conferring externalities for the entire resident population. The planning process and the recovery of the native vegetation in the localities with greater commitment, besides the increase of the connectivity between the fragments, can contribute effectively to the improvement of the observed scenario. The methods employed greatly assist decision-makers; their applicability reflects the environmental quality and provides guidelines for reversion of the degradation process in the landscapes dominated by agricultural activities, as well as the establishment of priority areas for revegetation and the maintenance of ecosystem services. Future works can use the environmental indicators to promote the management in large units, as well as combine the use of these indicators with other analyses (e.g. limnological, biotic).</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>Financial support was provided by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Proc. 1618451/2016), Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnolog&#237;a (Proc. 382397/2016), and the National Council of Technological and Scientific Development (Proc. 158927/2018-4 and 141217/2018-9).</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Silva, F. L., Aguiar L&#243;pez, F. M., Machado, R., Oliveira-Andreoli, E. Z., Fushita, &#194;. T., Cunha-Santino, M. B., &amp; Bianchini J&#250;nior, I. (2022). An Approach to Verify Naturalness Loss and Its Relation with Ecosystems Services in Brazilian Cerrado: Implications to Management. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 10, 55-74. https://doi.org/10.4236/gep.2022.102005</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.115409-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Burkhard, B., Kandziora, M., Hou, Y., &amp; Müller, F. (2014). Ecosystem Service Potentials, Flows and Demands-Concepts for Spatial Localisation, Indication and Quantification. Landscape Online, 34, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201434</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Müller, F., &amp; Windhorst, W. (2009). Landscapes’ Capacities to Provide Ecosystem Services—A Concept for Land-Cover Based Assessments. Landscape Online, 15, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.200915</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Costa, C. W., Lorandi, R., Lollo, J. A., Imani, M., &amp; Dupas, F. A. (2018). Surface Runoff and Accelerated Erosion in a Peri-Urban Wellhead Area in Southeastern Brazil. Environmental Earth Sciences, 77, Article No. 160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7366-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Costa, R. T., Gon&amp;#231;alves, C. F., Fushita, A. T., &amp; Santos, J. E. (2017). Land Use/Cover and Naturalness Changes for Watershed Environmental Management (Southeastern Brazil). Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 5, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.4236/gep.2017.511001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P., &amp; van den Belt, M. (1997). The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital. Nature, 387, 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Del-Claro, K., &amp; Torezan-Silingardi, H. M. (2019). The Study of Biotic Interactions in the Brazilian Cerrado as a Path to the Conservation of Biodiversity. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 91, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201920180768</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fernández-Raga, M., Campo, J., Rodrigo-Comino, J., &amp; Keesstra, S. D. (2019). Comparative Analysis of Splash Erosion Devices for Rainfall Simulation Experiments: A Laboratory Study. Water, 11, Article 1228. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11061228</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ferrante, L., &amp; Fearnside, P. (2019). Brazil’s New President and “Ruralists” Threaten Amazonia’s Environment, Traditional Peoples and the Global Climate. Environmental Conservancy, 46, 261-263. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892919000213</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ferreira, C. S., Silva, F. L., Moitas, M. L., Fushita, A. T., Bianchini Júnior, I., &amp; Cunha-Santino, M. B. (2018). Bacia do rio Monjolinho: Qualidade da água, sedimento e índice de Hemerobia. Ambiência, 14, 522-538. https://doi.org/10.5935/ambiencia.2018.03.07</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fonseca, C. R., &amp; Venticinque, E. M. (2018). Biodiversity Conservation Gaps in Brazil: A Role for Systematic Conservation Planning. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 16, 61-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.03.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fran&amp;#231;oso, R. D., Brand&amp;#227;o, R., Nogueira, C. C., Salmona, Y. B., Machado, R. B., &amp; Colli, G. R. (2015). Habitat Loss and the Effectiveness of Protected Areas in the Cerrado Biodiversity Hotspot. Natureza &amp; Conserva&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o, 13, 35-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ncon.2015.04.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fushita, A. T., Santos, J. E., Rocha, Y. T., &amp; Zanin, E. M. (2017). Historical Land Use/Cover Changes and the Hemeroby Levels of a Bio-Cultural Landscape: Past, Present and Future. Journal of Geographic Information System, 9, 576-590. https://doi.org/10.4236/jgis.2017.95036</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fushita, &amp;#194;. T., Santos, J. E., Souza, I. M. M., Romanini, E., &amp; Costa, R. T. (2016). Landscape Structural Indicators as a Tool to Assess Land Use Changes in Planning for Sub-Basin Sustainability (Southeastern Brazil). Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 8, 720-726. https://doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.2016.84041</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Garcia, A. S., Sawakuchi, H. O., Ferreira, M. E., &amp; Ballester, M. V. R. (2017). Landscape Changes in a Neotropical Forest-Savanna Ecotone Zone in Central Brazil: The Role of Protected Areas in the Maintenance of Native Vegetation. Journal of Environmental Management, 187, 16-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.11.010</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gomes, L., Miranda, H. S., &amp; Bustamante, M. M. C. (2018). How Can We Advance the Knowledge on the Behavior and Effects of Fire in the Cerrado Biome? Forest Ecology and Management, 417, 281-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.02.032</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Grande, T. O., Aguiar, L. M. S., &amp; Machado, R. B. (2020). Heating a Biodiversity Hotspot: Connectivity Is More Important than Remaining Habitat. Landscape Ecology, 35, 639-657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-00968-z</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Guidotti, V., Ferraz, S. F. B., Pinto, L. F. G., Sparovek, G., Taniwaki, R. H., Garcia, L. G., &amp; Brancalion, P. H. S. (2020). Changes in Brazil’s Forest Code can Erode the Potential of Riparian Buffers to Supply Watershed Services. Land Use Policy, 94, Article ID: 104511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104511</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hidasi-Neto, J., Joner, D. C., Resende, F., Monteiro, L. M., Faleiro, F. V., Loyola, R. D., &amp; Cianciaruso, M. V. (2019). Climate Change Will Drive Mammal Species Loss and Biotic Homogenization in the Cerrado Biodiversity Hotspot. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 17, 57-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.02.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Karam-Gemael, M., Loyola, R., Penha, J., &amp; Izzo, T. (2018). Poor Alignment of Priorities between Scientists and Policymakers Highlights the Need for Evidence-Informed Conservation in Brazil. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 16, 125-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.06.002</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kikuchi, J., Ito, K., &amp; Date, Y. (2018). Environmental Metabolomics with Data Science for Investigating Ecosystem Homeostasis. Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, 104, 56-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnmrs.2017.11.003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Liyanage, C. P., &amp; Yamada, K. (2017). Impact of Population Growth on the Water Quality of Natural Water Bodies. Sustainability, 9, Article 1405. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081405</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mahmoud, S. H., &amp; Gan, T. Y. (2018). Impact of Anthropogenic Climate Change and Human Activities on Environment and Ecosystem Services in Arid Regions. Science of Total Environment, 633, 1329-1344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.290</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">MapBiomas (2020, November 25). Infográfico Cerrado. https://mapbiomas-br-site.s3.amazonaws.com/Infograficos/Colecao5/MBI-Infografico-cerrado-5.0-BR.jpg</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mazzuco, G. G., Gon&amp;#231;alves, M. P., Miguel, B. H., Villa, M. F., Costa, C. W., &amp; Moschini, L. E. (2017). Indicadores de Naturalidade da Paisagem Aplicados no Monitoramento da Qualidade Ambiental de Mananciais. Revista Brasileira de Geografia Física, 10, 1406-1418. https://doi.org/10.26848/rbgf.v.10.4.p1406-1418</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mello, K. Taniwaki, R. H., Paula, F. R., Valente, R. A., Randhir, T. O., Macedo, D. R., Leal, C. G., Rodrigues, C. B., &amp; Hughes, R. M. (2020). Multiscale Land Use Impacts on Water Quality: Assessment, Planning, and Future Perspectives in Brazil. Journal of Environmental Management, 270, Article ID: 110879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110879</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Metzger, J. P., Bustamante, M. M. C., Ferreira, J., Fernandes, G. W, Librán-Embid, F., Pillar, V. D., Prist, P. R., Rodrigues, R. R., Vieira, I. C. G., &amp; Overbeck, G. E. (2019). Por que o Brasil precisa de suas Reservas Legais. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 17, 104-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.09.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Narducci, J., Quintas-Soriano, C., Castro, A., Som-Castellano, R., &amp; Brandt, J. S. (2019). Implications of Urban Growth and Farmland Loss for Ecosystem Services in the Western United States. Land Use Policy, 86, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.04.029</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Noojipady, P., Morton, C. D., Macedo, N. M., Victoria, C. D., Huang, C., Gibbs, K. H., &amp; Bolfe, L. E. (2017). Forest Carbon Emissions from Cropland Expansion in the Brazilian Cerrado Biome. Environmental Research Letters, 12, Article ID: 025004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa5986</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">O’Neill, R. V., Krummel, J. R., Gardner, R. H., Sugihara, G., Jackson, B., Deangelis, D. L., Milne, B. T., Turner, M. G., Zygmunt, B., Christensen, S. W., Dale, V. H., &amp; Graham, R. L. (1988). Indices of Landscape Pattern. Landscape Ecology, 1, 153-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00162741</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Oliveira, H. F. M., Camargo, N. F., Gager, Y., Muylaert, R. L., Ramon, E., &amp; Martins, R. C. C. (2019). Protecting the Cerrado: Where Should We Direct Efforts for the Conservation of Bat-Plant Interactions? Biodiversity and Conservation, 28, 2765-2779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01793-w</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Oliveira-Andreoli, E. Z., Silva, F. L., López, F. M. A., Machado, R., Teodoro, C. C., Bianchini Jr., I., Cunha-Santino, M. B., Fushita, A. T., &amp; Crestana, S. (2019). Importancia do planejamento regional para a manuten&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o dos usos múltiplos da água em bacias hidrográficas. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Ambientais, No. 52, 16-27.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Penereiro, J. C., Badinger, A., Maccheri, N. A., Meschiatti, M. C., Penereiro, J. C., Badinger, A., Maccheri, N. A., &amp; Meschiatti, M. C. (2018). Distributions of Seasonal Average Temperature and Precipitation Trends in Brazilian Biomes. Revista Brasileira de Meteorologia, 33, 97-113. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-7786331012</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brooks, T. M., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Fonseca, G. A. B. D., Rylands, A. B., Konstant, W. R., Flick, P., Pilgrim, J., Oldfield, S., Magin, G., &amp; Hilton-Taylor, C. (2002). Habitat Loss and Extinction in the Hotspots of Biodiversity. Conservation Biology, 16, 909-923. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00530.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brancalion, P. H. S., Garcia, L. C., Loyola, R., Rodrigues, R. R., Pillar, V. D., &amp; Lewinsohn, T. M. (2016). Análise crítica da Lei de Prote&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o da Vegeta&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o Nativa (2012), que substituiu o antigo Código Florestal: Atualiza&amp;#231;&amp;#245;es e a&amp;#231;&amp;#245;es em curso. Natureza &amp; Conserva&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o, 14, e1-e16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ncon.2016.03.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bonanomi, J., Tortato, F. R., Gomes, R. S. R., Penha, J. M., Bueno, A. S., &amp; Peres, C. A. (2019). Protecting Forests at the Expense of Native Grasslands: Land-Use Policy Encourages Open-Habitat Loss in the Brazilian Cerrado Biome. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 17, 26-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.12.002</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Batalha, M. A. (2011). O cerrado n&amp;#227;o é um bioma. Biota Neotropica, 11, 21-24. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-06032011000100001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Barbara, &amp;#194;. D. L. S., Valaski, S., &amp; Nucci, J. C. (2014). Hemerobia e planejamento da paisagem no bairro Mossunguê, Curitiba—PR. Revista Geografar, 9, 159-179. https://doi.org/10.5380/geografar.v9i1.36540</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Artmann, M., Chen, X., Ioj&amp;#259;, C., Hof, A., Onose, D., Poni&amp;#380;y, L., Lamov&amp;#353;ek, A. Z., &amp; Breuste, J. (2017). The Role of Urban Green Spaces in Care Facilities for Elderly People across European Cities. Urban For. Urban Green, 27, 203-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.08.007</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Arruda, M. R., Slingerland, M., Santos, J. Z. L., &amp; Giller, K. E. (2019). Agricultural Land Use Change and Associated Driving Forces over the Past 180 Years in Two Municipalities of the Brazilian Cerrado. Geojournal, 84, 555-570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-018-9875-2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pereira, B. W. F., Maciel, M. N. M., Oliveira, F. A., Alves, M. A. M. S., Ribeiro, A. M., Ferreira, B. M., Ribeiro, E. G. P., Pereira, B. W. F., Maciel, M. N. M., Oliveira, F. A., Alves, M. A. M. S., Ribeiro, A. M., Ferreira, B. M., &amp; Ribeiro, E. G. P. (2016). Uso da terra e degrada&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o na qualidade da água na bacia hidrográfica do rio Peixe-Boi, PA, Brasil. Revista Ambiente &amp; água, 11, 472-485. https://doi.org/10.4136/ambi-agua.1802</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Periotto, N. A., &amp; Tundisi, J. G. (2018). A Characterization of Ecosystem Services, Drivers and Values of Two Watersheds in S&amp;#227;o Paulo State, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, 78, 397-407. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.166333</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ramalho, M. F. J. L., &amp; Guerra, A. J. T. (2018). O risco climático da seca no semiárido brasileiro. Territorium, No. 25, 61-74. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-7723_25_5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rekow, L. (2019). Socio-Ecological Implications of Soy in the Brazilian Cerrado. Challenges in Sustainability, 7, 29-29. https://doi.org/10.12924/cis2019.07010007</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Resende, F. M., Cimon-Morin, J., Poulin, M., Meyer, L., &amp; Loyola, R. (2019). Consequences of Delaying Actions for Safeguarding Ecosystem Services in the Brazilian Cerrado. Challenges in Sustainability, 234, 90-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.03.009</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ribeiro, B. T., Nascimento, D. C., Curi, N., Guilherme, L. R. G., Costa, E. T. S., Lopes, G., Carneiro, J. P., Ribeiro, B. T., Nascimento, D. C., Curi, N., Guilherme, L. R. G., Costa, E. T. S., Lopes, G., &amp; Carneiro, J. P. (2019). Assessment of Trace Element Contents in Soils and Water from Cerrado Wetlands, Triangulo Mineiro Region. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, 43, e0180059. https://doi.org/10.1590/18069657rbcs20180059</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ribeiro, N. B., &amp; Johnsson, R. M. F. (2018). Discussions on Water Governance: Patterns and Common Paths. Ambiente &amp; Sociedade, 21, e01252. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422asoc0125r2vu18l1ao</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rockstr&amp;#246;m, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, &amp;#197., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., Nykvist, B., Wit, C. A., Hughes, T., van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., S&amp;#246;rlin, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corell, R. W., Fabry, V. J., Hansen, J., Walker, B., Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P., &amp; Foley, J. A. (2009). A Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Nature, 461, 472-475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Roque, F. O., Uehara-Prado, M., Valente-Neto, F., Quintero, J. M. O., Ribeiro, K. T., Martins, M. B., Lima, M. G., Souza, F. L., Fischer, E., Silva, U. L., Ishida, F. Y., Gray-Spence, A., Pinto, J. O. P., Ribeiro, D. B., Martins, C. A., Renaud, P. C., Pays, O., &amp; Magnusson, W. E. (2018). A Network of Monitoring Networks for Evaluating Biodiversity Conservation Effectiveness in Brazilian Protected Areas. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 16, 177-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.10.003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rüdisser, J., Tasser, E., &amp; Tappeiner, U. (2012). Distance to Nature—A New Biodiversity Relevant Environmental Indicator Set at the Landscape Level. Ecological Indicators, 15, 208-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.09.027</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sano, E. E., Rodrigues, A. A., Martins, E. S., Bettiol, G. M., Bustamante, M. M. C., Bezerra, A. S., Couto, A. F., Vasconcelos, V., Schüler, J., &amp; Bolfe, E. L. (2019). Cerrado Ecoregions: A Spatial Framework to Assess and Prioritize Brazilian Savanna Environmental Diversity for Conservation. Journal of Environmental Management, 232, 818-828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.108</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S&amp;#227;o Paulo (2020, November 25). Inventário Florestal do Estado de S&amp;#227;o Paulo—2020. https://smastr16.blob.core.windows.net/home/2020/07/inventarioflorestal2020.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Schaefer, M., Goldman, E., Bartuska, A. M., Sutton-Grier, A., &amp; Lubchenco, J. (2015). Nature as Capital: Advancing and Incorporating Ecosystem Services in United States Federal Policies and Programs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 7383-7389. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1420500112</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Silva, F. L., Oliveira, E. Z., Picharillo, C., Ruggiero, M. H., Costa, C. W., &amp; Moschini, L. E. (2017). Naturalidade da Paisagem Verificada por Meio de Indicadores Ambientais: Manancial do Rio Monjolinho, S&amp;#227;o Carlos-SP. Revista Brasileira de Geografia Física, 10, 970-980. https://doi.org/10.5935/1984-2295.20170063</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Silva, F. L., Stefani, M. S., Smith, W. S., Cunha-Santino, M. B., &amp; Bianchini Jr., I. (2019). The Municipality Role in Brazilian Wetlands Conservation: Establishment of Connections among the Master Plan, the National Hydric Resources Policy and Two International Strategic Plans. Revista Brasileira de Geografia Física, 12, 2193-2203. https://doi.org/10.26848/rbgf.v12.6.p2193-2203</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Singh, R., &amp; Singh, G. S. (2017). Traditional Agriculture: A Climate-Smart Approach for Sustainable Food Production. Energy, Ecology and Environment, 2, 296-316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40974-017-0074-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Soares-Filho, B., Raj&amp;#227;o, R., Macedo, M., Carneiro, A., Costa, W., Coe, M., Rodrigues, H., &amp; Alencar, A. (2014). Cracking Brazil’s Forest Code. Science, 344, 363-364. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1246663</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Soterroni, A. C., Mosnier, M., Carvalho, A. X. Y., Camara, G., Obersteiner, M., Andrade, P. R., Souza, R. C., Brock, R., Pirker, J., Kraxner, F., Havlik, P., Kapos, V., zu Ermgassen, E. K. H. J., Valin, H., &amp; Ramos, F. M. (2018). Future Environmental and Agricultural Impacts of Brazil’s Forest Code. Environmental Research Letters, 13, Article ID: 074021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaccbb</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sousa, J. S. B., Longo, M. G., &amp; Santos, B. A. (2019). Landscape Patterns of Primary Production Reveal Agricultural Benefits from Forest Conservation. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 17, 136-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.08.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Souza, P. J. O. P., Rocha, E. J. P., &amp; Ribeiro, A. (2013). Impacts of Soybean Expansion on Radiation Balance in Eastern Amazon. Acta Amazonica, 43, 169-177. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0044-59672013000200006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Stefanes, M., Roque, F. O., Lourival, R., Melo, I., Renaud, P. C., &amp; Quintero, J. M. O. (2018). Property Size Drives Differences in Forest Code Compliance in the Brazilian Cerrado. Land Use Policy, 75, 43-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.03.022</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Stefanoski, D. C., Santos, G. G., March&amp;#227;o, R. L., Petter, F. A., &amp; Pacheco, L. P. (2013). Uso e manejo do solo e seus impactos sobre a qualidade física. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, 17, 1301-1309. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662013001200008</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sterner, T., Barbier, E. B., Bateman, I., van den Bijgaart, I., Crépin, A.-S., Edenhofer, O., Fischer, C., Habla, W., Hassler, J., Johansson-Stenman, O., Lange, A., Polasky, S., Rockstr&amp;#246;m, J., Smith, H. G., Steffen, W., Wagner, G., Wilen, J. E., Alpízar, F., Azar, C., Carless, D., Chávez, C., Coria, J., Engstr&amp;#246;m, G., Jagers, S. C., K&amp;#246;hlin, G., L&amp;#246;fgren, &amp;#197., Pleijel, H., &amp; Robinson, A. (2019). Policy Design for the Anthropocene. Nature Sustainability, 2, 14-21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0194-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sukopp</surname><given-names> H. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1972</year>)<article-title>. Wandel von Flora und Vegetation in Mitteleuropa unter dem Einfluss des Menschen</article-title><source> Berichte über Landwirtschaft</source><volume> 50</volume>,<fpage> 112</fpage>-<lpage>139</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Vieira, P. H., Silva, A. C. A., &amp; Mendes, A. M. S. (2016). Aplica&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o do SIG na análise do uso e ocupa&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o das terras nas áreas de preserva&amp;#231;&amp;#227;o permanente do ribeir&amp;#227;o Tatu e seus afluentes presentes no município de Cordeirópolis/SP. Periódico Eletr&amp;#244;nico Fórum Ambiental da Alta Paulista, 12, 50-59. https://doi.org/10.17271/1980082712120161363</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Vieira, R. R. S., Ribeiro, B. R., Resende, F. M., Brum, F. T., Machado, N., Sales, L. P., Macedo, L., Soares-Filho, B., &amp; Loyola, R. (2018). Compliance to Brazil’s Forest Code Will Not Protect Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Diversity and Distributions, 24, 434-438. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12700</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J., &amp; Melillo, J. M. (1997). Human Domination of Earth’s Ecosystems. Science, 277, 494-499. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5325.494</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Walz, U., &amp; Stein, C. (2014). Indicators of Hemeroby for the Monitoring of Landscapes in Germany. Journal for Nature Conservation, 22, 279-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2014.01.007</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wrbka, T., Erb, K. H., Schulz, N. B., Peterseil, J., Hahn, C., &amp; Haberl, H (2004). Linking Pattern and Process in Cultural Landscapes. An Empirical Study Based on Spatially Explicit Indicators. Land Use Policy, 21, 289-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2003.10.012</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zanzarini, V., Zanchetta, D., &amp; Fidelis, A. (2019). Do We Need Intervention after Pine Tree Removal? The Use of Different Management Techniques to Enhance Cerrado Natural Regeneration. Perspective in Ecology and Conservation, 17, 146-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.07.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhang, W., Ricketts, T. H., Kremen, C., Carney, K., &amp; Swinton, S. M. (2007). Ecosystem Services and Dis-Services to Agriculture. Ecological Economics, 64, 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.024</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.115409-ref71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhao, S., Peng, C., Jiang, H., Tian, D., Lei, X., &amp; Zhou, X. (2006). Land Use Change in Asia and the Ecological Consequences. Ecological Research, 21, 890-896. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-006-0048-2</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>