Many authors (e.g., Li and Reynolds, 1994; Riitters et al., 2000; Neel et al., 2004; Zurlini et al., 2006, 2007; Proulx and Fahrig, 2010) suggested to study landscape pattern and functioning focusing on the two most fundamental measures of pattern, that is composition (what and how much is there) and configuration (connectivity, spatial arrangements).  In this respect, even simple binary maps generated by neutral landscape models (NLMs) (Gardner et al., 1987) can produce a surprisingly rich array of spatial patterns in the patter transition space defined by composition and configuration. As an example (Neel et al., 2004, Zurlini et al. 2014), a set of neutral landscapes can be generated where focal land-cover area (Pc) is related to connectivity (H) as the degree of spatial autocorrelation among adjacent cells (see Figure attached). There are a number of circumstances where quite a few transitions of focal area (black) pattern occur. There is a transition from a background matrix (top) to foreground patches (down), while, at the top, there is a transition of a perforated matrix from small or diffuse holes (left) to large or distinct holes (right). Below, there is a transition from smaller patches (left) to fewer, larger patches (right). In general, from left to right, at similar composition values, there is a transition from more to fewer fragmented landscapes with increasing connectivity, and from less to sharper contrast with the non-focal cover type. The pattern transition space is inclusive of all possible combinations of composition and connectivity. Structural connectivity and fragmentation can be estimated for real landscapes, for example, using the proportional adjacency of a focal cover type pixel, i.e., the conditional probability that a pixel is adjacent to another pixel of the same land-cover type (Pcc) (Riitters et al., 2000). One advantage of using it as a structural connectivity measure is that it can be easily calculated for both real and simulated binary landscapes and, therefore, can be used for generating the same pattern transition space either for real and simulated landscape patterns. Another advantage is that it represents an image ‘texture’ which is one of the fundamental aspects of pattern measured by popular pattern metrics (Riitters et al., 1995). One way to derive land-cover patterns across scales uses an overlapping moving window device to measure map composition, i.e. the proportion of focal cover type (Pc) for different window sizes over the entire region. As a result, we can characterize a pattern transition space [Pc, Pcc] at different scales resulting from different-sized spatial windows. Taken together, they can describe wide-ranging spatial patterns that are encountered on real maps for different focal land surface features including habitats, land-use/cover types, disturbance regimes, and any other focal feature (Riitters et al., 2000; Zurlini et al., 2006; 2013). In this respect, new conceptual strategies for the design of SEL sustainability patterns are emerging (e.g., Benayas and Bullock 2012; Zurlini et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2013). Such strategies could involve the design and management of landscape elements and structure such as to promote a shift of land-use pattern in the pattern transition space. This implies, for example, the strategic conservation of forests and placement of managed and semi-natural ecosystems to reduce water and soil stress intensity, and such as to enhance the services of natural ecosystems (e.g., commodities, water availability, pollination, reduced land erosion, soil formation) (Jones et al., 2013).

The shape and spatial arrangement of the landscape determines many things. The topography determines the flow of water on the landscape and thus the rearrangement and accumulation of soil. Plants will establish and develop at points on the landscape where they can best take advantage of the soil or water conditions. Animals will be attracted to places on the landscape that provide the best habitat for their needs. When humans make changes to the landscape by creating borders or converting to agriculture or another land use, they alter the flow of water, soil, nutrients and migrating animals. This can reduce the viability of the organisms who naturally existed in the ecosystem by fragmenting their habitats, cutting them off from food or opportunities to reproduce. For this reason, corridors are often established to connect habitats for plants and animals to disperse. 

Dear Siva

I think your question is very relevant. But first I'd like to answer that one recounts the evolution of ecology whatever its nature. Indeed classical ecology remains a descriptive science biotope and biocenosis a word ecosystem. We are witnessing the emergence of landscape ecology for about two decades. These interests cover areas as diverse as the study of the impacts of human development and ecological risk, biodiversity and evolution. It also includes prospective studies and the development of management strategies, restoration, and management of space and harmony socially acceptable territories. It also allows to observe and understand the attitude of the different actors or stakeholders vis-à-vis the landscape changes. Therefore it is a descriptive but also dynamic science. It is based on the triptych:

      - See therefore read the landscape

      - To understand is to do landscape analysis

      - Interpret what is the synthesis of the landscape analysis is particularly the action area of landscape ecology, involving knowledge of a variety of disciplines such as botany, zoology, ecology of populations, but also sociology.

To come to your question itself the spatial distribution of elements or components of a landscape impacts on fauna and flora. The man can play a positive or negative role in this composition.

For example if we consider a forest. If the forest is destroyed by a fire caused by humans (negative action). The consequence is a destruction of a biological corridor of flora and fauna.

Another example in my garden when I picture a small natural lake (affirmative action). Many plants will grow in and on the edge of the water. There may be frogs and tadpoles. We can say that we have created a biological corridor.

Best regards

FADEL

All ecological studies depend on the Landscape one way or the other. The scape in the compound word Landscape provides the philosophy of the how the size, configuration, composition and rate of change determine organic relationships that exist on LAND. Many studies in biogeography, Character displacement, Condominium, ecotones, biomes, Keystone species etc are all dependent one way or the other on the landscape. In Remote sensing and GIS the fractal dimensions of land determine a number of life processes such as Survival, extinction, endangered or endemism  for many faunal communities. In the emerging science of Ecosystem Services  the valuation of the resources be it provisioning, regulating, supporting or Cultural depend on the composition, configuration and again the rate of change of the landscape under study. I will make bold to suggest that Landscape science should be developed to bring together the dimensions of information that can provide an understanding of the multivariate and multicriteria factors that can serve as predictor variables to the sustenance of organic resources at the landscape level. 

Looking at the problem from the perspective of analyzing landscape fragmentation: composiiton refers to the the proportion of a land-cover class on the landscape, and is usually measured by a single index, whereas configuration refers to the spatial arrangement of those land-cover patches across the landscape, and can be characterized by a number of indices (like fractals etc.). Boots (2006) Journal of Geographical Systems suggests that if you decompose the system to just 2 land-cover classes (e.g., forest - non-forest) the proportion of forest describes composition, whereas five different indices are needed to completely describe configuration. 

LANDSCAPE is assemblage of many landforms formed from various processes acted in the region in past and continued to in present to some extent. There for in a landscape few are relict landforms where as few are passive landforms and less than that are active. Micro to macro life adapt various landforms as per their NEEDS, in terms of life cycle, annual cycle and daily cycle... Adaptation can be temporal and the attempt of organisms are observed to adapt newer habitats. With human intervention relocation of organisms/ animals are seen to adapt the sites. The study landscape therefore forms the base map for working of ecological balance in any region.

Landscape composition and configuration also influences wildlife movement and behavior. Evidence suggests deer are attracted to areas with high interspersion because they meet their food requirements in closer proximity to escape cover (tree stands). I guarantee other wildlife are also highly influenced by landscape composition and structure.

Dear Siva, just a three hints:

a) The experts in Landscape Ecology in this research network will have very helpful answers to your question, especially Wolfgang Haber, probably one of the most renowned experts on Landscape Ecology in Europe (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Wolfgang_Haber)

b) You might want to read one of these “classical” books on the relationship between landscape and ecology: “Design with Nature” by Ian McHarg, “The Conquest of Nature“ by David Blackbourn or “The Language of Landscape” by Anne Whiston Spirn …

c) As landscape architects we are very careful with the use of the term “Landscape”. J. B. Jackson stated in 1984: "A Landscape is not a natural feature of the environment but a synthetic space, a man-made system of spaces superimposed on the face of the land, functioning and evolving not according to natural laws but to serve a community – for the collective character of the landscape is one thing that all generations and all points of view have agreed upon. A landscape is thus a space deliberately created to speed up or slow down the process of nature.”

Many authors (e.g., Li and Reynolds, 1994; Riitters et al., 2000; Neel et al., 2004; Zurlini et al., 2006, 2007; Proulx and Fahrig, 2010) suggested to study landscape pattern and functioning focusing on the two most fundamental measures of pattern, that is composition (what and how much is there) and configuration (connectivity, spatial arrangements).  In this respect, even simple binary maps generated by neutral landscape models (NLMs) (Gardner et al., 1987) can produce a surprisingly rich array of spatial patterns in the patter transition space defined by composition and configuration. As an example (Neel et al., 2004, Zurlini et al. 2014), a set of neutral landscapes can be generated where focal land-cover area (Pc) is related to connectivity (H) as the degree of spatial autocorrelation among adjacent cells (see Figure attached). There are a number of circumstances where quite a few transitions of focal area (black) pattern occur. There is a transition from a background matrix (top) to foreground patches (down), while, at the top, there is a transition of a perforated matrix from small or diffuse holes (left) to large or distinct holes (right). Below, there is a transition from smaller patches (left) to fewer, larger patches (right). In general, from left to right, at similar composition values, there is a transition from more to fewer fragmented landscapes with increasing connectivity, and from less to sharper contrast with the non-focal cover type. The pattern transition space is inclusive of all possible combinations of composition and connectivity. Structural connectivity and fragmentation can be estimated for real landscapes, for example, using the proportional adjacency of a focal cover type pixel, i.e., the conditional probability that a pixel is adjacent to another pixel of the same land-cover type (Pcc) (Riitters et al., 2000). One advantage of using it as a structural connectivity measure is that it can be easily calculated for both real and simulated binary landscapes and, therefore, can be used for generating the same pattern transition space either for real and simulated landscape patterns. Another advantage is that it represents an image ‘texture’ which is one of the fundamental aspects of pattern measured by popular pattern metrics (Riitters et al., 1995). One way to derive land-cover patterns across scales uses an overlapping moving window device to measure map composition, i.e. the proportion of focal cover type (Pc) for different window sizes over the entire region. As a result, we can characterize a pattern transition space [Pc, Pcc] at different scales resulting from different-sized spatial windows. Taken together, they can describe wide-ranging spatial patterns that are encountered on real maps for different focal land surface features including habitats, land-use/cover types, disturbance regimes, and any other focal feature (Riitters et al., 2000; Zurlini et al., 2006; 2013). In this respect, new conceptual strategies for the design of SEL sustainability patterns are emerging (e.g., Benayas and Bullock 2012; Zurlini et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2013). Such strategies could involve the design and management of landscape elements and structure such as to promote a shift of land-use pattern in the pattern transition space. This implies, for example, the strategic conservation of forests and placement of managed and semi-natural ecosystems to reduce water and soil stress intensity, and such as to enhance the services of natural ecosystems (e.g., commodities, water availability, pollination, reduced land erosion, soil formation) (Jones et al., 2013).

In more general terms, one can examine J. J. Gibson theories:

"James Jerome Gibson (January 27, 1904–December 11, 1979), was an American psychologist, born in McConnelsville, Ohio,[1] who received his Ph.D. from Princeton University's Department of Psychology, and is considered one of the most important 20th century psychologists in the field of visual perception. In his classic work The Perception of the Visual World (1950) he rejected the then fashionable theory of behaviorism for a view based on his own experimental work, which pioneered the idea that animals 'sampled' information from the 'ambient' outside world. He studied the concept of optical flow (later published as part of his theory of affordance). According to Gibson, one determines the optical flow (which can be described as the apparent flow of the movement of objects in the visual field relative to the observer) using the pattern of light on the retina.[2] The term 'affordance' refers to the opportunities for action provided by a particular object or environment. This concept has been extremely influential in the field of design and ergonomics: see for example the work of Donald Norman who worked with Gibson, and has adapted many of his ideas for his own theories" WiKi.

Is what is above the ground 'Ecology' and below the ground 'Geology'?  What is the physical niche of the landscape, e.g. how much below the ground (e.g. roots and surroundings) versus how much above the ground (e.g. a bird flying in the sky)?

The setting and landscape composition are the basis for landscape ecology studies by interfering with landscape dynamics, as well as material flow and energy of ecosssystems. 

Landscape configuration and composition is at the heart of the survival of the ability of our natural systems to continue to provide essential services- recycling of nutrients, flood and pest control and maintenance of clean air soil and water. LC&Composition is essential to the study of habitat fragmentation in this case where I live where roads and pipelines are planned without regard to landscape configuration or composition. The connectedness of contiguous areas of habitat are essential in determining minimum sizes of habitat patches species need to survive. Also important in knowing the amount of habitat necessary for longterm persistence of local populations. Other fragmentation thresholds connected with LC&C include habitat corridors for species movements, riparian buffers to protect water quality/wildlife habitat and others that help to understand when ecological processes are likely to be disrupted.  Landscape Configuration and Composition help us make sense of complex ecological processes that operate species or ecosystem responses to human disturbance and habitat fragmentation. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32536907

Are 'airspace reserves' part of the landscape?

Do 'airspace reserves' take part of landscape shaping?

There is an ongoing Biodiversa research program named FARMLAND (European Network on Farmland Heterogeneity, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) which is specifically devoted to the study of this question : disentangling the effects of composition and configuration of crops within agricultural landscapes.  First papers will be published by the end of 2015. This project is based on the review coordinated by Lenore Fahrig in Ecology Letters : Fahrig, L. et al. (2011). "Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes." Ecology Letters 14(2): 101–112.