The importance of the relationship between population density and habitat area

Oikos

Volumn 89, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 613-619

  Matter, Stephen F ^a,b  

^a Div of Population Biology ^*  (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034118241     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.890322.x     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Bach, C. E. 1988. Effects of host plant patch size on herbivore density: patterns. - Ecology 69: 1090-1102.
2. Bender, D. J., Contreras, T. A. and Fahrig. L. 1998. Habitat loss and population decline: a meta-analysis of the patch size effect. - Ecology 79: 517-533.
3. Bowers, M. A. and Matter, S. F. 1997. Landscape ecology of mammals: relationships between density and patch size. -J. Mammal. 78: 999-1013.
4. Bowers, M. A. and Dooley, J. L. 1999. A controlled, hierarchical study of habitat fragmentation: responses at the individual patch and landscape scale. - Landscape Ecol. 14: 381-389.
5. Connor, E. F. and McCoy, E. D. 1979. The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Am. Nat. 113: 791-833.
6. Connor, E. F., Hosfield, E. H., Meeter, D. A. and Niu, X. 1997. Tests for aggregation and size-based sample unit selection when sample units vary in size. - Ecology 78: 1238-1249.
7. Connor, E. F., Courtney, A. C. and Yoder, J. 2000. Individuals-area relationships: the relationship between animal population density and area. - Ecology (in press).
8. Feller, W. 1968. An introduction to probability theory and its applications. Vol. 1. - John Wiley and Sons.
9. Gaston, K. J., Blackburn, T. M. and Gregory, R. D. 1999. Does variation in census area confound density comparisons? J. Appl. Ecol. 36: 191-204.
10. Hanski, I. 1994. A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. - J. Anim. Ecol. 63: 151-162.
11. Hanski, I., Moilanen, A., Pakkala, T. and Kuussaari. M. 1996. Metapopulation persistence of an endangered butterfly: a test of the quantitative incidence function model. - Conserv. Biol. 10: 578-590.
12. Kareiva, P. M. 1983. Influence of vegetational texture on herbivore movement. In: Denno, R. F. and McClure, M. S. (eds), Variable plants and herbivores in natural and managed systems. Academic Press, pp. 259-289.
13. Matter, S. F. 1997. Population density and area: the role of within and between patch processes. Oecologia 110: 533-538.
14. McDonald, K. A. and Brown, J. H. 1992. Using montaine mammals to model extinction due to global change. -Conserv. Biol. 6: 409-415.
15. Preston, F. W. 1962. The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity: part I. - Ecology 43: 185-215.
16. Risch, S. J. 1981. Insect herbivore abundance in tropical monocultures and polycultures: an experimental test of two hypotheses. - Ecology 62: 1325-1340.
17. Root, R. B. 1973. Organization of a plant-arthropod association in simple and diverse habitats: the fauna of collards, Brassica oleracea. - Ecol. Monogr. 43: 95-124.
18. Simberloff, D. 1988. The contribution of population and community biology to conservation science. Annu. Rev. Ecol Syst. 19: 473-511.
19. Smallwood, K. S. and Schonewald, C. 1996. Scaling population density and spatial pattern for terrestrial mammalian carnivores. - Oecologia 105: 329-335.
20. Stone, L. and Roberts, A. 1992. Competitive exclusion, or species aggregation? - Oecologia 91: 419-424.
21. Van Horne, B. 1983. Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. - J. Wildl. Manage. 47: 893-901.
22. Wahlberg, N., Moilanen, A. and Hanski, I. 1996. Predicting the occurrence of endangered species in fragmented landscapes. Science 273: 1536-1538.
23. Wright, D. H. and Reeves, J. K. 1992. On the meaning and measurement of nestedness of species assemblages. - Oecologia 92: 416-428.