Woodland key habitats evaluated as part of a functional reserve network

Biological Conservation

Volumn 143, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1212-1227

  Laita, Anne ^a   Mönkkönen, Mikko ^a   Kotiaho, Janne S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

Author keywords

Centrality measure; Connectivity; Graph theory; Integral Index of Connectivity; Reserve network; Woodland key habitat

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONNECTIVITY; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISPERSAL; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; FOREST MANAGEMENT; GRAPHICAL METHOD; HABITAT TYPE; NATURE CONSERVATION; RESERVE DESIGN; SCALE EFFECT; SPECIES OCCURRENCE; WOODLAND;

FINLAND;

EID: 77951024539     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.029     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Anonymous. Finnish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry (2008), Metsäntutkimuslaitos, Helsinki
2. Andrén H. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71 (1994) 355-366
3. Angelstam P., and Andersson L. Estimates of the needs for forest reserves in Sweden. Scand. J. Forest. Res. 3 Suppl. (2001) 38-51
4. Aune K., Jonsson B., and Moen J. Isolation and edge effects among woodland key habitats in Sweden: is forest policy promoting fragmentation?. Biol. Conserv. 124 (2005) 89-95
5. Balmford A., and Whitten T. Who should pay for tropical conservation, and how could the costs be met?. Oryx 37 (2003) 238-250
6. Bélisle M. Measuring landscape connectivity: the challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology 86 (2005) 1988-1995
7. Bender D.J., Contreras T.A., and Fahrig L. Habitat loss and population decline: a meta-analysis of the patch size effect. Ecology 79 (1998) 517-533
8. Brown J.H., and Kodric-Brown A. Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58 (1977) 445-449
9. Bunn A., Urban D., and Keitt T. Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J. Environ. Manage. 59 (2000) 265-278
10. de Nooy W., Mrvar A., and Batagelj V. Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek (2005), Cambridge University Press
11. Edman M., Kruys N., and Jonsson B.G. Local dispersal sources strongly affect colonization patterns of wood-decaying fungi on spruce logs. Ecol. Appl. 14 (2004) 893-901
12. Edman M., Gustafsson M., Stenlid J., Jonsson B.G., and Ericson L. Spore deposition of wood-decaying fungi: importance of landscape composition. Ecography 27 (2004) 103-111
13. Esseen P., Ehnström B., Ericsson L., and Sjöberg K. Boreal forests. Ecol. Bull. (1997) 16-47
14. Estrada E., and Bodin O. Using network centrality measures to manage landscape connectivity. Ecol. Appl. 18 (2008) 1810-1825
15. Fahrig L., and Merriam G. Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66 (1985) 1762-1768
16. Fahrig L., and Paloheimo J. Effect of spatial arrangement of habitat patches on local-population size. Ecology 69 (1988) 468-475
17. Franken R.J., and Hik D.S. Influence of habitat quality, patch size and connectivity on colonization and extinction dynamics of collared pikas Ochotona collaris. J. Anim. Ecol. 73 (2004) 889-896
18. Freeman L., Borgatti S., and White D. Centrality in valued graphs: a measure of betweenness based on network flow. Soc. Networks 13 (1991) 141-154
19. Gustafsson L., Hylander K., and Jacobson C. Uncommon bryophytes in Swedish forests-key habitats and production forests compared. Forest Ecol. Manag. 194 (2004) 11-22
20. Hanski I. Täsmäsuojelun mahdollisuus - vai mahdottomuus. In: Jalonen R., et al. (Ed). Uusi Metsäkirja (2006), Gaudeamus, Helsinki 200-207
21. Hanski I., Kuussaari M., and Nieminen M. Metapopulation structure and migration in the butterfly Melitaea Cinxia. Ecology 75 (1994) 747-762
22. Hansson L. Key habitats in Swedish managed forests. Scand. J. Forest Res. 3 Suppl. (2001) 52-61
23. Johansson P., and Ehrlén J. Influence of habitat quantity, quality and isolation on the distribution and abundance of two epiphytic lichens. J. Ecol. 91 (2003) 213-221
24. Johansson P., and Gustafsson L. Red-listed and indicator lichens in woodland key habitats and production forests in Sweden. Can. J. Forest Res. 31 (2001) 1617-1628
25. Jonsson M. Colonisation ability of the threatened tenebrionid beetle Oplocephala haemorrhoidalis and its common relative Bolitophagus reticulatus. Ecol. Entomol. 28 (2003) 159-167
26. Keitt T.H., Urban D.L., and Milne B.T. Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Conservation Ecology 1 1 (1997) 4
27. Knight R.L. Private lands: the neglected geography. Conserv. Biol. 13 (1999) 223-224
28. Korhonen K.T., Ihalainen A., Heikkinen J., Henttonen H., and Pitkänen J. Suomen metsävarat metsäkeskuksittain 2004-2006 ja metsävarojen kehitys 1996-2006. Metsätieteen Aikakauskirja 2B (2007) 149-213
29. Meriluoto M., and Soininen T. Metsäluonnon Arvokkaat Elinympäristöt (1998), Metsälehti Kustannus, Helsinki
30. Moilanen A., and Nieminen M. Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83 (2002) 1131-1145
31. Mönkkönen M., and Reunanen P. On critical thresholds in landscape connectivity: a management perspective. Oikos 84 (1999) 302-305
32. Nilsson C., and Gotmark F. Protected areas in Sweden: is natural variety adequately represented?. Conserv. Biol. 6 (1992) 232-242
33. Östlund L., Zackrisson O., and Axelsson A.L. The history and transformation of a Scandinavian boreal forest landscape since the 19th century. Can. J. Forest Res. 27 (1997) 1198-1206
34. Pascual-Hortal L., and Saura S. Integrating landscape connectivity in broad-scale forest planning through a new graph-based habitat availability methodology: application to capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) in Catalonia (NE Spain). Eur. J. Forest Res. 127 (2008) 23-31
35. Pascual-Hortal L., and Saura S. Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landscape Ecol. 21 (2006) 959-967
36. Penttila R., Lindgren M., Miettinen O., Rita H., and Hanski I. Consequences of forest fragmentation for polyporous fungi at two spatial scales. Oikos 114 (2006) 225-240
37. Perhans K., Gustafsson L., Jonsson F., Nordin U., and Weibull H. Bryophytes and lichens in different types of forest set-asides in boreal Sweden. Forest Ecol. Manage. 242 (2007) 374-390
38. Pressey R.L. Ad hoc reservations: forward or backward steps in developing representative reserve systems?. Conserv. Biol. 8 (1994) 662-668
39. Pykälä J. Effects of new forestry practices on rare epiphytic macrolichens. Conserv. Biol. 18 (2004) 831-838
40. Pykälä J. Implementation of Forest Act habitats in Finland: does it protect the right habitats for threatened species?. Forest Ecol. Manage. 242 (2007) 281-287
41. Ranius T., and Hedin J. The dispersal rate of a beetle, Osmoderma eremita, living in tree hollows. Oecologia 126 (2001) 363-370
42. Rassi, P., Alanen, A., Kanerva, T.,Mannerkoski, I. (Eds.), 2001. Suomen lajien uhanalaisuus 2000. Uhanalaisten lajien II seurantaryhmä. Ympäristöministeriö, Suomen ympäristökeskus, Edita.
43. Saunders D.A., Hobbs R.J., and Margules C.R. Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv. Biol. 5 (1991) 18-32
44. Saura S., and Torné J. Conefor Sensinode 2.2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ. Modell. Softw. 24 (2009) 135-139
45. Selonen, V.A.O., Kotiaho, J.S. 2006. Suojavyöhykkeen leveyden ja muodostumisajan vaikutus erityisen tärkeiden puroelinympäristöjen monimuotoisuuteen. In: Horne, P., Koskela, T., Kuusinen, M., Otsamo, A., Syrjänen, K. (Eds.), Metson jäljillä. Etelä-Suomen metsien monimuotoisuusohjelman tutkimusraportti. Maa- ja metsätalousministeriö, Ympäristöministeriö, Metsäntutkimuslaitos and Suomen ympäristökeskus, pp. 327-329.
46. Sillett S.C., McCune B., Peck J.E., Rambo T.R., and Ruchty A. Dispersal limitations of epiphytic lichens result in species dependent on old-growth forests. Ecol. Appl. 10 (2000) 789-799
47. Sippola A., Mönkkönen M., and Renvall P. Polypore diversity in the herb-rich woodland key habitats of Koli National Park in eastern Finland. Biol. Conserv. 126 (2005) 260-269
48. Stokland J.N. Representativeness and efficiency of bird and insect conservation in Norwegian boreal forest reserves. Conserv. Biol. 11 (1997) 101-111
49. Taylor P.D., Fahrig L., Henein K., and Merriam G. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68 (1993) 571-573
50. Tischendorf L., and Fahrig L. On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos 90 (2000) 7-19
51. Urban D., and Keitt T. Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82 (2001) 1205-1218
52. Urban D.L., Minor E.S., Treml E.A., and Schick R.S. Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol. Lett. 12 (2009) 260-273
53. Uusitalo, A., Paakkolanvaara, J., 2007. Kylien kaunokit, soiden sarat. Keski-Suomen uhanalaiset kasvit. Keski-Suomen ympäristökeskus.
54. van Langevelde F. Scale of habitat connectivity and colonization in fragmented nuthatch populations. Ecography 23 (2000) 614-622
55. Verboom J., Schotman A., Opdam P., and Metz J.A.J. European nuthatch metapopulations in a fragmented agricultural landscape. Oikos 61 (1991) 149-156
56. Virkkala, R., 1996. Metsien suojelualueverkon rakenne ja kehittämistarpeet: ekologinen lähestymistapa. Suomen Ympäristö 16, Suomen ympäristökeskus, Helsinki.
57. Walters S. Modeling scale-dependent landscape pattern, dispersal, and connectivity from the perspective of the organism. Landscape Ecol. 22 (2007) 867-881
58. With K.A., Gardner R.H., and Turner M.G. Landscape connectivity and population distributions in heterogeneous environments. Oikos 78 (1997) 151-169
59. Yrjönen K. Metsälain erityisen tärkeät elinympäristöt. Kartoitus yksityismetsissä 1998-2004. Loppuraportti. Maa-ja metsätalousministeriö. MMM:n julkaisuja 9 2004 (2004) 1-60