The role of habitat quality in fragmented landscapes: A conceptual overview and prospectus for future research

Oecologia

Volumn 163, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 535-547

  Mortelliti, Alessio ^a   Amori, Giovanni ^a   Boitani, Luigi ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Habitat degradation; Habitat fragmentation; Habitat loss; Patch quality; Patch structure

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; FUTURE PROSPECT; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; HABITAT LOSS; HABITAT QUALITY; HETEROGENEITY; META-ANALYSIS; PATCH DYNAMICS; SPECIES OCCURRENCE;

BIOLOGICAL MODEL; ECOLOGY; ECOSYSTEM; GEOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; RESEARCH; REVIEW;

ECOLOGY; ECOSYSTEM; GEOGRAPHY; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; RESEARCH;

EID: 77952320921     PISSN: 00298549     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-010-1623-3     Document Type: Review

References (79)

1. Adriaens D, Jacquemyn H, Honnay O, Hermy M (2009) Conservation of remnant populations of Colchicum autumnale: the relative importance of local habitat quality and habitat fragmentation. Acta Oecol 35: 69-82.
2. Anzures-Dadda A, Manson RH (2007) Patch- and landscape-scale effects on howler monkey distribution and abundance in rainforest fragments. Anim Conserv 10: 69-76.
3. Armstrong DP (2005) Integrating the metapopulation and habitat paradigms for understanding broad-scale declines of species. Conserv Biol 19: 1402-1410.
4. Arroyo-Rodriguez V, Mandujano S (2006) Forest fragmentation modifies habitat quality for Alouatta palliata. Int J Primatol 27: 1079-1096.
5. Betzholtz PE, Ehrig A, Lindeborg M, Dinnétz P (2007) Food plant density, patch isolation and vegetation height determine occurrence in a Swedish metapopulation of the marsh fritillary Euphydryas aurinia (Rottemburg, 1775) (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). J Insect Conserv 11: 343-350.
6. Boitani L, Falcucci A, Maiorano L, Rondinini C (2007) Ecological networks as conceptual frameworks or operational tools in conservation. Conserv Biol 21: 1414-1422.
7. Crooks K, Sanjayan M (2006) Connectivity conservation: maintaining connections for nature. In: Crooks K, Sanjayan M (eds) Connectivity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1-19.
8. Dennis RLH, Eales HT (1997) Patch occupancy in Coenonympha tullia (Muêller, 1764) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae): Habitat quality matters as much as patch size and isolation. J Insect Conserv 1: 167-176.
9. Denoel M, Lehmann A (2006) Multi-scale effect of landscape processes and habitat quality on newt abundance: implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 130: 495-504.
10. DeWoody YD, Feng Z, Swihart RK (2005) Merging spatial and temporal structure within a metapopulation model. Am Nat 166: 42-55.
11. Drielsma M, Ferrier S (2009) Rapid evaluation of metapopulation persistence in highly variegated landscapes. Biol Conserv 142: 529-540.
12. Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34: 487-515.
13. Falcucci A, Ciucci P, Maiorano L, Gentile L, Boitani L (2009) Assessing habitat quality for conservation using an integrated occurrence-mortality model. J Appl Ecol 46: 600-609.
14. Felton AM, Engstram LM, Felton A, Knott CD (2003) Orangutan population density, forest structure and fruit availability in hand-logged and unlogged peat swamp forests in West Kalimantan. Indonesia Biol Conserv 114: 91-101.
15. Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2007) Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16: 265-280.
16. Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Fazey I (2004) Appreciating ecological complexity: habitat contours as a conceptual landscape model. Conserv Biol 18: 1245-1253.
17. Fleishman E, Ray C, Sjoêgren-Gulve P, Boggs CL, Murphy DD (2002) Assessing the roles of patch quality, area, and isolation in predicting metapopulation dynamics. Conserv Biol 16: 706-716.
18. Franken RJ, Hik DS (2004) Influence of habitat quality, patch size and connectivity on colonization and extinction dynamics of collared pikas Ochotona collaris. J Anim Ecol 73: 889-896.
19. Fred MS, Brommer JE (2003) Influence of habitat quality and patch size on occupancy and persistence in two populations of the Apollo butterfly (Parnassius apollo). J Insect Conserv 7: 85-98.
20. Griffen BD, Drake JM (2008) Effects of habitat quality and size on extinction in experimental populations. Proc R Soc B Biol 275: 2251-2256.
21. Grundel R, Pavlovic NB (2007) Resource availability, matrix quality, microclimate, and spatial pattern as predictors of patch use by the Karner blue butterfly. Biol Conserv 135: 135-144.
22. Guevara S, Laborde J, Sanchez G (1998) Are isolated remnant trees in pastures a fragmented canopy? Selbyana 19: 34-43.
23. Gyllenberg M, Hanski I (1997) Habitat deterioration, habitat destruction, and metapopulation persistence in a heterogenous landscape. Theor Popul Biol 52: 198-215.
24. Hall LS, Krausman PR, Morrison ML (1997) The habitat concept and a plea for standard terminology. Wildlife Soc Bull 25: 173-182.
25. Hanski I, Gaggiotti O (eds) (2004) Ecology genetics and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier, Burlington.
26. Hanski I, Moilanen A, Pakkala T, Kuussaari M (1996) The quantitative incidence function model and persistence of an endangered butterfly metapopulation. Conserv Biol 10: 578-590.
27. Harrison S, Bruna E (1999) Habitat fragmentation and large scale conservation: what do we know for sure? Ecography 22: 225-232.
28. Hazell D, Hero JM, Lindenmayer D, Cunningham R (2004) A comparison of constructed and natural habitat for frog conservation in an Australian agricultural landscape. Biol Conserv 119: 61-71.
29. Heisswolf A, Reichmann S, Poethke HJ, Schrader B, Obermaier E (2009) Habitat quality matters for the distribution of an endangered leaf beetle and its egg parasitoid in a fragmented landscape. J Insect Conserv 13: 165-175.
30. Hill D, Fasham M, Tucker G, Shewry M, Shaw P (2005) Handbook of biodiversity methods. Survey, evaluation and monitoring. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
31. Hodgson JA, Moilanen A, Thomas CD (2009a) Metapopulation responses to patch connectivity and quality are masked by successional habitat dynamics. Ecology 90: 1608-1619.
32. Hodgson JA, Thomas CD, Wintle BA, Moilanen A (2009b) Climate change, connectivity and conservation decision making: back to basics. J Appl Ecol 46: 964-969.
33. Holland GJ, Bennett AF (2007) Occurrence of small mammals in a fragmented landscape: the role of vegetation heterogeneity. Wildl Res 34: 387-397.
34. Jaquiéry J, Guélat J, Broquet T, Berset-Brändli L, Pellegrini E, Moresi R, Hirzel AH, Perrin N (2008) Habitat-quality effects on metapopulation dynamics in greater white-toothed shrews, Crocidura russula. Ecology 89: 2777-2785.
35. Johnson MD (2007) Measuring habitat quality: a review. Condor 109: 489-504.
36. Kawecki TD (2004) Ecological and evolutionary consequences of source-sink population dynamics. In: Hanski I, Gaggiotti O (eds) Ecology, genetics, and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 387-414.
37. Kindvall O (1996) Habitat heterogeneity and survival in a bush cricket metapopulation. Ecology 77: 207-214.
38. Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2004) Landscape occupancy and local population size depends on host plant distribution in the butterfly Cupido minimus. Biol Conserv 120: 359-365.
39. Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Muêller CB, Tscharntke T (2005) Relative importance of resource quantity, isolation and habitat quality for landscape distribution of a monophagous butterfly. Ecography 28: 465-474.
40. Kuussaari M, Nieminen M, Hanski I (1996) An experimental study of migration in the Glanville fritillary butterfly Melitaea cinxia. J Anim Ecol 65: 791-801.
41. Lima SL, Zollner PA (1996) Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. Trends Ecol Evol 11: 131-135.
42. Lindenmayer DB, Fischer J (2007) Tackling the habitat fragmentation panchreston. Trends Ecol Evol 22: 127-132.
43. Lindenmayer D, Hobbs RJ, Montague-Drake R, Alexandra J, Bennett A, Burgman M, Cale P, Calhoun A, Cramer V, Cullen P, Driscoll D, Fahrig L, Fischer J, Franklin J, Haila Y, Hunter M, Gibbons P, Lake S, Luck G, MacGregor C, McIntyre S, Nally RM, Manning A, Miller J, Mooney H, Noss R, Possingham H, Saunders D, Schmiegelow F, Scott M, Simberloff D, Sisk T, Tabor G, Walker B, Wiens J, Woinarski J, Zavaleta E (2008) A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. Ecol Lett 11: 78-91.
44. Lloyd H (2008) Influence of within-patch habitat quality on high-Andean Polylepis bird abundance. Ibis 150: 735-745.
45. Luck GW, Daily GC (2003) Tropical countryside bird assemblages: richness composition and foraging differ by landscape context. Ecol Appl 13: 235-247.
46. Marsh DM, Trenham PC (2001) Metapopulation dynamics and amphibian conservation. Conserv Biol 15: 40-49.
47. Matter SF, Ezzeddine M, Duermit E, Mashburn J, Hamilton R, Lucas T, Roland J (2009) Interactions between habitat quality and connectivity affect immigration but not abundance or population growth of the butterfly, Parnassius smintheus. Oikos 118: 1461-1470.
48. Moilanen A, Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. Ecology 79: 2503-2515.
49. Mortelliti A, Boitani L (2008) Interaction of food resources and landscape structure in determining the probability of patch use by carnivores in fragmented landscapes. Lands Ecol 23: 285-298.
50. Mortelliti A, Amori G, Annesi F, Boitani L (2009) Testing for the relative contribution of patch neighborhood, patch internal structure, and presence of predators and competitor species in determining distribution patterns of rodents in a fragmented landscape. Can J Zool 87: 662-670.
51. North A, Ovaskainen O (2007) Interactions between dispersal, competition, and landscape heterogeneity. Oikos 116: 1106-1119.
52. Ovaskainen O, Luoto M, Ikonen L, Rekola H, Meyke E, Kuussaari M (2008) An Empirical test of a diffusion model: predicting clouded apollo movements in a novel environment. Am Nat 171: 610-619.
53. Peters RH (1991) A critique for ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
54. Pöyry J, Paukkunen J, Heliölä J, Kuussaari M (2009) Relative contribution of local and regional factors to species richness and total density of butterflies and moths in semi-natural grasslands. Oecologia 160: 577-587.
55. Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132: 1-652.
56. Quinn G, Keough M (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
57. Rabasa G, Gutierrez D, Escudero A (2007) Metapopulation structure and habitat quality in modelling dispersal in the butterfly Iolana iolas. Oikos 116: 793-806.
58. Rabasa SG, Gutierrez D, Escudero A (2008) Relative importance of host plant patch geometry and habitat quality on the patterns of occupancy, extinction and density of the monophagous butterfly Iolana iolas. Oecologia 156: 491-503.
59. Root KV (1998) Evaluating the effects of habitat quality, connectivity, and catastrophes on a threatened species. Ecol Appl 8: 854-865.
60. Runge JP, Runge MC, Nichols JD (2006) The role of local populations within a landscape context: defining and classifying sources and sinks. Am Nat 167: 925-938.
61. Santos T, Díaz JA, Pérez-tris J, Carbonell R, Tellería JL (2008) Habitat quality predicts the distribution of a lizard in fragmented woodlands better than habitat fragmentation. Anim Conserv 11: 46-56.
62. Schooley RL, Branch LC (2007) Spatial heterogeneity in habitat quality and cross-scale interactions in metapopulations. Ecosystems 10: 846-853.
63. Schooley RL, Wiens JA (2003) Finding habitat patches and directional connectivity. Oikos 102: 559-570.
64. Sergio F, Newton I (2003) Occupancy as a measure of territory quality. J Anim Ecol 72: 857-865.
65. Summerville KS, Crist TO (2004) Contrasting effects of habitat quantity and quality on moth communities in fragmented landscapes. Ecography 27: 3-12.
66. Swihart RK, Lusk JJ, Duchamp JE, Rizkalla CE, Moore JE (2006) The roles of landscape context, niche breadth, and range boundaries in predicting species responses to habitat alteration. Divers Distrib 12: 277-287.
67. Tabarelli M, Gascon C (2005) Lessons from fragmentation research: improving management and policy guidelines for biodiversity conservation. Conserv Biol 19: 734-739.
68. Taylor PD, Fahrig L, Henein K, Merriam G (1993) Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68: 571-573.
69. Taylor PD, Fahrig L, With KA (2006) Landscape connectivity: a return to the basics. In: Crooks K, Sanjayan M (eds) Connectivity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 29-43.
70. Thomas CD, Kunin WE (1999) The spatial structure of populations. J Anim Ecol 68: 647-657.
71. Thomas JA, Bourn NAD, Clarke RT, Stewart KE, Simcox DJ, Pearman GS, Curtis R, Goodger B (2001) The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proc R Soc B Biol 268: 1791-1796.
72. van Horne B (1983) Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. J Wildl Manag 47: 893-901.
73. Verboom J, Schotman A, Opdam P, Metz JAJ (1991) European nuthatch metapopulations in a fragmented agricultural landscape. Oikos 61: 149-156.
74. Verbeylen G, Wauters LA. De Bruyn L, Matthysen E (2009) Woodland fragmentation affects space use of Eurasian red squirrels. Acta Oecol 35: 94-103.
75. Virgos E (2001) Role of isolation and habitat quality in shaping species abundance: a test with badgers (Meles meles L.) in a gradient of forest fragmentation. J Biogeogr 28: 381-389.
76. Visconti P, Elkin C (2009) Using connectivity metrics in conservation planning: when does habitat quality matter? Divers Distrib 15: 602-612.
77. Wettstein W, Schmid B (1999) Conservation of arthropod diversity in montane wetlands effect of altitude, habitat quality and habitat fragmentation on butterflies and grasshoppers. J Appl Ecol 36: 363-373.
78. Wiens J (2001) The landscape context of dispersal. In: Clobert J, Danchin E, Dhondt AA, Nichols JD (eds) Dispersal. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 96-109.
79. Zheng C, Pennanen J, Ovaskainen O (2009) Modelling dispersal with diffusion and habitat selection: analytical results for highly fragmented landscapes. Ecol Model 220: 1495-1505.