A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape

Ecography

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 523-537

  Saura, Santiago ^a   Rubio, Lidón ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LLEIDA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONNECTIVITY; CONSERVATION PLANNING; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; FOREST ECOSYSTEM; HABITAT AVAILABILITY; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; PATCH DYNAMICS;

CATALONIA; LERIDA [CATALONIA]; SPAIN;

EID: 77953174883     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: 16000587     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05760.x     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Araújo M B. Would climate change drive species out of reserves? An assessment of existing reserve-selection methods. Global Change Biol 2004, 10:1618-1626.
2. Arndt S. Correlating and predicting psychiatric symptom ratings: Spearman's r versus Kendall's tau correlation. J. Psychiatr. Res 1999, 33:97-104.
3. Barabási A L. Linked: the new science of networks 2002, Pegasus
4. Bennett A F. The future of connectivity conservation. Connectivity conservation 2006, 676-694. Crooks K RSanjayan M. Cambridge Univ. Press
5. Bodin T, Norberg J. A network approach for analyzing spatially structured populations in fragmented landscape. Landscape Ecol 2007, 22:31-44.
6. Bogaert J. Entropy increase of fragmented habitats: a sign of human impact? Ecol. Indic 2005, 5:207-212.
7. Bunn A G. Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J. Environ. Manage 2000, 59:265-278.
8. Cabeza M. Habitat loss and connectivity of reserve networks in probability approaches to reserve design. Ecol. Lett 2003, 6:665-672.
9. Calabrese J M, Fagan W F. A comparison-shopper's guide to connectivity metrics. Front. Ecol. Environ 2004, 2:529-536.
10. Chetkiewicz C L B. Corridors for conservation: integrating pattern and process. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst 2006, 37:317-342.
11. Crooks K R, Sanjayan M. Connectivity conservation 2006, Cambridge Univ. Press
12. Estrada E, Bodin Using network centrality measures to manage landscape connectivity. Ecol. Appl 2008, 18:1810-1825.
13. Fahrig L. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst 2003, 34:487-515.
14. Fall A. Spatial graphs: principles and applications for habitat connectivity. Ecosystems 2007, 10:448-461.
15. Ferrari J R. Two measures of landscape-graph connectivity: assessment across gradients in area and configuration. Landscape Ecol 2007, 22:1315-1323.
16. Frank K, Wissel C. A formula for the mean lifetime of metapopulations in heterogeneous landscapes. Am. Nat 2002, 159:530-552.
17. Grubesic T H. Comparative approaches for assessing network vulnerability. Int. Regional Sci. Rev 2008, 31:88-112.
18. Hanski I. Metapopulation dynamics: does it help to have more of the same? Trends Ecol. Evol 1989, 4:113-114.
19. Hanski I, Ovaskainen O. The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape. Nature 2000, 404:755-758.
20. Jaeger J A G. Landscape division, splitting index, and effective mesh size: new measures of landscape fragmentation. Landscape Ecol 2000, 15:115-130.
21. Jordán F. Carabids (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in a forest patchwork: a connectivity analysis of the Bereg Plain landscape graph. Landscape Ecol 2007, 22:1527-1539.
22. Kallimanis A S. Metapopulation extinction risk under spatially autocorrelated disturbance. Conserv. Biol 2005, 19:534-546.
23. Kareiva P. Evaluating and quantifying the conservation dividends of connectivity. Connectivity conservation 2006, 293-295. Crooks K RSanjayan M. Cambridge Univ. Press
24. Keitt T H. Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Conserv. Ecol 1997, 1:15-16.
25. Kramer-Schadt S. Fragmented landscapes, road mortality and patch connectivity: modelling influences on the dispersal of Eurasian lynx. J. Appl. Ecol 2004, 41:711-723.
26. Lesne A. Complex networks: from graph theory to biology. Lett. Math. Phys 2006, 78:235-262.
27. Li B L, Archer S. Weighted mean patch size: a robust index for quantifying landscape structure. Ecol. Model 1997, 102:353-361.
28. McDonnell M D. Mathematical methods for spatially cohesive reserve design. Environ. Model. Assess 2002, 7:107-114.
29. McRae B H. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology and conservation. Ecology 2008, 10:2712-2724.
30. Tercer Inventario Forestal Nacional, Lleida 2005, Dirección General para la Biodiversidad
31. Minor E S, Urban D L. Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol. Appl 2007, 17:1771-1782.
32. Minor E S, Urban D L. A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv. Biol 2008, 22:297-307.
33. Moilanen A, Hanski I. On the use of connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Oikos 2001, 95:147-151.
34. Moilanen A, Nieminen M. Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 2002, 83:1131-1145.
35. Neel M C. Patch connectivity and genetic diversity conservation in the federally endangered and narrowly endemic plant species Astragalus albens (Fabaceae). Biol. Conserv 2008, 141:938-955.
36. Nicholson E. A new method for conservation planning for the persistence of multiple species. Ecol. Lett 2006, 9:1049-1060.
37. Ovaskainen O, Hanski I. Spatially structured metapopulation models: global and local assessment of metapopulation capacity. Theor. Popul. Biol 2001, 60:281-302.
38. Ovaskainen O, Hanski I. How much does an individual habitat fragment contribute to metapopulation dynamics and persistence? Theor. Popul. Biol 2003, 64:481-495.
39. Pascual M, Dunne J A. Ecological networks: linking structure to dynamics in food webs 2006, Oxford Univ. Press
40. Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S. Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landscape Ecol 2006, 21:959-967.
41. Pascual-Hortal L, 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. For. Res 2008, 127:23-31.
42. Revilla E. Effects of matrix heterogeneity on animal dispersal: from individual behavior to metapopulation-level parameters. Am. Nat 2004, 164:E130-E153.
43. Ricotta C. Quantifying the network connectivity of landscape mosaics: a graph-theoretical approach. Community Ecol 2000, 1:89-94.
44. Saura S. Evaluating forest landscape connectivity through Conefor Sensinode 2.2. Patterns and processes in forest landscapes: multiple use and sustainable management 2008, 403-422. Lafortezza R. Springer
45. Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L. A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landscape Urban Plann 2007, 83:91-103.
46. Saura S, Torné J. Conefor Sensinode 2.2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ. Model. Software 2009, 24:135-139.
47. Schadt S. Rule-based assessment of suitable habitat and patch connectivity for the Eurasian lynx. Ecol. Appl 2002, 12:1469-1483.
48. Schick R S, Lindley S T. Directed connectivity among fish populations in a riverine network. J. Appl. Ecol 2007, 44:1116-1126.
49. Schooley R L, Wiens J A. Finding habitat patches and directional connectivity. Oikos 2003, 102:559-570.
50. Strogatz S H. Exploring complex networks. Nature 2001, 410:268-276.
51. Taylor P D. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 1993, 68:571-573.
52. Tischendorf L, Fahrig L. How should we measure landscape connectivity? Landscape Ecol 2000, 15:633-641.
53. Trzcinski M K. Independent effects of forest cover and fragmentation on the distribution of forest breeding birds. Ecol. Appl 1999, 9:586-593.
54. Turner M G. Land ownership and land-cover change in the southern appalachian highlands and the Olympic Peninsula. Ecol. Appl 1996, 6:1150-1172.
55. Urban D, Keitt T. Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 2001, 82:1205-1218.
56. Wiegand T. Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population dynamics. Conserv. Biol 2005, 19:108-121.
57. Williams P H, Araújo M B. Apples, oranges, and probabilities: integrating multiple factors into biodiversity conservation with consistency. Environ. Model. Assess 2002, 7:139-151.
58. Jordán F. Characterizing the importance of habitat patches and corridors in maintaining the landscape connectivity of a Pholidoptera transsylvanica (Orthoptera) metapopulation. Landscape Ecol 2003, 18:83-92.