The importance of land use/land cover data in fish and mussel conservation planning

Annales de Limnologie

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 199-209

  Hopkins, Robert L ^a   Whiles, Matt R ^b  

^a The Institute for Employee Safety   (United States)

^b SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aquatic biodiversity; Landscape; Reserve selection; Species distribution models

Indexed keywords

AQUACULTURE; BIODIVERSITY; BIVALVE; CATCHMENT; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DATA SET; DISTURBANCE; ENDEMIC SPECIES; ESTIMATION METHOD; FISH; HABITAT CONSERVATION; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; LAND COVER; LAND USE; LANDSCAPE; LIMITING FACTOR; POPULATION DECLINE; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; POPULATION MODELING; PRIORITIZATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RIPARIAN VEGETATION; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES OCCURRENCE; SPECIES RICHNESS; WATERSHED;

GREEN RIVER; OHIO RIVER; UNITED STATES;

PISCES;

EID: 80051756477     PISSN: 00034088     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1051/limn/2011026     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Abell R., 2002. Conservation biology for the biodiversity crisis: a freshwater follow-up. Conserv. Biol., 16, 1435-1437. (Pubitemid 35169650)
2. Abell R., Allan J.D. and Lehner B., 2007. Unlocking the potential of protected areas for freshwater. Biol. Conserv., 134, 48-63. (Pubitemid 44754763)
3. Allan J.D., 2004. Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 35, 257-284. (Pubitemid 40059721)
4. Brotons L., Thuiller W., Arau'jo M.B. and Hirzel A.H., 2004. Presence-absence versus presence-only methods for predicting bird habitat suitability. Ecography, 27, 437-448. (Pubitemid 38826095)
5. Collares-Pereira M.J. and Cowx I.G., 2004. The role of catchment scale environmental management in freshwater fish conservation. Fisheries Manag. Ecol., 11, 303-312. (Pubitemid 38783645)
6. Dudgeon D., Arthington A.H., Gessner M.O., Kawabat Z.I., Knowler D.J., Lévêque C., Naiman R.J., Prieur-Richard A.-H., Soto D., Stiassny M.L.J. and Sullivan C.A., 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews, 81, 163-182. (Pubitemid 44092338)
7. Elith J., Graham C.H., Anderson R.P., Dudík M., Ferrier S., Guisan A., Hijmans R.J., Huettmann F., Leathwick J.R., Lehmann A., Li J., Lohmann L.G., Loiselle B.A., Manion G., Moritz C., Nakamura M., Nakazawa Y., Overton J., Peterson A.T., Phillips S.J., Richardson K.S., Scachetti-Pereira R., Schapire R.E., Soberón J., Williams S., Wisz M.S. and Zimmermann N.E., 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography, 29, 129-151.
8. Elith J., Leathwick J.R. and Hastie T., 2008. A working guide to boosted regression trees. J. Anim. Ecol., 77, 802-813. (Pubitemid 351799674)
9. Environmental System Research Institute, 2006. ArcGIS/ArcInfo for Windows XP Version 9.2.0, Environmental System Research Institute, Redlands, CA, USA.
10. Filipe A.F., Marques T.A., Seabra S., Tiago P., Ribeiro F., Moreria Da Costa L., Cowx I.G. and Collares-Pereira M.J., 2004. Selection of priority areas for fish conservation in Guadiana River basin, Iberian Peninsula. Conserv. Biol., 18, 189-200. (Pubitemid 38215603)
11. Guisan A. and Thuiller W., 2005. Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol. Lett., 8, 993-1009. (Pubitemid 41247275)
12. Hirzel A. and Guisan A., 2002. Which is the optimal sampling strategy for habitat suitability modeling. Ecol. Model., 157, 331-341. (Pubitemid 35255421)
13. Hopkins R.L.II, 2009. Use of landscape pattern metrics and multiple spatial scales in aquatic species distribution models. Landscape Ecol., 24, 943-955.
14. Hopkins R.L.II and Burr B.M., 2009. Modeling freshwater fish distributions using multiscale landscape data: a case study of six narrow range endemics. Ecol. Model., 220, 2024-2034.
15. Hopkins R.L.II, Burns M.D., Burr B.M. and Hopman L.J., 2009. Building a centralized database for Kentucky fishes: progress and future applications. J. Kentucky Acad. Sci., 69, 73-78.
16. Jones E.B.D.III, Helfman G.S., Harper J.O. and Boltstad P.V., 1999. Effects of riparian forest removal on fish assemblages in southern Appalachian streams. Conserv. Biol., 13, 1454-1465.
17. Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, 2005. Kentucky's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Accessed online 2 May 2010, http://fw.ky.gov/kfwis/stwg.
18. Linke S., Pressey R.L., Bailey R.C. and Norris R.H., 2007. Management options for river conservation planning: condition and conservation re-visited. Freshwater Biol., 52, 918-938. (Pubitemid 46662691)
19. Master L.L., Flack S.R. and Stein B.A., 1998. Rivers of life: critical watersheds for protecting freshwater biodiversity, The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, MA, 71 p.
20. McGarigal K. and Marks B.J., 1995. FRAGSTATS. Spatial analysis program for quantifying landscape structure, USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-351.
21. McRae S.E., Allan J.D. and Burch J.B., 2004. Reach and catchment-scale determinants of the distribution of freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) in southeastern Michigan (U.S.A.). Freshwater Biol., 49, 127-142. (Pubitemid 38162009)
22. Moilanen A., Leathwick J. and Elith J., 2008. A method for spatial freshwater conservation prioritization. Freshwater Biol., 53, 577-592. (Pubitemid 351171218)
23. Moyle P.B. and Yoshiyama R.M., 1994. Protection of aquatic biodiversity in California: a five- tiered approach. Fisheries, 19, 6-17.
24. Naeem S. and Wright J.P., 2003. Disentangling biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning: deriving solutions to seemingly insurmountable problems. Ecol. Lett., 6, 567-579. (Pubitemid 36658672)
25. Neves R.J., Bogan A.E., Williams J.D., Ahlstedt S.A. and Hartfield P.W., 1997. Status of aquatic mollusks in the southeastern United States: a downward spiral of diversity. In: Benz G.W. and Collins D.E. (eds.), Aquatic fauna in peril: the southeastern perspective, Special Publication 1, Southeast Aquatic Research Institute, Lenz Design and Communications, Decatur, 43-85.
26. Poff N.L. and Allan J.D., 1995. Functional organization of stream fish assemblages in relation to hydrologic variability. Ecology, 76, 606-627.
27. Poole K.E. and Downing J.A., 2004. Relationship of declining mussel biodiversity to stream-reach and watershed characteristics in an agricultural landscape. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 23, 114-125. (Pubitemid 38241662)
28. R Development Core Team, 2006. R: a language and environment for statistical computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
29. Rahel F.J., 2000. Homogenization of fish faunas across the United States. Science, 288, 854-856. (Pubitemid 30257733)
30. Ricciardi A. and Rasmussen J.B., 1999. Extinction rates of North American freshwater fauna. Conserv. Biol., 13, 1220-1222. (Pubitemid 29475553)
31. Ridgeway G., 2006. Generalized boosted regression models. Accessed online 16 May 2009, ftp://ftp.auckland.ac.nz/pub/software/CRAN/doc/packages/gbm.pdf.
32. Roth N.E., Allan J.D. and Erickson D.L., 1996. Landscape influences on stream biotic integrity assessed at multiple spatial scales. Landscape Ecol., 11, 141-156. (Pubitemid 126723323)
33. Saunders D.L., Meeuwig J.J. and Vincent A.C.J., 2002. Freshwater protected areas: strategies for conservation. Conserv. Biol., 16, 30-41. (Pubitemid 34190427)
34. Scott M.C., Helfman G.S., McTammany T.E., Benfield E.F. and Boltstad P.V., 2002. Multiscale influences on physical and chemical stream conditions across Blue Ridge landscape. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 38, 1379-1392. (Pubitemid 35352929)
35. Singkran N. and Meixler M.S., 2008. Influences of habitat and land cover on fish distributions along a tributary to Lake Ontario, New York. Landscape Ecol., 23, 539-551.
36. Srivastava D.S. and Vellend M., 2005. Biodiversity-ecosystem function research: is it relevant to conservation? Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 36, 267-294. (Pubitemid 43068859)
37. Strayer D.L., 2006. Challenges for freshwater invertebrate conservation. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 25, 271-287. (Pubitemid 43836997)
38. Tilman D., 1999. The ecological consequences of changes in biodiversity: a search for general principles. Ecology, 80, 1455-1474. (Pubitemid 29355287)
39. Wang L.J., Lyons J., Kanehl P. and Gatti R., 1997. Influence of watershed land use on habitat quality and biotic integrity in Wisconsin streams. Fisheries, 22, 6-12. (Pubitemid 127338179)
40. Warren M.L.Jr, Angermeier P.L., Burr B.M. and Haag W.R., 1997. Decline of a diverse fish fauna: patterns of imperilment and protection in the southeastern United States. In: Benz G.W. and Collins D.E. (eds.), Aquatic fauna in peril: the southeastern perspective, Special Publication 1, Southeast Aquatic Research Institute, Lenz Design and Communications, Decatur, 105-164.