Impact of species-specific dispersal and regional stochasticity on estimates of population viability in stream metapopulations

Landscape Ecology

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 405-416

  Poos, Mark S ^a,b   Jackson, Donald A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b GREAT LAKES LABORATORY FOR FISHERIES AND AQUATIC SCIENCES   (Canada)

Author keywords

Dispersal; Metapopulations; Parameter estimates; Population viability analysis; Stochastic patch occupancy models

Indexed keywords

COLONIZATION; CYPRINID; DATA SET; DISPERSAL; ENDANGERED SPECIES; EXTINCTION; MARK-RECAPTURE METHOD; METAPOPULATION; PARAMETERIZATION; PATCH DYNAMICS; POPULATION ESTIMATION; POPULATION MODELING; POPULATION VIABILITY ANALYSIS; STOCHASTICITY; STREAMWATER; TAGGING;

CLINOSTOMUS; CLINOSTOMUS ELONGATUS; CYPRINIDAE;

EID: 84856482850     PISSN: 09212973     EISSN: 15729761     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-011-9683-2     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Akçakaya HR (2000) Viability analyses with habitat-based metapopulation models. Popul Ecol 42(1): 45-53.
2. Akçakaya HR, Sjögren-Gulve P (2000) Population viability analysis in conservation planning: an overview. Ecol Bulletins 48: 9-21.
3. Baguette M, VanDyck H (2007) Landscape connectivity and animal behavior: functional grain as a key determinant for dispersal. Landscape Ecol 22(8): 1117-1129.
4. Bolker B, Holyoak M, Krivan V, Rowe L, Schmitz O (2003) Connecting theoretical and empirical studies of trait-mediated interactions. Ecology 84: 1101-1114.
5. Carle FL, Strub MR (1978) A new method for estimating population size from removal data. Biometrics 34: 621-630.
6. COSEWIC (2007) COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the redside dace Clinostomus elongatus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, pp 54.
7. Dreschler M, Frank K, Hanski I, O'Hara RB, Wissel C (2003) Ranking metapopulation extinction risk: from patterns in data to conservation management decisions. Ecol Appl 13: 990-998.
8. Fagan WF (2002) Connectivity, fragmentation, and extinction risk in dendritic metapopulatoins. Ecology 83(12): 3243-3249.
9. Foley P (1994) Predicting extinction times from environmental stochasticity and carrying capacity. Conserv Biol 8(1): 124-137.
10. Frank K, Wissel C (1998) Spatial aspects of metapopulation survival: from model results to rules of thumb for landscape management. Landscape Ecol 13: 363-379.
11. Frank K, Wissel C (2002) A formula for the mean lifetime of metapopulations in heterogeneous landscapes. Am Nat 159: 530-552.
12. Gotelli NJ (1991) Metapopulation models: the rescue effect, the propagule rain, and the core-satelite hypothesis. Am Nat 138: 768-776.
13. Gotelli NJ, Taylor CM (1999) Testing metapopulation models with stream-fish assemblages. Evol Ecol Res 1: 835-845.
14. Grimm V, Storch I (2000) Minimum viable population size of capercaillie Terao urogallus: results from a stochastic model. Wildl Biol 5: 219-225.
15. Grimm V, Wissel C (2004) The intrinsic mean time to extinction: a unifying approach to analysing persistence and viability of populations. Oikos 105(3): 501-511.
16. Grimm V, Lorek H, Finke J, Koester F, Malachinski M, Sonnenschein M, Moilanen A, Storch I, Singer A, Wissel C, Frank, K (2004) META-X: generic software for metapopulation viability analysis. Biodivers Conserv 13: 165-188.
17. Hanski I (1994) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J Anim Ecol 63(1): 151-162.
18. Hanski I (1998) Connecting the parameters of local extinction and metapopulation dynamics. Oikos 83(2): 390-396.
19. Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, New York.
20. Hanski I, Gilpin ME (1997) Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics, and evolution. Academic Press, San Diego.
21. Hanski I, Moilanen A, Pakkala T, Kuussaari M (1996) The quantitative incidence function model and persistence of an endangered butterfly metapopulation. Conserv Biol 10(2): 578-590.
22. Hansson L (1991) Dispersal and connectivity in metapopulations. Biol J Linn Soc 42: 89-103.
23. Heinz SK, Conradt L, Wissel C, Frank K (2005) Dispersal in fragmented landscapes: deriving a practical formula for patch accessibility. Landscape Ecol 20: 83-99.
24. Heinz SK, Wissel C, Frank K (2006) The viability of metapopulations: individual dispersal behaviour matters. Landscape Ecol 21: 77-89.
25. Hill J, Grossman GD (1987) Home range estimates for three North American stream fishes. Copeia 1987(2): 376-380.
26. Kindvall O (2000) Comparative precision of three spatially realistic simulation models of metapopulation dynamics. Ecol Bulletins 48: 101-110.
27. Koster WJ (1939) Some phases in the life history and relationships of the cyprinid Clinostomus elongatus (Kirtland). Copeia 1939: 201-208.
28. Lande R (1993) Risks of population extinction from demographic and environmental stochasticity and random catastrophes. Am Nat 142: 911.
29. Lande R, Engen S, Saether BE (1988) Extinction times in finite metapopulation models with stochastic local dynamics. Oikos 83(2): 383-389.
30. Marsh D (2008) Metapopulation viability analysis for amphibians. Anim Conserv 11(6): 463-465.
31. McCoy EG, Mushinsky HR (2007) Estimates of minimum patch size depend on the method of estimation and the condition of habitat. Ecology 88(6): 1401-1407.
32. McKee PM, Parker BJ (1982) The distribution biology and status of the fishes campostoma-anomalum clinostomus-elongatus notropis-photogenis cyprinidae and fundulus-notatus cyprinodontidae in Canada. Can J Zool 60(6): 1347-1358.
33. Minns CK (1995) Allometry of home range size in lake and river fishes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 52: 1499-1508.
34. Moilanen A (1999) Patch occupancy models of metapopulation dynamics: efficient parameter estimation using implicit statistical inference. Ecology 80(3): 1031-1043.
35. Moilanen A (2004) SPOMSIM: software for stochastic patch occupancy models of metapopulation dynamics. Ecol Model 179: 533-550.
36. Moilanen A, Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. Ecology 79: 2503-2515.
37. Morris WF, Doak DF (2002) Quantitative conservation biology: theory and practice of population viability analysis. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sutherland.
38. Morrissey MB, de Kerckhove DT (2009) The maintenance of genetic variation due to asymmetric gene flow in dendritic metapopulations. Am Nat 174: 875-889.
39. Novinger DC, Coon TG (2000) Behavior and physiology of the redside dace, Clinostomus elongatus, a threatened species in Michigan. Environ Biol Fish 57: 315-326.
40. Ogle DH (2009) Functions to support fish stock assessment textbook (v. 0. 0-8). http://www. ncfaculty. net/dogle/. Accessed 12 Jan 20d09.
41. Oksanen J (2004) Incidence function model in R. http://cc. oulu. fi/~jarioksa/opetus/openmeta/metafit. pdf. Accessed 12 Feb 2009.
42. OMNR (2007) Stream assessment protocol for southern Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Picton, Ontario.
43. Ovaskainen O (2004) Habitat-specific movement parameters estimated using mark-recapture data and a diffusion model. Ecology 85: 242-257.
44. Ovaskainen O, Hanski I (2004) From individual behavior to metapopulation dynamics: unifying the patchy population and classic metapopulation models. Am Nat 164(3): 364-377.
45. Pierce GJ, Ollason JG (1987) Eight reasons why optimal foraging theory is a comlete waste of time. Oikos 49: 111-118.
46. Poos MS, Lawrie D, Tu C, Jackson DA Estimating local and regional population sizes for an endangered minnow, redside dace (Clinostomus elongatus), in Canada. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems (in press).
47. R Development Core Team (2008) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. (ISBN: 3-900051-07-0).
48. Reed DH, O'Grady JJ, Ballou JD, Frankham R (2003) The frequency and severity of catastrophic die-offs in vertebrates. Anim Conserv 6: 109-114.
49. Reid SM, Jones NE, Yunker G (2008) Evaluation of single-pass electrofishing and rapid habitat assessment for monitoring redside dace. North Am J Fish Manag 28(1): 50-56.
50. Resetarits WJ, Binckley CA, Chalcraftet DR (2005) Habitat selection, species interactions, and processes of community assembly in complex landscapes: a metacommunity perspective. In: Holyoak M, Leibold MA, Holt RD (eds) Metacommunities-spatial dynamics and ecological communities. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 374-398.
51. Revilla E, Wiegand T (2008) Movement ecology special feature: individual movement behavior, matrix heterogeneity, and the dynamics of spatially structured populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105: 19120-19125.
52. Robert A (2009) The effects of spatially correlated perturbations and habitat configuration on metapopulation persistence. Oikos 118(10): 1590-1600.
53. Roitberg BD, Mangel M (1997) Individuals on the landscape: behavior can mitigate landscape differences among habitats. Oikos 80: 234-240.
54. Schtickzelle N, Mennechez G, Baguette M (2006) Dispersal depression with habitat fragmentation in the bog fritillary butterfly. Ecology 87: 1057-1065.
55. Tischendorf L (2001) Can landscape indices predict ecological processes consistently? Landscape Ecol 16: 235-254.
56. Verboom J, Lankester K, Metz JAJ (1991) Linking local and regional dynamics in stochastic metapopulation models. Biol J Linn Soc 42: 39-55.
57. Verboom J, Metz JAJ, Meelis E (1993) Metapopulation models for impact assessment of fragmentation. In: Vos CC, Opdam P (eds) Landscape ecology of a stressed environment. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 172-192.
58. Vos CC, Verboom J, Opdam PFM, ter Braak CJF (2001) Toward ecologically scaled landscape indices. Am Nat 157: 24-41.
59. Walsh MG, Winkelman DL (2004) Anchor and visible implant elastomer tag retention by hatchery rainbow trout stocked into an Ozark stream. N Am J Aquaculture 24: 1435-1439.
60. Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.
61. Zippin C (1958) The removal method of population estimation. J Wildl Manag 22: 82-90.