Integrating graph-based connectivity metrics into species distribution models

Landscape Ecology

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 557-569

  Foltête, Jean Christophe ^a   Clauzel, Céline ^a   Vuidel, Gilles ^a   Tournant, Pierline ^a,b  

^a Diplômée   (France)

^b université Bourgogne Franche Comté   (France)

Author keywords

Fragmented habitat; Graph theory; Landscape connectivity; Landscape metric; Metapopulation; Predictive model

Indexed keywords

CONNECTIVITY; FROG; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; METAPOPULATION; POPULATION STRUCTURE; PROBABILITY; SPECIES OCCURRENCE;

FRANCE;

ANURA; HYLA ARBOREA;

EID: 84859197345     PISSN: 09212973     EISSN: 15729761     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-012-9709-4     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Armstrong DP (2005) Integrating the metapopulation and habitat paradigms for understanding broad-scale declines of species. Conserv Biol 19(5): 1402-1410.
2. Arthur SM, Manly BFJ, McDonald LL, Garner GW (1996) Assessing habitat selection when availability changes. Ecology 77: 215-227.
3. Austin MP (2002) Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling. Ecol Model 157: 101-118.
4. Bodin O (2009) Prioritizing habitat patches for conservation in fragmented landscapes/townscapes using network-based models and analyses. In: Brebbia CA, Neophytou M, Beriatos E, Ioannou I, Kungolos AG (eds) Sustainable development and planning. Wit Press, Southampton, pp 109-118.
5. Bodin O, Saura S (2010) Ranking individual habitat patches as connectivity providers: integrating network analysis and patch removal experiments. Ecol Model 221: 2393-2405.
6. Borgatti SP (2005) Centrality and network flow. Soc Netw 27: 55-71.
7. Borgula A (1993) Causes of the decline in Hyla arborea. In: Stumpel A, Tester U (eds) Ecology and conservation of the European tree frog, 1st international workshop on Hyla arborea, Postdam, February 1992, Schweizerischer Bund für Naturschutz, Basel, pp 71-80.
8. Bunn AG, Urban DL, Keitt TH (2000) Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J Environ Manag 59: 265-278.
9. Calabrese JM, Fagan WF (2004) A comparison-shopper's guide to connectivity metrics. Front Ecol Environ 2(10): 529-536.
10. Carlson A, Edenhamn P (2000) Extinction dynamics and the regional persistence of a tree frog metapopulation. Proc R Soc Lond B 267: 1311-1313.
11. Dale MRT, Fortin MJ (2010) From graphs to spatial graphs. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41: 21-38.
12. Estrada E, Bodin O (2008) Using network centrality measures to manage landscape connectivity. Ecol Appl 18: 1810-1825.
13. Fahrig L, Grez AA (1996) Population spatial structure, human-caused landscape changes and species survival. Rev Chil Hist Nat 69(1): 5-13.
14. Fog K (1993) Migration in the tree frog Hyla arborea. In: Stumpel A, Tester U (eds) Ecology and conservation of the European tree frog. 1st international workshop on Hyla arborea, Potsdam, February 1992, Schweizerischer Bund für Naturschutz, Basel,pp 55-63.
15. Franklin J (2009) Mapping species distributions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
16. Galpern P, Manseau M, Fall A (2011) Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: a guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biol Conserv 144: 44-55.
17. Guisan A, Thuillier W (2005) Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol Lett 8: 993-1009.
18. Guisan A, Zimmermann NE (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135: 147-186.
19. Gustafson EJ, Parker GR (1994) Using an index of habitat patch proximity for landscape design. Landsc Urban Plan 29: 117-130.
20. Hanski I, Ovaslaken O (2000) The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape. Nature 404: 755-758.
21. Hirzel AH, Arlettaz R (2003) Modelling habitat suitability for complex species distributions by environmental-distance geometric mean. Environ Manag 32(5): 614-623.
22. Hirzel AH, Le Lay G (2008) Habitat suitability modelling and niche theory. J Appl Ecol 45: 1372-1381.
23. Hjermann DØ (2000) Analyzing habitat selection in animals without well-defined home ranges. Ecology 81: 1462-1468.
24. Kindlmann P, Burel F (2008) Connectivity measures: a review. Landscape Ecol 23: 879-890.
25. Matthiopoulos J (2003) The use of space by animals as a function of accessibility and preference. Ecol Model 159: 239-268.
26. Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol Appl 17: 1771-1782.
27. Minor SM, Urban DL (2008) A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv Biol 22: 297-307.
28. Moilanen A (2011) On the limitations of graph-theoretic connectivity in spatial ecology and conservation. J Appl Ecol. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1365-2664. 2011. 02062. x.
29. Pellet J, Hoehn S, Perrin N (2004) Multiscale determinants of tree frog (Hyla arborea L.) calling ponds in western Switzerland. Biodivers Conserv 13: 2227-2235.
30. Pinston H (2000) Amphibiens et Reptiles de Franche-Comté. Atlas commenté de Répartition. Conseil Régional de Franche-Comté, Besançon.
31. Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks and, population regulation. Am Nat 132: 652-661.
32. Richard Y, Armstrong DP (2010) The importance of integrating landscape ecology in habitat models: isolation-driven occurrence of north island robins in a fragmented landscape. Landscape Ecol 25: 1363-1374.
33. Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landsc Urban Plan 83: 91-103.
34. Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Thies C (2005) Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity-ecosystem service management. Ecol Lett 8: 857-874.
35. Urban DL, Keitt TH (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graph theoretic approach. Ecology 82: 1205-1218.
36. Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Schick RS (2009) Graph models of land mosaics. Ecol Lett 12: 260-273.
37. Vos C, Stumpel AHP (1995) Comparison of habitat-isolation parameters in relation to fragmented distribution patterns in the tree frog (Hyla arborea). Landscape Ecol 11: 203-214.
38. Wright KA (1943) Isolation by distance. Genetics 28: 114-138.
39. Zetterberg A, Mörtberg UM, Balfors B (2010) Making graph theory operational for landscape ecological assessments, planning, and design. Landsc Urban Plan 95: 181-191.