Different open-canopy vegetation types affect matrix permeability for a dispersing forest amphibian

Journal of Applied Ecology

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 319-329

  Cline, Brittany B ^a   Hunter, Malcolm L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Agricultural; Dispersal; Edge permeability; Functional connectivity; Habitat fragmentation; Juvenile; Landscape matrix; Lawn; Lithobates sylvaticus; Wood frog

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CANOPY; DISPERSAL; FOREST ECOSYSTEM; FRAGMENTATION; FROG; HABITAT CONSERVATION; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; HABITAT TYPE; HAY; JUVENILE; MATRIX; METAMORPHISM; MOTILITY; MOVEMENT; PERMEABILITY; PREDICTION; VEGETATION STRUCTURE;

AMPHIBIA; ANIMALIA; LITHOBATES; RANA SYLVATICA; ZEA MAYS;

EID: 84896395706     PISSN: 00218901     EISSN: 13652664     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12197     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Barbasch, T. & Benard, M.F. (2011) Past and present risk: exposure to predator chemical cues before and after metamorphosis influences juvenile wood frog behavior. Ethology, 117, 367-373.
2. Bélisle, M. (2005) Measuring landscape connectivity: the challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology, 86, 1988-1995.
3. Berven, K.A. & Grudzien, T.A. (1990) Dispersal in the wood frog (Rana sylvatica): implications for genetic population structure. Evolution, 44, 2047-2056.
4. Bowler, D.E. & Benton, T.G. (2005) Causes and consequences of animal dispersal strategies: relating individual behaviour to spatial dynamics. Biological Reviews, 80, 205-225.
5. Burgess, S.C., Treml, E.A. & Marshall, D.J. (2012) How do dispersal costs and habitat selection influence realized population connectivity? Ecology, 96, 1378-1387.
6. Clobert, J., LeGallliard, J., Cote, J., Meylan, S. & Massot, M. (2009) Informed dispersal, heterogeneity in animal dispersal syndromes and the dynamics of spatially structured populations. Ecology Letters, 12, 197-209.
7. Cosentino, B.J., Schooley, R.L. & Phillips, C.A. (2011) Connectivity of agroecosystems: dispersal costs can vary among crops. Landscape Ecology, 26, 371-379.
8. Desrochers, R.E., Kerr, J.T. & Currie, D.J. (2011) How, and how much, natural cover loss increases species richness? Global Ecology and Biogeography, 20, 857-867.
9. Dingle, H. (1996) Migration: The Biology of Life on the Move, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, New York.
10. Dingle, H. & Drake, V.A. (2007) What is migration? BioScience, 57, 113-121.
11. Eycott, A.E., Stewart, G.B., Buyyng-Ali, L.M., Bowler, D.E., Watts, K. & Pullin, A.S. (2012) A meta-analysis on the impact of different matrix structures on species movement rates. Landscape Ecology, 27, 1263-1278.
12. Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. (2011) An R Companion to Applied Regression, 2nd edn. Sage, Blackwood Oaks, California. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=car.
13. Gosner, K.L. (1960) A simplified key for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. Herpetologica, 16, 183-190.
14. Hothorn, T., Hornik, K., van de Wiel, M.A. & Zeileis, A. (2008) Implementing a class of permutation tests: the coin package. Journal of Statistical Software, 28, 1-23.
15. Hudgens, B.R., Morris, W.F., Haddad, N.M., Fields, W.R., Wilson, J.W., Kuefler, D. & Jobe, T. (2012) How complex do models need to be to predict dispersal of threatened species through matrix habitats? Ecological Applications, 22, 1701-1710.
16. Janin, A., Léna, J.-P., Deblois, S. & Joly, P. (2012) Use of stress-hormone levels and habitat selection to assess functional connectivity of a landscape for an amphibian. Conservation Biology, 26, 923-931.
17. Kuefler, D., Hudgens, B., Haddad, N.M., Morris, W.F. & Thurgate, N. (2010) The conflicting role of matrix habitats as conduits and barriers for dispersal. Ecology, 91, 944-950.
18. deMaynadier, P.G. & Hunter, M.L. Jr. (1998) Effects of silvicultural edges on the distribution and abundance of amphibians in Maine. Conservation Biology, 12, 340-352.
19. Patrick, D.A., Harper, E.B., Hunter, M.L. Jr. & Calhoun, A.J.K. (2008) Terrestrial habitat selection and strong density-dependent mortality in recently metamorphosed amphibians. Ecology, 89, 2563-2574.
20. Popescu, V.D. & Hunter, M.L. Jr. (2011) Clearcutting affects habitat connectivity for a forest amphibian by decreasing permeability to juvenile movements. Ecological Applications, 21, 1283-1295.
21. Revilla, E., Wiegand, T., Palomares, F., Ferreras, P. & Delibes, M. (2004) Effects of matrix heterogeneity on animal dispersal: from individual behavior to metapopulation-level parameters. The American Naturalist, 164, E130-E153.
22. Rittenhouse, T.A.G. & Semlitsch, R.D. (2006) Grasslands as movement barriers for a forest-associated salamander: migration behavior of adult and juvenile salamanders at a distinct habitat edge. Biological Conservation, 131, 14-22.
23. Rittenhouse, T.A.G., Harper, E.B., Rehard, L.R. & Semlitsch, R.D. (2008) The role of microhabitats in the dessication and survival of anurans in recently harvested oak-hickory forest. Copeia, 4, 807-814.
24. Rothermel, B.B. & Semlitsch, R.D. (2002) An experimental investigation of landscape resistance of forest versus old-field habitats to emigrating juvenile amphibians. Conservation Biology, 16, 1324-1332.
25. Semlitsch, R.D. & Bodie, J.R. (2003) Biological criteria for buffer zones around wetlands and riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conservation Biology, 17, 1219-1220.
26. Semlitsch, R.D., Connor, C.A., Hocking, D.J., Rittenhouse, T.A.G. & Harper, E.B. (2008) Effects of timber harvesting on pond-breeding amphibian persistence: testing the evacuation hypothesis. Ecological Applications, 18, 283-289.
27. Van Buskirk, J. (2012) Permeability of the landscape matrix between amphibian breeding sites. Ecology and Evolution, 2, 3160-3167.
28. Vos, C.C., Goedhart, P.W., Lammertsma, D.R. & Spitzen-Van der Sluijs, A.M. (2007) Matrix permeability of agricultural landscapes: an analysis of movements of the common frog (Rana temporaria). Herpetological Journal, 17, 174-182.
29. Zeller, K.A., McGarigal, K. & Whiteley, A.R. (2012) Estimating landscape resistance to movement: a review. Landscape Ecology, 27, 777-797.