Quantifying connectivity using graph based connectivity response curves in complex landscapes under simulated forest management scenarios

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 321, Issue , 2014, Pages 94-104

  Ernst, Bevan W ^a  

^a THOMPSON RIVERS UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Biodiversity conservation; Forestry; Landscape connectivity; Landscape ecology

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONSERVATION; ECOSYSTEMS; GRAPHIC METHODS; TIMBER;

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION; CONNECTIVITY INDICES; CONTROLLED MANIPULATIONS; HABITAT CONNECTIVITY; LANDSCAPE COMPOSITION; LANDSCAPE CONNECTIVITIES; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES;

FORESTRY;

BIODIVERSITY; CONNECTIVITY; FOREST MANAGEMENT; GRAPHICAL METHOD; HABITAT CONSERVATION; HABITAT CORRIDOR; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; ECOSYSTEMS; FORESTRY;

EID: 84899074088     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.033     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Anand, M.O., Krishnaswamy, J., Kumar, A., Bali, A., 2010. Sustaining biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes in the Western Ghats: Remnant forests matter. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2363-2374.
2. BC Minsitry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations. 2012. Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations - Province of B.C. [WWW Document]. Vegetation Resources Inventory. URL <> (accessed 3.1.13). http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hts/vri/intro/index.html.
3. Beier P., Noss R.F. Do habitat corridors provide connectivity?. Conserv. Biol. 1998, 12:1241-1252.
4. Beier P., Majka D.R., Spencer W.D. Forks in the road: choices in procedures for designing wildland linkages. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22:836-851.
5. Blaschke T. The role of the spatial dimension within the framework of sustainable landscapes and natural capital. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2006, 75:198-226.
6. Broquet T., Johnson C.A., Petit E., Thompson I., Burel F., Fryxell J.M. Dispersal and genetic structure in the American marten, Martes americana. Mol. Ecol. 2006, 15:1689-1697.
7. Brudvig L.A., Damschen E.I., Tewksbury J.J., Haddad N.M., Levey D.J. Landscape connectivity promotes plant biodiversity spillover into non-target habitats. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106:9328-9332.
8. Eriksson S., Hammer M. The challenge of combining timber production and biodiversity conservation for long-term ecosystem functioning- A case study of Swedish boreal forestry. For. Ecol. Manage. 2006, 237:208-217.
9. Esseen P., Ericson L., Lindsrom H., Zackrisson O. Occurrence and ecology of Usnea-Longissima in central Sweden. Lichenologist 1981, 13:177-190.
10. Fischer J., Lindenmayer D.B. Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2007, 16:265-280.
11. Fischer J., Lindenmayer D.B., Manning A.D. Biodiversity, ecosystem function, and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2006, 4:80-86.
12. Forest Practices Board. 2012. Conserving Old Growth Forests in BC (Special Investigation No. FPB/SIR/36). Forest Practices Board of British Columbia., British Columbia, Canada.
13. Gillis M.D., Gray S.L., Clarke D., Power K. Canada's national forest inventory: what can it tell us about old growth?. Forestry Chronicle 2003, 79:421-428.
14. Hanski I., Ovaskainen O. Metapopulation theory for fragmented landscapes. Theor. Popul. Biol. 2003, 64:119-127.
15. Hinam H.L., Clair C.C.S. High levels of habitat loss and fragmentation limit reproductive success by reducing home range size and provisioning rates of Northern saw-whet owls. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141:524-535.
16. Hoberg, G., Malkinson, L., 2012. Challenges in the design of performance-based forestry regulations: lessons from British Columbia. Forest Policy and Economics.
17. Houle M., Fortin D., Dussault C., Courtois R., Ouellet J.-P. Cumulative effects of forestry on habitat use by gray wolf (Canis lupus) in the boreal forest. Landsc. Ecol. 2010, 25:419-433.
18. Hudgens B.R., Haddad N.M. Predicting which species will benefit from corridors in fragmented landscapes from population growth models. Am. Nat. 2003, 161:808-820.
19. Jenness, J., 2008. Jeness Enterprises, ArcGis Tools; Conefor inputs tool. Flagstaff, AZ.
20. Kindlmann P., Burel F. Connectivity measures: a review. Landsc. Ecol. 2008, 23:879-890.
21. Klenner W., Walton R. Landscape-level habitat supply modelling to develop and evaluate management practices that maintain diverse forest values in a dry forest ecosystem in southern British Columbia. For. Ecol. Manage. 2009, 258:S146-S157.
22. Klenner W., Kurz W., Beukema S. Habitat patterns in forested landscapes: management practices and the uncertainty associated with natural disturbances. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2000, 27:243-262.
23. Kurz W.A., Beukema S.J., Klenner W., Greenough J.A., Robinson D.C.E., Sharpe A.D., Webb T.M. TELSA: the tool for exploratory landscape scenario analyses. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2000, 27:227-242.
24. Laita A., Monkkonen M., Kotiaho J.S. Woodland key habitats evaluated as part of a functional reserve network. Biol. Conserv. 2010, 143:1212-1227.
25. Laita A., Kotiaho J.S., Monkkonen M. Graph-theoretic connectivity measures: what do they tell us about connectivity?. Landsc. Ecol. 2011, 26:951-967.
26. Lindenmayer D.B., Fischer J. Tackling the habitat fragmentation panchreston. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2007, 22:127-132.
27. Lindenmayer D.B., Manning A.D., Smith P.L., Possingham H.P., Fischer J., Oliver I., McCarthy M.A. The focal-species approach and landscape restoration: a critique. Conserv. Biol. 2002, 16:338-345.
28. Lindenmayer D., Hobbs R.J., Montague-Drake R., Alexandra J., Bennett A., Burgman M., Cale P., Calhoun A., Cramer V., Cullen P., Driscoll D., Fahrig L., Fischer J., Franklin J., Haila Y., Hunter M., Gibbons P., Lake S., Luck G., MacGregor C. A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. Ecol. Lett. 2008, 11:78-91.
29. Lloyd D. A Guide to Site Identification and Interpretation for the Kamloops Forest Region Land Management Handbook 23 1990, Government of British Columbia, Victoria, BC.
30. Long J.A., Nelson T.A., Wulder M.A. Characterizing forest fragmentation: distinguishing change in composition from configuration. Appl. Geogr. 2010, 30:426-435.
31. McGarigal K., Romme W.H., Crist M., Roworth E. Cumulative effects of roads and logging on landscape structure in the San Juan Mountains, Colorado (USA). Landsc. Ecol. 2001, 16:327-349.
32. Minor E.S., Urban D.L. Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Eco. Appl. 2007, 17:1771-1782.
33. Minor E.S., Urban D.L. A graph-theory frarmework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22:297-307.
34. 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. Landsc. Ecol. 2006, 21:959-967.
35. Payer D.C., Harrison D.J. Influence of forest structure on habitat use by American marten in an industrial forest. For. Ecol. Manag. 2003, 179:145-156.
36. Perault D.R., Lomolino M.V. Corridors and mammal community structure across a fragmented, old-growth forest landscape. Ecol. Monogr. 2000, 70:401-422.
37. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2011, Austria, Vienna.
38. Raphael M.G., Wisdom M.J., Rowland M.M., Holthausen R.S., Wales B.C., Marcot B.G., Rich T.D. Status and trends of habitats of terrestrial vertebrates in relation to land management in the interior Columbia river basin. Forest Ecol. Manage. 2001, 153:63-87.
39. Rayfield B., Fortin M.J., Fall A. Connectivity for conservation: a framework to classify network measures. Ecology 2011, 92:847-858.
40. Reed R.A., JohnsonBarnard J., Baker W.L. Contribution of roads to forest fragmentation in the Rocky Mountains. Conserv. Biol. 1996, 10:1098-1106.
41. Saunders D.A., Hobbs R.J., Margules C.R. Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation - a review. Conserv. Biol. 1991, 5:18-32.
42. 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. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 83:91-103.
43. Saura S., Rubio L. A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography 2010, 33:523-537.
44. Saura S., Torne J. Conefor Sensinode 2.2: A software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ. Modell. Softw. 2009, 24:135-139.
45. Saura S., Vogt P., Velazquez J., Hernando A., Tejera R. Key structural forest connectors can be identified by combining landscape spatial pattern and network analyses. For. Ecol. Manage. 2011, 262:150-160.
46. Smith A.C., Koper N., Francis C.M., Fahrig L. Confronting collinearity: comparing methods for disentangling the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation. Landsc. Ecol. 2009, 24:1271-1285.
47. Spies T.A., Hemstrom M.A., Youngblood A., Hummel S. Conserving old-growth forest diversity in disturbance-prone landscapes. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20:351-362.
48. Steventon J.D., Daust D.K. Management strategies for a large-scale mountain pine beetle outbreak: modelling impacts on American martens. Forest Ecol. Manage. 2009, 257:1976-1985.
49. Taylor P.D., Fahrig L., Henein K., Merriam G. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 1993, 68:571-573.
50. Tewksbury, J.J., Levey, D.J., Haddad, N.M., Sargent, S., Orrock, J.L., Weldon, A., Danielson, B.J., Brinkerhoff, J., Damschen, E.I., Townsend, P., 2002. Corridors affect plants, animals, and their interactions in fragmented landscapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99, 12923-12926.
51. Tinker D.B., Resor C.A.C., Beauvais G.P., Kipfmueller K.F., Fernandes C.I., Baker W.L. Watershed analysis of forest fragmentation by clearcuts and roads in a Wyoming forest. Landsc. Ecol. 1998, 13:149-165.
52. Tischendorf L., Bender D.J., Fahrig L. Evaluation of patch isolation metrics in mosaic landscapes for specialist vs. generalist dispersers. Landsc. Ecol. 2003, 18:41-50.
53. Tischendorf L., Grez A., Zaviezo T., Fahrig L. Mechanisms affecting population density in fragmented habitat. Ecol. Soc. 2005, 10:13.
54. Zetterberg A., Mörtberg U.M., Balfors B. Making graph theory operational for landscape ecological assessments, planning, and design. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 95:181-191.
55. Zuckerberg B., Porter W.F. Thresholds in the long-term responses of breeding birds to forest cover and fragmentation. Biol. Conserv. 2010, 143:952-962.