Reframing landscape fragmentation's effects on ecosystem services

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 190-198

  Mitchell, Matthew G E ^a   Suarez Castro, Andrés F ^a   Martinez Harms, Maria ^a   Maron, Martine ^a   McAlpine, Clive ^a   Gaston, Kevin J ^b   Johansen, Kasper ^a   Rhodes, Jonathan R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Ecosystem service flow; Ecosystem service supply; Ecosystem services; Landscape fragmentation

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; FRAGMENTATION; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LANDSCAPE CHANGE; MANAGEMENT PRACTICE;

ANIMAL; BIODIVERSITY; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; HUMAN ACTIVITIES;

ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; ECOSYSTEM; HUMAN ACTIVITIES;

EID: 84925622990     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2015.01.011     Document Type: Review

References (80)

1. Butchart S.H.M., et al. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 2010, 328:1164-1168.
2. Foley J.A., et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 2011, 478:337-342.
3. Carpenter S.R., et al. Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:1305-1312.
4. Mitchell M.G., et al. Linking landscape connectivity and ecosystem service provision: current knowledge and research gaps. Ecosystems 2013, 16:894-908.
5. Ekroos J., et al. Optimizing agri-environment schemes for biodiversity, ecosystem services or both?. Biol. Conserv. 2014, 172:65-71.
6. Werling B.P., et al. Perennial grasslands enhance biodiversity and multiple ecosystem services in bioenergy landscapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2014, 111:1652-1657.
7. Ziter C., et al. Functional diversity and management mediate aboveground carbon stocks in small forest fragments. Ecosphere 2013, 4:art85.
8. Dobbs C., et al. Multiple ecosystem services and disservices of the urban forest establishing their connections with landscape structure and sociodemographics. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 43:44-55.
9. Fahrig L. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2003, 34:487-515.
10. Fischer J., Lindenmayer D.B. Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2007, 16:265-280.
11. Hughes T.P., et al. New paradigms for supporting the resilience of marine ecosystems. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2005, 20:380-386.
12. Chapin F.S., et al. Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2010, 25:241-249.
13. Mace G.M. Whose conservation?. Science 2014, 345:1558-1560.
14. Tallis H., et al. A global system for monitoring ecosystem service change. Bioscience 2012, 62:977-986.
15. Villamagna A.M., et al. Capacity, pressure, demand, and flow: a conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and delivery. Ecol. Complex. 2013, 15:114-121.
16. Edwards D.P., et al. Maintaining ecosystem function and services in logged tropical forests. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2014, 29:511-520.
17. Pütz S., et al. Long-term carbon loss in fragmented neotropical forests. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5:5037.
18. Peres C.A., Lake I.R. Extent of nontimber resource extraction in tropical forests: accessibility to game vertebrates by hunters in the Amazon basin. Conserv. Biol. 2003, 17:521-535.
19. Trombulak S.C., Frissell C.A. Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conserv. Biol. 2000, 14:18-30.
20. Bagstad K.J., et al. Spatial dynamics of ecosystem service flows: a comprehensive approach to quantifying actual services. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 4:117-125.
21. Bagstad K.J., et al. A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 5:27-39.
22. Brosi B.J., et al. Optimal design of agricultural landscapes for pollination services. Conserv. Lett. 2008, 1:27-36.
23. Lin B.B., Fuller R.A. Sharing or sparing? How should we grow the world's cities?. J. Appl. Ecol. 2013, 50:1161-1168.
24. Leibold M.A., et al. The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol. Lett. 2004, 7:601-613.
25. Gonzalez A., et al. Biodiversity as spatial insurance: the effects of habitat fragmentation and dispersal on ecosystem functioning. Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Wellbeing 2009, 134-146. Oxford University Press. S. Naeem (Ed.).
26. Dobson A., et al. Habitat loss, trophic collapse, and the decline of ecosystem services. Ecology 2006, 87:1915-1924.
27. Harper K.A., et al. Edge influence on forest structure and composition in fragmented landscapes. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19:768-782.
28. Cardinale B.J., et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 2012, 486:59-67.
29. Balvanera P., et al. Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services. Ecol. Lett. 2006, 9:1146-1156.
30. Gamfeldt L., et al. Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4:1340.
31. Isbell F., et al. High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature 2011, 477:199-202.
32. Hoehn P., et al. Functional group diversity of bee pollinators increases crop yield. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2008, 275:2283-2291.
33. Letourneau D.K., et al. Effects of natural enemy biodiversity on the suppression of arthropod herbivores in terrestrial ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2009, 40:573-592.
34. Klein A-M., et al. Wild pollination services to California almond rely on semi-natural habitat. J. Appl. Ecol. 2012, 49:723-732.
35. Chaplin-Kramer R., et al. A meta-analysis of crop pest and natural enemy response to landscape complexity. Ecol. Lett. 2011, 14:922-932.
36. Numata I., et al. Carbon emissions from deforestation and forest fragmentation in the Brazilian Amazon. Environ. Res. Lett. 2011, 6:044003.
37. Ziter C., et al. Temperate forest fragments maintain aboveground carbon stocks out to the forest edge despite changes in community composition. Oecologia 2014, 176:893-902.
38. Ziv G., et al. Trading-off fish biodiversity, food security, and hydropower in the Mekong River Basin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:5609-5614.
39. Edwards H., et al. Incorporating ontogenetic dispersal, ecological processes and conservation zoning into reserve design. Biol. Conserv. 2010, 143:457-470.
40. Ricketts T.H., et al. Landscape effects on crop pollination services: are there general patterns?. Ecol. Lett. 2008, 11:499-515.
41. Brauman K.A., et al. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu. Rev. Env. Resour. 2007, 32:67-98.
42. Bagstad K.J., et al. From theoretical to actual ecosystem services: mapping beneficiaries and spatial flows in ecosystem service assessments. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19:64.
43. Luck G.W., et al. Protecting ecosystem services and biodiversity in the world's watersheds. Conserv. Lett. 2009, 2:179-188.
44. Plantegenest M., et al. Landscape epidemiology of plant diseases. J. Roy. Soc. Interface 2007, 4:963-972.
45. Tscharntke T., et al. Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity - ecosystem service management. Ecol. Lett. 2005, 8:857-874.
46. Bianchi F.J.J.A., et al. Spatial variability in ecosystem services: simple rules for predator-mediated pest suppression. Ecol. Appl. 2010, 20:2322-2333.
47. Otieno M., et al. Local management and landscape drivers of pollination and biological control services in a Kenyan agro-ecosystem. Biol. Conserv. 2011, 144:2424-2431.
48. Takano T., et al. Urban residential environments and senior citizens' longevity in megacity areas: the importance of walkable green spaces. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2002, 56:913-918.
49. Wolch J., et al. Childhood obesity and proximity to urban parks and recreational resources: a longitudinal cohort study. Health Place 2011, 17:207-214.
50. Jackson L.E., et al. Towards landscape design guidelines for reducing Lyme disease risk. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2006, 35:315-322.
51. Li S., et al. Consequences of landscape fragmentation on Lyme disease risk: a cellular automata approach. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e39612.
52. Kremen C., et al. Pollination and other ecosystem services produced by mobile organisms: a conceptual framework for the effects of land-use change. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10:299-314.
53. Bodin O., et al. The value of small size: loss of forest patches and ecological thresholds in southern Madagascar. Ecol. Appl. 2006, 16:440-451.
54. Nilsson C., et al. Fragmentation and flow regulation of the world's large river systems. Science 2005, 308:405-408.
55. Loomis J. Quantifying recreation use values from removing dams and restoring free-flowing rivers: a contingent behavior travel cost demand model for the Lower Snake River. Water Resour. Res. 2002, 38:2-1-2-8.
56. Whittaker D., Shelby B. Evaluating instream flows for recreation: applying the structural norm approach to biophysical conditions. Leisure Sci. 2002, 24:363-374.
57. Isaacs R., Kirk A.K. Pollination services provided to small and large highbush blueberry fields by wild and managed bees. J. Appl. Ecol. 2010, 47:841-849.
58. Cohen D.A., et al. Parks and physical activity: why are some parks used more than others?. Prev. Med. 2010, 50:S9-S12.
59. Van Dyck D., et al. Associations of neighborhood characteristics with active park use: an observational study in two cities in the USA and Belgium. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2013, 12:26-34.
60. Ouyang W., et al. Soil erosion dynamics response to landscape pattern. Sci. Total Environ. 2010, 408:1358-1366.
61. Ziegler A.D., et al. Hydrological consequences of landscape fragmentation in mountainous northern Vietnam: buffering of Hortonian overland flow. J. Hydrol. 2007, 337:52-67.
62. Gergel S.E. Spatial and non-spatial factors: when do they affect landscape indicators of watershed loading?. Landscape Ecol. 2005, 20:177-189.
63. Gémesi Z., et al. Effects of watershed configuration and composition on downstream lake water quality. J. Environ. Qual. 2011, 40:517-527.
64. Lazzaro L., et al. Role of hedgerows in intercepting spray drift: evaluation and modelling of the effects. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 123:317-327.
65. Tyndall J., Colletti J. Mitigating swine odor with strategically designed shelterbelt systems: a review. Agroforest. Syst. 2007, 69:45-65.
66. Fisher B., et al. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68:643-653.
67. Bennett E.M., et al. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol. Lett. 2009, 12:1394-1404.
68. Bateman I.J., et al. Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 2013, 341:45-50.
69. Perrings C., et al. The biodiversity and ecosystem services science-policy interface. Science 2011, 331:1139-1140.
70. Seppelt R., et al. A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J. Appl. Ecol. 2011, 48:630-636.
71. Phalan B., et al. Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: land sharing and land sparing compared. Science 2011, 333:1289-1291.
72. Fischer J., et al. Land sparing versus land sharing: moving forward. Conserv. Lett. 2014, 7:149-157.
73. Jantz P., et al. Carbon stock corridors to mitigate climate change and promote biodiversity in the tropics. Nat. Clim. Change 2014, 4:138-142.
74. Wendland K.J., et al. Targeting and implementing payments for ecosystem services: opportunities for bundling biodiversity conservation with carbon and water services in Madagascar. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69:2093-2107.
75. Polasky S., et al. Implementing the optimal provision of ecosystem services. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2014, 111:6248-6253.
76. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis 2005, Millennium Assessment, Island Press.
77. Taylor P.D., et al. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 1993, 68:571-573.
78. Diaz S., Cabido M. Vive la différence: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2001, 16:646-655.
79. Forman R.T., Godron M. Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology. Bioscience 1981, 31:733-740.
80. Watling J.I., et al. Meta-analysis reveals the importance of matrix composition for animals in fragmented habitat. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2011, 20:209-217.