Incorporating habitat availability into systematic planning for restoration: A species-specific approach for Atlantic Forest mammals

Diversity and Distributions

Volumn 21, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 1027-1037

  Crouzeilles, Renato ^a,b   Beyer, Hawthorne L ^c   Mills, Morena ^c   Grelle, Carlos E V ^a   Possingham, Hugh P ^c,d  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^b INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABILITY   (Brazil)

^c UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^d IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

GIS; Landscape ecology; Mathematical optimization; Metapopulation; Probability of Connectivity; Systematic conservation planning

Indexed keywords

BIOGEOGRAPHY; CONSERVATION PLANNING; COST ANALYSIS; GIS; HABITAT AVAILABILITY; HABITAT RESTORATION; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; MAMMAL; METAPOPULATION; PERSISTENCE; SPECIES CONSERVATION;

ATLANTIC FOREST; BRAZIL;

CALUROMYS PHILANDER; LEOPARDUS PARDALIS; MAMMALIA;

EID: 84939810602     PISSN: 13669516     EISSN: 14724642     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12349     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Armsworth, P.R. (2014) Inclusion of costs in conservation planning depends on limited data sets and hopeful assumptions. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1322, 61-76. doi:10.1111/nyas.12455.
2. Ball, I.R. & Possingham, H.P. (2000) Marxan version 1.8.3. Available at www.ecology.uq.edu.au/marxan (accessed 05 October 2012).
3. Banks-Leite, C., Pardini, R., Tambosi, L.R., Pearse, W.D., Bueno, A.A., Bruscagin, R.T., Condez, T.H., Dixo, M., Igari, A.T., Martensen, A.C. & Metzger, J.P. (2014) Using ecological thresholds to evaluate the costs and benefits of set-asides in a biodiversity hotspot. Science, 345, 1041-1045.
4. Bélisle, M. (2005) Measuring landscape connectivity: the challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology, 86, 1988-1995.
5. Beyer, H.L. (2012) Geospatial Modelling Enviornment (Version 0.7.2.1). Available at www.spatialecology.com/gme (accessed 01 September 2012).
6. Birch, J.C., Newton, A.C., Aquino, C.A., Cantarello, E., Echeverría, C., Kitzberger, T., Schiappacasse, I. & Garavito, N.T. (2010) Cost-effectiveness of dryland forest restoration evaluated by spatial analysis of ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 107, 21925-21930.
7. Bowen, M.E., McAlpine, C.A., House, A.P.N. & Smith, G.C. (2007) Regrowth forests on abandoned agricultural land: a review of their habitat values for recovering forest fauna. Biological Conservation, 140, 273-296.
8. Calmon, M., Lino, C.F., Nave, A.G., Pinto, L.P. & Rodrigues, R.R. (2009) Pacto pela restauração da Mata Atlântica: um movimento pela restauração da floresta. O valor das florestas (ed. by M.A. Fujihara, R. Cavalcanti, A. Guimarães and R. Garlipp), pp. 331-333. Terra das Artes Editora, São Paulo, Brasil.
9. Calmon, M., Brancalion, P.H.S., Paese, A., Aronson, J., Castro, P., da Silva, S.C. & Rodrigues, R.R. (2011) Emerging threats and opportunities for large-scale ecological restoration in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Restoration Ecology, 19, 154-158.
10. Chinneck, J.W. & Ramadan, K. (2000) Linear programming with interval coefficients. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51, 209-220.
11. Crossman, N.D. & Bryan, B.A. (2006) Systematic landscape restoration using integer programming. Biological Conservation, 128, 369-383.
12. Crouzeilles, R., Lorini, M.L. & Grelle, C.E.V. (2010) Deslocamento na matriz para espécies da mata Atlântica e a dificuldade da construção de perfis ecológicos. Oecologia Australis, 14, 875-903.
13. Crouzeilles, R., Lorini, M.L. & Grelle, C.E.V. (2013) The importance of using sustainable use protected areas for functional connectivity. Biological Conservation, 159, 450-457.
14. Crouzeilles, R., Prevedello, J.A., Figueiredo, M.S.L., Lorini, M.L. & Grelle, C.E.V. (2014) The effects of the number, size and isolation of patches along a gradient of native vegetation cover: how can we increment habitat availability? Landscape Ecology, 29, 479-489.
15. Drechsler, M., Lourival, R. & Possingham, H.P. (2009) Conservation planning for successional landscapes. Ecological Modelling, 220, 438-450.
16. ESRI (2008) ArcView 9.3. ESRI, Redlands, CA.
17. Fahrig, L. (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 34, 487-515.
18. Hanski, I. & Ovaskainen, O. (2000) The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape. Nature, 404, 755-758.
19. Holl, K.D. & Howarth, R.B. (2000) Paying for restoration. Restoration Ecology, 8, 260-267.
20. Margules, C.R. & Pressey, R.L. (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature, 405, 243-253.
21. Martensen, A.C., Pimentel, R.G. & Metzger, J.P. (2008) Relative effects of fragment size and connectivity on bird community in the Atlantic Rain Forest: implications for conservation. Biological Conservation, 141, 2184-2192.
22. Meir, E., Andelman, S. & Possingham, H.P. (2004) Does conservation planning matter in a dynamic and uncertain world? Ecology Letters, 7, 615-622.
23. Melo, F.P.L., Pinto, S.R.R., Brancalion, P.H.S., Castro, P.S., Rodrigues, R.R., Aronson, J. & Tabarelli, M. (2013) Priority setting for scaling-up tropical forest restoration projects: early lessons from the Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact. Environmental Science & Policy, 33, 395-404.
24. Menz, M.H.M., Dixon, K.W. & Hobbs, R.J. (2013) Hurdles and Opportunities for Landscape-Scale Restoration. Science, 339, 526-527.
25. Metzger, J.P., Martensen, A.C., Dixo, M., Bernacci, L.C., Ribeiro, M.C., Teixeira, A.M.G. & Pardini, R. (2009) Time-lag in biological responses to landscape changes in a highly dynamic Atlantic forest region. Biological Conservation, 142, 1166-1177.
26. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.
27. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., Fonseca, G.A.B. & Kent, J. (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403, 853-858.
28. Nicholson, E. & Possingham, H.P. (2007) Making conservation decisions under uncertainty for the persistence of multiple species. Ecological Applications, 17, 251-265.
29. Noss, R., Nielsen, S. & Vance-Borland, K. (2009) Prioritizing ecosystems, species and sites for restoration. Spatial Conservation Prioritization: quantitative methods and computational tools (ed.by A. Moilanen, K.A. Wilson and H.P. Possingham), pp. 158-171. Oxford University Press, London, UK.
30. Oliveira, V.B., Paglia, A.P., Fonseca, M. & Guimarães, E. (2010) RPPN e biodiversidade: o papel das reservas particulares na proteção da biodiversidade da Mata Atlântica. Conservação Internacional/Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica/The Nature Conservancy, Belo Horizonte, BH, Brasil.
31. Paglia, A.P., Fonseca, G.A.B., Rylands, A.B., Herrmann, G., Aguiar, L.M.S., Chiarello, A.G., Leite, Y.L.R., Costa, L.P., Siciliano, S., Kierulff, M.C.M., Mendes, S.L., Tavares, V.C., Mittermeier, R.A. & Patton, J.L. (2012) Annotated checklist of Brazilian Mammals. Conservation International, Arlington, VA.
32. Pardini, R., Bueno, A.A., Gardner, T.A., Prado, P.I. & Metzger, J.P. (2010) Beyond the fragmentation threshold hypothesis: regime shifts in biodiversity across fragmented landscapes. PLoS ONE, 5, e13666.
33. Pires, A.S., Koeler, L.P., Fernandez, F.A.S., Schittini, G.M. & Oliveira, L.C. (2002) Frequency of movements of small mammals among Atlantic Coastal Forest fragments in Brazil. Biological Conservation, 108, 229-237.
34. R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Available at: http://www.R-project.org (accessed 20 September 2012).
35. Rey Benayas, J.M., Newton, A.C., Diaz, A. & Bullock, J.M. (2009) Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis. Science, 325, 1121-1124.
36. Ribeiro, M.C., Metzger, J.P., Martensen, A.C., Ponzoni, F. & Hirota, M.M. (2009) Brazilian Atlantic forest: how much is left and how is the remaining forest distributed? Implications for conservation. Biological Conservation, 142, 1141-1153.
37. Santini, L., Di Marco, M., Boitani, L., Maiorano, L. & Rondinini, C. (2014) Incorporating spatial population structure in gap analysis reveals inequitable assessments of species protection. Diversity and Distributions, 20, 698-707.
38. 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. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83, 91-103.
39. Saura, S. & Rubio, L. (2010) A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography, 33, 523-537.
40. Shackelford, N., Hobbs, R.J., Burgar, J.M., Erickson, T.E., Fontaine, J.B., Laliberté, E., Ramalho, C.E., Perring, M.P. & Standish, R.J. (2013) Primed for change: developing ecological restoration for the 21st century. Restoration Ecology, 21, 297-304.
41. Silva, J.M.C. & Casteleti, C.H.M. (2003) Status of the biodiversity of the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. The Atlantic Forest of South America: biodiversity status, threats, and outlook (ed.by C. Galindo-Leal and I.G. Câmara), pp. 43-59. CABS and Island Press, Washington, DC.
42. Society of Ecological Restoration International Science and Policy Working Group (2004) The SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration. Society for Ecological Restoration International, Tucson, AZ.
43. SOS Mata Atlântica & INPE (2011) Atlas dos remanescentes florestais da Mata Atlântica - Período de 2011-2012. Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica, São Paulo, Brasil.
44. Stauffer, D. (1985) Introduction to percolation theory. Taylor and Francis, London.
45. Tabarelli, M., Pinto, L.P., Silva, J.M.C., Hirota, M. & Bede, L. (2005) Challenges and opportunities for Biodiversity conservation in the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Conservation Biology, 19, 695-700.
46. Tambosi, L.M., Martensen, A.C., Ribeiro, M.C. & Metzger, J.P. (2014) A framework to optimize biodiversity restoration efforts based on habitat amount and landscape connectivity. Restoration Ecology, 22, 169-177.
47. Thomson, J.R., Moilanen, A.J., Vesk, P.A., Bennett, A.F. & Mac Nally, R. (2009) Where and when to revegetate: a quantitative method for scheduling landscape reconstruction. Ecological Applications, 19, 817-828.
48. Tischendorf, L. & Fahrig, L. (2000) On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos, 90, 7-19.
49. Visconti, P. & Elkin, C. (2009) Using connectivity metrics in conservation planning-when does habitat quality matter? Diversity and Distributions, 15, 602-612.
50. Westphal, M.I., Pickett, M., Getz, W.M. & Possingham, H.P. (2003) The use of stochastic dynamic programming in optimal landscape reconstruction for metapopulations. Ecological Applications, 13, 543-555.
51. Westphal, M.I., Field, S.A. & Possingham, H.P. (2007) Optimizing landscape configuration: a case study of woodland birds in the Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81, 56-66.
52. Wilson, K.A., Lulow, M., Burger, J., Fang, Y., Andersen, C., Olson, D., O'Connell, M. & McBride, M.F. (2011) Optimal restoration: accounting for space, time and uncertainty. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48, 715-725.
53. Wright, S.J. (2003) The myriad consequences of hunting for vertebrates and plants in tropical forests. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 6, 73-86.