A bird’s eye view: using circuit theory to study urban landscape connectivity for birds

Landscape Ecology

Volumn 32, Issue 9, 2017, Pages 1771-1787

  Grafius, Darren R ^a   Corstanje, Ron ^a   Siriwardena, Gavin M ^b   Plummer, Kate E ^b,c   Harris, Jim A ^a  

^a CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b THE NUNNERY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Circuit theory; Circuitscape; Connectivity; Cyanistes caeruleus; Ecosystem service; Landscape structure; Modelling; Parus major; Urban

Indexed keywords

BIRD; CONNECTIVITY; ECOSYSTEM FUNCTION; ECOSYSTEM MODELING; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; GREENSPACE; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; PASSERINE; THEORETICAL STUDY; URBAN AREA; URBAN ECOSYSTEM; WOODLAND;

BEDFORD [BEDFORD (ADS)]; BEDFORD [ENGLAND]; ENGLAND; LUTON [ENGLAND]; MILTON KEYNES [ENGLAND]; UNITED KINGDOM;

AVES; CYANISTES CAERULEUS; PARUS MAJOR;

EID: 85025088494     PISSN: 09212973     EISSN: 15729761     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-017-0548-1     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Baguette M, Van Dyck H (2007) Landscape connectivity and animal behavior: functional grain as a key determinant for dispersal. Landscape Ecol 22:1117–1129
2. Beaujean S (2015) Identification of priority corridors to improve the urban ecological network in the city of Liege. MSc thesis, Cranfield University, Cranfield
3. Belaire JA, Westphal LM, Whelan CJ, Minor ES (2015) Urban residents’ perceptions of birds in the neighborhood: biodiversity, cultural ecosystem services, and disservices. Condor 117:192–202
4. Bennie J, Davies TW, Inger R, Gaston KJ (2014) Mapping artificial lightscapes for ecological studies. Methods Ecol Evol 5:534–540
5. Bonnington C, Gaston KJ, Evans KL (2013) Fearing the feline: domestic cats reduce avian fecundity through trait-mediated indirect effects that increase nest predation by other species. J Appl Ecol 50:15–24
6. Braaker S, Kormann U, Bontadina F, Obrist MK (2017) Prediction of genetic connectivity in urban ecosystems by combining detailed movement data, genetic data and multi-path modelling. Landsc Urban Plan 160:107–114
7. Braaker S, Moretti M, Boesch R, Ghazoul J, Obrist MK, Bontadina F (2014) Assessing habitat connectivity for ground-dwelling animals in an urban environment. Ecol Appl 24:1583–1595
8. Cox DTC, Gaston KJ (2015) Likeability of garden birds: importance of species knowledge & richness in connecting people to nature. PLoS ONE 10:e0141505
9. Cox DTC, Gaston KJ (2016) Urban bird feeding: connecting people with nature. PLoS ONE 11:e0158717
10. Cox DTC, Inger R, Hancock S, Anderson K, Gaston KJ (2016) Movement of feeder-using songbirds: the influence of urban features. Sci Rep 6:37669
11. Cox DTC, Shanahan DF, Hudson HL, Fuller RA, Anderson K, Hancock S, Gaston KJ (2017) Doses of nearby nature simultaneously associated with multiple health benefits. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14:1–13
12. Dallimer M, Irvine KN, Skinner AMJ, Davies ZG, Rouquette JR, Maltby LL, Warren PH, Armsworth PR, Gaston KJ (2012) Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. Bioscience 62:47–55
13. Davies ZG, Fuller RA, Loram A, Irvine KN, Sims V, Gaston KJ (2009) A national scale inventory of resource provision for biodiversity within domestic gardens. Biol Conserv 142:761–771
14. Dunning JB, Danielson BJ, Pulliam HR (1992) Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65:169
15. Ekman J (1989) Ecology of non-breeding social systems of Parus. Wilson Bull 101:263–288
16. Fahrig L, Baudry J, Brotons L, Burel FG, Crist TO, Fuller RJ, Sirami C, Siriwardena GM, Martin JL (2011) Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecol Lett 14:101–112
17. Farine DR, Sheldon BC (2016) Social ecology of a woodland songbird community: from individual movements to the emergence of population social structure. BioRxiv. doi:10.1101/085944
18. Fernández-Juricic E, Jokimäki J (2001) A habitat island approach to conserving birds in urban landscapes: case studies from southern and northern Europe. Biodivers Conserv 10:2023–2043
19. Fuller RA, Irvine KN, Devine-Wright P, Warren PH, Gaston KJ (2007) Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biol Lett 3:390–394
20. Galbraith JA, Beggs JR, Jones DN, McNaughton EJ, Krull CR, Stanley MC (2014) Risks and drivers of wild bird feeding in urban areas of New Zealand. Biol Conserv 180:64–74
21. Gil-Tena A, Brotons L, Fortin MJ, Burel F, Saura S (2013) Assessing the role of landscape connectivity in recent woodpecker range expansion in Mediterranean Europe: forest management implications. Eur J For Res 132:181–194
22. Grafius DR, Corstanje R, Warren PH, Evans KL, Hancock S, Harris JA (2016) The impact of land use/land cover scale on modelling urban ecosystem services. Landscape Ecol 31:1509–1522
23. Hashimoto H, Natuhara Y, Morimoto Y (2005) A habitat model for Parus major minor using a logistic regression model for the urban area of Osaka, Japan. Landsc Urban Plann 70:245–250
24. Hinsley SA, Hill RA, Bellamy PE, Harrison NM, Speakman JR, Wilson AK, Ferns PN (2008) Effects of structural and functional habitat gaps on breeding woodland birds: working harder for less. Landscape Ecol 23:615–626
25. Hong S-H, Han B-H, Choi S-H, Sung CY, Lee K-J (2013) Planning an ecological network using the predicted movement paths of urban birds. Landsc Ecol Eng 9:165–174
26. Jackson CR, Marnewick K, Lindsey PA, Røskaft E, Robertson MP (2016) Evaluating habitat connectivity methodologies: a case study with endangered African wild dogs in South Africa. Landscape Ecol 31(7):1433–1447
27. Jones D (2011) An appetite for connection: Why we need to understand the effect and value of feeding wild birds. Emu 111:1–7
28. Jones DN, Reynolds SJ (2008) Feeding birds in our towns and cities: a global research opportunity. J Avian Biol 39:265–271
29. Kindlmann P, Burel F (2008) Connectivity measures: a review. Landscape Ecol 23:879–890
30. Koen EL, Bowman J, Garroway CJ, Mills SC, Wilson PJ (2012) Landscape resistance and American marten gene flow. Landscape Ecol 27:29–43
31. Koen EL, Bowman J, Sadowski C, Walpole AA (2014) Landscape connectivity for wildlife: development and validation of multispecies linkage maps. Methods Ecol Evol 5:626–633
32. Kupfer JA (2012) Landscape ecology and biogeography: rethinking landscape metrics in a post-FRAGSTATS landscape. Prog Phys Geogr 36:400–420
33. LaPoint S, Balkenhol N, Hale J, Sadler J, van der Ree R (2015) Ecological connectivity research in urban areas. Funct Ecol 29:868–878
34. Luck GW, Davidson P, Boxall D, Smallbone L (2011) Relations between urban bird and plant communities and human well-being and connection to nature. Conserv Biol 25:816–826
35. Mackenzie JA, Hinsley SA, Harrison NM (2014) Parid foraging choices in urban habitat and their consequences for fitness. Ibis 156:591–605
36. Marulli J, Mallarach JM (2005) A GIS methodology for assessing ecological connectivity: application to the Barcelona Metropolitan Area. Landsc Urban Plan 71:243–262
37. Mason CF (2001) Woodland area, species turnover and the conservation of bird assemblages in lowland England. Biodivers Conserv 10:495–510
38. McClure ML, Hansen AJ, Inman RM (2016) Connecting models to movements: testing connectivity model predictions against empirical migration and dispersal data. Landscape Ecol 31:1–14
39. McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK (2015) Adaptation and adaptedness of organisms to urban environments. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 46:261–280
40. McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Ene E (2012) Fragstats v4: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
41. McRae BH, Dickson BG, Keitt TH, Shah VB (2008) Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology 89:2712–2724
42. McRae B, Shah VB, Mohapatra TK (2013) Circuitscape 4 user guide. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington. http://www.circuitscape.org
43. Milton Keynes Council (2015) Find out more about Milton Keynes. In: Milt. Keynes Counc. http://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/jobs-careers/find-out-more-about-milton-keynes. Accessed 4 Sept 2015
44. Moilanen A (2011) On the limitations of graph-theoretic connectivity in spatial ecology and conservation. J Appl Ecol 48:1543–1547
45. Møller AP, Jennions MD (2002) How much variance can be explained by ecologists and evolutionary biologists? Oecologia 132:492–500
46. Mörtberg UM (2001) Resident bird species in urban forest remnants; landscape and habitat perspectives. Landscape Ecol 16:193–203
47. Office for National Statistics (2013) 2011 census, Key statistics for built up areas in England and Wales (report). United Kingdom Office for National Statistics, London
48. Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S (2006) Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landscape Ecol 21:959–967
49. Peiser RB, Chang AC (1999) Is it possible to build financially successful new towns? The Milton Keynes experience. Urban Stud 36:1679–1703
50. Perrins CM (1979) British tits. Collins, London
51. Radford JQ, Bennett AF, Cheers GJ (2005) Landscape-level thresholds of habitat cover for woodland-dependent birds. Biol Conserv 124:317–337
52. Rayfield B, Fortin MJ, Fall A (2010) The sensitivity of least-cost habitat graphs to relative cost surface values. Landscape Ecol 25:519–532
53. Rosenfeld EJ (2012) Assessing the ecological significance of linkage and connectivity for avian populations in urban areas. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham
54. Saura S, Torné J (2009) Conefor Sensinode 2.2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ Model Softw 24:135–139
55. Shimazaki A, Yamaura Y, Senzaki M, Yabuhara Y, Akasaka T, Nakamura F (2016) Urban permeability for birds: an approach combining mobbing-call experiments and circuit theory. Urban For Urban Green 19:167–175
56. Song W, Kim E (2015) Landscape factors affecting the distribution of the great tit in fragmented urban forests of Seoul, South Korea. Landscape Ecol Eng. doi:10.1007/s11355-015-0280-4
57. Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000) On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos 90:7–19
58. Tremblay MA, St. Clair CC (2009) Factors affecting the permeability of transportation and riparian corridors to the movements of songbirds in an urban landscape. J Appl Ecol 46:1314–1322
59. Tremblay MA, St. Clair CC (2011) Permeability of a heterogeneous urban landscape to the movements of forest songbirds. J Appl Ecol 48:679–688
60. Uezu A, Metzger JP, Vielliard JME (2005) Effects of structural and functional connectivity and patch size on the abundance of seven Atlantic Forest bird species. Biol Conserv 123:507–519
61. Wernham CV, Toms MP, Marchant JH, Clark JA, Siriwardena GM, Baillie SR (eds) (2002) The Migration Atlas: movements of the birds of Britain and Ireland. T. & A.D. Poyser, London
62. Yu D, Liu Y, Xun B, Shao H (2015) Measuring landscape connectivity in a urban area for biological conservation. Clean Soil Air Water 43:605–613
63. Zhou W, Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML (2016) Shifting concepts of urban spatial heterogeneity and their implications for sustainability. Landscape Ecol. doi:10.1007/s10980-016-0432-4