Applying network theory to prioritize multispecies habitat networks that are robust to climate and land-use change

Conservation Biology

Volumn 31, Issue 6, 2017, Pages 1383-1396

  Albert, Cécile H ^a,b   Rayfield, Bronwyn ^b,c,d   Dumitru, Maria ^b   Gonzalez, Andrew ^b,e  

^a AVIGNON UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC EN OUTAOUAIS   (Canada)

^d Apex Resource Management Solutions Ltd   (Canada)

^e Centre de la Science de la Biodiversité du Québec Université du Québec a' Rimouski   (Canada)

Author keywords

biodiversidad; biodiversity; corredores; corridors; fragmentaci n de h bitat; graph theory; habitat fragmentation; metapoblaci n; metapopulation; modelos de distribuci n de especies; species distribution models; teor a de gr ficos; zonaci n; zonation

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CLIMATE CHANGE; CONNECTIVITY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ECOLOGICAL ZONATION; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; GRAPHICAL METHOD; HABITAT AVAILABILITY; HABITAT CORRIDOR; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; HABITAT LOSS; HABITAT QUALITY; LAND USE CHANGE; METAPOPULATION; NETWORK ANALYSIS; PERIURBAN AREA; PRIORITIZATION; PROTECTED AREA; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; TRADE-OFF; VERTEBRATE;

CANADA; MONTREAL; QUEBEC [CANADA];

VERTEBRATA;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISPERSAL; BIODIVERSITY; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CLIMATE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FOREST; QUEBEC; VERTEBRATE;

ANIMAL DISTRIBUTION; ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; CLIMATE CHANGE; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; FORESTS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; QUEBEC; VERTEBRATES;

EID: 85026476224     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: 15231739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12943     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, De Blust G, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, Matthysen E. 2003. The application of ‘least-cost’ modelling as a functional landscape model. Landscape and Urban Planning 64:233–247.
2. Andren H. 1994. Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71:355–366.
3. Araújo MB, New M. 2007. Ensemble forecasting of species distributions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 22:42–47.
4. Baguette M, Van Dyck H. 2007. Landscape connectivity and animal behavior: functional grain as a key determinant for dispersal. Landscape Ecology 22:1117–1129.
5. Beier P, Spencer W, Baldwin RF, McRae BH. 2011. Toward best practices for developing regional connectivity maps. Conservation Biology 25:879–892.
6. Berteaux D, et al. 2010. The CC-Bio Project: studying the effects of climate change on Quebec biodiversity. Diversity and Distributions 2:1181–1204.
7. Bocedi G, Palmer SCF, Pe'er G, Heikkinen RK, Matsinos YG, Watts K, Travis JM. 2014. RangeShifter: a platform for modelling spatial eco-evolutionary dynamics and species’ responses to environmental changes. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 5:388–396.
8. Brodie J, Paxton M, Nagulendran K, Balamurugan G, Clements GC, Reynolds G, Jain A, Hon J. 2016. Connecting science policy and implementation for landscape scale habitat connecitivty. Conservation Biology 30:950–961.
9. Calabrese JM, Fagan WF. 2004. A comparison-shopper's guide to connectivity metrics. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2:529–536.
10. Carroll C, McRae BH, Brooke SA. 2011. Use of linkage mapping and centrality analysis across habitat gradients to conserve connectivity of gray wolf populations in Western North America. Conservation Biology 26:78–87.
11. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 2010. COP-10 decision X/2. CBD Secretariat, Montreal.
12. Coulter Riordan E, Rundel PW. 2014. Land use compounds habitat losses under projected climate change in a threatened California ecosystem. PLOS ONE 9 (e86487) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0086487.
13. Crooks KR, Sanjayan M. 2006. Connectivity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
14. Crouzeilles R, Lorini ML, Viveiros Grelle CE. 2013. The importance of using sustainable use protected areas for functional connectivity. Biological Conservation 159:450–457.
15. Dupras J, Marull J, Parcerisas L, Coll F, Gonzalez A, Girard M, Tello E. 2016. The impacts of urban sprawl on ecological connectivity in the Montreal Metropolitan Region. Environmental Science & Policy 58:61–73.
16. Fall A, Fall J. 2001. A domain-specific language for models of landscape dynamics. Ecological Modelling 141:1–18.
17. Freeman LC. 1978. Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1:215–239.
18. Haddad NM, et al. 2015. Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth's ecosystems. Science Advances 1 (e1500052): https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500052.
19. Heller NE, Zavaleta ES. 2009. Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: a review of 22 years of recommendations. Biological Conservation 142:14–32.
20. Henle K, Davies KF, Kleyer M, Margules C, Settele J. 2004. Predictors of species sensitivity to fragmentation. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:207–251.
21. Hodgson JA, Wallis DW, Krishna R, Cornell SJ. 2016. How to manipulate landscapes to improve the potential for rane expansion. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7:1558–1566.
22. Irwin EG, Bockstael NE. 2007. The evolution of urban sprawl: evidence of spatial heterogeneity and increasing land fragmentation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104:20672–20677.
23. Jantz P, Goetz S, Laporte N. 2014. Carbon stock corridors to mitigate climate change and promote biodiversity in the tropics. Nature Climate Change 4:138–142.
24. Jetz W, Wilcove DS, Dobson AP. 2007. Projected impacts of climate and land-use change on the global diversity of birds. PLOS Biology 5 (e157) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0050157.
25. Kerr J, Packer L. 1998. The impact of climate change on mammal diversity in Canada. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 49:263–270.
26. Kujala H, Moilanen A, Araújo MB, Cabeza M. 2013. Conservation planning with uncertain climate change projections. PLOS ONE 8 (e53315) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053315.
27. Lehtomäki J, Moilanen A. 2013. Methods and workflow for spatial conservation prioritization using Zonation. Environmental Modelling and Software 47:128–137.
28. Magris RA, Reml EA, Pressey RL, Weeks R. 2015. Integrating multiple species connectivity and habitat quality into conservation planning for coral reefs. Ecography 39:649–664.
29. Mantyka-Pringle CS, Visconti P, Di Marco M, Martin TG, Rondinini C, Rhodes JR. 2015. Climate change modifies risk of global biodiversity loss due to land-cover change. Biological Conservation 187:103–111.
30. Marrotte RR, Gonzalez A, Millien V. 2014. Landscape resistance and habitat combine to provide an optimal model of genetic structure and connectivity at the range margin of a small mammal. Molecular Ecology 23:3983–3998.
31. Mazaris AD, Papanikolaou AD, Barbet-Massin M, Kallimanis AS, Jiguet F, Schmeller DS, Pantis JD. 2013. Evaluating the connectivity of a protected areas’ network under the prism of global change: the efficiency of the European Natura 2000 network for Four birds of prey. PLOS ONE 8 (e59640) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059640.
32. Meller L, Cabeza M, Pironon S, Barbet-Massin M, Maiorano L, Georges D, Thuiller W. 2014. Ensemble distribution models in conservation prioritization: from consensus predictions to consensus reserve networks. Diversity and Distributions 20:309–321.
33. Minor ES, Lookingbill TR. 2010. A multiscale network analysis of protected-area connecitivty for mammals in the United States. Conservation Biology 24:1549–1558.
34. Mitchell MGE, et al. 2015. The Montérégie Connection Project: inking landscapes, biodiversity, and ecosystem services to improve decision-making. Ecology and Society 20 (art. 15) https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07927-200415.
35. Moilanen A, Franco AM, Early RI, Fox R, Wintle B, Thomas CD. 2005. Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 272:1885–1891.
36. Mumby PJ, Elliott IA, Eakin CM, Skirving W, Paris CB, Edwards HJ, Enriquez S, IglesiasPrieto R, Cherubin LM, Stevens JR. 2011. Reserve design for uncertain responses of coral reefs to climate change. Ecology Letters 14:132–140.
37. Nicholson E, Westphal MI, Frank K, Rochester WA, Pressey RL, Lindenmayer DB, Possingham HP. 2006. A new method for conservation planning for the persistence of multiple species. Ecology Letters 9:1049–1060.
38. Pelletier D, Clark M, Anderson MG, Rayfield B, Wulder MA, Cardille JA. 2014. Applying circuit theory for corridor expansion and management at regional scales: tiling, pinch points, and omnidirectional connectivity. PLOS ONE 9 (e84135) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084135.
39. R Development Core Team. 2012. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
40. Rayfield B, Pelletier D, Dumitru M, Cardille JA, Gonzalez A. 2016. Multipurpose habitat networks for short-range and long-range connectivity: a new method combining graph and circuit connectivity. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7:222–231.
41. Saura S, Bodin Ö, Fortin MJ. 2014. Stepping stones are crucial for species’ long-distance dispersal and range expansion through habitat networks. Journal of Applied Ecology 51:171–182.
42. Saura S, Estreguil C, Mouton C, Rodríguez-Freire M. 2011. Network analysis to assess landscape connectivity trends: application to European forests (1990–2000). Ecological Indicators 11:407–416.
43. Schmitz OJ, et al. 2015. Conserving biodiversity: practical guidance about climate change adaptation approaches in support of land-use planning. Natural Areas Journal 35:190–203.
44. Titeux N, Henle K, Mihoub J-B, Regos A, Geizendorffer IR, Cramer W, Verburg PH, Brotons L. 2016. Biodiversity scenarios neglect future land-use changes. Global Change Biology 22:2505–2515.
45. Verburg PH, Overmars KP. 2009. Combining top-down and bottom-up dynamics in land use modeling: exploring the future of abandoned farmlands in Europe with the Dyna-CLUE model. Landscape Ecology 24:1167–1181.
46. Zetterberg A, Mörtberg UM, Balfors B. 2010. Making graph theory operational for landscape ecological assessments, planning, and design. Landscape and Urban Planning 95:181–191.