Empirical estimation of dispersal resistance surfaces: a case study with red-cockaded woodpeckers

Trainor, Anne M.; Walters, Jeffrey R.; Morris, William F.; Sexton, Joseph O.; Moody, Aaron

doi:10.1007/s10980-013-9861-5

Cited by 93 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is a commonly used approach, partly because of the lack of adequate data on species movements and hence the actual resistance of different habitat types to movement (Richard and Armstrong 2010;Zeller et al 2012). However, the relationship between habitat suitability and dispersal possibilities of species may not be so simple and can lead to underestimation of the population's connectivity (Trainor et al 2013), especially for far-ranging species. Since different transformation functions may yield different resistance surfaces, and thus affect connectivity estimates, identifying the biologically most relevant function is an important step in connectivity assessments (Trainor et al 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although proper selection and application of connectivity measures is undeniably important for evaluation of connectivity, how the landscape is represented in terms of habitat suitability and resistance for a given species may be equally important (Zeller et al 2012;Trainor et al 2013). Landscape structure clearly influences dispersal and habitat connectivity (e.g., Goodwin and Fahrig 2002;Uezu et al 2005;Pflüger and Balkenhol 2014), making it crucial to represent landscape structure appropriately in connectivity analyses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In categorical resistance surfaces, a limited number of classes represent different resistance levels to movement (e.g., Chardon et al 2003;Rabinowitz and Zeller 2010;Magrach et al 2012;. Alternatively, each cell in the matrix can be assigned a continuous resistance value (e.g., Kuemmerle et al 2011;Ziółkowska et al 2012;Trainor et al 2013). In practice, the decision how to represent matrix resistance in a given connectivity analysis often depends on data availability for a given species (Beier et al 2008;Sawyer et al 2011;Zeller et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Resistance surfaces based on land cover maps, maybe in conjunction with data on linear barriers (e.g., roads, rivers), are typically categorical, and the definition of cost values often relies on expert opinion. On the other hand, resistance maps based on habitat suitability models typically result in continuous resistance maps, where resistance is highest where habitat suitability is lowest (Zeller et al 2012;Trainor et al 2013). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effects of different matrix representations and connectivity measures on habitat network assessments

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing landscape connectivity is important to understand the ecology of landscapes and to evaluate alternative conservation strategies. The question is though, how to quantify connectivity appropriately, especially when the information available about the suitability of the matrix surrounding habitat is limited. Our goal here was to investigate the effects of matrix representation on assessments of the connectivity among habitat patches and of the relative importance of individual patches for the connectivity within a habitat network. We evaluated a set of 50 9 50 km 2 test areas in the Carpathian Mountains and considered three different matrix representations (binary, categorical and continuous) using two types of connections among habitat patches (shortest lines and least-cost paths). We compared connections, and the importance of patches, based on (1) isolation, (2) incidencefunctional, and (3) graph measures. Our results showed that matrix representation can greatly affect assessments of connections (i.e., connection length, effective distance, and spatial location), but not patch prioritization. Although patch importance was not much affected by matrix representation, it was influenced by the connectivity measure and its parameterization. We found the biggest differences in the case of the integral index of connectivity and equally weighted patches, but no consistent pattern in response to changing dispersal distance. Connectivity assessments in more fragmented landscapes were more sensitive to the selection of matrix representation. Although we recommend using continuous matrix representation whenever possible, our results indicated that simpler matrix representations can be also used as a proxy to delineate those patches that are important for overall connectivity, but not to identify connections among habitat patches.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of different matrix representations and connectivity measures on habitat network assessments

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Connectivity is the key factor to understand how ecological systems respond to the challenges of land use change, habitat loss and fragmentation (Auffret et al, 2015). Connectivity means show that the surroundings facilitate or impede the movement of organisms and ecological units (Taylor et al, 1993;Zeller et al, 2012;Trainor et al, 2013;Pflüger and Balkenhol., 2014). It has two structural and functional components.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Habitat Changes of Caspian Red Deer (Cervus Elaphus Maral Gray, 1850) Based on Temporal Changes of Effective Area and Functional Connectivity ‒ A Case Study of Lisar Protected Area

Panahandeh¹

2016

Appl Ecol Env Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.A growing number of human activities are among the top factors causing habitat loss and fragmentation. The aim of this study was to investigate the temporal changes in habitat suitability, connectivity status and analysis of these changes using landscape ecology approach. Evidences indicate high probability of local extinction of Caspian red deer (Cervus elaphus maral Gray, 1850) in the current habitats of Guilan province in the north of Iran due to severe habitat destruction. In this study, habitat suitability layers and corridors were drawn with combining layers of land cover derived from the interpretation of satellite images, elevation, topography and distance to man-made in the period 1990-2015. Accordingly, 35% decrease in area metric of habitat suitability, 34% increase in the number of patches, 89% in edge density and 53% reduction in the average size of patches indicate that the occurrence of habitat fragmentation along with habitat loss, severely disrupted the integrity of the habitat. As a result, in all corridors, the relative share of semi-dense and dense forest cover were reduced. Research results have given a clear picture of the extent of changes in habitat suitability and connectivity paths that can have an effective role in restoration process.

show abstract

Assessing habitat connectivity of rare species to inform urban conservation planning

McCluskey,

Kuzma,

Enander

et al. 2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urbanization is commonly associated with biodiversity loss and habitat fragmentation. However, urban environments often have greenspaces that can support wildlife populations, including rare species. The challenge for conservation planners working in these systems is identifying priority habitats and corridors for protection before they are lost. In a rapidly changing urban environment, this requires prompt decisions informed by accurate spatial information. Here, we combine several approaches to map habitat and assess connectivity for a diverse set of rare species in seven urban study areas across southern Michigan, USA. We incorporated multiple connectivity tools for a comprehensive appraisal of species‐habitat patterns across these urban landscapes. We observed distinct differences in connectivity by taxonomic group and site. The three turtle species (Blanding's, Eastern Box, and Spotted) consistently had more habitat predicted to be suitable per site than other evaluated species. This is promising for this at‐risk taxonomic group and allows conservation efforts to focus on mitigating threats such as road mortality. Grassland and prairie‐associated species (American Bumble Bee, Black and Gold Bumble Bee, and Henslow's Sparrow) had the least amount of habitat on a site‐by‐site basis. Kalamazoo and the northern Detroit sites had the highest levels of multi‐species connectivity across the entire study area based on the least cost paths. These connectivity results have direct applications in urban planning. Kalamazoo, one of the focal urban regions, has implemented a Natural Features Protection (NFP) plan to bolster natural area protections within the city. We compared our connectivity results to the NFP area and show where this plan will have an immediate positive impact and additional areas for potential consideration in future expansions of the protection network. Our results show that conservation opportunities exist within each of the assessed urban areas for maintaining rare species, a key benefit of this multi‐species and multi‐site approach.

show abstract

Empirical estimation of dispersal resistance surfaces: a case study with red-cockaded woodpeckers

Cited by 93 publications

References 36 publications

Effects of different matrix representations and connectivity measures on habitat network assessments

Effects of different matrix representations and connectivity measures on habitat network assessments

Analysis of Habitat Changes of Caspian Red Deer (Cervus Elaphus Maral Gray, 1850) Based on Temporal Changes of Effective Area and Functional Connectivity ‒ A Case Study of Lisar Protected Area

Assessing habitat connectivity of rare species to inform urban conservation planning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About