The disproportionately high value of small patches for biodiversity conservation

Riva, Federico; Fahrig, Lenore

doi:10.1111/conl.12881

Cited by 86 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…And nally, they con rm that protecting more habitat -regardless of how it is arranged -is critical for biodiversity protection (30,31). Most importantly, these results mean that, contrary to a long list of national and international policies (13,19,21), there is no apparent ecological reason to prioritize few large patches over large numbers of small patches when the objective is maximizing biodiversity protection in human-dominated landscapes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…(13,16,17). In fact, most empirical SLOSS studies nd more species across several small than few large patches (18), even when only species of conservation concern are considered (19). This implies that small patches have disproportionately high biodiversity value, on a per-area basis, as has been found in several empirical studies (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…While Chase et al (11) stressed that landscapescale inferences cannot be made from their analysis, readers are already using their in uential paper to make such inferences. If these extrapolations are not valid, they will further threaten biodiversity in regions where much habitat has been lost, most remaining habitat is in small patches, and habitat conservation and restoration are most needed (19,27). We therefore re-analyze the same compiled database used in Chase et al (11) to determine whether ecosystem decay "scales up" to the landscape scale, i.e., is a dominant driver of landscape-scale biodiversity patterns.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This means that, in contrast to current conservation practices that favor a priori large patches over small patches, small patches have disproportionately high cumulative value for biodiversity conservation (18-25, 29). Consequently, lack of protection of small patches is leading to a large cumulative loss of biodiversity (19). Given ongoing biodiversity declines and many recently proposed opportunities to enhance area-based conservation initiatives, we contend that the conservation value of small patches must be acknowledged if we are to sustain biodiversity in the face of global environmental threats.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Small patches are disproportionately important for biodiversity conservation, despite ecosystem decay

Riva

Fahrig

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Positive effects of habitat patch size on biodiversity are often extrapolated to infer negative effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity at a landscape scale. However, such cross-scale extrapolations often fail, undermining the effectiveness of policies based on them. Forty-two percent of the manuscripts that cited a recent, landmark patch-scale analysis (Chase et al. 2020, Nature 584, 238–243) used it to infer negative fragmentation effects, despite the fact that Chase et al. cautioned against such extrapolation. We use the same dataset used by Chase et al. to test whether it is valid to extrapolate their observed patch-scale patterns to a landscape scale. We compare species diversity across many small vs. few large patches totaling the same area and sampling effort, while accounting for the patch-scale "ecosystem decay" observed in Chase et al. We find that landscape-scale patterns are opposite to their equivalent patch-scale patterns. For an equal total habitat area, species richness and evenness decrease with mean size of the patches comprising that habitat area, whether considering all species or only species of conservation concern. Thus, landscape-scale processes (e.g., turnover) enhance biodiversity across sets of many small patches despite ecosystem decay within each patch, and this is not due to incursion of generalist species into small patches. Our results confirm that patch-scale biodiversity patterns can rarely be extrapolated to a landscape scale. Most importantly, they highlight that conservation should recognize the value of small habitat patches as an important asset for preserving biodiversity worldwide.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Small patches are disproportionately important for biodiversity conservation, despite ecosystem decay

Riva

Fahrig

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, our results suggest that the effects of the area of reed strips and the area of wetland on reedbed birds abundance are of the same order of magnitude. This means that an increase in reed strips area may have a similar effect on the abundance of reedbed species than an increase in wetland area (Riva and Fahrig, 2022). It is however important to underline that some passerines specialist of these habitats were not contacted at all during our surveys, e.g., the moustached warbler ( Acrocephalus melanopogon ) or the bearded reedling ( Panurus biarmicus ) even though they are breeding in the Camargue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field margins as substitute habitat for the conservation of birds in agricultural wetlands

Mallet

Béchet

Mesléard

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breeding birds in agricultural landscapes have declined considerably since the 1950s and the beginning of agricultural intensification in Europe. Given the increasing pressure on agricultural land, it is necessary to identify conservation measures that consume little productive land. We tested the hypothesis that field margins represent substitute habitats for bird species in agricultural wetlands. We monitored bird species in 86 crop fields in rice paddy landscapes of Camargue (southern France), a wetland of international importance for birds. We investigated whether the area of three types of field margins (grass strips, hedgerows and reed strips) within a 500 m buffer around each studied crop field had an effect on the abundance of three groups of birds defined based on their primary habitat (reedbeds, grasslands, and forest edge species). We controlled for the area of each semi-natural habitat (wetlands, grasslands, and woodlands), crop diversity and mean crop field size. Our study confirms that bird guilds are favored by the cover of their primary habitat but are also influenced by the cover of field margins. Reedbed birds are favored by the cover of wetlands and reed strips, grassland birds are favored by the cover of grasslands and wetlands and negatively impacted by the cover of woodlands and hedgerows, while forest edge birds are favored by the cover of hedgerows and negatively impacted by the cover of reed strips. These results suggest that field margins may represent substitute habitats for reedbed and forest edge bird species and highlight their importance for biodiversity conservation in wetland agricultural landscapes. However, our results also suggest that increasing the area of hedgerows and reed strips may have a negative effect on grassland birds and forest edge birds, respectively. Recommendations for field margin management in agricultural wetlands should therefore be tailored to local conservation priorities.

show abstract

Passive monitoring of avian habitat on working lands

Dixon

Baker

Ellis

2023

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intensive agricultural landscapes pose a challenge to wildlife managers, policymakers, and landowners hoping to increase the diversity of desired wildlife species, such as grassland birds, which require urgent conservation action. In intensive agricultural landscapes, like those of the Midwestern United States, most land area is privately owned and operated and managed primarily for production. Thus, conducting ecological research in intensive agricultural landscapes requires collaborative approaches aimed at farm owners and operators. Recent advances in acoustic data collection and high-resolution habitat mapping, including low-cost acoustic recorders and satellite remote sensing, may be well positioned to address this challenge by enabling expanded assessments and monitoring of wildlife populations and habitats across regions. This study examined fine-grained habitat characteristics and their relationship with avian biodiversity in intensive agricultural landscapes at 44 agricultural sites across the state of Iowa. Passive acoustic monitoring and manual identification of bird species allowed for measurement of vocalizing bird richness. High-resolution mapping of noncrop vegetation provided detailed information on small noncrop vegetation habitat complexes within row-crop agriculture. Measures of image texture provided characterizations of compositional heterogeneity within noncrop vegetation. General linear Poisson modeling demonstrated robust associations between noncrop vegetation and vocalizing bird richness, yet variation in grassland bird richness was not well predicted by noncrop vegetation. Noncrop vegetation texture demonstrated potential as a predictor of vocalizing bird richness, though not better than or when combined with noncrop vegetated area, indicating it may not be an independent measure of habitat quality. Passive acoustic monitoring resulted in useful data at 44 out of 60 originally selected sites, with some lost to failed recorders and/or collaboration issues. Challenges remain in detecting habitat characteristics that promote grassland birds in row crop landscapes. Working toward probabilistic research design across privately owned working landscapes and incorporating more detailed management practice information would improve the transferability of this approach to farmland management and policy.

show abstract

The disproportionately high value of small patches for biodiversity conservation

Cited by 86 publications

References 38 publications

Small patches are disproportionately important for biodiversity conservation, despite ecosystem decay

Small patches are disproportionately important for biodiversity conservation, despite ecosystem decay

Field margins as substitute habitat for the conservation of birds in agricultural wetlands

Passive monitoring of avian habitat on working lands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About