2008
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-008-9298-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of habitat availability and landscape structure on the distribution of wood cricket (Nemobius sylvestris) on the Isle of Wight, UK

Abstract: Manuscript word count: 7291 2 AbstractLittle information is available regarding the landscape ecology of woodland invertebrate species with limited dispersal ability. An investigation was therefore conducted within woodland fragments in an agricultural landscape for the flightless wood cricket (Nemobius sylvestris) on the Isle of Wight, UK. The current pattern of distribution of the species, established during a field survey, was related to measures of habitat availability and habitat isolation/fragmentation. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When new habitat becomes available for colonisation, species whose primary occurrences have more of the new habitats nearby can have advantages for expansion of their distribution into the new habitats [37]. The positive influence of historical habitat availability on grassland species richness was found in Estonian islands [38] and wood cricket populations in the UK were mainly found in woodland fragments situated closely to another occupied site [39]. However, the positive influence of habitat availability on species re-distribution was not supported by our study, in which the availability of secondary open habitat was unrelated to the proportion of secondary open habitat occupied by the species (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When new habitat becomes available for colonisation, species whose primary occurrences have more of the new habitats nearby can have advantages for expansion of their distribution into the new habitats [37]. The positive influence of historical habitat availability on grassland species richness was found in Estonian islands [38] and wood cricket populations in the UK were mainly found in woodland fragments situated closely to another occupied site [39]. However, the positive influence of habitat availability on species re-distribution was not supported by our study, in which the availability of secondary open habitat was unrelated to the proportion of secondary open habitat occupied by the species (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[21], [30]). In their comprehensive review, Prugh et al [8] found stronger effects of distance to the nearest occupied source patch, a demographic isolation measure, on patch occupancy than of distance to nearest habitat patch of any size and distance to nearest large patch, two measures of landscape isolation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, no relationship was predicted between the occurrence of the field cricket, a species avoiding wet habitats [20], and distance of a patch to water. Finally, we expected positive relationships between the occurrence of both species and the age of the patch, as patch age has been shown to positively affect occurrence patterns in wood crickets ( Nemobius sylvestris ) [21]. Alternatively, the suitability of a patch may increase over the first years and then decrease again with ongoing succession.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Early researchers used Euclidean distance between patches to quantify isolation and its inverse connectivity (e.g., Hanski 1994). Euclidean distance remains one of the most widespread measures of isolation (Brosi 2009), but the measure has been refined by, for example, the consideration of only large patches (Cherkaoui et al 2009) or of patches occupied by target species (Brouwers & Newton 2009). Several authors warn against measuring Euclidean distance alone (Moilanen & Nieminen 2002) because functional connectivity may depend on factors other than distance, such as the size and shape of patches (e.g., Bender et al 2003; Prugh 2009) and characteristics of the matrix (i.e., nonforested areas surrounding patches of native forest) between patches (Ricketts 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%