Uncertainties in the identification of potential dispersal corridors: The importance of behaviour, sex, and algorithm

Maiorano, Luigi; Boitani, Luigi; Chiaverini, Luca; Ciucci, Paolo

doi:10.1016/j.baae.2017.02.005

Cited by 58 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Exploring connectivity surface performance by sex would be an additional component that may offer more insights into model performance. For example, studies modelling African lion and brown bear movement found substantially different corridor locations when males and females were modelled separately (Elliot et al., ; Maiorano, Boitani, Chiaverini, & Ciucci, ). This is more likely to be a factor in species where dispersal behaviour and distances vary with sex, such as in large carnivores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are all data types and connectivity models created equal? Validating common connectivity approaches with dispersal data

Zeller

Jennings

Vickers

et al. 2018

Diversity and Distributions

172

171

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim There is enormous interest in applying connectivity modelling to resistance surfaces for identifying corridors for conservation action. However, the multiple analytical approaches used to estimate resistance surfaces and predict connectivity across resistance surfaces have not been rigorously compared, and it is unclear what methods provide the best inferences about population connectivity. Using a large empirical data set on puma (Puma concolor), we are the first to compare several of the most common approaches for estimating resistance and modelling connectivity and validate them with dispersal data. Location Southern California, USA. Methods We estimate resistance using presence‐only data, GPS telemetry data from puma home ranges and genetic data using a variety of analytical methods. We model connectivity with cost distance and circuit theory algorithms. We then measure the ability of each data type and connectivity algorithm to capture GPS telemetry points of dispersing pumas. Results We found that resource selection functions based on GPS telemetry points and paths outperformed species distribution models when applied using cost distance connectivity algorithms. Point and path selection functions were not statistically different in their performance, but point selection functions were more sensitive to the transformation used to convert relative probability of use to resistance. Point and path selection functions and landscape genetics outperformed other methods when applied with cost distance; no methods outperformed one another with circuit theory. Main conclusions We conclude that path or point selection functions, or landscape genetic models, should be used to estimate landscape resistance for wildlife. In cases where resource limitations prohibit the collection of GPS collar or genetic data, our results suggest that species distribution models, while weaker, may still be sufficient for resistance estimation. We recommend the use of cost distance‐based approaches, such as least‐cost corridors and resistant kernels, for estimating connectivity and identifying functional corridors for terrestrial wildlife.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, we did not find this to be the case. (Elliot et al, 2014;Maiorano, Boitani, Chiaverini, & Ciucci, 2017). This is more likely to be a factor in species where dispersal behaviour and distances vary with sex, such as in large carnivores.…”

Section: Circuitscape Cost Distancementioning

confidence: 99%

Are all data types and connectivity models created equal? Validating common connectivity approaches with dispersal data

Zeller

Jennings

Vickers

et al. 2018

Diversity and Distributions

172

171

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…39.7 bears/ 1000 km 2 ; Ciucci et al 2015a), suggesting it is approximating carrying capacity, no other stable reproductive nuclei have been established in this time in the peripheral portions of the range, nor has the population's distribution noticeably expanded beyond the historical occurrence of erratic bears (Ciucci et al 2017). However, habitat suitability and connectivity at the landscape scale do not seem to be limiting (Falcucci et al 2009;Maiorano et al 2017). Therefore, the apparent failure of the population to expand could be due to intrinsic factors (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Demographic projections of the Apennine brown bear population Ursus arctos marsicanus (Mammalia: Ursidae) under alternative management scenarios

Gervasi

Ciucci

2018

The European Zoological Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Apennine brown bears are a very small, isolated population of central Italy, consisting of about 50 individuals and under a severe risk of extinction. We performed a population viability analysis (PVA) for this population, contrasting a deterministic model and an individual-based stochastic model, using a set of demographic parameters estimated for the same population during the last decade. We also built a set of simulated management scenarios, in which we compared the effectiveness of alternative conservation measures and assessed the susceptibility of the population to catastrophic mortality events. The deterministic model produced an estimate of the asymptotic population growth rate r = 0.001, corresponding to an asymptotically stable population. The stochastic model produced an estimate of r = − 0.013 (standard deviation = 0.103), corresponding to an annual population decrease of 1.3%, a 17% extinction risk in 100 years, an average population of 27 bears for non-extinct populations, and an average time to extinction of 81 years for those gone extinct. Extinction probability increased to more alarming levels (> 0.4) when at least one catastrophic event occurred during a 100-year period. Current vital rates of the population are not compatible with a more than negligible numerical increase, and this bear population is likely to remain small and exposed to a relatively high risk of extinction, if the average survival or reproductive rates do not increase. Management efforts aimed to increase food availability generated minimal to moderate variations in population growth rate and in the associated risk of extinction, whereas interventions meant to reduce adult female mortality were highly effective in increasing persistence probability. We propose that the general objectives of the action plan for the conservation of the Apennine brown bear for the incoming decade should explicitly contemplate quantitative demographic goals, focusing in particular on adult female and cub mortality.

show abstract

“…This bear population is facing serious risks of extinction due to its persistent small size and reduced genetic variability (Benazzo et al, 2017;Ciucci et al, 2015), and is in need of immediate proactive conservation measures (Anonymous, 2011;Ciucci & Boitani, 2008). Despite favorable habitat suitability at the landscape scale, including several protected areas (Falcucci, Ciucci, Maiorano, Gentile, & Boitani, 2009) and adequate connectivity (Maiorano, Boitani, Chiaverini, & Ciucci, 2017), survival of this bear population is threatened by human-related factors. In particular, current levels of human-caused mortality (due to the illegal use of poison baits and shooting), are thought to be incompatible with population growth and expansion (Falcucci et al, 2009;Gervasi et al, 2017;Gervasi & Ciucci, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Local attitudes toward Apennine brown bears: Insights for conservation issues

Glikman

Ciucci²,

Marino

et al. 2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human‐carnivore coexistence is a multi‐faceted issue that requires an understanding of the diverse attitudes and perspectives of the communities living with large carnivores. To inform initiatives that encourage behaviors in line with conservation goals, we focused on assessing the two components of attitudes (i.e., feelings and beliefs), as well as norms of local communities coexisting with Apennine brown bears (Ursus arctos marsicanus) for a long time. This bear population is under serious extinction risks due to its persistently small population size, which is currently confined to the long‐established protected area of Abruzzo, Lazio and Molise National Park (PNALM) and its surrounding region in central Italy. We interviewed 1,611 residents in the PNALM to determine attitudes and values toward bears. We found that support for the bear's legal protection was widespread throughout the area, though beliefs about the benefits of conserving bears varied across geographic administrative districts. Our results showed that residents across our study areas liked bears. At the same time, areas that received more benefits from tourism were more strongly associated with positive feelings toward bears. Such findings provide useful information to improve communication efforts of conservation authorities with local communities.

show abstract

Uncertainties in the identification of potential dispersal corridors: The importance of behaviour, sex, and algorithm

Cited by 58 publications

References 48 publications

Are all data types and connectivity models created equal? Validating common connectivity approaches with dispersal data

Are all data types and connectivity models created equal? Validating common connectivity approaches with dispersal data

Demographic projections of the Apennine brown bear population Ursus arctos marsicanus (Mammalia: Ursidae) under alternative management scenarios

Local attitudes toward Apennine brown bears: Insights for conservation issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About