What determines the spatial extent of landscape effects on species?

Miguet, Paul; Jackson, Heather Bird; Jackson, Nathan D.; Martin, Amanda; Fahrig, Lenore

doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0314-1

Cited by 229 publications

(348 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

332

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another common multi-scale analysis method used frequently in landscape ecology characterises multiscale species-environment relationships by altering the size of circular buffers/kernel around point locations at which ecological data is sampled [61][62][63], while leaving the spatial or thematic resolution constant. However, this type of multi-scale analysis is not an explicit focus of this paper as it does not involve altering the spatial and/or thematic resolution to identify scale effects (see [63,64] for a comprehensive review).…”

Section: Multi-scale Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ecological studies characterising an intrinsic scale infer that differences in correlation coefficients are related to the response of an ecological phenomenon to particular scales, and scales where there are high correlation coefficient values represents intrinsic scales [62,81]. In most cases these forms of multi-scale analysis involve assessing the effects of analysis scale by changing the size of circular buffers around point locations at which ecological data are sampled for testing multi-scale species-environment relationships [64,82,83]. However, a recent study by Kendall et al [50] using this multi-scale buffer analysis method showed that patterns of r 2 values for a range of buffer sizes changed with thematic resolution and spatial resolution (defined by the minimum mappable unit).…”

Section: Recent Progress (Post-2010) In Research On the Effects Of Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2e). Furthermore, each environmental variable used in an ecological analysis may be represented by multiple spatial datasets with a range of observation scales [64,72], which each could be represented by multiple scale dimensions.…”

Section: Recent Progress (Post-2010) In Research On the Effects Of Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One aspect that limits understanding of spatial and thematic resolution is a lack of integration of ecological processes into scale-dependent models. Scale-dependent relationships emerge from a myriad of ecological process operating at different scales [56,64,67] and generalisations about scale should consider these processes more explicitly. While, spatial statistics can be used to measure the statistical property of spatial patterns for multiple spatial predictors at multiple scales in order to identify the appropriate predictor to model the relationship between species' distributions and environmental variables [67].…”

Section: Future Research Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Recent Progress on Spatial and Thematic Resolution in Landscape Ecology

Lechner

Rhodes

2016

Curr Landscape Ecol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this review we examine the past 5 years of landscape ecology research examining the effects of both spatial and thematic resolution on ecological analysis. While spatial resolution has been a topic of research for many decades, scale effects from thematic resolution have only recently been studied. Recent multi-scale analyses have demonstrated that the effects of thematic resolution on ecological analysis are comparable to spatial resolution and both spatial and thematic resolution interact. Additionally, spatial and thematic resolution can impact on multi-scale methods that are commonly used to identify the intrinsic scale-the scale at which ecological phenomena interact with the environment. A key aim of multi-scale analysis in landscape ecology is to characterise the scale-dependency of ecological processes, however, the interdisciplinary nature of landscape ecology means that research on scale has incorporated methods from a range of disciplines. These methods and concepts include: 1) multi-scale methods which characterise the sensitivity of an analysis to the modifiable areal unit problem, 2) spatial statistics for characterising the scale dependency of landscape patterns and identifying the optimal scale and 3) ecological theory describing intrinsic scales/domains of scales. We conclude by drawing on the existing literature to describe potential future areas of research to address the impacts of spatial and thematic resolution. We suggest further research on the effects of thematic resolution and conceptualising the scale continuum as multi-dimensional. We also identify mechanistic models and spatial statistics as a promising direction for future research.

show abstract

Section: Multi-scale Analysis Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recent Progress (Post-2010) In Research On the Effects Of Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recent Progress (Post-2010) In Research On the Effects Of Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Research Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Recent Progress on Spatial and Thematic Resolution in Landscape Ecology

Lechner

Rhodes

2016

Curr Landscape Ecol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, habitat fragmentation-a process that potentially underpins non-linear species-area relationships (Andrén, 1994;Hanski, 2015)-also exhibits scale-dependent effects on species Jarzyna et al, 2015;Miguet et al, 2015). In recognition of these potentially scale-dependent mechanisms, Turner and Tjørve (2005) emphasised the importance of exploring how the shape of the species-area relationship varies at different spatial scales.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implications of vegetation clearing biases for the interpretation of landscape-scale species-area relationships

Simmonds¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vegetation clearing results in the loss of species from landscapes. Indeed, the area of remaining native vegetation is an important determinant of species richness in humanmodified mosaics. Of interest to ecologists and landscape managers is the effect of areathat is, how the number of species a landscape supports changes with the amount of native vegetation, as revealed by the shape and functional form of the species-area relationship. Understanding this is vital for guiding conservation interventions such as setting limits to vegetation clearing or establishing revegetation targets.Crucially though, it is not only vegetation area that affects patterns of species richness at the landscape level-so do environmental attributes such as soil properties and topography. Complicating the matter is the fact that these attributes tend to be correlated ii Second, I explored the extent to which the effect of native vegetation area on species richness differed in 100 km 2 landscapes categorised by attributes such as soil fertility, range in elevation or matrix land use. Using a case study of south-east Australian birds, Ifound that the shape of the species-area relationship varied substantially depending on whether landscapes were, for example, more-or less-topographically variable, or had higher or lower soil fertility. While threshold models depicting a point of sudden change in the effect of area emerged consistently, the amount of vegetation corresponding with observed thresholds differed considerably among landscape types. Therefore, aggregating and analysing species-area data from different landscape types is likely to misrepresent how species richness is affected by vegetation area. This will be exacerbated by clearing biases, because heavily cleared landscapes tend to be characterised by very different attributes to high cover landscapes. When data for the entire study extent were analysed, a remarkable degree of scaleinvariance was observed-namely, a threshold relationship with a change-point at approximately 30% vegetation cover. However, when data were analysed for two regional subsets of the overall dataset, the effect of vegetation area, and the factors moderating this relationship, were scale-dependent. Given this finding, observed thresholds can only reliably be used to guide landscape management at the scale and in the region where the relationship was observed.Finally, I evaluated the implications of accounting for clearing biases when using speciesarea relationships to guide conservation, focussing on a region of Australia undergoing rapid landscape transformation. I found that using observed thresholds from species-area models that do and do not account for landscape attributes yielded different outcomes for landscape-scale species richness conservation, given a scenario of future vegetation loss.Specifically, the number and location of landscapes that could be prioritised for conservation actions varied considerably depending on the species-area model used.This research demonstrates that the eff...

show abstract

Occurrence of lemurs in landscapes and their species‐specific scale responses to habitat loss

Steffens

Malabet

Lehman

2020

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on the impact of habitat loss on species occurrence consistently find that the amount of habitat (measured as patch area) is a major determinant of species occurrence at a patch-level. However, patch-level research may fail to detect important patterns and processes only observable at a landscape-level. A landscapelevel approach that incorporates species-specific scale responses is needed to better understand what drives species occurrence. Our aim was to determine the landscape-level scale of effect of habitat amount on the occurrence of three species of nocturnal lemurs (Cheirogaleus medius, Microcebus murinus, and M. ravelobensis).We surveyed line transects to determine the occurrence of three lemur species within a fragmented landscape of deciduous dry forest and anthropogenic grassland in northwestern Madagascar. To determine the scale of effect of habitat loss on lemur occurrence, we compared logistic regression models of occurrence against habitat amount among eight different landscape scales using Akaike's Information Criterion values. We found differing scale responses among the lemurs in our study.Occurrence of C. medius responded to habitat amount at scales between 0.5-4 ha, M. murinus at scales between 1 and 4 ha and M. ravelobensis at scales between 0.125 and 4 ha. We suggest that the scale of effect for C. medius is mediated by their ability to hibernate. A relatively lower scale-response for Microcebus spp. likely reflect their omnivorous diet, small habitat requirements, and limited dispersal ability. Differences in scale responses between M. murinus and M. ravelobensis are likely a result of differing dispersal ability and responses to edge effects between these species. Our study is among the first on lemurs to show the value of a landscape-level approach when assessing the effects of habitat loss on species occurrence. K E Y W O R D S arboreal, biogeography, fragments, Madagascar, primate

show abstract

What determines the spatial extent of landscape effects on species?

Cited by 229 publications

References 57 publications

Recent Progress on Spatial and Thematic Resolution in Landscape Ecology

Recent Progress on Spatial and Thematic Resolution in Landscape Ecology

Implications of vegetation clearing biases for the interpretation of landscape-scale species-area relationships

Occurrence of lemurs in landscapes and their species‐specific scale responses to habitat loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About