A species‐centered approach for uncovering generalities in organism responses to habitat loss and fragmentation |
| |
Authors: | Matthew G Betts Lenore Fahrig Adam S Hadley Katherine E Halstead Jeff Bowman W Douglas Robinson John A Wiens David B Lindenmayer |
| |
Institution: | 1. Dept of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR 97331, USA.;2. Ottawa‐Carleton Inst. of Biology, Carleton Univ., Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada.;3. Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR 97331, USA.;4. Wildlife Research and Monitoring Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2140 East Bank Drive, Peterborough, ON K9J 7B8, Canada.;5. Oak Creek Lab of Biology, Dept of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR 97331, USA.;6. Point Blue Conservation Science, Petaluma, CA 94954, USA;7. School of Plant Biology, Univ. of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.;8. Fenner School of Environment and Society, ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions and National Environment Research Program, The Australian National Univ., Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia. |
| |
Abstract: | Theoretical models predict strong influences of habitat loss and fragmentation on species distributions and demography, but empirical studies have shown relatively inconsistent support across species and systems. We argue that species’ responses to landscape‐scale habitat loss and fragmentation are likely to appear less idiosyncratic if it is recognized that species perceive the same landscapes in different ways. We present a new quantitative approach that uses species distribution models (SDMs) to measure landscapes (e.g. patch size, isolation, matrix amount) from the perspective of individual species. First, we briefly summarize the few efforts to date demonstrating that once differences in habitat distributions are controlled, consistencies in species’ responses to landscape structure emerge. Second, we present a detailed example providing step‐by‐step methods for application of a species‐centered approach using freely available land‐cover data and recent statistical modeling approaches. Third, we discuss pitfalls in current applications of the approach and recommend avenues for future developments. We conclude that the species‐centered approach offers considerable promise as a means to test whether sensitivity to habitat loss and fragmentation is mediated by phylogenetic, ecological, and life‐history traits. Cross‐species generalities in responses to habitat loss and fragmentation will be challenging to uncover unless landscape mosaics are defined using models that reflect differing species‐specific distributions, functional connectivity, and domains of scale. The emergence of such generalities would not only enhance scientific understanding of biotic processes driving fragmentation effects, but would allow managers to estimate species sensitivities in new regions. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|