| Literature DB >> 22205984 |
Carly Vynne1, Jonah L Keim, Ricardo B Machado, Jader Marinho-Filho, Leandro Silveira, Martha J Groom, Samuel K Wasser.
Abstract
Conserving animals beyond protected areas is critical because even the largest reserves may be too small to maintain viable populations for many wide-ranging species. Identification of landscape features that will promote persistence of a diverse array of species is a high priority, particularly, for protected areas that reside in regions of otherwise extensive habitat loss. This is the case for Emas National Park, a small but important protected area located in the Brazilian Cerrado, the world's most biologically diverse savanna. Emas Park is a large-mammal global conservation priority area but is too small to protect wide-ranging mammals for the long-term and conserving these populations will depend on the landscape surrounding the park. We employed novel, noninvasive methods to determine the relative importance of resources found within the park, as well as identify landscape features that promote persistence of wide-ranging mammals outside reserve borders. We used scat detection dogs to survey for five large mammals of conservation concern: giant armadillo (Priodontes maximus), giant anteater (Myrmecophaga tridactyla), maned wolf (Chrysocyon brachyurus), jaguar (Panthera onca), and puma (Puma concolor). We estimated resource selection probability functions for each species from 1,572 scat locations and 434 giant armadillo burrow locations. Results indicate that giant armadillos and jaguars are highly selective of natural habitats, which makes both species sensitive to landscape change from agricultural development. Due to the high amount of such development outside of the Emas Park boundary, the park provides rare resource conditions that are particularly important for these two species. We also reveal that both woodland and forest vegetation remnants enable use of the agricultural landscape as a whole for maned wolves, pumas, and giant anteaters. We identify those features and their landscape compositions that should be prioritized for conservation, arguing that a multi-faceted approach is required to protect these species.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22205984 PMCID: PMC3243687 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028939
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Survey quadrats and habitat types occurring in and around Emas National Park, Brazil.
Definitions and labels for covariates tested in resource selection models.
| Covariate | Label | Definition |
| Park | park | discrete variable; sample found inside Emas National Park |
| Distance to park | parkDist | distance, in meters, to the National Park |
| Natural water spring | spring | discrete variable; site is within 500 m of a natural water spring |
| Rivers | river | distance, in meters, to the nearest permanent river-like waterway |
| Any road | road | within 30 meters of any road, paved or unpaved |
| Distance to road | roadDist | distance, in kilometers, to any road, paved or unpaved |
| Distance to main road | MainroadDist | distance, in kilometers, to any paved or busy road |
| Riverine forest | forest | discrete variable; high, tall-canopy forest habitat determined by year-round high soil moisture. |
| Woodland cerrado | cerrado | discrete variable; closed woodland with crown cover of 50% to 90%, made up of trees, often 8–12 m or even taller, casting a considerable shade so that the ground layer is much reduced |
| Open cerrado | open cerrado | discrete variable; vegetation is dominated (at least visually) by trees and shrubs often 3–8 m tall and giving more than 30% crown cover but with still a fair amount of herbaceous vegetation |
| Open grassland | grassland | discrete variable; dry grassland without shrubs or trees or with a scattering of shrubs and small trees |
| Inundated marshland | marsh | discrete variable; seasonally waterlogged grasslands |
| Cattle pasture | pasture | discrete variable; pasture area used for grazing livestock, predominantly cattle |
| Agriculture | agriculture | discrete variable; agricultural land used for growing soy, corn, millet, cotton, or sugar cane |
| Unknown | unknown | habitat of unknown type; classification could not be determined due to cloud cover over satellite image |
| Distance to agriculture | agDist | distance, in kilometers, to any agricultural field |
| Distance to closed | closedDist | distance, in kilometers, to either forest or cerrado |
| Distance to edge | edgeDist | distance, in kilometers, to any habitat edge |
| Closed-canopy | closed | proportion of closed-canopy habitat (cerrado, forest) within 1.4 km2 of a sample |
| Open-canopy | open | proportion of non-agriculture, open-canopy habitat (grassland, open cerrado, ranchland) within 1.4 km2 of a sample |
| Natural habitat | natural | proportion of natural habitat (forest, cerrado, open cerrado, grassland, marsh) within 1.4 km2 of sample |
| Non-cropland | nocrop | proportion of non-cropland habitat within 1 km2 of a sample |
| Elevation | elevation | elevation, in meters, as analyzed from a Digital Elevation Model |
| Habitat heterogeneity | heterogeneous | number of different vegetation types within small, medium, and large window around sample |
Parameter estimates and standard errors for the final resource selection models for species surveyed in the Cerrado of Brazil.
| Species | Covariate | Parameter Estimate | Standard Error |
| Armadillo | intercept | −2.232 | 0.425 |
| closedDist | 0.514 | 0.220 | |
| natural | 0.747 | 0.619 | |
| marsh | −3.910 | 1.668 | |
| MainroadDist | −0.729 | 0.191 | |
| natural * MainroadDist | 1.894 | 0.375 | |
| Anteater | intercept | −1.842 | 0.380 |
| nocrop | −0.931 | 0.569 | |
| roadDist | −0.086 | 0.078 | |
| forest | 1.287 | 0.456 | |
| cerrado | 0.779 | 0.432 | |
| open cerrado | 1.858 | 0.480 | |
| pasture | 0.943 | 0.250 | |
| unknown | 1.883 | 0.997 | |
| nocrop*roadDist | 0.806 | 0.236 | |
| Maned wolf | intercept | 2.391 | 0.573 |
| agDist | −1.267 | 0.184 | |
| (agDist)2 | 0.122 | 0.019 | |
| closed | −2.913 | 0.524 | |
| pasture | −1.176 | 0.311 | |
| Jaguar | intercept | −8.387 | 2.100 |
| closed | 2.670 | 1.830 | |
| natural | 7.469 | 2.398 | |
| Puma | intercept | −4.084 | 1.208 |
| closed | 25.620 | 8.307 | |
| natural | 2.508 | 1.371 |
Positive parameter estimates indicate a positive relationship between the covariate and resource selection. All of the final models are in the form of the logistic resource selection probability function.
Figure 2Selection probability by species and proportion of natural habitat per square kilometer.
Figure 3Selection probability by species and vegetation type (FO = forest, CE = cerrado, OC = open cerrado, GR = grassland, MA = marshland, PA = pasture, AG = cropland, UK = unclassified/unknown).
Figure 4Selection probability by species and proportion of closed-canopy vegetation per square kilometer.
Figure 5Selection probability by species and outside versus inside Emas National Park.