Literature DB >> 24606549

Response variables for evaluation of the effectiveness of conservation corridors.

Andrew J Gregory1, Paul Beier.   

Abstract

Many studies have evaluated effectiveness of corridors by measuring species presence in and movement through small structural corridors. However, few studies have assessed whether these response variables are adequate for assessing whether the conservation goals of the corridors have been achieved or considered the costs or lag times involved in measuring the response variables. We examined 4 response variables-presence of the focal species in the corridor, interpatch movement via the corridor, gene flow, and patch occupancy--with respect to 3 criteria--relevance to conservation goals, lag time (fewest generations at which a positive response to the corridor might be evident with a particular variable), and the cost of a study when applying a particular variable. The presence variable had the least relevance to conservation goals, no lag time advantage compared with interpatch movement, and only a moderate cost advantage over interpatch movement or gene flow. Movement of individual animals between patches was the most appropriate response variable for a corridor intended to provide seasonal migration, but it was not an appropriate response variable for corridor dwellers, and for passage species it was only moderately relevant to the goals of gene flow, demographic rescue, and recolonization. Response variables related to gene flow provided a good trade-off among cost, relevance to conservation goals, and lag time. Nonetheless, the lag time of 10-20 generations means that evaluation of conservation corridors cannot occur until a few decades after a corridor has been established. Response variables related to occupancy were most relevant to conservation goals, but the lag time and costs to detect corridor effects on occupancy were much greater than the lag time and costs to detect corridor effects on gene flow.
© 2014 Society for Conservation Biology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Evaluación de corredor; animal movement; corridor evaluation; flujo génico; fragmentación; fragmentation; gene flow; movimiento animal; occupancy; ocupación

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24606549     DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12252

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  5 in total

1.  Large-Scale Habitat Corridors for Biodiversity Conservation: A Forest Corridor in Madagascar.

Authors:  Tanjona Ramiadantsoa; Otso Ovaskainen; Joel Rybicki; Ilkka Hanski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Habitat corridors facilitate genetic resilience irrespective of species dispersal abilities or population sizes.

Authors:  Mark R Christie; L Lacey Knowles
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 5.183

3.  Structural connectivity at a national scale: Wildlife corridors in Tanzania.

Authors:  Jason Riggio; Tim Caro
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Ecological corridors for the amphibians and reptiles in the Natura 2000 sites of Romania.

Authors:  Tiberiu C Sahlean; Monica Papeș; Alexandru Strugariu; Iulian Gherghel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  A Framework for Developing Connectivity Targets and Indicators to Guide Global Conservation Efforts.

Authors:  R Travis Belote; Paul Beier; Tyler Creech; Zachary Wurtzebach; Gary Tabor
Journal:  Bioscience       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 8.589

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.