IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v440y2021ics030438002030452x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An equitable method for evaluating habitat amount and potential occupancy

Author

Listed:
  • Drielsma, Michael
  • Love, Jamie

Abstract

Landscape connectivity measures based on metapopulation theory were developed over 20 years ago. Initially, they applied classic metapopulation models to simple patch-based representations of landscapes using vector spatial data structures. Realism was improved by developing dynamic estimates of occupancy and metapopulation capacity, the latter providing a measure of the integrated habitat amount. Such measures are used to estimate the ability of habitat networks to support metapopulation persistence. The original methods for occupancy mapping and metapopulation capacity were adapted to work with fine-grained, continuous-value raster data. That step shifted the method outside of the classic metapopulation model which left some methodological issues unresolved; in particular, what has been termed the deceptive paradox of patch-based connectivity whereby perverse and what we describe as inequitable results are obtained through arbitrary circumscription of the analysis grid and through the trading of habitat between habitat quality, extent and connectivity. We provide a solution to this issue and apply it within the frame of Drielsma and Ferrier's (2009) raster-based Rapid Evaluation of Metapopulation Persistence (REMP).

Suggested Citation

  • Drielsma, Michael & Love, Jamie, 2021. "An equitable method for evaluating habitat amount and potential occupancy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 440(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:440:y:2021:i:c:s030438002030452x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438002030452X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109388?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ilkka Hanski & Otso Ovaskainen, 2000. "The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape," Nature, Nature, vol. 404(6779), pages 755-758, April.
    2. Drielsma, Michael & Ferrier, Simon & Manion, Glenn, 2007. "A raster-based technique for analysing habitat configuration: The cost–benefit approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 324-332.
    3. Liao, Jinbao & Li, Zhenqing & Hiebeler, David E. & El-Bana, Magdy & Deckmyn, Gaby & Nijs, Ivan, 2013. "Modelling plant population size and extinction thresholds from habitat loss and habitat fragmentation: Effects of neighbouring competition and dispersal strategy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 268(C), pages 9-17.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Drielsma, Michael J. & Love, Jamie & Taylor, Subhashni & Thapa, Rajesh & Williams, Kristen J., 2022. "General Landscape Connectivity Model (GLCM): a new way to map whole of landscape biodiversity functional connectivity for operational planning and reporting," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 465(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Su, Min & Chen, Ge & Yang, Yuanqi, 2019. "Dynamics of host-parasite interactions with horizontal and vertical transmissions in spatially heterogeneous environment," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 517(C), pages 452-458.
    2. Laguna, M.F. & Abramson, G. & Kuperman, M.N. & Lanata, J.L. & Monjeau, J.A., 2015. "Mathematical model of livestock and wildlife: Predation and competition under environmental disturbances," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 309, pages 110-117.
    3. Liao, Limei & Shen, Yang & Liao, Jinbao, 2020. "Robustness of dispersal network structure to patch loss," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 424(C).
    4. Joyce Maschinski & Michael Ross & Hong Liu & Joe O’Brien & Eric Wettberg & Kristin Haskins, 2011. "Sinking ships: conservation options for endemic taxa threatened by sea level rise," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 107(1), pages 147-167, July.
    5. Vuilleumier, Séverine & Fontanillas, Pierre, 2007. "Landscape structure affects dispersal in the greater white-toothed shrew: Inference between genetic and simulated ecological distances," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 201(3), pages 369-376.
    6. Drielsma, Michael J. & Love, Jamie & Taylor, Subhashni & Thapa, Rajesh & Williams, Kristen J., 2022. "General Landscape Connectivity Model (GLCM): a new way to map whole of landscape biodiversity functional connectivity for operational planning and reporting," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 465(C).
    7. Cornell, Stephen J. & Ovaskainen, Otso, 2008. "Exact asymptotic analysis for metapopulation dynamics on correlated dynamic landscapes," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 209-225.
    8. Christensen, Claire & Albert, István & Grenfell, Bryan & Albert, Réka, 2010. "Disease dynamics in a dynamic social network," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 389(13), pages 2663-2674.
    9. Eriksson, A. & Elías-Wolff, F. & Mehlig, B., 2013. "Metapopulation dynamics on the brink of extinction," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 101-122.
    10. d’Acampora, Bárbara H.A. & Higueras, Ester & Román, Emilia, 2018. "Combining different metrics to measure the ecological connectivity of two mangrove landscapes in the Municipality of Florianópolis, Southern Brazil," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 384(C), pages 103-110.
    11. Bodin, Örjan & Saura, Santiago, 2010. "Ranking individual habitat patches as connectivity providers: Integrating network analysis and patch removal experiments," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(19), pages 2393-2405.
    12. Gatmiry, Zohreh S. & Hafezalkotob, Ashkan & Khakzar bafruei, Morteza & Soltani, Roya, 2021. "Food web conservation vs. strategic threats: A security game approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 442(C).
    13. Shen, Yang & Zeng, Chenghui & Nijs, Ivan & Liao, Jinbao, 2019. "Species persistence in spatially regular networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 406(C), pages 1-6.
    14. Zhouqiao Ren & Jianhua He & Qiaobing Yue, 2021. "Assessing the Impact of Urban Expansion on Surrounding Forested Landscape Connectivity across Space and Time," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    15. Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K. & Paton, Peter W.C., 2010. "Cost-effective species conservation in exurban communities: A spatial analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 180-202, April.
    16. Peck, Steven L., 2012. "Networks of habitat patches in tsetse fly control: Implications of metapopulation structure on assessing local extinction probabilities," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 246(C), pages 99-102.
    17. Vuilleumier, Séverine & Possingham, Hugh P., 2012. "Interacting populations in heterogeneous environments," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 96-105.
    18. Stewart, Christopher William & van der Ree, Rodney, 2010. "A Voronoi diagram based population model for social species of wildlife," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(12), pages 1554-1568.
    19. Foltête, Jean-Christophe, 2019. "How ecological networks could benefit from landscape graphs: A response to the paper by Spartaco Gippoliti and Corrado Battisti," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 391-394.
    20. Gaaff, Aris & Reinhard, Stijn, 2012. "Incorporating the value of ecological networks into cost–benefit analysis to improve spatially explicit land-use planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 66-74.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:440:y:2021:i:c:s030438002030452x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.