IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i12p2104-d980629.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Habitat Divergence and Fragmentation Analysis of Two Sympatric Pheasants in the Qilian Mountains, China

Author

Listed:
  • Wen-Dong Xie

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Life Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Jia Jia

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Life Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Kai Song

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Chang-Li Bu

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Life Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Li-Ming Ma

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Life Science, Hebei University, Baoding 071002, China)

  • Ge-Sang Wang-Jie

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Life Science, Hebei University, Baoding 071002, China)

  • Quan-Liang Li

    (Qinghai Service Center of Qilian National Park, Xining 810000, China)

  • Heng-Qing Yin

    (Qinghai Service Center of Qilian National Park, Xining 810000, China)

  • Feng-Yi Xu

    (Qinghai Service Center of Qilian National Park, Xining 810000, China)

  • Dui-Fang Ma

    (Zhangye Management Division of Gansu Provincial Administration of Qilian National Park, Zhangye 734000, China)

  • Xin-Hai Li

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Yun Fang

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Yue-Hua Sun

    (Key Laboratory of Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

Abstract

Habitat fragmentation is considered a major threat to biodiversity worldwide. Two endangered species, the blood pheasant ( Ithaginis cruentus ) and the blue eared pheasant ( Crossoptilon auritum ), co-exist in a fragmented forest in the Qilian Mountains. However, how their habitats react to the fragmenting landscape remains unclear. Therefore, we carried out a field survey in the core habitat of the two species in Qilian Mountains National Park and used the MaxEnt Model to predict their potential distribution and to assess the protection efficiency. Then, we utilized a modified within-patch fragmentation categorizing model to identify how their functional fragmentations differentiated. The results showed that the habitat utilization of the two pheasant species was significantly different, with a potential distribution area of 18,281 km 2 for the blood pheasant and 43,223 km 2 for the blue eared pheasant. The habitat of the blue eared pheasant is highly fragmented with 27.7% categorized as ‘Interior’ and 49.3% as ‘Edge’, while the habitat of the blood pheasant is more severe with 2.1% categorized as ‘Interior’ and 50.4% as ‘Edge’. Analysis shows that large areas of habitat for the two pheasants remain unprotected by the Qilian Mountains National Park. The intense grazing and human infrastructure may have a large effect on the currently highly fragmented landscape. Future measurements are needed to alleviate this conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Wen-Dong Xie & Jia Jia & Kai Song & Chang-Li Bu & Li-Ming Ma & Ge-Sang Wang-Jie & Quan-Liang Li & Heng-Qing Yin & Feng-Yi Xu & Dui-Fang Ma & Xin-Hai Li & Yun Fang & Yue-Hua Sun, 2022. "Comparative Habitat Divergence and Fragmentation Analysis of Two Sympatric Pheasants in the Qilian Mountains, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-14, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:12:p:2104-:d:980629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/12/2104/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/12/2104/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ying Tang & Julie A Winkler & Andrés Viña & Jianguo Liu & Yuanbin Zhang & Xiaofeng Zhang & Xiaohong Li & Fang Wang & Jindong Zhang & Zhiqiang Zhao, 2018. "Uncertainty of future projections of species distributions in mountainous regions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, January.
    2. Jesús Aguirre-Gutiérrez & Luísa G Carvalheiro & Chiara Polce & E Emiel van Loon & Niels Raes & Menno Reemer & Jacobus C Biesmeijer, 2013. "Fit-for-Purpose: Species Distribution Model Performance Depends on Evaluation Criteria – Dutch Hoverflies as a Case Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-11, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Leandro, Camila & Jay-Robert, Pierre & Mériguet, Bruno & Houard, Xavier & Renner, Ian W., 2020. "Is my sdm good enough? insights from a citizen science dataset in a point process modeling framework," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 438(C).
    2. Egarter Vigl, Lukas & Marsoner, Thomas & Schirpke, Uta & Tscholl, Simon & Candiago, Sebastian & Depellegrin, Daniel, 2021. "A multi-pressure analysis of ecosystem services for conservation planning in the Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Barker, Justin R. & MacIsaac, Hugh J., 2022. "Species distribution models: Administrative boundary centroid occurrences require careful interpretation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 472(C).
    4. Halvorsen, Rune & Mazzoni, Sabrina & Dirksen, John Wirkola & Næsset, Erik & Gobakken, Terje & Ohlson, Mikael, 2016. "How important are choice of model selection method and spatial autocorrelation of presence data for distribution modelling by MaxEnt?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 328(C), pages 108-118.
    5. Santiago José Elías Velazco & Franklin Galvão & Fabricio Villalobos & Paulo De Marco Júnior, 2017. "Using worldwide edaphic data to model plant species niches: An assessment at a continental extent," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-24, October.
    6. Perennes, Marie & Diekötter, Tim & Groß, Jens & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2021. "A hierarchical framework for mapping pollination ecosystem service potential at the local scale," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 444(C).
    7. Grimmett, Liam & Whitsed, Rachel & Horta, Ana, 2020. "Presence-only species distribution models are sensitive to sample prevalence: Evaluating models using spatial prediction stability and accuracy metrics," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 431(C).
    8. Jing Zhen & Xinyuan Wang & Qingkai Meng & Jingwei Song & Ying Liao & Bo Xiang & Huadong Guo & Chuansheng Liu & Ruixia Yang & Lei Luo, 2018. "Fine-Scale Evaluation of Giant Panda Habitats and Countermeasures against the Future Impacts of Climate Change and Human Disturbance (2015–2050): A Case Study in Ya’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, April.
    9. Bell, David M. & Schlaepfer, Daniel R., 2016. "On the dangers of model complexity without ecological justification in species distribution modeling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 330(C), pages 50-59.
    10. Tereza Cristina Giannini & Wilian França Costa & Guaraci Duran Cordeiro & Vera Lucia Imperatriz-Fonseca & Antonio Mauro Saraiva & Jacobus Biesmeijer & Lucas Alejandro Garibaldi, 2017. "Projected climate change threatens pollinators and crop production in Brazil," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, August.
    11. Moullec, Fabien & Barrier, Nicolas & Drira, Sabrine & Guilhaumon, François & Hattab, Tarek & Peck, Myron A. & Shin, Yunne-Jai, 2022. "Using species distribution models only may underestimate climate change impacts on future marine biodiversity," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 464(C).

    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:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:12:p:2104-:d:980629. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.