Dynamic connectivity of temporary wetlands in the southern Great Plains
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Luis Ruiz (1)
Niki Parikh (1)
Lucas J. Heintzman (1)
Steven D. Collins (1)
Scott M. Starr (1)
Christopher K. Wright (2)
Geoffrey M. Henebry (2)
Natasja van Gestel (1) (3)
Nancy E. McIntyre (1) - 关键词：Betweenness centrality ; Cutpoint ; Graph theory ; Habitat network ; Hub ; Playa ; Stepping ; stone
- 刊名：Landscape Ecology
- 出版年：2014
- 出版时间：March 2014
- 年：2014
- 卷：29
- 期：3
- 页码：507-516
- 全文大小：1,729 KB
- 参考文献：1. Baum KA, Haynes KJ, Dillemuth FP, Cronin JT (2004) The matrix enhances the effectiveness of corridors and stepping stones. Ecology 85:2671-676 CrossRef
2. Beger M, Grantham HS, Pressey RL, Wilson KA, Peterson EL, Dorfman D, Mumby PJ, Lourival R, Brumbaught DR, Possingham HP (2010) Conservation planning for connectivity across marine, freshwater, and terrestrial realms. Biol Conserv 143:565-75 CrossRef
3. Bodin ?, Saura S (2010) Ranking individual habitat patches as connectivity providers: integrating network analysis and patch removal experiments. Ecol Model 221:2393-405 CrossRef
4. Bolen EG, Smith LM, Schramm HL (1989) Playa lakes: prairie wetlands of the Southern High Plains. Bioscience 39:615-23 CrossRef
5. Brinson MM, Malverez AI (2002) Temperate freshwater wetlands: types, status, and threats. Environ Conserv 29:115-33 CrossRef
6. Bunn A, Urban D, Keitt T (2000) Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J Environ Manag 59:265-78 CrossRef
7. Cariveau AB, Pavlacky DC Jr, Bishop AA, LaGrange TG (2011) Effects of surrounding land use on playa inundation following intense rainfall. Wetlands 31:65-3 CrossRef
8. Corbet PS (1999) Dragonflies: behaviour and ecology of Odonata. Comstock, Ithaca
9. Collins SD, Heintzman LJ, Starr SM, Wright CK, Henebry GM, McIntyre NE (in review) Hydrological dynamics of temporary wetlands in the southern Great Plains as a function of surrounding land use. J Arid Environ
10. Csardi G, Nepusz T (2006) The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal, Complex Systems 1695. http://igraph.sourceforge.net. Accessed 4 Jun 2013
11. D’Eon RG, Glenn SM, Parfitt I, Fortin M-J (2002) Landscape connectivity as a function of scale and organism vagility in a real forested landscape. Conserv Ecol 6(2):10. http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss2/art10/. Accessed 10 Jun 2013
12. Dale MRT, Fortin M-J (2010) From graphs to spatial graphs. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:21-8 CrossRef
13. Fall A, Fortin M-J, Manseau M, O’Brien D (2007) Spatial graphs: principles and applications for habitat connectivity. Ecosystems 10:448-61 CrossRef
14. Farmer AH, Parent AH (1997) Effects of the landscape on shorebird movements at spring migration stopovers. Condor 99:698-07 CrossRef
15. Fish EB, Atkinson EL, Mollhagen TR, Shanks CH, Brenton CM (1998). Playa lakes digital database for the Texas portion of the Playa Lakes Joint Venture region. Technical Publication #T-9-813, Department of Natural Resources Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX
16. Fortin M-J, Dale M (2005) Spatial analysis: a guide for ecologists. Cambridge University Press, New York
17. Galpern P, Manseau M, Fall A (2011) Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: a guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biol Conserv 144:44-5 CrossRef
18. Girvan M, Newman MEJ (2002) Community structure in social and biological networks. PNAS 99:7821-826 CrossRef
19. Hanski I (1999) Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapes. Oikos 87:209-19 CrossRef
20. Haukos DA, Smith LM (1994) The importance of playa wetlands to biodiversity of the Southern High Plains. Landsc Urban Plan 28:83-8 CrossRef
21. Johnson LA, Haukos DA, Smith LM, McMurry ST (2012) Physical loss and modification of Southern Great Plains playas. J Environ Manag 112:275-83 CrossRef
22. Johst K, Brandl R, Eber S (2002) Metapopulation persistence in dynamic landscapes: the role of dispersal distance. Oikos 98:263-70 CrossRef
23. Jordan F, Baldi A, Orci K-M, Racz I, Varga Z (2003) Characterizing the importance of habitat patches and corridors in maintaining the landscape connectivity of a / Pholidoptera transsylvanica (Orthoptera) metapopulation. Landscape Ecol 18:83-2 CrossRef
24. Keitt TH, Urban DL, Milne BT (1997) Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Conserv Ecol 1:4. http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss1/art4/. Accessed 24 July 2013
25. Laita A, Kotiaho JS, M?nkk?nen M (2011) Graph-theoretic connectivity measures: what do they tell us about connectivity? Landscape Ecol 26:951-67 CrossRef
26. Metzger J-P, Décamps H (1997) The structural connectivity threshold: an hypothesis in conservation biology at the landscape scale. Acta Oecol 18:1-2 CrossRef
27. Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol Appl 17:1771-782 CrossRef
28. Minor ES, Urban DL (2008) A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv Biol 22:297-07 CrossRef
29. Newman MEJ, Girvan M (2004) Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys Rev E 69:026113 CrossRef
30. Ozesmi SL, Bauer ME (2002) Satellite remote sensing of wetlands. Wetl Ecol Manag 10:381-02 CrossRef
31. Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S (2007) Impact of spatial scale on the identification of critical habitat patches for the maintenance of landscape connectivity. Landsc Urban Plan 83:176-86 CrossRef
32. R Core Team (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation, Vienna
33. Ray JD, Sullivan BD, Miller HW (2003) Breeding ducks and their habitats in the High Plains of Texas. Southwest Nat 48:241-48 CrossRef
34. Rayfield B, Fortin M-J, Fall A (2011) Connectivity for conservation: a framework to classify network measures. Ecology 92:847-58 CrossRef
35. Rubio L, Saura S (2012) Assessing the importance of individual habitat patches as irreplaceable connecting elements: an analysis of simulated and real landscape data. Ecol Complex 11:28-7 CrossRef
36. Sader SA, Ahl D, Wen-Shu L (1995) Accuracy of Landsat-TM and GIS rule-based methods for forest wetland classification in Maine. Remote Sens Environ 53:133-44 CrossRef
37. Schooley RL, Branch LC (2007) Spatial heterogeneity in habitat quality and cross-scale interactions in metapopulations. Ecosystems 10:846-53 CrossRef
38. Smith LM (2003) Playas of the Great Plains. University of Texas Press, Austin
39. Smith MA, Green DM (2005) Dispersal and the metapopulation paradigm in amphibian ecology and conservation: are all amphibian populations metapopulations? Ecography 28:110-28 CrossRef
40. Smith LM, Haukos DA, McMurry ST, LaGrange T, Willis D (2011) Ecosystem services provided by playas in the High Plains: potential influences of USDA conservation programs. Ecol Appl 21(Suppl):S82–S92 CrossRef
41. Taylor PD, Fahrig L, Henein K, Merriam G (1993) Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68:571-73 CrossRef
42. Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000) On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos 90:7-9 CrossRef
43. Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice. Springer-Verlag, New York
44. Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Schick RS (2009) Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol Lett 12:260-73 CrossRef
45. Webb EB, Smith LM, Vrtiska MP, LaGrange TG (2010) Effects of local and landscape variables on wetland bird habitat use during migration through the Rainwater Basin. J Wildl Manag 74:109-19 CrossRef
46. Wickham H (2011) The split-apply-combine strategy for data analysis. J Stat Softw 40: 1-9. http://www.jstatsoft.org/v40/i01/. Accessed 3 Jun 2013
47. Williams DD (2006) The biology of temporary waters. Oxford University Press, New York - 作者单位：Luis Ruiz (1)
Niki Parikh (1)
Lucas J. Heintzman (1)
Steven D. Collins (1)
Scott M. Starr (1)
Christopher K. Wright (2)
Geoffrey M. Henebry (2)
Natasja van Gestel (1) (3)
Nancy E. McIntyre (1)
1. Department of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, 79409-3131, USA
2. Geographic Information Science Center of Excellence, South Dakota State University, 1021 Medary Ave., Wecota Hall 506B, Brookings, SD, 57007-3510, USA
3. The Ecosystem Science and Society Center, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, 86011-5620, USA - ISSN：1572-9761
文摘
We quantified fluctuations in the status of individual patches (wetlands) in supporting connectivity within a network of playas, temporary wetlands of the southern Great Plains of North America that are loci for regional biodiversity. We used remote sensing imagery to delineate the location of surface waters in >8,000 playa basins in a ~31,900?km2 portion of Texas and quantified connectivity in this region from 2007 to 2011. We ranked playas as stepping-stones, cutpoints, and hubs at different levels of environmental conditions (regionally wet, dry, and average periods of precipitation) for dispersal distances ranging from 0.5 to 34?km, representing a range of species-vagilities, to provide baseline dynamics within an area likely to experience disrupted connectivity due to anthropogenic activities. An individual playa’s status as a stepping-stone, cutpoint, or hub was highly variable over time (only a single playa was a top 20 stepping-stone, cutpoint, or hub in >50?% of all of the dates examined). Coalescence of the inundated playa network usually occurred at ?0?km dispersal distance and depended on wetland density, indicating that critical thresholds in connectivity arose from synergistic effects of dispersal ability (spatial scale) and wet playa occurrence (a function of precipitation). Organisms with dispersal capabilities limited to <10?km routinely experienced effective isolation during our study. Connectivity is thus a dynamic emergent landscape property, so management to maintain connectivity for wildlife within ephemeral habitats like inundated playas will need to move beyond a patch-based focus to a network focus by including connectivity as a dynamic landscape property.