Abstract
Habitat fragmentation involves a reduction in the effective area available to a population and the imposition of hard patch edges. Studies seeking to measure effects of habitat fragmentation have compared populations in fragments of different size to estimate and area effect but few have examined the effect of converting open populations to closed ones (an effect of edges). To do so requires a shift in spatial scope-from comparison of individual fragments to that of fragmented versus unfragmented landscapes. Here we note that large-scale, “controlled” studies of habitat fragmentation have rarely been performed and are needed. In making our case we develop a simple computer simulation model based on how individual animals with home ranges are affected by the imposition of habitat edges, and use it to predict population-level responses to habitat fragmentation. We then compare predictions of the model with results from a field experiment on Peromyscus and Microtus. Our model treats the case where home ranges/territories fall entirely within or partially overlap with that of sample areas in continuous landscapes, but are restricted to areas within habitat fragments in impacted landscapes. Results of the simulations demonstrate that the imposition of hard edges can produce different population abundances for similar-sized areas in continuous and fragmented landscapes. This edge effect is disproportionately greater in small than large fragments and for species with larger than smaller home ranges. These predictions were generally supported by our field experiment. We argue that large-scale studies of habitat fragmentation are sorely needed, and that control-experiment contrasts of fragmented and unfragmented microlandscapes provide a logical starting point.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barrett GW, Peles JD, Harper SJ (1995) Reflections on the use of experimental landscapes in mammalian ecology. In: Lidicker WZ (ed) Landscape approaches in mammalian ecology and conservation. University of Minnesota Press, St. Paul, Minn., pp 157–174
Bierregaard RO Jr, Lovejoy TE, Kapos V,Santos AA dos, Hutchings RW (1992) The biological dynamics of tropical rainforest fragments. Bio Science 42: 859–866
Bowers MA, Dooley JL Jr (1993) Predation hazard and seed removal by small mammals: microhabitat versus patch scale effects. Oecologia 94: 247–254
Bowers MA, Gregario K, Brame CJ, Matter SF, Dooley JL Jr (1996) Use of space and habitats by meadow voles at the patch and landscape scales. Oecologia 105: 107–115
Burgess RL, Sharpe DM (1981) Forest island dynamics in mandominated landscapes. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Diffendorfer JE, Slade NA, Gaines MS, Holt RD (1995) Population dynamics of small mammals in fragmented and continuous old-field habitat. In: Lidicker WZ (ed) Landscape approaches in mammalian ecology and conservation. University of Minnesota Press, St. Paul, Minn., pp 175–199
Dooley JL Jr (1993) Patch effects on rodent demography. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.
Dooley JL Jr, Bowers MA (1996) Influence of patch attributes and microhabitat on the demography of two old-field rodents. Oikos (in press)
Fahrig L, Merriam G (1985) Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66: 1762–1768
Forman RTT (1987) The ethics of isolation, the spread of disturbance, and landscape ecology. In: Turner MG (ed) Landscape heterogeneity and disturbance. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 213–229
Foster J, Gaines MS (1991) The effects of a successional habitat mosaic on a small mammal community. Ecology 72: 1358–1373
Groom MJ, Schumaker N (1993) Evaluating landscape change: patterns of worldwide deforestation and local fragmentation In: Kareiva PM, Kingsolver JG, Huey RB (eds) Biotic interactions and global change. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass., pp 24–44
Hargrove WW, Pickering J (1992) Pseudoreplication: a sine qua non for regional ecology. Landsc Ecol 6: 251–258
Harper SJ, Bollinger EK, Barrett GW (1993) Effects of habitat patch shape on population dynamics of meadow voles (Microfus pennsylvanicus). J Mamm 74: 1045–1055
Harris LD (1984) The fragmented forest: island biogeography theory and the preservation of biotic diversity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.
Hopkins AJM, Saunders DA (1987) Ecological studies as the basis for management. In: Saunders DA, Arnold GW, Burbidge AA, Hopkins JM (eds) Nature conservation: the role of remnants of native vegetation. Surrey Beatty, Chipping Norton, Australia, pp 15–28
Hurlbert SH (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol Monogr 54: 187–211
Ims RA, Stenseth NC (1989) Divided the fruit flies fall. Nature 342: 21–22
Ims RA, Rolstad J, Wegge P (1993) Predicting space use responses to habitat fragmentation: can voles, Microtus oeconomus, serve as an experimental model system (EMS) for Capercaillie grouse, Tetro urogallus, in Boreal forests? Conserv Biol 63: 261–268
Kareiva PM (1987) Habitat fragmentation and the stability of predator-prey interactions. Nature 321: 388–391
Kotliar KB, Wiens JA (1990) Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity. Oikos 59: 253–260
Krebs JR (1971) Territory and breeding densities in the great tit, Parus major. Ecology 52: 2–22
Levin SA (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 1943–1967
Lovejoy TE, Bierregaard RO Jr, Rylands AB, Malcolm JR, Quintela CE, Harper LH, Brown KS Jr, Powell AN, Powell GVN, Schubart HOR, Hays MB (1986) Edge and other effects of isolation on Amazon forest fragments. In: Soule ME (ed) Conservation biology: the science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer Press, Sunderland, Mass., pp 257–285
Lynch JF, Whigham DF (1984) Effects of forest fragmentation on breeding bird communities in Maryland, USA. Biol Conserv 28: 287–324
Menkens GE, Anderson SH (1988) Estimation of small mammal population size. Ecology 69: 1952–1959
O'Neill RV, DeAngelis DL, Waide JB, Allen TFH (1986) A hierarchical concept of ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
Otis DL, Burnham KP, White GC, Anderson DR (1978) Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal population. Wildl Monogr 62: 5–135
Pickett STA, Thompson JN (1978) Patch dynamics and the size of nature reserves. Biol Conserv 13: 27–37
Quinn JF, Hastings A (1988) Extinction in subdivided habitats. Conserv Biol 1: 198–208
Quinn JF, Wolin CL, Judge MI (1989) An experimental analysis of patch size, habitat subdivision, and extinction in a marine intertidal snail. Conserv Biol 3: 242–251
Robinson GR, Holt RD, Gaines MS, Hamburg SP, Johnson ML, Fitch HS, Martinke EA (1992) Diverse and contrasting effects of habitat fragmentation. Science 257: 524–526
Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ, Margules CR (1991) Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv Biol 5: 18–32
Simberloff D (1988) The contribution of population and community biology to conservation science. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 19: 473–511
Skalski JR, Robson DS (1992) Techniques for wildlife investigations: design and analyses of capture data. Academic Press, San Diego, California
Soule ME (1986) Conservation biology: the science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.
Stamps JA, Buechner M, Krishnan VV (1987) The effects of edge geometry on territorial defense costs: intruder pressure in bounded habitats. Am Zool 27: 307–325
Stenseth NC (1985) Why mathematical models in evolutionary ecology? In: Cooley JH, Golley FB (eds) Trends in ecological research for the 1980s. Plenum Press, N.Y., pp 239–287
Temple SA, Cary JR (1988) Modeling dynamics of habitat-interior bird populations in fragmented landscapes. Conserv Biol 2: 340–347
Temple SA, Wilcox BA (1986) Effects of forest fragmentation on vertebrates in douglas-fir forests. In: Verner J, Morrison ML, Ralph CJ (eds) Modeling habitat relationships of terrestrial vertebrates. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wis., pp 261–262
Turchin PB (1982) Modelling the effect of host patch size on Mexican bean beetle emigration. Ecology 67: 124–132
Usher MB (1985) Implications of species-area relationships for wildlife conservation. J Environ Manage 21: 181–191
Usher MB (1987) Effects of fragmentation on communities and populations: a review with applications to wildlife conservation. In: Saunders DA, Arnold GW, Burbidge AA, Hopkins AJM (eds) Nature conservation: the role of remnants of native vegetation. Surrey Beatty, Chipping Norton, Australia, pp 103–121
Vance RR (1984) The effect of dispersal on population stability in one-species discrete-space population growth models. Am Nat 123: 230–254
Van Dorp D, Opdam PFM (1987) Effect of patch size, isolation, and regional abundance on forest bird communities. Landsc Ecol 1: 59–73
Van Horne B (1982) Niches of adult and juvenile deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) in seral stages of coniferous forest. Ecology 63: 992–1003
Verboom JA, Schotman A, Opdam PFM, Metz JAJ (1991) European nuthatch populations in a fragmented agricultural landscape. Oikos 61: 149–156
Whitcomb RF, Robbins CS, Lynch BL, Klimkiewicz MK, Bystrak D (1981) Effects of forest fragmentation on avifauna of the eastern deciduous forest. In: Burgess RL, Sharpe DM (eds) Forest island dynamics in man dominated landscapes. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 125–206
Wiens JA (1973) Interterritorial habitat variation in Grasshopper and Savanah sparrows. Ecology 54: 877–884
Wiens JA, Crawford CS, Gosz JR (1985) Boundary dynamics: a conceptual framework for studying landscape ecosystems. Oikos 45: 421–427
Wiens JA, Stenseth NC, Van Horne B, Ims RA (1993) Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos 66: 369–380
Wilcox BA (1980) Insular ecology and conservation. In: Soule ME, Wilcox BA (eds) Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass., pp 95–117
Yahner RH (1988) Changes in wildlife communities near edges. Conserv Biol 2: 242–251
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bowers, M.A., Matter, S.F., Dooley, J.L. et al. Controlled experiments of habitat fragmentation: a simple computer simulation and a test using small mammals. Oecologia 108, 182–191 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00333230
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00333230