Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating habitat connectivity methodologies: a case study with endangered African wild dogs in South Africa

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

In fragmented landscapes, connectivity between subpopulations is vital for species’ persistence. Various techniques are used to assess the degree of connectivity between habitat patches, yet their performance is seldom evaluated. Models are regularly based on habitat selection by individuals in resident populations, yet dispersers may not require habitat which supports permanent residence.

Objectives and methods

Using a database of African wild dog (Lycaon pictus) occurrence records in north-eastern South Africa (n = 576), we developed and compared ecological niche models (ENM) for wild dogs packs and dispersers. Additionally, we used least cost path (LCP) and current flow models to assess connectivity. Results were further validated using occurrence records (n = 339) for cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus).

Results and conclusions

The ENM for wild dog packs identified large but isolated patches of suitable habitat, while the disperser ENM had greater suitability values for areas in between highly suitable patches. Without disperser-specific data, models omitted large areas which were confirmed to have provided connectivity. Although models derived from a potentially subjective cost layer have been criticised, the current flow model outperformed the other connectivity techniques and provided the most meaningful predictions for conservation planning. We identified five priority conservation areas for wild dogs, two of which had a greater feasibility for recolonisation. The scarcity of disperser-specific data promotes models using habitat data for resident individuals but here we illustrate the pitfalls thereof. Our study provides insights into the performance of these frequently employed techniques and how they may affect conservation management decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, Blust GD, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, Matthysen E (2003) The application of ‘least-cost’ modelling as a functional landscape model. Landsca Urban Plan 64:233–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beier P, Majka DR, Spencer WD (2008) Forks in the road: choices in procedures for designing wildland linkages. Conserv Biol 22:836–851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cardillo M, Mace GM, Jones KE, Bielby J, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Sechrest W, Orme CDL, Purvis A (2005) Multiple causes of high extinction risk in large mammal species. Science 309:1239–1241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll C, Mcrae BH, Brookes A (2012) Use of linkage mapping and centrality analysis across habitat gradients to conserve connectivity of gray wolf populations in Western North America. Conserv Biol 26:78–87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Creel S, Creel NM (2002) The African Wild dog: behaviour, ecology and conservation. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Cushman SA (2006) Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on amphibians: a review and prospectus. Biol Conserv 128:231–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cushman SA, Mckelvey KS, Schwartz MK (2009) Use of empirically derived source–destination models to map regional conservation corridors. Conserv Biol 23:368–376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dalerum F, Somers MJ, Kunkel K, Cameron EZ (2008) The potential for large carnivores to act as biodiversity surrogates in southern Africa. Biodivers Conserv 17:2939–2949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies-Mostert HT, Kamler JF, Mills MGL, Jackson CR, Rasmussen GSA, Groom RJ, Macdonald DW (2012) Long-distance transboundary dispersal of African wild dogs among protected areas in southern Africa. Afr J Ecol 50:500–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies-Mostert HT, Mills MGL, Macdonald DW (2009) A critical assessment of South Africa’s managed metapopulation recovery strategy for African wild dogs and its value as a template for large carnivore conservation elsewhere. In: Hayward M, Somers M (eds) Reintroduction of Top-Order Predators. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson A, Lodge D, Alder J, Cumming GS, Keymer J et al (2006) Habitat loss, trophic collapse, and the decline of ecosystem services. Ecology 87:1915–1924

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudik M, Ferrier S, Guisan A et al (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan WF, Calabrese JM (2006) Quantifying connectivity: balancing metric performance with data requirements. In: Crooks KR, Sanjayan M (eds) Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 297–317

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:487–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreras P (2001) Landscape structure and asymmetrical inter-patch connectivity in a metapopulation of the endangered Iberian lynx. Biol Conserv 100:125–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller TK, Kat PW, Bulger JB, Maddock AH, Ginsberg JR, Burrows R, McNutt JW, Mills MGL (1992) Population dynamics of African wilddogs. In: McCullough DR, Barrett H (eds) Wildlife 2001: populations. Elsevier Science Publishers, London, pp 1125–1139

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Graves TA, Farley S, Goldstein MI, Servheen C (2007) Identification of functional corridors with movement characteristics of brown bears on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska. Landscape Ecol 22:765–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilty JA, Merenlender AM (2004) Use of riparian corridors and vineyards by mammalian predators in Northern California. Conserv Biol 18:126–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huck M, Jędrzejewski W, Borowik T, Miłosz-Cielma M, Schmidt K, Jędrzejewska B, Nowak S, Mysłajek RW (2011) Habitat suitability, corridors and dispersal barriers for large carnivores in Poland. Acta Theriol 56:91–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hutcheson K (1970) A test for comparing diversities based on the Shannon formula. J Theor Biol 29:151–154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson CR, Robertson MP (2011) Predicting the potential distribution of an endangered cryptic subterranean mammal from few occurrence records. J Nat Conserv 19:87–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee-Yaw JA, Davidson A, McRae BH, Green DM (2009) Do landscape processes predict phylogeographic patterns in the wood frog? Mol Ecol 18:1863–1874

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey P, du Toit JT, Mills MG, Alexander R (2005a) The potential contribution of ecotourism to wild dog Lycaon pictus conservation. Biol Conserv 123:339–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey P, du Toit JT, Mills MGL (2004) The distribution and population status of African wild dogs Lycaon pictus outside protected areas in South Africa. S Afr J Wildl Res 34:143–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey PA, Du Toit JT, Mills MG (2005b) Attitudes of ranchers towards African wild dogs Lycaon pictus: conservation implications for wild dogs on private land. Biol Conserv 125:113–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey PA, Romañach SS, Davies-Mostert HT (2009) The importance of conservancies for enhancing the value of game ranch land for large mammal conservation in southern Africa. J Zool 277:99–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nat (Lond) 405:243–253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Masenga EH, Jackson CR, Mjingo EE, Jacobson A, Riggio J, Lyamuya RD, Fyumagwa RD, Borner M, Røskaft E (in press) Insights into long-distance dispersal by African wild dogs in East Africa. Afr J Ecol. doi:10.1111/aje.12244

  • McNutt JW (1996) Sex-biased dispersal in African wild dogs, Lycaon pictus. Anim Behav 52:1067–1077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McRae BH, Dickson BG, Keitt TH, Shah VB (2008) Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology and conservation. Ecology 10:2712–2724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McRae BH, Kavanagh DM (2011). Linkage mapper connectivity analysis software. The Nature Conservancy, Seattle. Available from http://www.circuitscape.org/linkagemapper (Accessed Nov 2012)

  • Merrill T, Mattson DJ, Wright RG, Quigley HB (1999) Defining landscapes suitable for restoration of grizzly bears Ursus arctos in Idaho. Biol Conserv 87:231–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mucina L, Rutherford MC (2006) The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland., Strelitzia 19South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman MEJ (2005) A measure of betweenness centrality based on random walks. Soc Netw 27:39–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noss RF, Quigley HB, Hornocker MG, Merrill T, Paquet PC (1996) Conservation biology and carnivore conservation in the Rocky Mountains. Conserv Biol 10:949–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palomares F, Delibes M, Ferreras P, Fedriani JM, Calzada J, Revilla E (2000) Iberian Lynx in a fragmented landscape: predispersal, dispersal, and postdispersal habitats. Conserv Biol 14:809–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, SchapireR E (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190:231–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray N, Burgman MA (2006) Subjective uncertainties in habitat suitability maps. Ecol Model 195:172–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard Y, Armstrong DP (2010) Cost distance modelling of landscape connectivity and gap-crossing ability using radio-tracking data. J Appl Ecol 47:603–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer SC, Epps CW, Brashares JS (2011) Placing linkages among fragmented habitats: do least-cost models reflect how animals use landscapes? J Appl Ecol 48:668–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson A, Caro T, Davies-Mostert H, Mills MGL, Macdonald DW, Borner M, Masenga E, Packer C (2014) Cheetahs and wild dogs show contrasting patterns of suppression by lions. J Anim Ecol 83:1418–1427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thorn M, Green M, Scott D, Marnewick K (2013) Characteristics and determinants of human-carnivore conflict in South African farmland. Biodivers Conserv 22:1715–1730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dyk G, Slotow R (2003) The effects of fences and lions on the ecology of African wild dogs reintroduced to Pilanesberg National Park, South Africa. Afr Zool 38:79–94

    Google Scholar 

  • WAG-SA (2014) Minutes of the Wild dog advisory group of South Africa (WAG-SA) meetings. Johannesburg, South Africa

  • Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48:607–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodroffe R, Ginsberg JR (1998) Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science 280:2126–2128

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woodroffe R, Ginsberg JR (1999) Conserving the African wild dog Lycaon pictus. I. Diagnosing and treating the causes of decline. Oryx 33:132–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Endangered Wildlife Trust for making wild dog and cheetah occurrence records available to us, as well as to all the volunteers who submitted the sighting records of these species. Rosie Woodroffe, Jon Swenson, and two anonymous reviewers are thanked for constructive suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Realfagbygget, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Craig R. Jackson & Eivin Røskaft

  2. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Postboks 5685, Sluppen, 7485, Trondheim, Norway

    Craig R. Jackson

  3. Carnivore Conservation Programme, Endangered Wildlife Trust, Private Bag X11, Modderfontein, 1645, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Kelly Marnewick

  4. Centre for Wildlife Management, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, South Africa

    Kelly Marnewick

  5. Panthera, New York, USA

    Peter A. Lindsey

  6. Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0002, South Africa

    Peter A. Lindsey

  7. Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield, 0028, South Africa

    Mark P. Robertson

Authors
  1. Craig R. Jackson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kelly Marnewick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter A. Lindsey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eivin Røskaft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mark P. Robertson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Craig R. Jackson.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 742 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jackson, C.R., Marnewick, K., Lindsey, P.A. et al. Evaluating habitat connectivity methodologies: a case study with endangered African wild dogs in South Africa. Landscape Ecol 31, 1433–1447 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0342-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0342-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation