Advertisement

Landscape Ecology

, Volume 26, Issue 7, pp 969–981 | Cite as

Where do we go from here? Dispersal simulations shed light on the role of landscape structure in determining animal redistribution after reintroduction

  • V. La Morgia
  • Elisa Malenotti
  • Guido Badino
  • Francesca Bona
Research Article

Abstract

Reintroduction projects represent viable options for animal conservation. They allow the establishment of new local populations and may contribute to recreating functional networks within a metapopulation. In the latter case, landscape connectivity may be a major determinant of the phase of spread of the reintroduced populations. Here, we deal with an example of a red deer (Cervus elaphus) translocation planned to enable the connection among existing isolated populations of the species in the Italian Alps. Our aim was to assess whether the analysis of landscape suitability and the simulation of dispersal of released individuals could shed light on the actual process of population spread. For these purposes, we adopted a modelling approach using radiotracking data to develop a habitat suitability map. On the basis of this map, we simulated the dispersal of the animals after release and we then compared the simulation results with the outcome of null models and with the observed population redistribution. The results suggest that the spread of the subpopulation was easier north-westward than southward. Taking into account landscape suitability, our simulations produced a reliable estimate of the ease of colonization of the valleys neighbouring the release-site and they allowed the identification and validation of a potential pathway for animal dispersal. The suitability model based on the monitoring of individuals in the earliest phase of establishment shed light on the spread of the population and on its potential connections with other deer subpopulations.

Keywords

Connectivity Habitat suitability Italian Alps Radiotracking Red deer Reintroduction biology Resource utilization functions 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to the Wildlife Managers Marco Giovo and Federica Gaydou for providing radiotracking data, to Olivier Friard for his technical support, and to Stefano Focardi for a review of an early draft of the paper.

Supplementary material

10980_2011_9621_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (544 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 545 kb)

References

  1. Allouche O, Tsoar A, Kadmon R (2006) Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS). J Appl Ecol 43:1223–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Binzenhöfer B, Schröder B, Strauss B, Biedermann R, Settele J (2005) Habitat models and habitat connectivity analysis for butterflies and burnet moths: the example of Zygaena carniolica and Coenonympha arcania. Biol Cons 126:247–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference A practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Byers JA (2001) Correlated random walk equations of animal dispersal resolved by simulation. Ecology 82:1680–1690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chetkiewicz C-LB, Boyce MS (2009) Use of resource selection functions to identify conservation corridors. J Appl Ecol 46:1036–1047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clutton-Brock TH, Guinness FE, Albon SD (1982) Red deer: behavior and ecology of two sexes. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Cole LC (1949) The measurement of interspecific association. Ecology 30:411–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conner MM, White GC, Freddy DJ (2001) Elk movement in response to early-season hunting in Northwest Colorado. J Wildl Manage 65:926–940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coughenour MB (1991) Spatial components of plant-herbivore interactions in pastoral, ranching, and native ungulate ecosystems. J Range Manage 44:530–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:487–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gardner RH, Gustafson EJ (2004) Simulating dispersal of reintroduced species within heterogeneous landscapes. Ecol Model 171:339–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gillies CS, Hebblewhite M, Nielsen SE, Krawchuk MA, Alldridge CL, Frair JL, Saher DJ, Stevens CE, Jerde CL (2006) Application of random effects to the study of resource selection by animals. J Anim Ecol 75:887–898PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gonzales E, Gergel SE (2007) Testing assumptions of cost surface analysis as a tool for invasive species management. Landscape Ecol 22:1155–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gonzales G, Pépin D (1996) Le cerf (Cervus elaphus) en milieu montagnard et nordique. I. Paléontologie, occupation de l’espace, utilisation du temps et des ressources. Revue bibliographique. Gibier Faune Sauvage 13:27–52Google Scholar
  15. GRASS Development Team 2008. Geographic resources analysis support system (GRASS) Software. Open source geospatial foundation project. Available from http://grass.osgeo.org. Accessed July 2009
  16. Gustafson EJ, Gardner RH (1996) The effect of landscape heterogeneity on the probability of patch colonization. Ecology 77:94–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Handcock MS, Stein ML (1993) A Bayesian analysis of kriging. Technometrics 35:403–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hanski IA (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Hargrove W, Hoffman F, Efroymson R (2005) A practical map-analysis tool for detecting potential dispersal corridors. Landscape Ecol 20:361–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Henein K, Merriam G (1990) The element of connectivity where corridor is variable. Landscape Ecol 4:157–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hodgetts BV, Wass JR, Matthews LR (1998) The effects of visual and auditory disturbance on the behaviour of red deer (Cervus elaphus) at pasture with and without shelter. Appl Anim Behav Sci 55:337–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson CJ, Seip DR, Boyce MS (2004) A quantitative approach to conservation planning: using resource selection functions to map the distribution of mountain caribou at multiple spatial scales. J Appl Ecol 41:238–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kramer-Schadt S, Revilla E, Wiegand T, Breitenmoser U (2004) Fragmented landscapes, road mortality and patch connectivity: modelling influences on the dispersal of Eurasian lynx. J Appl Ecol 41:711–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kramer-Schadt S, Revilla E, Wiegand T (2005) Lynx reintroductions in fragmented landscapes of Germany: projects with a future or misunderstood wildlife conservation? Biol Cons 125:169–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. LaRue MA, Nielsen CK (2008) Modelling potential dispersal corridors for cougars in midwestern North America using least-cost path methods. Ecol Model 212:372–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lele SR, Keim JL (2006) Weighted distributions and estimation of resource selection probability functions. Ecology 87:3021–3028PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marzluff JM, Millspaugh JJ, Hurvitz P, Handcock MS (2004) Relating resources to a probabilistic measure of space use: forest fragments and steller’s jay. Ecology 85:1411–1427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mysterud A, Ostbye E (1999) Cover as a habitat element for temperate ungulates: effects on habitat selection and demography. Wildlife Soc B 27:385–394Google Scholar
  29. Okubo A (1980) Diffusion and ecological problems: mathematical models. Springer, VerlagGoogle Scholar
  30. Ovaskainen O (2004) Habitat-specific movement parameters estimated using mark-recapture data and a diffusion model. Ecology 85:242–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ovaskainen O (2008) Analytical and numerical tools for diffusion-based movement models. Theor Popul Biol 73:198–211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Patthey P (2003) Habitat and corridor selection of an expanding red deer (Cervus elaphus) population. Université de Lausanne, Faculté des Sciences, Thèse de doctoratGoogle Scholar
  33. Pépin D, Adrados C, Janeau G, Joachim J, Mann C (2008) Individual variation in migratory and exploratory movements and habitat use by adult red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) in a mountainous temperate forest. Ecol Res 23:1005–1013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pépin D, Morellet N, Goulard M (2009) Seasonal and daily walking activity patterns of free-ranging adult red deer (Cervus elaphus) at the individual level. Eur J Wildl Res 55(5):478–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pfeffer K, Pebesma EJ, Burrough PA (2003) Mapping alpine vegetation using vegetation observations and topographic attributes. Landscape Ecol 18:759–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pompilio L, Meriggi A (2001) Modelling wild ungulate distribution in Alpine habitat: a case study. Ital J Zool 68:281–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from http://www.R-project.org. Accessed May 2010
  38. Rittenhouse CD, Millspaugh JJ, Hubbard MW, Sheriff SL, Dijak WD (2008) Resource selection by translocated three-toed box turtles in Missouri. J Wildl Manage 72:268–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rowland MM, Wisdom MJ, Johnson BK, Kie JG (2000) Elk distribution and modeling in relation to roads. J Wildl Manage 64:672–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schippers P, Verboom J, Knaapen JP, Apeldoorn RC (1996) Dispersal and habitat connectivity in complex heterogeneous landscapes: an analysis with a GIS-based random walk model. Ecography 19:97–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Seaman DE, Millspaugh JJ, Kernohan BJ, Brundige GC, Raedeke KJ, Gitzen RA (1999) Effects of sample size on kernel home range estimates. J Wildl Manage 63:739–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Seddon PJ, Armstrong DP, Maloney RF (2007) Developing the science of reintroduction biology. Conserv Biol 21:303–312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Taylor PD, Fahrig L, Henein K, Merriam G (1993) Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68:571–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Turchin P (1998) Quantitative analysis of movement: measuring and modeling population redistribution in animals and plants. Sinauer associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  45. Vuilleumier S, Metzger R (2006) Animal dispersal modelling: handling landscape features and related animal choices. Ecol Model 190:159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walters S (2007) Modeling scale-dependent landscape pattern, dispersal, and connectivity from the perspective of the organism. Landscape Ecol 22:867–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Warrens MJ (2008) On association coefficients for 2 × 2 tables and properties that do not depend on the marginal distributions. Psychometrika 73:777–789PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Worton BJ (1989) Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies. Ecology 70:164–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. La Morgia
    • 1
  • Elisa Malenotti
    • 1
  • Guido Badino
    • 1
  • Francesca Bona
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Animal BiologyUniversity of TurinTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations