Advertisement

Landscape Ecology

, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp 761–774 | Cite as

Multi-scale network analysis shows scale-dependency of significance of individual protected areas for connectivity

  • Kristine Maciejewski
  • Graeme S. Cumming
Research Article

Abstract

Context

The problem of how ecological mechanisms create and interact with patterns across different scales is fundamental not only for understanding ecological processes, but also for interpretations of ecological dynamics and the strategies that organisms adopt to cope with variability and cross-scale influences.

Objectives

Our objective was to determine the consistency of the role of individual habitat patches in pattern-process relationships (focusing on the potential for dispersal within a network of patches in a fragmented landscape) across a range of scales.

Methods

Network analysis was used to assess and compare the potential connectivity and spatial distribution of highland fynbos habitat in and between protected areas of the Western Cape of South Africa. Connectivity of fynbos patches was measured using ten maximum threshold distances, ranging from five to 50 km, based on the known average dispersal distances of fynbos endemic bird species.

Results

Network connectivity increased predictably with scale. More interestingly, however, the relative contributions of individual protected areas to network connectivity showed strong scale dependence.

Conclusions

Conservation approaches that rely on single-scale analyses of connectivity and context (e.g., based on data for a single species with a given dispersal distance) are inadequate to identify key land parcels. Landscape planning, and specifically the assessment of the value of individual areas for dispersal, must therefore be undertaken with a multi-scale approach. Developing a better understanding of scaling dependencies in fragmenting landscapes is of high importance for both ecological theory and conservation planning.

Keywords

Habitat connectivity Stepping stone Fynbos Endemic Fragmentation Pattern and scale 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the DST/NRF Centre of Excellence at the Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, a CPRR Grant to GSC from the National Research Foundation of South Africa, and a James S. McDonnell Foundation complexity scholar award to GSC.

References

  1. Baggio R, Scott N, Cooper C (2010) Network acience: a review focused on tourismGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakun A, Broad K (2003) Environmental ‘loopholes’ and fish population dynamics: comparative pattern recognition with focus on El Nino effects in the Pacific. Fish Oceanogr 12(4/5):458–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball I, Possingham H (2000) MARXAN (V1.8.2): marine reserve design using spatially explicit annealing, a manual. The Ecology Centre, University of Queensland, BrisbaneGoogle Scholar
  4. Bettsetter C (2002) On the minimum node degree and connectivity of a wireless multihop network. In: Proceedings of ACM international symposium. Mobile Ad Hoc Netw. and Como (MobiHoc)Google Scholar
  5. BirdLife International (2010) Endemic Bird Area factsheet: Cape fynbos. Downloaded from 450 http://www.birdlife.org. Accessed 20 Aug 2014
  6. Bodin Ö, Tengö M, Norman A, Lundberg J, Elmqvist T (2006) The value of small size: loss of forest patches and ecological thresholds in southern Madagascar. Ecol Appl 16(2):440–451CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Borgatti SP, Mehra A, Brass DJ, Labianca G (2009) Network analysis in the social sciences. Science 323:892–895CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Boyd C, Brooks TM, Butchart SHM, Edgar GJ, da Fonseca GAB, Hawkins F, Hoffmann M, Sechrest W, Stuart SN, van Dijk PP (2008) Spatial scale and the conservation of threatened species. Conserv Lett 1(1):37–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brooks CP (2003) A scalar analysis of landscape connectivity. Oikos 102(2):433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown JD, Berghaus RD, Costa TP, Poulson R, Carter DL, Lebarbenchon C, Stallknecht DE (2012) Intestinal excretion of a wild bird-origin H3N8 low pathogenic avian influenza virus in Mallards (Anas Platyrhynchos). J Wildl Dis 48(4): 991-998.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cadenasso ML, Pickett STA (2001) Effect of edge structure on the flux of species into forest interiors. Conserv Biol 15(1):91–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cadenasso ML, Pickett STA, Weathers KC, Bell SS, Benning TL, Cerreiro MM, Dawson TE (2003) An interdisciplinary and synthetic approach to ecological boundaries. BioScience 53:717–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cowling RM, Hilton-Taylor C (1994) Patterns of plant diversity and endemism in Southern Africa: an overview. In: Huntley BJ (ed) Botanical Diversity in Southern Africa. National Botanical Institute, Pretoria, pp 31–52Google Scholar
  14. Csardi G, Nepusz T (2006) The igraph software package for complex network research. Int J Complex Syst 1695(5):1–9Google Scholar
  15. Cumming GS (2011) Spatial resilience: integrating landscape ecology, resilience, and sustainability. Landscape Ecol 26(7):899–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cumming GS, Bodin O, Ernstson H, Elmqvist T (2010) Network analysis in conservation biogeography: challenges and opportunities. Divers Distrib 16:414–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Debinski DM, Holt RD (2000) A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments. Conserv Biol 14(2):342–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Driscoll DD, Banks SC, Barton PS, Lindenmayer DB, Smith AL (2013) Conceptual domain of the matrix in fragmented landscapes. Trends Ecol Evol 28(10):605–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dunk JR, Zielinski WJ, Priesler HK (2004) Predicting the occurrence of rare mollusks in northern California forests. Ecol Appl 14:713–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Erdös P, Rényi R (1959) On random graphs. Publ Math Debr 6:290–297Google Scholar
  21. ESRI (2012) ArcGIS desktop: release 10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  22. Franklin JF, Lindenmayer DB (2009) Importance of matrix habitats in maintaining biological diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106(2):349–350CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Fruchterman TM, Reingold EM (1991) Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Softw Pract Exp 21(11):1129–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gaidet N, El Mamy ABO, Cappelle J, Caron A, Cumming GS, Grosbois V, Gil P, Hammouni S, de Almeida RS, Fereidouni SR, Cattoli G, Abolnik C, Mundava J, Fofana B, Ndlovu M, Diawara Y, Hurtado R, Newman SH, Dodman T, Balanca G (2012) Investigating avian influenza infection hotspots in old-world shorebirds. PLoS One 7(9):e46049CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Geselbracht L, Torres R, Cumming GS, Dorfman D, Beck M, Shaw D (2009) Identification of a spatially efficient portfolio of priority conservation sites in marine and estuarine areas of Florida. Aquat Conserv-Mar Freshw Ecosyst 19(4):408–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gibson CC, Ostrom E, Ahn T-K (2000) The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey. Ecol Econ 32(2):217–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gonzalez A (2000) Community relaxation in fragmented landscapes: the relation between species richness, area and age. Ecol Lett 3(5):441–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hockey PAR, Dean WRJ, Ryan P (2005) Roberts Birds of Southern Africa, VIIth edn. The Trustees of the John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape TownGoogle Scholar
  29. Huntley B, Barnard P (2012) Potential impacts of climatic change on southern African birds of fynbos and grassland biodiversity hotspots. Divers Distrib 18(8):769–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Janssen MA, Orjan B, Anderies JM, Elmqvist T, Ernstson H, McAllister RRJ, Per O, Ryan P (2006) Toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):15Google Scholar
  31. Keitt TH, Urban DL, Milne BT (1997) Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Conserv Ecol 1(1):4Google Scholar
  32. Kim H, Anderson R (2013) An experimental evaluation of robustness of networks. Syst J IEEE 7(2):179–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kuussaari M, Bommarco R, Heikkinen RK et al (2009) Extinction debt: a challenge for biodiversity conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 24(10):564–571CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Lee ATK, Barnard P (2012) Endemic fynbos avifauna: comparative range declines a cause for concern. Ornithol Observ 3:19–28Google Scholar
  35. Levin SA (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology: the Robert H. MacArthur award lecture. Ecology 73(6):1943–1967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Levin SA (2000) Multiple scales and the maintenance of biodiversity. Ecosystems 3(6):498–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lindenmayer DB, Fischer J (2006) Habitat fragmentation and landscape change. Island Pres, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  38. Mateo Sánchez MC, Cushman SA, Saura S (2013) Scale dependence in habitat selection: the case of the endangered brown bear (Ursus arctos) in the Cantabrian Range (NW Spain). Int J Geogr Inf Sci 28(8):1531–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Matisziw TC, Murray AT (2008) Connectivity change in habitat networks. Landscape Ecol 24(1):89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Matisziw TC, Alam M, Trauth KM, Inniss EC, Semlitsch RD, McIntosh S, Horton J (2015) A vector approach for modeling landscape corridors and habitat connectivity. Environ Model Assess 20(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol Appl 17(6):1771–1782CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Mitchell BA (2005) Editorial. -Parks 15:6Google Scholar
  43. Moore C, Cumming GS, Slingsby J, Grewar J (2014) Tracking socioeconomic vulnerability using network analysis: insights from an avian influenza outbreak in an ostrich production network. PLoS One 9(1):e86973CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Norberg J, Wilson J, Walker B, Ostrom E (2008) Diversity and Resilience of social-ecological systems. In: Norberg J, Cumming GS (eds) Complexity theory for a sustainable future. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 46–79Google Scholar
  45. Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S (2007) Impact of spatial scale on the identification of critical habitat patches for the maintenance of landscape connectivity. Landscape Urban Plan 83:176–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Peters DPC, Bestelmeyer BT, Turner MG (2007) Cross-scale interactions and changing pattern-process relationships: consequences for system dynamics. Ecosystems 10(5):790–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Poiani KA, Richter BD, Anderson MG, Richter HE (2000) Biodiversity conservation at multiple scales: functional sites, landscapes, and networks. Bioscience 50:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Poteete A, Ostrom E (2004) Heterogeneity, group size, and collective action: the role of institutions in forest management. Dev Change 35(3):435–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pressey RL, Cabeza M, Watts ME, Cowling RM, Wilson KA (2007) Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends Ecol Evol 22(11):583–592CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Prugh LR, Hodges KE, Sinclair ARE, Brashares JS (2008) Effect of habitat area and isolation on fragmented animal populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:20770–20775CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Rebelo A (1992) Red Data Book species in the Cape Floristic Region: threats, priorities and target species. Trans R Soc S Afr 48(1):55–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Reppas AI, Spiliotis KG, Siettos CI (2011) On the effect of path length of small-world networks on epidemic dynamics. Virulence 3:146–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landscape and Urban Plan 83(2):91–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Simberloff D, Farr JA, Cox J, Mehlman DW (1992) Movement corridors—conservation bargains or poor investments. Conserv Biol 6(4):493–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Stauffer D (1985) Introduction to percolation theory. Taylor and Francis, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Swindle KA, Ripple WJ, Meslow EC, Schafer D (1999) Old-forest distribution around spotted owl nests in the central Cascade Mountains, Oregon. J Wildl Manag 63(4):1212–1221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Terborgh J, Lopez L, Nunez P et al (2001) Ecological meltdown in predator-free forest fragments. Science 294(5548):1923–1926CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Thompson M (1996) A standard land-cover classification scheme for remote-sensing applications in South Africa. S Afr J Sci 92:34–42Google Scholar
  59. Tigas LA, Van Vuren DH, Sauvajot RM (2002) Behavioral responses of bobcats and coyotes to habitat fragmentation and corridors in an urban environment. Biol Conserv 108(3):299–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. TNC (2003) The five-s framework for site conservation: a practitioner’s handbook for site conservation planning and measuring conservation success. The Nature Conservancy, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  61. Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  62. Uezu A, Beyer DD, Metzger JP (2008) Can agroforest woodlots work as stepping stones for birds in the Atlantic forest region? Biodivers Conserv 17(8):1907–1922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Schick RS (2009) Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol Lett 12(3):260–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. van Dijk JGB, Hoye BJ, Verhagen JH, Nolet BA, Fouchier RAM, Klaassen M (2014) Juveniles and migrants as drivers for seasonal epizootics of avian influenza virus. J Anim Ecol 83:266–275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Walters S (2007) Modeling scale-dependent landscape pattern, dispersal, and connectivity from the perspective of the organism. Landscape Ecol 22(6):867–881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis—methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Watts DJaSHS (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393:440–442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Weisstein EW (2015) Fast Fourier Transform, from MathWorld–A Wolfram Web Resource. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/FastFourierTransform.html
  69. With KA, Crist TO (1995) Critical thresholds in species responses to landscape structure. Ecology 76(8):2446–2459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wu J (1999) Hierarchy and scaling: extrapolating information along a scaling ladder. Can J Remote Sens 25:367–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wu J (2004a) Effects of changing scale on landscape pattern analysis: scaling relations. Landscape Ecol 19:125–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wu J (2004b) Effects of changing scale on landscape pattern analysis: scaling relations. Landscape Ecol 19(2):125–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wu J, Loucks OL (1995) From balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm shift in ecology. Q Rev Biol 70:439–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African OrnithologyUniversity of Cape TownRondeboschSouth Africa
  2. 2.ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef StudiesJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations