Landscape Ecology

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 35–46 | Cite as

Species Dynamics in Disturbed Landscapes: When does a Shifting Habitat Mosaic Enhance Connectivity?

  • Michael C. Wimberly
Research article


Although landscape ecology emphasizes the effects of spatial pattern on ecological processes, most neutral models of species–habitat relationships have treated habitat as a static constraint. Do the working hypotheses derived from these models extend to real landscapes where disturbances create a shifting mosaic? A spatial landscape simulator incorporating vegetation dynamics and a metapopulation model was used to compare species in static and dynamic landscapes with identical habitat amounts and spatial patterns. The main drivers of vegetation dynamics were stand-replacing disturbances, followed by gradual change from early-successional to old-growth habitats. Species dynamics were based on a simple occupancy model, with dispersal simulated as a random walk. As the proportion of available habitat (p) decreased from 1.0, species occupancy generally declined more rapidly and reached extinction at higher habitat levels in dynamic than in static landscapes. However, habitat occupancy was sometimes actually higher in dynamic landscapes than in static landscapes with similar habitat amounts and patterns. This effect was most pronounced at intermediate amounts of habitat (p = 0.3−0.6) for mobile species that had high colonization rates, but were unable to cross non-habitat patches. Differences between static and dynamic landscapes were contingent upon the initial metapopulation size and the shapes of disturbances and the resulting habitat patterns. Overall, the results demonstrate that dispersal-limited species exhibit more pronounced critical behavior in dynamic landscapes than is predicted by simple neutral models based on static landscapes. Thus, caution should be exercised in extending generalizations derived from static landscape models to disturbance-driven landscape mosaics.


Connectivity Critical behavior Disturbance Extinction Fragmentation Patch dynamics Percolation Threshold 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Akcakaya, H.R., Radeloff, V.C., Mlandenoff, D.J., He, H.S. 2004Integrating landscape and metapopulation modeling approaches: viability of the sharp-tailed grouse in a dynamic landscapeConservation Biology18526537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakker, V.J., Vuren, D.H. 2004Gap-crossing decisions by the red squirrel, a forest-dependent small mammalConservation Biology18689697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bascompte, J., Sole, R.V. 1996Habitat fragmentation and extinction thresholds in spatially explicit modelsJournal of Animal Ecology65465473Google Scholar
  4. Boughton, D., Malvadkar, U. 2002Extinction risk in successional landscapes subject to catastrophic disturbancesConservation Ecology62Google Scholar
  5. Boychuk, D., Perera, A.H., Ter-Mikaelian, M.T., Martell, D.L., Li, C. 1997Modelling the effect of spatial scale and correlated fire disturbances on forest age distributionEcological Modelling95145164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brooks, T.M., Pimm, S.L., Oyugi, J.O. 1999Time lag between deforestation and bird extinction in tropical forest fragmentsConservation Biology1311401150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cowlishaw, G. 1999Predicting the pattern of decline of African primate diversity: an extinction debt from historical deforestationConservation Biology1311831193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Desrochers, A., Hannon, S.J. 1997Gap crossing decisions by forest songbirds during the post-fledging periodConservation Biology1112041210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fahrig, L. 1991Simulation methods for developing general landscape-level hypotheses of single-species dynamicsTurner, M.G.Gardner, R.H. eds. Quantitative Methods in Landscape EcologySpringer-VerlagNew York417442Google Scholar
  10. Fahrig, L. 1998When does fragmentation of breeding habitat affect population survival?Ecological Modelling105273292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fahrig, L. 2002Effect of habitat fragmentation on the extinction threshold: a synthesisEcological Applications12346353Google Scholar
  12. Flather, C.H., Bevers, M. 2002Patchy reaction-diffusion and population abundance: the relative importance of habitat amount and arrangementAmerican Naturalist1594056Google Scholar
  13. Gardner, R.H., Milne, B.T., Turner, M.G., O’Neill, R.V. 1987Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape patternsLandscape Ecology11928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gardner, R.H., Turner, M.G., O’Neill, R.V., Lavorel, S. 1991Simulation of the scale-dependent effects of landscape boundaries on species persistence and dispersalHolland, M.M.Risser, P.G.Naiman, R.J. eds. Ecotones: The Role of Landscape Boundaries in the Management and Restoration of Changing EnvironmentsChapman and HallNew York7689Google Scholar
  15. Glenn, E.M., Hansen, M.C., Anthony, R.G. 2004Spotted owl home-range and habitat use in young forests of western OregonJournal of Wildlife Management683350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gu, W.D., Heikkila, R., Hanski, I. 2002Estimating the consequences of habitat fragmentation on extinction risk in dynamic landscapesLandscape Ecology17699710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gustafson, E.J., Gardner, R.H. 1996The effect of landscape heterogeneity on the probability of patch colonizationEcology7794107Google Scholar
  18. Hanski, I. 1999Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapesOikos87209219Google Scholar
  19. Heyerdahl, E.K., Brubaker, L.B., Agee, J.K. 2001Spatial controls of historical fire regimes: a multiscale example from the interior westUSAEcology82660678Google Scholar
  20. Hill, M.F., Caswell, H. 1999Habitat fragmentation and extinction thresholds on fractal landscapesEcology Letters2121127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnson, M.P. 2000The influence of patch demographics on metapopulations, with particular reference to successional landscapesOikos886774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johst, K., Brandl, R., Eber, S. 2002Metapopulation persistence in dynamic landscapes: the role of dispersal distanceOikos98263270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keitt, T.H., Urban, D.L., Milne, B.T. 1997Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapesConservation Ecology14Google Scholar
  24. Keymer, J.E., Marquet, P.A., Velasco-Hernandez, J.X., Levin, S.A. 2000Extinction thresholds and metapopulation persistence in dynamic landscapesAmerican Naturalist156478494Google Scholar
  25. Matlack, G.R., Monde, J. 2004Consequences of low mobility in spatially and temporally heterogeneous ecosystemsJournal of Ecology9210251035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moloney, K.A., Levin, S.A. 1996The effects of disturbance architecture on landscape-level population dynamicsEcology77375394Google Scholar
  27. Pickett, S.T.A., White, P.S. 1985The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch DynamicsAcademic PressOrlandoFLGoogle Scholar
  28. Richards, W.H., Wallin, D.O., Schumaker, N.H. 2002An analysis of late-seral forest connectivity in western Oregon, USAConservation Biology1614091421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schumaker, N.H., Ernst, T., White, D., Baker, J., Haggerty, P. 2004Projecting wildlife responses to alternative future landscapes in Oregon's Willamette BasinEcological Applications14381400Google Scholar
  30. Tilman, D., May, R.M., Lehman, C.L., Nowak, M.A. 1994Habitat destruction and the extinction debtNature3716566Google Scholar
  31. Wagner, C.E. 1978Age-class distribution and forest fire cycleCanadian Journal of Forest Research8220227Google Scholar
  32. Watt, A.S. 1947Pattern and process in the plant communityJournal of Ecology35122Google Scholar
  33. Wimberly, M.C. 2002Spatial simulation of historical landscape patterns in coastal forests of the Pacific NorthwestCanadian Journal of Forest Research3213161328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wimberly, M.C. 2004Fire and forest landscapes in the Georgia Piedmont: an assessment of spatial modeling assumptionsEcological Modelling1804156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wimberly, M.C., Spies, T.A. 2001Influences of environment and disturbance on forest patterns in coastal Oregon watershedsEcology8214431459Google Scholar
  36. With, K.A., King, A.W. 1999aDispersal success on fractal landscapes: a consequence of lacunarity thresholdsLandscape Ecology147382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. With, K.A., King, A.W. 1999bExtinction thresholds for species in fractal landscapesConservation Biology13314326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wu, J.G., Levin, S.A. 1994A spatial patch dynamic modeling approach to pattern and process in an annual grasslandEcological Monographs64447464Google Scholar
  39. Wu, J.G., Loucks, O.L. 1995From balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm shift in ecologyQuarterly Review of Biology70439466CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael C. Wimberly
    • 1
  1. 1.Warnell School of Forest ResourcesUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations