Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Relative importance of habitat area and isolation for bird occurrence patterns in a naturally patchy landscape

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

Abstract

There is debate among ecologists about whether total habitat area or patch arrangement contributes most to population and/or community responses to fragmented or patchy landscapes. We tested the relative effects of patch area and isolation for predicting bird occurrence in a naturally patchy landscape in the Bear River Mountains of Northern Utah, USA. We selected focal patches (mountain meadows) ranging in elevation from 1,920 to 2,860 m and in size from 0.6 to 182 ha. Breeding birds were sampled in each focal meadow during the summers of 2003 and 2004 using variable-distance point transects. Logistic regression and likelihood-based model selection were used to determine the relationship between likelihood of occurrence of three bird species (Brewer’s sparrow, vesper sparrow, and white-crowned sparrow) and area, isolation, and proximity metrics. We used model weights and model-averaged confidence intervals to assess the importance of each predictor variable. Plots of area versus isolation were used to evaluate complex relationships between the variables. We found that meadow area was the most important variable for explaining occurrence for two species, and that isolation was the most important for the other. We also found that the absolute distance was more appropriate for evaluating isolation responses than was the species-specific proximity metric. Our findings add clarity to the debate between ecologists regarding the relative importance of area and isolation in species responses to patchy landscapes.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrewartha HG, Birch LC (1954) The distribution and abundance of animals. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Bissonette JA (2003) Linking landscape patterns to biological reality. In: Bissonette JA, Storch I (eds) Landscape ecology and resource management: linking theory with practice. Island Press, Washington, pp 15–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman J (2003) Is dispersal distance of birds proportional to territory size? Can J Zool 81:195–202. doi:10.1139/z02-237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP et al (1993) Distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilton GM, Baker MC, Barrentine CD et al (1995) White-crowned Sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys). In: Poole A, Gill F (eds) The birds of North America, No. 183. The Birds of North America, Inc, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Clergeau P, Burel F (1997) The role of spatio-temporal patch connectivity at the landscape level: and example in a bird distribution. Landsc Urban Plan 38:37–43. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00017-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning JB, Danielson BJ, Pulliam HR (1992) Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65:169–175. doi:10.2307/3544901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESRI Inc (1999) ArcView GIS 3.2a. Environmental Systems Research Institute Inc., Redlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:287–515. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2007) Non-optimal animal movement in human-altered landscapes. Funct Ecol 21:1003–1015. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2435.2007.01326.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fazey I, Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2005) What do conservation biologists publish? Biol Conserv 124:63–73. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2007) Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:265–280. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00287.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn D (2002) Point dispersion wizard. Avenue script. http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.asp?dbid=12538

  • Haila Y (2002) A conceptual genealogy of fragmentation research: from island biogeography to landscape ecology. Ecol Appl 12(2):321–334

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (2004) Metapopulation biology: past, present, and future. In: Hanski I, Gaggiotti OE (eds) Ecology, genetics and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier, Burlington, pp 3–22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones SL, Cornely JE (2002) Vesper Sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus). In: Poole A, Gill F (eds) The birds of North America, No. 624. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1969) Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological controls. Bull Entomol Soc Am 15:237–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1970) Extinction. In: Ferstenhaber M (ed) Lectures in mathematics for biology, vol 2. American Mathematics Society, Providence, pp 77–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Fischer J (2006) Habitat fragmentation and landscape change: an ecological and conservation synthesis. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham RB, Donnelly CF et al (2002) Effects of forest fragmentation on bird assemblages in a novel landscape context. Ecol Monogr 72:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch JF, Whigham DF (1984) Effects of forest fragmentation on breeding bird communities in Maryland, USA. Biol Conserv 28:287–324. doi:10.1016/0006-3207(84)90039-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Neel MC et al (2002) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. University of Massachusetts, Amherst

    Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A, Nieminen M (2002) Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83:1131–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV, Milne BT, Turner MG et al (1988) Resource utilization scales and landscape pattern. Landscape Ecol 2:63–69. doi:10.1007/BF00138908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotenberry JT, Patten MA, Preston KL (1999) Brewer’s Sparrow (Spizella breweri). In: Poole A, Gill F (eds) The birds of North America, No. 390. The Birds of North America, Inc, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. (2004) SAS 9.1.3 help and documentation. The SAS Institute, Cary

    Google Scholar 

  • Villard M-A (2002) Habitat fragmentation: major conservation issue or intellectual attractor? Ecol Appl 12:319–320. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0319:HFMCIO]2.0.CO;2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villard M-A, Merriam G, Maurer BA (1995) Dynamics in subdivided populations of neotropical migratory birds in a fragmented temperate forest. Ecology 76:27–40. doi:10.2307/1940629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitcomb RF, Robbins CS, Lynch JF et al (1981) Effects of forest fragmentation on avifauna of eastern deciduous forest. In: Burgess RL, Sharpe DM (eds) Forest island dynamics in man-dominated landscapes. Springer, New York, pp 125–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (1987) Habitat occupancy patterns of North American shrubsteppe birds: the effects of spatial scale. Oikos 48:132–147. doi:10.2307/3565849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA, Schooley RL, Weeks RD Jr (1997) Patchy landscapes and animal movements: do beetles percolate? Oikos 78:257–264. doi:10.2307/3546292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • With KA, Cadaret SJ, Davis C (1999) Movement responses to patch structure in experimental fractal landscapes. Ecology 80:1340–1353

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the US Forest Service, and supported by the USGS Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (cooperators: Utah State University, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, US Geological Survey, Wildlife Management Institute, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service), and the Utah State University Ecology Center. Clint McCarthy of USFS provided early vision for this project, and was instrumental in creating funding opportunities. Marmot Mountain L.L.C. provided camping gear for use in the field. We thank James A. MacMahon, Andreas Leidolf, and Patricia Crammer for their comments and reviews of thesis drafts, and Drs. Thomas C. Edwards Jr, and David Koons for help with analyses. We also thank our field technicians for their dedication and acceptance of extreme working conditions. Thanks to Jingle Wu for helping to re-frame the discussion and for giving the MS a second chance. This manuscript was much improved thanks to insightful reviews by Drs. John Dunning, Eric Bollinger, A. Joshua Leffler, Helene Wagner and several anonymous referees. All URLs, including those listed for relevant software packages, were checked in November 2007, prior to submission of this article. Floral references follow USDA nomenclature available at http://plants.usda.gov. The use of trade or firm names in this paper is for reader information only and does not imply endorsement by the US Geological Survey of any product or service.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tammy L. Wilson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilson, T.L., Johnson, E.J. & Bissonette, J.A. Relative importance of habitat area and isolation for bird occurrence patterns in a naturally patchy landscape. Landscape Ecol 24, 351–360 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-008-9309-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-008-9309-5

Keywords

Navigation