Landscape Ecology

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 351–360 | Cite as

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

  • Tammy L. Wilson
  • Elizabeth J. Johnson
  • John A. Bissonette
Research Article

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.

Keywords

Breeding bird Fragmentation Metapopulation dynamics Sagebrush obligate Mountain meadow Utah USA 

References

  1. Andrewartha HG, Birch LC (1954) The distribution and abundance of animals. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  2. 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 15–34Google Scholar
  3. Bowman J (2003) Is dispersal distance of birds proportional to territory size? Can J Zool 81:195–202. doi:10.1139/z02-237 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP et al (1993) Distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 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, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  7. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dunning JB, Danielson BJ, Pulliam HR (1992) Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65:169–175. doi:10.2307/3544901 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. ESRI Inc (1999) ArcView GIS 3.2a. Environmental Systems Research Institute Inc., RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hahn D (2002) Point dispersion wizard. Avenue script. http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.asp?dbid=12538
  15. Haila Y (2002) A conceptual genealogy of fragmentation research: from island biogeography to landscape ecology. Ecol Appl 12(2):321–334Google Scholar
  16. Hanski I (2004) Metapopulation biology: past, present, and future. In: Hanski I, Gaggiotti OE (eds) Ecology, genetics and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier, Burlington, pp 3–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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., PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  18. Levins R (1969) Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological controls. Bull Entomol Soc Am 15:237–240Google Scholar
  19. Levins R (1970) Extinction. In: Ferstenhaber M (ed) Lectures in mathematics for biology, vol 2. American Mathematics Society, Providence, pp 77–107Google Scholar
  20. Lindenmayer DB, Fischer J (2006) Habitat fragmentation and landscape change: an ecological and conservation synthesis. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham RB, Donnelly CF et al (2002) Effects of forest fragmentation on bird assemblages in a novel landscape context. Ecol Monogr 72:1–18Google Scholar
  22. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  24. McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Neel MC et al (2002) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. University of Massachusetts, AmherstGoogle Scholar
  25. Moilanen A, Nieminen M (2002) Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83:1131–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  28. SAS Institute Inc. (2004) SAS 9.1.3 help and documentation. The SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  29. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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 125–205Google Scholar
  32. Wiens JA (1987) Habitat occupancy patterns of North American shrubsteppe birds: the effects of spatial scale. Oikos 48:132–147. doi:10.2307/3565849 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wiens JA, Schooley RL, Weeks RD Jr (1997) Patchy landscapes and animal movements: do beetles percolate? Oikos 78:257–264. doi:10.2307/3546292 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. With KA, Cadaret SJ, Davis C (1999) Movement responses to patch structure in experimental fractal landscapes. Ecology 80:1340–1353Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tammy L. Wilson
    • 1
  • Elizabeth J. Johnson
    • 2
  • John A. Bissonette
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Wildland Resources, College of Natural ResourcesUtah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.Area Ecology Program, Deschutes National ForestBendUSA
  3. 3.US Geological Survey Utah Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, College of Natural ResourcesUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations