Abstract
Network-based methods are being actively developed to respond to the needs for operational assessments of the degree of landscape connectivity and of the impact of landscape changes in ecological flows and related ecological processes. Among these, a recent paper by Matisziw and Murray (2009) presented the C index as an adequate and advantageous way of ranking habitat patches by their importance for the maintenance of landscape connectivity. We show that this index is equivalent and conveys the same information in undirected graphs as a previously described index, the landscape coincidence probability (LCP), which can be readily computed in any landscape network through the Conefor Sensinode software package. We slightly generalize the LCP definition for cases involving asymmetric dispersal, which makes LCP compatible with C and maintains the equivalency between both indices in directed graphs. We place LCP and C in a broader context of other existing indices and ongoing developments and describe how some of these may be better suited for the analysis of the connectivity in landscape networks and their changes. We conclude by highlighting the need (1) to go beyond the identification of unobstructed movement paths or habitat components (sets of interconnected patches) when pursuing the most appropriate landscape connectivity indices and (2) for increased efforts in assessing and reporting the potential overlaps, coincidences and synergies between the available approaches in order to guide the final user and facilitate index selection in a densely populated metric space.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Baguette, M. 2003. Long distance dispersal and landscape occupancy in a metapopulation of the cranberry fritillary butterfly. Ecography 26: 153–160.
Bodin, O., and J. Norberg. 2007. A network approach for analyzing spatially structured populations in fragmented landscape. Landsc. Ecol. 22: 31–44.
Bogaert, J., A. Farina and R. Ceulemans. 2005. Entropy increase of fragmented habitats: a sign of human influence? Ecol. Indic. 5: 207–212.
Crooks, K.R. and M. Sanjayan (eds). 2006. Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
Estrada, E. and Ö. Bodin. 2008. Using network centrality measures to manage landscape connectivity. Ecol. Appl. 18: 1810–1825.
Fagan, W.F. and J.M. Calabrese. 2006. Quantifying connectivity: balancing metric performance with data requirements. In: K.R. Crooks and M. Sanjayan (eds.), Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press, New York. pp. 297–317.
Fu, W., S. Liu, S.D. DeGloria, S. Dong and R. Beazley. 2010. Characterizing the “fragmentation-barrier” effect of road networks on landscape connectivity: a case study in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 83: 91–103.
Hanski, I. and O. Ovaskainen. 2000. The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape. Nature 404: 755–758.
Jaeger, J.A.G. 2000. Landscape division, splitting index, and effective mesh size: new measures of landscape fragmentation. Landsc. Ecol. 15: 115–130.
Jantz, P. and S. Goetz. 2008. Using widely available geospatial data sets to assess the influence of roads and buffers on habitat core areas and connectivity. Nat. Areas J. 28: 261–274.
Jordán, F., A. Báldi, K.M. Orci, I. Rácz and Z. Varga. 2003. Characterizing the importance of habitat patches and corridors in maintaining the landscape connectivity of a Pholidoptera transsylvanica (Orthoptera) metapopulation. Landsc. Ecol. 18: 83–92.
Jordán, F., T. Magura, B. Tóthmérész, V. Vasas and V. Ködöböcz. 2007. Carabids (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in a forest patchwork: a connectivity analysis of the Bereg Plain landscape graph. Landsc. Ecol. 22: 1527–1539.
Knick, S.T. and S.E. Hanser. 2010. Connecting pattern and process in Greater Sage-Grouse populations and sagebrush landscapes. In: C.D. Marti (ed.), Ecology and Conservation of Greater Sage-Grouse: a Landscape Species and Its Habitats. Studies in Avian Biology 38, Cooper Ornithological Society scientific series, University of California Press (in press).
Laita, A., M. Mönkkönnen and J.S. Kotiaho. 2010. Woodland key habitats evaluated as part of a functional reserve network. Biol. Conserv. 143: 1212–1227.
Matisziw, T.C. and A.T. Murray. 2009. Connectivity change in habitat networks. Landsc. Ecol. 24: 89–100.
McRae, B.H. and P. Beier. 2007. Circuit theory predicts gene flow in plant and animal populations. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. USA 104: 19885–19890.
McRae, B.H., B.G. Dickson, T.H. Keitt and V.B. Shah. 2008. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology and conservation. Ecology 10: 2712–2724.
Minor, E.S. and D.L. Urban. 2007. Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol. Appl. 17: 1771–1782.
Minor, E.S. and D.L. Urban. 2008. A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv. Biol. 22: 297–307.
Neel, M.C. 2008. Patch connectivity and genetic diversity conservation in the federally endangered and narrowly endemic plant species Astragalus albens (Fabaceae). Biol. Conserv. 141: 938–955.
Nathan, R. and H.C. Muller-Landau. 2000. Spatial patterns of seed dispersal, their determinants and consequences for recruitment. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 278–285.
Pascual-Hortal, L. and S. Saura. 2006. Comparison and development of new graph-based landscape connectivity indices: towards the priorization of habitat patches and corridors for conservation. Landsc. Ecol. 21: 959–967.
Pascual-Hortal, L. and S. Saura. 2008. Integrating landscape connectivity in broad-scale forest planning through a new graph-based habitat availability methodology: application to capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) in Catalonia (NE Spain). Eur. J. For. Res. 127: 23–31.
Perotto-Baldivieso, H., E. Meléndez, M.A. García, P. Leimgruber, S.M. Cooper, A. Martínez, P. Calle, O. Ramos, M. Quiñones, C. Christen and G. Pons. 2009. Spatial distribution, connectivity, and the influence of scale: habitat availability for the endangered Mona Island rock iguana. Biodiv. Conserv. 18: 905–917.
Ricotta, C, A. Stanisci, G.C. Avena and C. Blasi. 2000. Quantifying the network connectivity of landscape mosaics: a graph-theoretical approach. Community Ecol. 1: 89–94.
Saura, S. and L. Pascual-Hortal. 2007. A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landsc. Urban Plan. 83: 91–103.
Saura, S. and L. Rubio. 2010. A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography 33: 523–537.
Saura, S. and J. Torné. 2009. Conefor Sensinode 2.2: a software package for quantifying the importance of habitat patches for landscape connectivity. Environ. Modell. Softw. 24: 135–139.
Saura, S., C. Estreguil, C. Mouton and M. Rodríguez-Freire. 2011. Network analysis to assess landscape connectivity trends: application to European forests (1990–2000). Ecol. Indic. 11:407–416.
Schick, R. S. and S.T. Lindley. 2007. Directed connectivity among fish populations in a riverine network. J. Appl. Ecol. 44: 1116–1126.
Schooley, R. L. and J.A. Wiens. 2003. Finding habitat patches and directional connectivity. Oikos 102: 559–570.
Urban, D. and T.H. Keitt. 2001. Landscape connectivity: a graphtheoretic perspective. Ecology 82: 1205–1218.
Urban D.L., E.S. Minor, E.A. Treml and R.S. Schick. 2009. Graph models of landscape mosaics. Ecol. Lett. 12: 260–273.
Visconti, P. and C. Elkin. 2009. Using connectivity metrics in conservation planning – when does habitat quality matter? Divers. Distrib. 15: 602–612.
Vogt, P., K.H. Riitters, M. Iwanowski, C. Estreguil, J. Kozak and P. Soille. 2007. Mapping landscape corridors. Ecol. Indic. 7: 481–488.
Watts, K. and P. Handley. 2010. Developing a functional connectivity indicator to detect change in fragmented landscapes. Ecol. Indic. 10: 552–557.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Saura, S. Measuring connectivity in habitat mosaics: the equivalence of two existing network indices and progress beyond them. COMMUNITY ECOLOGY 11, 217–222 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.11.2010.2.10
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.11.2010.2.10