Skip to main content

Assessing Multi-Scale Landscape Connectivity Using Network Analysis

Abstract

Landscape connectivity has implications for many ecological processes, including spread of invasive species and conservation of native ones. Because species have different minimum area requirements and different movement abilities, landscape designs suitable for one species (or group of species) may be inappropriate for other species. Methods from network analysis can be used to combine information on landscape pattern and species life history characteristics for species-specific assessments of potential connectivity. The lab is intended to provide students with the following opportunities.

Keywords

  • Network Analysis
  • Home Range
  • Functional Connectivity
  • Habitat Patch
  • Landscape Pattern

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6374-4_12
  • Chapter length: 17 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-1-4939-6374-4
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Figure 12.1
Figure 12.2
Figure 12.3
Figure 12.4

References and Recommended Readings

Note: An asterisk preceding the entry indicates that it is a suggested reading.

  • Almany GR, Connolly SR, Heath DD et al (2009) Connectivity, biodiversity conservation and the design of marine reserve networks for coral reefs. Coral Reefs 28:339–351

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Angelone S, Holderegger R (2009) Population genetics suggests effectiveness of habitat connectivity measures for the European tree frog in Switzerland. J Appl Ecol 46:879–887

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bodin O, Norberg J (2007) A network approach for analyzing spatially structured populations in fragmented landscape. Landsc Ecol 22:31–44

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman J (2003) Is dispersal distance of birds proportional to territory size? Can J Zool 81:195

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • *Calabrese JM, Fagan WF (2004) A comparison-shopper’s guide to connectivity metrics. Front Ecol Environ 2:529–536. Very readable discussion of the different approaches available to ecologists for quantifying connectivity

    Google Scholar 

  • CBI (2012) The Conservation Biology Institute. October 2012. PAD-US (CBI Edition) Version 2. Corvallis, Oregon

    Google Scholar 

  • Clergeau P, Burel F (1997) The role of spatio-temporal patch connectivity at the landscape level: an example in a bird distribution. Landsc Urban Plan 38:37

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • *Crooks KR, Sanjayan M (2006) Connectivity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. The interested reader would enjoy many of the articles in this book

    Google Scholar 

  • De Nooy W, Mrvar A, Batagelj V (2005) Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dixo M, Metzger JP, Morgante JS et al (2009) Habitat fragmentation reduces genetic diversity and connectivity among toad populations in the Brazilian Atlantic Coastal Forest. Biol Conserv 142:1560–1569

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Estrada-Pena A (2005) Effects of habitat suitability and landscape patterns on tick (Acarina) metapopulation processes. Landsc Ecol 20:529–541

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:487–515

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L, Merriam G (1985) Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66:1762–1768

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari JR, Lookingbill TR, Neel M (2007) Two measures of landscape-graph connectivity: assessment across gradients in area and configuration. Landsc Ecol 22:1315–1323

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreras P (2001) Landscape structure and asymmetrical inter-patch connectivity in a metapopulation of the endangered Iberian lynx. Biol Conserv 100:125–136

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2007) Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:265–280

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Flather CH, Bevers M (2002) Patchy reaction-diffusion and population abundance: The relative importance of habitat amount and arrangement. Am Nat 159:40–56

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Galpern P, Manseau M, Fall A (2011) Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: a guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biol Conserv 144:44–55. A catalog of the different ways patch-based networks can be built and analyzed for different conservation purposes

    Google Scholar 

  • *Grant EHC, Lowe WH, Fagan WF (2007) Living in the branches: population dynamics and ecological processes in dendritic networks. Ecol Lett 10:165–175. Excellent summary of theory and empirical studies relating to ecological dynamics in streams and other dendritic networks

    Google Scholar 

  • *Grober-Dunsmore R, Pittman SJ, Caldow C et al (2009) A landscape ecology approach for the study of ecological connectivity across tropical marine seascapes. In: Nagelkergen I (ed) Ecological connectivity among tropical coastal ecosystems. Springer, New York, pp 493–530. The reader with marine interests would enjoy the collection of articles compiled in this book

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I, Gilpin M (1991) Metapopulation dynamics—brief-history and conceptual domain. Biol J Linn Soc 42:3–16

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Harary F (1969) Graph theory. Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan F, Baldi A, Orci KM et al (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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kadoya T (2009) Assessing functional connectivity using empirical data. Popul Ecol 51:5–15

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kindlmann P, Burel F (2008) Connectivity measures: a review. Landsc Ecol 23:879–890

    Google Scholar 

  • King AW, With KA (2002) Dispersal success on spatially structured landscapes: when do spatial pattern and dispersal behavior really matter? Ecol Model 147:23–39

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lookingbill TR, Gardner RH, Ferrari JR et al (2010) Combining a dispersal model with network theory to assess habitat connectivity. Ecol Appl 22:427–441

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lyford ME, Jackson ST, Betancourt JL et al (2003) Influence of landscape structure and climate variability on a late Holocene plant migration. Ecol Monogr 73:567–583

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • *Minor ES, Lookingbill TR (2010) A multiscale network analysis of protected-area connectivity for mammals in the United States. Conserv Biol 24:1549–1558. Assessment of potential connectivity among protected area networks for three large biomes of the United States. Strategies for prioritizing lands for conservation using network analysis are discussed

    Google Scholar 

  • Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol Appl 17:1771–1782

    CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morzillo AT, Ferrari JR, Liu JG (2011) An integration of habitat evaluation, individual based modeling, and graph theory for a potential black bear population recovery in southeastern Texas, USA. Landsc Ecol 26:69–81

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Wascher D (2004) Climate change meets habitat fragmentation: linking landscape and biogeographical scale levels in research and conservation. Biol Conserv 117:285–297

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-Hortal L, Saura S (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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pe'er G, Kramer-Schadt S (2008) Incorporating the perceptual range of animals into connectivity models. Ecol Model 213:73–85

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson DM, Whittaker RJ (2010) Conservation biogeography—foundations, concepts and challenges. Divers Distrib 16:313–320

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Royer L, Reimann M, Andreopoulos B et al (2008) Unraveling protein networks with power graph analysis. PLoS Comput Biol 4(7), e1000108

    CrossRef  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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. Landsc Urban Plan 83:91–103

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Scott JM, Davis FW, McGhie RG et al (2001) Nature reserves: do they capture the full range of America’s biological diversity? Ecol Appl 11:999–1007

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor PD, Fahrig L, Henein K et al (1993) Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68:571–573

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tischendorf L, Fahrig L (2000) On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos 90:7–19

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Treml EA, Halpin PN, Urban DL et al (2008) Modeling population connectivity by ocean currents, a graph-theoretic approach for marine conservation. Landsc Ecol 23:19–36

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL, Keitt T (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82:1205–1218

    Google Scholar 

  • *Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA (2009) Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol Lett 12:260–273. A review of recent applications of graph theory to landscape ecology

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dorp D, Opdam PFM (1987) Effects of patch size, isolation and regional abundance on forest bird communities. Landsc Ecol 1:59–73

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1997) A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276:122–126

    CAS  CrossRef  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd R. Lookingbill .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer-Verlag New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lookingbill, T.R., Minor, E.S. (2017). Assessing Multi-Scale Landscape Connectivity Using Network Analysis. In: Gergel, S., Turner, M. (eds) Learning Landscape Ecology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6374-4_12

Download citation