Dispersal and Wetland Fragmentation

  • Bradley J. Cosentino
  • Robert L. Schooley
Reference work entry


Wetlands provide habitat for a diverse array of aquatic and semiaquatic species, many of which provide direct economic and recreational value. Despite the ecosystem services provided by wetland fauna and flora, historical wetland loss has been dramatic. Wetland loss was >50% in the USA and 60–70% in Europe by the 1980s, with most losses resulting from agriculture and urban development. Although habitat loss can result from natural, stochastic events, anthropogenic habitat loss and subsequent fragmentation are among the most important drivers of biodiversity loss. One mechanism underlying the loss of biodiversity after habitat loss and fragmentation is the breakdown of wetland connectivity previously maintained by dispersal.


Biodiversity Connectivity Dispersal Fragmentation Landscape 


  1. Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, De Blust G, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, Matthysen E. The application of ‘least-cost’ modeling as a functional landscape model. Landscape Urban Plan. 2003;64:233–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amezaga JM, Santamaría L, Green AJ. Biotic wetland connectivity – supporting a new approach for wetland policy. Acta Oecol. 2002;23:213–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Calabrese JM, Fagan WF. A comparison-shopper’s guide to connectivity metrics. Front Ecol Environ. 2004;2:529–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clobert J, Baguette M, Benton TG, Bullock JM, editors. Dispersal ecology and evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.Google Scholar
  5. Cosentino BJ, Schooley RL, Phillips CA. Connectivity of agroecosystems: dispersal costs can vary among crops. Landscape Ecol. 2011a;26:371–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cosentino BJ, Schooley RL, Phillips CA. Spatial connectivity moderates the effect of predatory fish on salamander metapopulation dynamics. Ecosphere. 2011b;2(8):1–14 . art 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gibbs JP. Wetland loss and biodiversity conservation. Conserv Biol. 2000;14:314–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Groom MJ, Meffe GK, Carroll CR. Principles of conservation biology. 3 ed. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates; 2006.Google Scholar
  9. Hanski I, Gilpin ME, editors. Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics, and evolution. San Diego: Academic Press; 1997.Google Scholar
  10. Leibowitz SG, Vining KC. Temporal connectivity in a prairie pothole complex. Wetlands. 2003;23:13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Meyer JL, Wallace JB. Lost linkages and lotic ecology: rediscovering small streams. In: Press MC, Huntly N, Levin S, editors. Ecology: achievement and challenge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2001. p. 295–317.Google Scholar
  12. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. Washington DC: World Resources Institute; 2005.Google Scholar
  13. Regester KJ, Whiles MR, Lips KR. Variation in the trophic basis of production and energy flow associated with emergence of larval salamander assemblages from forest ponds. Freshwater Biol. 2008;53:1754–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rittenhouse TAG, Semlitsch RD. Distribution of amphibians in terrestrial habitat surrounding wetlands. Wetlands. 2007;27:153–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roe JH, Georges A. Heterogeneous wetland complexes, buffer zones, and travel corridors: landscape management for freshwater reptiles. Biol Conserv. 2007;135:67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schooley RL, Cosentino BJ. Metapopulation dynamics of wetland species. In: Finlayson CM, editor. Encyclopedia of wetlands. Dordrecht: Springer; in press.Google Scholar
  17. Semlitsch RD. Size does matter: the value of small isolated wetlands. National Wetland Newslett. 2000;22:5–7.Google Scholar
  18. Semlitsch RD, Bodie JR. Biological criteria for buffer zones around wetlands and riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conserv Biol. 2003;17:1219–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Taylor PD, Fahrig L, With KA. Landscape connectivity: a return to basics. In: Crooks KR, Sanjayan M, editors. Connectivity conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Woodward RT, Wui Y-S. The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ. 2001;37:257–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Natural Resources and Environmental SciencesUniversity of IllinoisUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations