A Multiscale Network Analysis of Protected‐Area Connectivity for Mammals in the United States

Abstract

Protected areas must be close, or connected, enough to allow for the preservation of large-scale ecological and evolutionary processes, such as gene flow, migration, and range shifts in response to climate change. Nevertheless, it is unknown whether the network of protected areas in the United States is connected in a way that will preserve biodiversity over large temporal and spatial scales. It is also unclear whether protected-area networks that function for larger species will function for smaller species. We assessed the connectivity of protected areas in the three largest biomes in the United States. With methods from graph theory--a branch of mathematics that deals with connectivity and flow--we identified and measured networks of protected areas for three different groups of mammals. We also examined the value of using umbrella species (typically large-bodied, far-ranging mammals) in designing large-scale networks of protected areas. Although the total amount of protected land varied greatly among biomes in the United States, overall connectivity did not. In general, protected-area networks were well connected for large mammals but not for smaller mammals. Additionally, it was not possible to predict connectivity for small mammals on the basis of connectivity for large mammals, which suggests the umbrella species approach may not be an appropriate design strategy for conservation networks intended to protect many species. Our findings indicate different strategies should be used to increase the likelihood of persistence for different groups of species. Strategic linkages of existing lands should be a conservation priority for smaller mammals, whereas conservation of larger mammals would benefit most from the protection of more land.

Comparing Connectivity in Forest Networks of Seven Metropolitan Cities of South Korea

“…생물종별 로 전파 능력(dispersal ability)이 각기 다르고 (Sutherland et al, 2000), 공간 규모에 따라 관심 서식지(focal (Minor and Lookingbill, 2010;Kang and Park, 2011).…”

Multiscale guidance and tools for implementing a landscape approach to resource management in the Bureau of Land Management

“…In the short term, small intact areas may function as dispersal or migration "stepping stones" that facilitate movements across broad areas with high levels of development that may inhibit movements (Minor and Lookingbill, 2010). Small intact areas may also serve as refugia (Tulloch and others, 2015).…”

“…Small intact areas may also serve as refugia (Tulloch and others, 2015). Over longer time frames, small intact areas could facilitate organism movements in response to changing climates (Minor and Lookingbill, 2010;Tulloch and others, 2015). Thus, small intact areas may contribute to connectivity and support metapopulations, which may enhance ecological resilience to changing climates in multipleuse landscapes (Sayer and others, 2013).…”

An Integrated Approach to Mitigation Wetland Site Selection: A Case Study in Gwacheon, Korea

“…The degree of landscape connectivity has a tendency to vary for different species in the same landscape because the landscape configuration or composition of focal habitat surroundings is different according to the spatial scale. In order to conserve the meta-populations of various species, a strategy for assessing or maintaining landscape connectivity is necessary at the regional scale and on larger scales [14]. However, loss of functional landscape connectivity due to urban sprawl interferes with the naturalization and settlement of species within the urban habitat from the core habitat, which leads to simplification of species composition in urban ecosystems [15][16][17].…”