2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10841-010-9269-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Functional habitat area as a reliable proxy for population size: case study using two butterfly species of conservation concern

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The resource‐based habitat approach has been applied to species of conservation interest to construct statistical distribution models, functional habitat maps and management maps to adapt nature reserve management relative to the presence, abundance and spatial and functional configuration of essential ecological resources for threatened insect species (e.g. Turlure et al ., , b ; Kalarus, Skórka & Nowicki, ). Using standard geographic information system (GIS) tools, functional habitat is delineated based on several layers of information about key ecological resource distributions and on mobility estimates derived from mark–release–recapture programs to fix maximal distances between clusters of resources (for details, see Vanreusel & Van Dyck, ).…”
Section: Resource‐based Habitat Concept (Rbhc)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The resource‐based habitat approach has been applied to species of conservation interest to construct statistical distribution models, functional habitat maps and management maps to adapt nature reserve management relative to the presence, abundance and spatial and functional configuration of essential ecological resources for threatened insect species (e.g. Turlure et al ., , b ; Kalarus, Skórka & Nowicki, ). Using standard geographic information system (GIS) tools, functional habitat is delineated based on several layers of information about key ecological resource distributions and on mobility estimates derived from mark–release–recapture programs to fix maximal distances between clusters of resources (for details, see Vanreusel & Van Dyck, ).…”
Section: Resource‐based Habitat Concept (Rbhc)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, habitat quality determines the carrying capacity. This capacity mainly depends on the quantity of resources such as oviposition places or nectar sources (Turlure et al, 2010) and influences the population density threshold when individuals have to start leaving an area in larger numbers (Konvicka et al, 2012). Hence, dispersal is strongly density-dependent (Baker, 1984;Shreeve, 1992): To avoid intraspecific competition, the emigration rate increases with increasing population density (Baguette et al, 1996;Brunzel, 2002;Enfjäll & Leimar, 2005).…”
Section: Dispersal Behaviormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Habitat alteration and fragmentation are commonly cited as primary factors causing the decline of natural populations because the loss of habitat that meets the minimum requirements for growth and reproduction has become increasingly limited in many areas (Andrén 1994;Turlure et al 2010;Bergerot et al 2012). As a result, degraded and isolated habitats often experience substantial declines in populations and concordant declines in biodiversity (Chapin et al 2000).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%