Pasture height and crop direction influence reptile movement in an agricultural matrix

Kay, Geoffrey M.; Driscoll, Don A.; Lindenmayer, David B.; Pulsford, Stephanie A.; Mortelliti, Alessio

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2016.10.019

Cited by 29 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These methods provide a zone, with the inclusion of a larger number of alternative routes, attributing much importance to the surrounding land uses. These methods also can consider the use or adaptation of such species to the matrix (Umetsu & Pardini 2007;Umetsu, Metzger & Pardini 2008;Gheler-Costa et al 2012;Kay et al 2016). In turn, the MLmax method seems to be more suitable for specialist species.…”

Section: Comparison Between the Four Simulation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

LandScape Corridors (lscorridors): a new software package for modelling ecological corridors based on landscape patterns and species requirements

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maintaining connectivity is one of the main challenges for biodiversity conservation world-wide. Ecological corridors are important to maintain landscape connectivity, but their efficiency depends on landscape patterns and species responses at different spatial extents and landscape contexts. 2. We developed a new ecologically oriented free software package, LandScape Corridors (LSCORRIDORS), to improve ecological corridor design by considering biodiversity responses to landscape attributes at a variety of spatial extents. LandScape Corridors considers stochastic variation, species perception and landscape influence on organisms in the design of ecological corridors. In addition to the least cost path algorithm, we propose four different methods for the simulation of multiple-path functional ecological corridors. One method uses the information for each pixel separately, whereas the three other methods permit corridor simulation considering the landscape context at different spatial extents. 3. LandScape Corridors permits to simulate corridors for species with different requirements and considers that different species perceive and respond to the surrounding landscape in different ways, as many species may choose to move through areas that may not be the most permeable ones in the landscape. Two parameters in LSCORRIDORS modulate the stochasticity in corridors simulations. The first parameter is the level of variability added to the input resistance map in each simulation, resulting in more variable and spatially spread-out corridors. The other parameter is the spatial extent that may influence each pixel; larger extents result in larger spatial zones affecting each pixel during corridors simulations. In addition, when considering spatial influence, the simulations may be performed for species highly, medially or less sensitive to habitat quality. 4. Some currently available software are not free or depend on a paid GIS software to work. In addition, some software do not support large matrices in their simulations, limiting their use. LandScape Corridors is designed to deal with large rasters, is based on strictly freeware software, and is freely available online. This allows the users to implement new methods for modelling multi-scale and ecologically based corridors. 5. LandScape Corridors is a potential tool for the identification of protected areas, as corridor simulation considers species movement and landscape connectivity, essential characteristics to aid in large-scale biodiversity conservation, especially in anthropogenic landscapes. LandScape Corridors provides what we may call a zone for conservation, showing a set of connected areas in the landscape which may be ordered according to their potential for ecological corridors or which may be used as an aid for conservation strategies or ecological restoration projects.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Between the Four Simulation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

LandScape Corridors (lscorridors): a new software package for modelling ecological corridors based on landscape patterns and species requirements

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, human‐modified land cover can change over time (e.g. simplification of cover by harvesting crops) reducing species dispersal between habitat patches (Kay et al ., ), mortality risk (Anderson & Burgin, ; Ewers & Didham, ) and the likelihood of emigrating from patches (Prevedello & Vieira, ; Driscoll et al ., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amphibians in agricultural landscapes: the habitat value of crop areas, linear plantings and remnant woodland patches

Hansen

Scheele

Driscoll

et al. 2018

Animal Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mitigating the negative impacts of agriculture on amphibians requires knowledge of how different land uses affect species distribution and community composition. In the case of frogs, there is currently insufficient information on their use of terrestrial habitats in cropping landscapes to inform conservation planning. We examined how four different farmland types (linear plantings, cereal crops, grazing paddocks and woody mulch) and crop harvesting influenced amphibian abundance, richness, body condition and movement. We found the abundance of frogs was significantly higher in linear plantings compared to grazing paddocks and adjacent patches of remnant woodland vegetation. However, species richness and abundance of three individual species did not vary significantly between farmland types. For the most common frog Uperoleia laevigata, body condition was higher at the edges of the woody debris treatment (coupled with higher abundance) and lower in farmland with debris and linear plantings. The body condition of Limnodynastes tasmaniensis and L. interioris was not influenced by farmland type. Frog abundance and condition was largely unaffected by crop harvesting. However, frogs were less common after harvesting at the edges of farmland and within remnant patches. Movement patterns did not suggest mass movement out of crops after harvest, where almost half of all individuals recaptured remained within the farmland. These results suggest that some generalist frog species may have an affinity for habitats within agricultural paddocks, particularly when key habitat features like plantings are present. However, we found overall frog richness was low and did not differ between remnant patches, edges and farmland which may be an indication of habitat degradation within terrestrial habitats across the landscape. Although protection of remnant native vegetation is important, conservation strategies for the protection of amphibians will be ineffective if they do not consider the variety of land uses and the relationships of different species and their microhabitats within and outside of patches.

show abstract

“…Prevedello et al [44] showed that the perceptual range of two neotropical marsupial species increased with decreasing vegetation complexity, being highest in mowed pasture and lower in plantations and abandoned pasture. Thus, by creating a matrix with low structural complexity, habitat fragmentation can both induce the need for animals to find habitat patches, as well as increase their ability to find patches [44][45][46]. Further research is needed to determine how this phenomenon interacts with movement costs in the matrix and what the consequences are for population dynamics.…”

Section: Navigation Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In these cases, novel approaches to matrix management can facilitate inter-patch movements. Studies of rodents in Italy [46], marsupials in Brazil [79] and geckoes in Australia [45] all found that experimentally released animals preferentially followed plantation rows when moving, rather than necessarily moving towards habitat patches. Orienting plantation rows to connect habitat patches and stepping stones (figure 5) is thus a relatively simple approach for directing dispersing animals towards suitable habitat and thus promoting connectivity.…”

Section: (B) Navigation Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this section, we demonstrate how altered resource availability can affect foraging decisions and home range movement, and how external factors influence decision-making during different stages of dispersal. movement path -tortuosity/directionality [12,44,45,46,52] -home range size and overlap [3,11,37] -foraging distance [17,36,37] -dispersal rate, timing and distance [3,4,5,14,56,57,58,78] motion capacity -habitat loss and fragmentation [3,20,58,61] -food availability [11] -physical barriers [8,19] -predation [3,78] navigation capacity -habitat loss and fragmentation [12,41,44,45,46,52,53] fitness [18,20,37,58] internal state -habitat loss and fragmentation [17,18,36,37,38,41] -competition/inbreeding [5,…”

Section: Internal Statementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coupling movement and landscape ecology for animal conservation in production landscapes

Doherty¹,

Driscoll²

2018

Proc. R. Soc. B.

Self Cite

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Habitat conversion in production landscapes is among the greatest threats to biodiversity, not least because it can disrupt animal movement. Using the movement ecology framework, we review animal movement in production landscapes, including areas managed for agriculture and forestry. We consider internal and external drivers of altered animal movement and how this affects navigation and motion capacities and population dynamics. Conventional management approaches in fragmented landscapes focus on promoting connectivity using structural changes in the landscape. However, a movement ecology perspective emphasizes that manipulating the internal motivations or navigation capacity of animals represents untapped opportunities to improve movement and the effectiveness of structural connectivity investments. Integrating movement and landscape ecology opens new opportunities for conservation management in production landscapes.

show abstract

Pasture height and crop direction influence reptile movement in an agricultural matrix

Cited by 29 publications

References 49 publications

LandScape Corridors (lscorridors): a new software package for modelling ecological corridors based on landscape patterns and species requirements

LandScape Corridors (lscorridors): a new software package for modelling ecological corridors based on landscape patterns and species requirements

Amphibians in agricultural landscapes: the habitat value of crop areas, linear plantings and remnant woodland patches

Coupling movement and landscape ecology for animal conservation in production landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About