CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mapping landscape connectivity for large spatial extents

Koen, Erin L., Ellington, E. Hance, Bowman, Jeff·2019·Landscape Ecology
DOI 10.1007/s10980-019-00897-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10980-019-00897-6

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many modeling workflows for connectivity analysis are constrained by computational demand.

    “However, once the surface is created and used as input for a connectivity analysis, many modeling workflows share the trait of being constrained by computational demand [15,22,25,26], as representing spatial patterns in a cumulative process like connectivity requires extensive calculations, often across millions of pixels.”

    From Circuitscape in julia: empowering dynamic approaches to connectivity assessment (2021) · cites this paper as [26]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. Anderson MG, Clark M, Olivero Sheldon A (2012) Resilient sites for terrestrial conservation in the northeast and mid-Atlantic region. The Nature Conservancy, Boston, p 168
  2. Berger J (2004) The last mile: how to sustain long-distance migration in mammals. Conserv Biol 18:320–331 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Bolger DT, Newmark WD, Morrison TA, Doak DF (2008) The need for integrative approaches to understand and conserve migratory ungulates. Ecol Lett 11:63–77 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Briggs SV (2009) Priorities and paradigms: directions in threatened species recovery. Conserv Lett 2:101–108 · DOI
  5. Carroll C, Rohlf DJ, Li Y-W, Hartl B, Phillips MK, Noss RF (2015) Connectivity conservation and endangered species recovery: a study in the challenges of defining conservation-reliant species. Conserv Lett 8:132–138 · DOI
  6. Crooks KR, Sanjayan M (eds) (2006) Connectivity conservation (Vol. 14). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  7. Doyle PG, Snell JL (1984) Random walks and electric networks. Mathematical Association of America, Washington · DOI · Paper page
  8. Drake JC, Griffis-Kyle K, McIntyre NE (2017) Using nested connectivity models to resolve management conflicts of isolated water networks in the Sonoran Desert. Ecosphere 8(1):e01647 · DOI
  9. Environment Canada (2012) Recovery strategy for the woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), boreal population, in Canada. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa, p 138
  10. Koen EL, Tosa MI, Nielsen CK, Schauber EM (2017) Does landscape connectivity shape local and global social network structure in white-tailed deer? PLoS ONE 12:e0173570 · DOI
  11. Leonard PB, Duffy EB, Baldwin RF, McRae BH, Shah VB, Mohapatra TK (2017) GFLOW: software for modelling circuit theory-based connectivity at any scale. Methods Ecol Evol 8:519–526 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Marrotte RR, Bowman J, Brown MG, Cordes C, Morris KY, Prentice MB, Wilson PJ (2017) Multi-species genetic connectivity in a terrestrial habitat network. Mov Ecol 5:21 · DOI · Paper page
  13. McClure ML, Hansen AJ, Inman RM (2016) Connecting models to movements: testing connectivity model predictions against empirical migration and dispersal data. Landscape Ecol 31:1419–1432 · DOI · Paper page
  14. McRae BH, Beier P (2007) Circuit theory predicts gene flow in plant and animal populations. PNAS 104:19885–19890 · DOI · Paper page
  15. MNRF (1998) Introduction to the Ontario Land Cover Data Base: First edition. Land classification data [computer file]. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Peterborough
  16. Moilanen A (2011) On the limitations of graph-theoretic connectivity in spatial ecology and conservation. J Appl Ecol 48:1543–1547 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Nova Scotia Lynx Recovery Team (2006) Provincial recovery plan for the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, Nova Scotia, p 32
  18. O’Grady JJ, Brook BW, Reed DH, Ballou JD, Tonkyn DW, Frankham R (2006) Realistic levels of inbreeding depression strongly affect extinction risk in wild populations. Biol Conserv 133:42–51 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Olds AD, Connolly RM, Pitt KA, Maxwell PS (2012) Habitat connectivity improves reserve performance. Conserv Lett 5:56–63 · DOI
  20. Osipova L, Okello MM, Njumbi SJ, Ngene S, Western D, Hayward MW, Balkenhol N (2018) Fencing solves human-wildlife conflict locally but shifts problems elsewhere: a case study using functional connectivity modelling of the African elephant. J Appl Ecol 55:2673–2684 · DOI
  21. Pebesma EJ, Bivand R (2005) Classes and methods for spatial data in R. R News 5:9–13
  22. Pelletier D, Lapointe M-É, Wulder MA, White JC, Cardille JA (2017) Forest connectivity regions of Canada using circuit theory and image analysis. PLoS ONE 12:e0169428 · DOI
  23. R Core Team (2018) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria
  24. Seidler RG, Long RA, Berger J, Bergen S, Beckmann JP (2015) Identifying impediments to long-distance mammal migrations. Conserv Biol 29:99–109 · DOI
  25. Shirk AJ, Wallin DO, Cushman SA, Rice CG, Warheit KI (2010) Inferring landscape effects on gene flow: a new model selection framework. Mol Ecol 19:3603–3619 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Walpole AA, Bowman J, Murray DL, Wilson PJ (2012) Functional connectivity of lynx at their southern range periphery in Ontario, Canada. Landscape Ecol 27:761–773 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Koen, E. L., Ellington, E. H., & Bowman, J.
ORCID
Koen, Erin L.
Venue
Landscape Ecology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-09-11
Volume
34
Issue
10
Pages
2421-2433
ISSN
  • 0921-2973
  • 1572-9761
DOI
10.1007/s10980-019-00897-6
Cited by
24
References
6
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review