CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 160

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Least-Cost Modelling and Landscape Ecology: Concepts, Applications, and Opportunities

Etherington, Thomas R.·2016·Current Landscape Ecology Reports
DOI 10.1007/s40823-016-0006-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40823-016-0006-9

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The 10,000 threshold is ecologically and methodologically justified by applying filters to maintain the interpretative relevance of the corridors.

    “This threshold is ecologically and methodologically justified [52], by applying filters to maintain the interpretative relevance of the corridors.”

    From Tracing neanderthal mobility through the romanian carpathians: a GIS-based least-cost connectivity model (2025) · cites this paper as [52]

    The Least-Cost Corridors section discusses the methodological challenge of delineating a corridor of suitable width, but it does not justify a 10,000 threshold or describe filters to preserve interpretative relevance. It says there is currently no consensus on how to delineate a suitable corridor width; no page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 96

  1. Kuhn W. Core concepts of spatial information for transdisciplinary research. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2012;26(12):2267–76. · DOI
  2. Tobler W. A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Econ Geogr. 1970;46(2):234–40. · DOI
  3. Miller HJ. Tobler’s First Law and Spatial Analysis. Ann Assoc Am Geogr. 2004;94(2):284–9. · DOI
  4. Fahrig L. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2003;34:487–515. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Etherington TR. Geographical isolation and invasion ecology. Prog Phys Geogr. 2015;39(6):697–710. · DOI
  6. Glen AS, Pech RP, Byrom AE. Connectivity and invasive species management: towards an integrated landscape approach. Biol Invasions. 2013;15(10):2127–38. · DOI
  7. Meentemeyer RK, Haas SE, Václavík T. Landscape epidemiology of emerging infectious diseases in natural and human-altered ecosystems. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2012;50:379–402. · DOI
  8. Ostfeld RS, Glass GE, Keesing F. Spatial epidemiology: an emerging (or re-emerging) discipline. Trends Ecol Evol. 2005;20(6):328–36. · DOI
  9. MacArthur RH, Wilson EO. The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press: Princeton; 1967.
  10. Forman RTT, Godron M. Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology. Bioscience. 1981;31(10):733–40. · DOI
  11. Opdam P, Van Dorp D, Ter Braak CJF. The effect of isolation on the number of woodland birds in small woods in the Netherlands. J Biogeogr. 1984;11(6):473–8. · DOI
  12. Thomas CD, Thomas JA, Warren MS. Distributions of occupied and vacant butterfly habitats in fragmented landscapes. Oecologia. 1992;92(4):563–7. · DOI
  13. Taylor PD, Fahrig L, Henein K, Merriam G. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos. 1993;68(3):571–3. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Ricketts TH. The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat. 2001;158(1):87–99. · DOI
  15. Warntz W. Transportation, social physics, and the law of refraction. Prof Geogr. 1957;9(4):2–7. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Warntz W. A note on surfaces and paths and applications to geographical problems. Ann Arbor: Michigan Inter-University Community of Mathematical Geographers; 1965.
  17. McHarg I. Where should highways go? Landsc Archit. 1967;57(3):179–81.
  18. Turner AK, Miles RD. The GCARS System: a computer-assisted method of regional route location. Highw Res Rec. 1971;348:1–15.
  19. Tomlin CD. Geographic Information Systems and Cartographic Modeling. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1990.
  20. Chardon JP, Adriaensen F, Matthysen E. Incorporating landscape elements into a connectivity measure: a case study for the Speckled wood butterfly (Pararge aegeria L.). Landsc Ecol. 2003;18(6):561–73. · DOI
  21. Verbeylen G, De Bruyn L, Adriaensen F, Matthysen E. Does matrix resistance influence red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris L. 1758) distribution in an urban landscape? Landsc Ecol. 2003;18(8):791–805. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, De Blust G, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, et al. The application of 'least-cost' modelling as a functional landscape model. Landsc Urban Plan. 2003;64(4):233–47. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Goodchild MF. An evaluation of lattice solutions to the problem of corridor location. Environ Plan A. 1977;9(7):727–38. · DOI · Paper page
  24. Dijkstra EW. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numer Math. 1959;1(1):269–71. · DOI
  25. Etherington TR. Mapping organism spread potential by integrating dispersal and transportation processes using graph theory and catchment areas. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2012;26(3):541–56. · DOI
  26. Etherington TR, Holland EP. Least-cost path length versus accumulated-cost as connectivity measures. Landsc Ecol. 2013;28(7):1223–9. · DOI
  27. Etherington TR, Trewby ID, Wilson GJ, McDonald RA. Expert opinion-based relative landscape isolation maps for badgers across England and Wales. Area. 2014;46(1):50–8. · DOI
  28. Etherington TR, Perry GLW, Cowan PE, Clout MN. Quantifying the direct transfer costs of common brushtail possum dispersal using least-cost modelling: a combined cost-surface and accumulated-cost dispersal kernel approach. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e88293. · DOI
  29. Trainor AM, Walters JR, Morris WF, Sexton J, Moody A. Empirical estimation of dispersal resistance surfaces: a case study with red-cockaded woodpeckers. Landsc Ecol. 2013;28(4):755–67. · DOI
  30. Foltête J-C, Berthier K, Cosson JF. Cost distance defined by a topological function of landscape. Ecol Modell. 2008;210(1-2):104–14. · DOI
  31. Richard Y, Armstrong DP. Cost distance modelling of landscape connectivity and gap-crossing ability using radio-tracking data. J Appl Ecol. 2010;47(3):603–10. · DOI
  32. Rothley K. Finding and filling the “cracks” in resistance surfaces for least-cost modeling. Ecol Soc. 2005;10(1):4. · DOI
  33. Theobald DM. A note on creating robust resistance surfaces for computing functional landscape connectivity. Ecol Soc. 2005;10(2):r1. · DOI
  34. Wiens JA. Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct Ecol. 1989;3(4):385–97. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Cushman SA, Landguth EL. Scale dependent inference in landscape genetics. Landsc Ecol. 2010;25(6):967–79. · DOI · Paper page
  36. Liu W, Chen D, Scott NA. Effects of cell sizes on resistance surfaces in GIS-based cost distance modeling for landscape analyses. In: Gong P, Liu Y, editors. Geoinformatics 2007: Geospatial Information Technology and Applications; May 25-27; Nanjing, China. Bellingham, WA: SPIE; 2007. p. 6754–19.
  37. Zeller KA, McGarigal K, Whiteley AR. Estimating landscape resistance to movement: a review. Landsc Ecol. 2012;27(6):777–97. This review presents a very thorough assessment of the ecological applications of least-cost modelling. Topics covered include: taxonomic bias, environmental variables, biological data, and analytical approaches. The supplementary material also provides a list of ecological studies and approaches that make a useful reference resource. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Beier P, Majka DR, Newell SL. Uncertainty analysis of least-cost modeling for designing wildlife linkages. Ecol Appl. 2009;19(8):2067–77. · DOI · Paper page
  39. Bunn AG, Urban DL, Keitt TH. Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J Environ Manage. 2000;59(4):265–78. · DOI
  40. Compton BW, McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Gamble LR. A resistant-kernel model of connectivity for amphibians that breed in vernal pools. Conserv Biol. 2007;21(3):788–99. · DOI · Paper page
  41. Eycott AE, Marzano M, Watts K. Filling evidence gaps with expert opinion: the use of Delphi analysis in least-cost modelling of functional connectivity. Landsc Urban Plan. 2011;103(3-4):400–9. · DOI
  42. Watts K, Eycott AE, Handley P, Ray D, Humphrey JW, Quine CP. Targeting and evaluating biodiversity conservation action within fragmented landscapes: an approach based on generic focal species and least-cost networks. Landsc Ecol. 2010;25(9):1305–18. · DOI
  43. Pinto N, Keitt TH. Beyond the least-cost path: evaluating corridor redundancy using a graph-theoretic approach. Landsc Ecol. 2009;24(2):253–66. · DOI · Paper page
  44. Manel S, Holderegger R. Ten years of landscape genetics. Trends Ecol Evol. 2013;28(10):614–21. · DOI
  45. Spear SF, Balkenhol N, Fortin M-J, McRae BH, Scribner K. Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: considerations for parameterization and analysis. Mol Ecol. 2010;19(17):3576–91. · DOI · Paper page
  46. Cushman SA, McKelvey KS, Hayden J, Schwartz MK. Gene flow in complex landscapes: testing multiple hypotheses with causal modeling. Am Nat. 2006;168(4):486–99. · DOI · Paper page
  47. Graves TA, Beier P, Royle JA. Current approaches using genetic distances produce poor estimates of landscape resistance to interindividual dispersal. Mol Ecol. 2013;22(15):3888–903. · DOI
  48. Goldberg CS, Waits LP. Comparative landscape genetics of two pond-breeding amphibian species in a highly modified agricultural landscape. Mol Ecol. 2010;19(17):3650–63. · DOI
  49. Balkenhol N, Waits LP, Dezzani RJ. Statistical approaches in landscape genetics: an evaluation of methods for linking landscape and genetic data. Ecography. 2009;32(5):818–30. · DOI
  50. Olden JD, Lawler JJ, Poff NL. Machine learning methods without tears: a primer for ecologists. Q Rev Biol. 2008;83(2):171–93. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Zurell D, Berger U, Cabral JS, Jeltsch F, Meynard CN, Münkemüller T, et al. The virtual ecologist approach: simulating data and observers. Oikos. 2010;119(4):622–35. A introduction to the virtual ecology framework that provides much promise for the development of methods that integrate least-cost modelling with ecological data. · DOI
  52. Miller JA. Virtual species distribution models: using simulated data to evaluate aspects of model performance. Prog Phys Geogr. 2014;38(1):117–28. · DOI
  53. Cantwell MD, Forman RTT. Landscape graph: ecological modeling with graph theory to detect configurations common to diverse landscapes. Landsc Ecol. 1993;8(4):239–55. · DOI
  54. Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Schick RS. Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol Lett. 2009;12(3):260–73. · DOI · Paper page
  55. Rosenberg DK, Noon BR, Meslow EC. Biological corridors: form, function, and efficacy. Bioscience. 1997;47(10):677–87. · DOI
  56. Sawyer SC, Epps CW, Brashares JS. Placing linkages among fragmented habitats: do least-cost models reflect how animals use landscapes? J Appl Ecol. 2011;48(3):668–78. · DOI
  57. McRae BH, Hall SA, Beier P, Theobald DM. Where to restore ecological connectivity? Detecting barriers and quantifying restoration benefits. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e52604. · DOI · Paper page
  58. Yu C, Lee J, Munro-Stasiuk MJ. Extensions to least-cost path algorithms for roadway planning. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2003;17(4):361–76. · DOI
  59. Nathan R, Klein E, Robledo-Arnuncio JJ, Revilla E. Dispersal kernels: review. In: Clobert J, Baguette M, Benton TG, Bullock JM, editors. Dispersal Ecology and Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 187–210.
  60. Graves T, Chandler RB, Royle JA, Beier P, Kendall KC. Estimating landscape resistance to dispersal. Landsc Ecol. 2014;29(7):1201–11. · DOI
  61. Nelson TA, Boots B. Detecting spatial hot spots in landscape ecology. Ecography. 2008;31(5):556–66. · DOI
  62. Etherington TR, Perry GLW. Visualising continuous intra-landscape isolation with uncertainty using least-cost modelling based catchment areas: common brushtail possums in the Auckland isthmus. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2016;30(1):36–50. · DOI
  63. Vignieri SN. Streams over mountains: influence of riparian connectivity on gene flow in the Pacific jumping mouse (Zapus trinotatus). Mol Ecol. 2005;14(7):1925–37. · DOI
  64. Collischonn W, Pilar JV. A direction dependent least-cost-path algorithm for roads and canals. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2000;14(4):397–406. · DOI
  65. Shepard ELC, Wilson RP, Rees WG, Grundy E, Lambertucci SA, Vosper SB. Energy landscapes shape animal movement ecology. Am Nat. 2013;182(3):298–312. A very thought provoking paper that highlights the importance of anisotropic forces on organism movement. Many of the arguments and ideas have direct analogies in a least-cost modelling context and so could be easily incorporated into ecological analyses. · DOI
  66. Zhan C, Menon S, Gao P. A directional path distance model for raster distance mapping. In: Frank AU, Campari I, editors. Spatial Information Theory: a theoretical basis for GIS. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1993. p. 434–43. · DOI
  67. van Bemmelen J, Quak W, van Hekken M, van Oosterom P. Vector vs. raster-based algorithms for cross country movement planning. In: McMaster RB, Armstrong MP, editors. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Computer-Assisted Cartography (Auto-Carto XI); October 30 - November 1 1993; Minneapolis, Minnesota. Bethesda, Maryland American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing and American Congress on Surveying and Mapping; 1993. p. 304-17.
  68. Xu J, Lathrop RG. Improving simulation accuracy of spread phenomena in a raster-based geographic information system. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 1995;9(2):153–68. · DOI
  69. Xu J, Lathrop RG. Improving cost-path tracing in a raster data format. Comput Geosci. 1994;20(10):1455–65. · DOI
  70. Douglas DH. Least-cost path in GIS using an accumulated cost surface and slopelines. Cartographica. 1994;31(3):37–51. · DOI · Paper page
  71. Tomlin D. Propagating radial waves of travel cost in a grid. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2010;24(9):1391–413. · DOI
  72. Dean DJ. Optimal routefinding with unlimited possible directions of movement. Trans GIS. 2011;15(1):87–107. · DOI
  73. Dunn AG. Grid-induced biases in connectivity metric implementations that use regular grids. Ecography. 2010;33(3):627–31. · DOI
  74. Etherington TR. Least-cost modelling on irregular landscape graphs. Landsc Ecol. 2012;27(7):957–68. · DOI
  75. Stachelek J. [Re] Least-cost modelling on irregular landscape graphs. ReScience. 2016;2(1):1–4.
  76. Antikainen H. Comparison of different strategies for determining raster-based least-cost paths with a minimum amount of distortion. Trans GIS. 2013;17(1):96–108. · DOI
  77. Gonçalves AB. An extension of GIS-based least-cost path modelling to the location of wide paths. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2010;24(7):983–96. · DOI
  78. Shirabe T. A method for finding a least-cost wide path in raster space. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2015;30(8):1469–85. · DOI
  79. Urban DL, O'Neill RV, Shugart HH. Landscape ecology: a hierarchical perspective can help scientists understand spatial patterns. Bioscience. 1987;37(2):119–27. · DOI
  80. Auffret AG, Berg J, Cousins SAO. The geography of human-mediated dispersal. Divers Distrib. 2014;20(12):1450–6. · DOI
  81. Choi Y, Um J-G, Park M-H. Finding least-cost paths across a continuous raster surface with discrete vector networks. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci. 2014;41(1):75–85. · DOI · Paper page
  82. Turner AK. A decade of experience in computer aided route selection. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens. 1978;44(12):1561–76.
  83. Gonzales EK, Gergel SE. Testing assumptions of cost surface analysis - a tool for invasive species management. Landsc Ecol. 2007;22(8):1155–68. · DOI
  84. Rae C, Rothley K, Dragicevic S. Implications of error and uncertainty for an environmental planning scenario: a sensitivity analysis of GIS-based variables in a reserve design exercise. Landsc Urban Plan. 2007;79(3-4):210–7. · DOI
  85. Rayfield B, Fortin M-J, Fall A. The sensitivity of least-cost habitat graphs to relative cost surface values. Landsc Ecol. 2010;25(4):519–32. · DOI · Paper page
  86. Schadt S, Knauer F, Kaczensky P, Revilla E, Wiegand T, Trepl L. Rule-based assessment of suitable habitat and patch connectivity for the Eurasian lynx. Ecol Appl. 2002;12(5):1469–83. · DOI
  87. Hazel T, Toma L, Vahrenhold J, Wickremesinghe R. Terracost: computing least-cost-path surfaces for massive grid terrains. ACM Journal of Experimental Algorithmics. 2008;12:Article 1.9. · DOI
  88. Kovanen J, Sarjakoski T. Tilewise accumulated cost surface computation with graphics processing units. ACM Transactions on Spatial Algorithms and Systems. 2015;1(2):Article 8. · DOI
  89. Zhan FB, Noon CE. Shortest path algorithms: an evaluation using real road networks. Transp Sci. 1998;32(1):65–73. · DOI
  90. Antikainen A. Using the hierarchical pathfinding A* algorithm in GIS to find paths through rasters with nonuniform traversal cost. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf. 2013;2(4):996–1014. · DOI
  91. Rocchini D, Hortal J, Lengyel S, Lobo JM, Jiménez-Valverde A, Ricotta C, et al. Accounting for uncertainty when mapping species distributions: the need for maps of ignorance. Prog Phys Geogr. 2011;35(2):211–26. · DOI
  92. MacEachren AM, Robinson A, Hopper S, Gardner S, Murray R, Gahegan M, et al. Visualizing geospatial information uncertainty: what we know and what we need to know. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci. 2005;32(3):139–60. · DOI
  93. Bonte D, Van Dyck H, Bullock JM, Coulon A, Delgado M, Gibbs M, et al. Costs of dispersal. Biol Rev. 2012;87(2):290–312. · DOI
  94. Nathan R, Getz WM, Revilla E, Holyoak M, Kadmon R, Saltz D, et al. A movement ecology paradigm for unifying organismal movement research. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(49):19052–9. · DOI
  95. Carroll C, McRae BH, Brookes A. Use of linkage mapping and centrality analysis across habitat gradients to conserve connectivity of gray wolf populations in western North America. Conserv Biol. 2012;26(1):78–87. · DOI
  96. Phillips SJ, Williams P, Midgley G, Archer A. Optimizing dispersal corridors for the Cape Proteaceae using network flow. Ecol Appl. 2008;18(5):1200–11. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Etherington, T. R.
Venue
Current Landscape Ecology Reports
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-03
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
40-53
ISSN
2364-494X
DOI
10.1007/s40823-016-0006-9
Cited by
160
References
2
Language
en
Update notices
correction (2017-05-06)
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (unspecified)

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