CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 224

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The devil is in the dispersers: predictions of landscape connectivity change with demography

Elliot, Nicholas B., Cushman, Samuel A., Macdonald, David W., Loveridge, Andrew J.·2014·Journal of Applied Ecology
DOI 10.1111/1365-2664.12282
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Summary: Concern about the effects of habitat fragmentation has led to increasing interest in dispersal and connectivity modelling. Most modern techniques for connectivity modelling have resistance surfaces as their foundation. However, resistance surfaces for animal movement are frequently estimated without considering dispersal, despite being the principal natural mechanism by which organisms move between populations. We collected Global Positioning System data over 10 years from 50 A frican lions P anthera leo (11 male natal dispersers, 20 adult males and 19 adult females) and used a path level analysis to parameterize demographic‐specific resistance surfaces for the Kavango Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area ( KAZA ) in Southern A frica. Lion path selection varied according to demographic grouping: adult females were most averse to risky landscapes such as agro‐pastoral lands, towns, areas of high human density and highways. Male natal dispersers were the least‐risk averse suggesting they are potentially the most prone demographic to human–lion conflict. Adults of both sexes selected bushed grassland and shrubland habitats and avoided woodland. Male natal dispersers displayed the opposite trend suggesting con‐specific avoidance and/or suboptimal habitat use. We used the resistance surfaces to calculate factorial least‐cost path networks for each demographic‐specific resistance surface and present results that show substantial differences between predicted patterns of connectivity for male natal dispersers, adult females and adult males. Synthesis and applications . Resistance surfaces are widely used to create connectivity models, which are promoted for use by conservation managers. Our results suggest that the demographic category used to parameterize resistance surfaces may lead to radically different conclusions about connectivity. Failure to include dispersing individuals when parameterizing resistance surfaces intended for connectivity modelling may lead to erroneous conclusions about connectivity and potentially unsound management strategies.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1365-2664.12282

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The dynamic presence of other nonhuman animals can be a major force in shaping movement behaviour and the resulting connectivity pathways, particularly with dispersing individuals.

    “Similarly, the dynamic presence of other nonhuman animals can be a major force in shaping movement behaviour and the resulting connectivity pathways, particularly with dispersing individuals55.”

    From Connectivity modelling in conservation science: a comparative evaluation (2022) · cites this paper as [55]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 53

  1. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.98036.x · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1023/A:1024737317695 · DOI
  3. 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2011.00201.x · DOI
  4. 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2006.00107.x · DOI
  5. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110050 · DOI
  6. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608898.001.0001 · DOI
  7. 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[0833:HSBWTC]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  8. 10.1007/s10980-008-9220-0 · DOI
  9. 10.1111/ele.12145 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/978-4-431-87771-4_7 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.13538.x · DOI
  12. 10.1007/978-4-431-87771-4_19 · DOI
  13. 10.1007/s10980-010-9467-0 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.02.011 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1007/s10980-010-9534-6 · DOI
  16. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01111.x · DOI
  17. 10.1002/9781118520178.ch21 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01899.x · DOI
  19. ESRI, 2010, ArcInfo Workstation
  20. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0084 · DOI
  21. 10.1007/s10980-013-9873-1 · DOI
  22. 10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0609:CUBDT]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  23. 10.1007/978-4-431-87771-4_16 · DOI
  24. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01695.x · DOI
  25. 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2005.00955.x · DOI · Paper page
  26. IUCN & UNEP(2010)The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA).UNEP‐WCMC Cambridge. Available at:www.protectedplanet.net(accessed 07 May 2012).
  27. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01665.x · DOI
  28. 10.1644/1545-1542(2003)084<0081:BBHRSI>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  29. 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2012.03123.x · DOI
  30. 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2011.07149.x · DOI
  31. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.01.018 · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.09.010 · DOI
  33. Loveridge A.J., 2010, The Biology and Conservation of Wild Felids, 283
  34. 10.1525/aa.2000.102.4.829 · DOI
  35. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1991.tb00127.x · DOI
  36. 10.1111/ele.12091 · DOI
  37. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98539.x · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.01.013 · DOI
  39. R Core Team, 2012, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
  40. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01806.x · DOI
  41. 10.1007/s10531-012-0381-4 · DOI
  42. Rudnick D., 2012, The role of landscape connectivity in planning and implementing conservation and restoration priorities, Issues in Ecology, 16, 1
  43. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.01970.x · DOI
  44. 10.1016/j.biocon.2012.09.011 · DOI
  45. 10.1016/j.biocon.2012.07.018 · DOI
  46. Stander P.E., 1990, A suggested management strategy for stock‐raiding lions in Namibia, South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 20, 37
  47. 10.1023/A:1021501231182 · DOI
  48. 10.1007/s10980-013-9861-5 · DOI
  49. Trivers R., 1985, Social Evolution
  50. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02099.x · DOI
  51. 10.1007/s10980-010-9525-7 · DOI
  52. 10.2307/2389612 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.1007/s10980-012-9737-0 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Elliot, N. B., Cushman, S. A., Macdonald, D. W., & Loveridge, A. J.
Affiliations
  • Wildlife Conservation Research Unit Department of Zoology University of Oxford Recanati‐Kaplan Centre Tubney House Abingdon Road Tubney Oxfordshire OX13 5QL UK
  • USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station 2500 S Pine Knoll Dr. Flagstaff AZ 86001 USA
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-07-21
Volume
51
Issue
5
Pages
1169-1178
ISSN
  • 0021-8901
  • 1365-2664
DOI
10.1111/1365-2664.12282
Cited by
224
References
1
Language
en
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

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