The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: considerations for parameterization and analysis
Abstract
Measures of genetic structure among individuals or populations collected at different spatial locations across a landscape are commonly used as surrogate measures of functional (i.e. demographic or genetic) connectivity. In order to understand how landscape characteristics influence functional connectivity, resistance surfaces are typically created in a raster GIS environment. These resistance surfaces represent hypothesized relationships between landscape features and gene flow, and are based on underlying biological functions such as relative abundance or movement probabilities in different land cover types. The biggest challenge for calculating resistance surfaces is assignment of resistance values to different landscape features. Here, we first identify study objectives that are consistent with the use of resistance surfaces and critically review the various approaches that have been used to parameterize resistance surfaces and select optimal models in landscape genetics. We then discuss the biological assumptions and considerations that influence analyses using resistance surfaces, such as the relationship between gene flow and dispersal, how habitat suitability may influence animal movement, and how resistance surfaces can be translated into estimates of functional landscape connectivity. Finally, we outline novel approaches for creating optimal resistance surfaces using either simulation or computational methods, as well as alternatives to resistance surfaces (e.g. network and buffered paths). These approaches have the potential to improve landscape genetic analyses, but they also create new challenges. We conclude that no single way of using resistance surfaces is appropriate for every situation. We suggest that researchers carefully consider objectives, important biological assumptions and available parameterization and validation techniques when planning landscape genetic studies.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Across long time scales at which genetic mutations can be measured, resistance distance is strongly correlated to the differences between populations.
“It has already been demonstrated that across long time scales at which genetic mutations can be measured, resistance distance is strongly correlated to the differences between populations [28], [29], [42].”
From Applying circuit theory for corridor expansion and management at regional scales: tiling, pinch points, and omnidirectional connectivity (2014) · cites this paper as [42]
Citations
Cites
Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change
Parmesan, C. (2006) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110100 · Cited by 8,652
USING CIRCUIT THEORY TO MODEL CONNECTIVITY IN ECOLOGY, EVOLUTION, AND CONSERVATION
McRae, B. H., Dickson, B. G., Keitt, T. H., & Shah, V. B. (2008) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/07-1861.1 · Cited by 2,244
Self-citationThe population genetic consequences of habitat fragmentation for plants
Young, A., Boyle, T., & Brown, T. (1996) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/0169-5347(96)10045-8 · Cited by 2,113
McRae, B. H. (2006) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2006.tb00500.x · Cited by 1,081
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 105
- 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00242-6 · DOI · Paper page
- AndersonCD EppersonBK FortinM‐Jet al.(2010)Considering spatial and temporal scale in landscape‐genetic studies of gene flow.Molecular Ecology 19 3565–3575. · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-007-9108-4 · DOI
- Balkenhol N, 2009, Evaluating and improving analytical approaches in landscape genetics through simulations and wildlife case studies
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00417.x · DOI
- Beier P, Use of land facets in planning for climate change: conserving the arena not the actors, Conservation Biology
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00942.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1890/08-1898.1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1086/392950 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03476.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00243.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-005-5956-y · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-009-9351-y · DOI
- 10.2307/2656714 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1026062530600 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01686.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00328.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01267.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02253.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02764.x · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511754821 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04656.x · DOI
- 10.1086/506976 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.07.002 · DOI
- 10.2307/3544901 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04748.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.03148.x · DOI
- Emaresi G, Landscape genetics of the Alpine newt (Mesotriton alpestris) inferred from a strip‐based approach, Conservation Genetics
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03434.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04678.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01325.x · DOI
- 10.1017/S1464793105006949 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2007.01326.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03720.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2000.01136.x · DOI
- 10.1098/rsbl.2009.0820 · DOI
- Goldberg DE, 1989, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning
- GoldbergCS WaitsLP(2010)Comparative landscape genetics of two pond‐breeding amphibian species in a highly modified agricultural landscape.Molecular Ecology 19 3650–3663. · DOI
- 10.1023/B:LAND.0000004184.03500.a8 · DOI
- 10.1093/jhered/93.4.260 · DOI
- 10.1890/03-5327 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.95.25.14843 · DOI
- 10.1086/285922 · DOI
- Hirzel A, 2001, When GIS come to life. Linking landscape‐ and population ecology for large population management modelling: the case of Ibex (Capra ibex) in Switzerland
- 10.1641/B580306 · DOI
- Holland J, 1975, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems
- 10.1007/s10980-005-0438-9 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10021-007-9095-y · DOI
- 10.1007/s10144-008-0120-6 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02563.x · DOI
- 10.1890/01-0622 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0254-6299(16)31656-8 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04702.x · DOI
- 10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1203:LBADOT]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02719.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04152.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03673.x · DOI
- 10.1890/07-0645.1 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00008-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2001.01340.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1601-5223.1999.00217.x · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1095210 · DOI
- 10.1890/08-0879.1 · DOI
- MurphyMA DezanniR PilliodDS StorferA(2010)Landscape genetics of high mountain frog metapopulations.Molecular Ecology 19 3634–3649. · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01671.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2005.tb01747.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.12.014 · DOI
- 10.1086/587826 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2006.tb01872.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04226.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01112.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03629.x · DOI
- 10.1139/z02-175 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-007-9159-6 · DOI
- 10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[2498:LCAMEO]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1007/0-387-22648-6_17 · DOI
- 10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0178:HLCCCI]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-009-9436-7 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0006-3207(90)90054-S · DOI
- 10.1890/08-0101.1 · DOI
- Ronce O, 2001, Dispersal, 341, 10.1093/oso/9780198506607.003.0026 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2001.tb01325.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1993.tb01215.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04726.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03952.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02573.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-004-0166-6 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00442-006-0500-6 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02936.x · DOI
- 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800917 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04691.x · DOI
- 10.2307/3544927 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.03216.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02568.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1988.tb02518.x · DOI
- Wang Y‐H, 2008, Habitat suitability modeling to correlate gene flow with landscape connectivity, Landscape Ecology, 23, 989
- 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04122.x · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.042649999 · DOI
- Whitlock MC, 1999, Indirect measures of gene flow and migration: F(ST) ≠ 1/(4Nm + 1), Heredity, 82, 117, 10.1038/sj.hdy.6884960 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01700.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00419.x · DOI
- 10.1023/B:COGE.0000014053.97782.79 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00317286 · DOI
- 10.2307/2265819 · DOI
- 10.2307/3545811 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Howey, M. C. L. (2011) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.03.024 · Cited by 168
Circuitscape in Julia: High Performance Connectivity Modelling to Support Conservation Decisions
(2020) · JuliaCon Proceedings · doi:10.21105/jcon.00058 · Cited by 163
Pelletier, D., Clark, M., Anderson, M. G., Rayfield, B., Wulder, M. A., & Cardille, J. A. (2014) · PLOS One · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0084135 · Cited by 158
Circuitscape in julia: empowering dynamic approaches to connectivity assessment
Hall, K. R., Anantharaman, R., Landau, V. A., Clark, M., Dickson, B. G., Jones, A., Platt, J., Edelman, A., & Shah, V. B. (2021) · Land · doi:10.3390/land10030301 · Cited by 115
Mullins, J., McDevitt, A. D., Kowalczyk, R., Ruczyńska, I., Górny, M., & Wójcik, J. M. (2014) · Acta Theriologica · doi:10.1007/s13364-014-0180-2 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- SPEAR, S. F., BALKENHOL, N., FORTIN, M., MCRAE, B. H., & SCRIBNER, K.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-08-13
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 3576-3591
- ISSN
- 0962-1083
- 1365-294X
- Cited by
- 598
- References
- 4
- Language
- en
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