The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Forks in the Road: Choices in Procedures for Designing Wildland Linkages
Abstract
Abstract: Models are commonly used to identify lands that will best maintain the ability of wildlife to move between wildland blocks through matrix lands after the remaining matrix has become incompatible with wildlife movement. We offer a roadmap of 16 choices and assumptions that arise in designing linkages to facilitate movement or gene flow of focal species between 2 or more predefined wildland blocks. We recommend designing linkages to serve multiple (rather than one) focal species likely to serve as a collective umbrella for all native species and ecological processes, explicitly acknowledging untested assumptions, and using uncertainty analysis to illustrate potential effects of model uncertainty. Such uncertainty is best displayed to stakeholders as maps of modeled linkages under different assumptions. We also recommend modeling corridor dwellers (species that require more than one generation to move their genes between wildland blocks) differently from passage species (for which an individual can move between wildland blocks within a few weeks). We identify a problem, which we call the subjective translation problem, that arises because the analyst must subjectively decide how to translate measurements of resource selection into resistance. This problem can be overcome by estimating resistance from observations of animal movement, genetic distances, or interpatch movements. There is room for substantial improvement in the procedures used to design linkages robust to climate change and in tools that allow stakeholders to compare an optimal linkage design to alternative designs that minimize costs or achieve other conservation goals.
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?
Several authors have alluded to the idea that artificial boundaries might influence the results of least cost path and landscape resistance models, but no one has directly addressed the issue.
“Several authors have alluded to the idea that artificial boundaries might influence the results of least cost path and landscape resistance models [2], [11], [15]–[18], but to our knowledge, no one has directly addressed the issue.”
From The effect of map boundary on estimates of landscape resistance to animal movement (2010) · cites this paper as [2]
Citations
Cites
McRae, B. H. (2006) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2006.tb00500.x · Cited by 1,081
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 65
- 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00242-6 · DOI · Paper page
- Andelman S., 1999, The Nature Conservancy
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.01082.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.07010094.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/CBO9780511754821.025 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.98036.x · DOI · Paper page
- Beier P., 1992, A checklist for evaluating impacts to wildlife movement corridors, Wildlife Society Bulletin, 20, 434
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00161.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-005-5956-y · DOI
- 10.1890/04-0906 · DOI
- Carr M. H., 2002, Final report. Southeastern ecological framework
- 10.1890/02-5195 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110050 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00328.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2006.00215.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00292.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00804.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01325.x · DOI
- Environmental Law Institute, 2003, Conservation thresholds for land use planners
- 10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00213-5 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0169-2046(97)80002-3 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98519.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-007-9104-8 · DOI
- 10.2193/0091-7648(2004)032[0852:OUDMTA]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.00070.x · DOI
- 10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0609:CUBDT]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1890/03-5327 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-004-3162-y · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.620293.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99075.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-005-5203-6 · DOI
- Hunter R. D., 2003, Landscape‐level connectivity in coastal southern California USA as assessed through carnivore habitat suitability, Natural Areas Journal, 23, 302
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001, Climate Change 2001: synthesis
- 10.1016/S1631-0691(03)00050-7 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.12.007 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2193/2005-709 · DOI
- Kobler A. andM.Adamic.1999.Brown bears in Slovenia: identifying locations for construction of wildlife bridges across highways. InG.Evink P.Garrett andD.Zeigler editors.Proceedings of International Conference on Ecology and Transportation. Available fromhttp://www.icoet.net/ICOWET/99proceedings.asp(accessed January 2008).
- 10.1017/S1367943003001100 · DOI
- 10.1111/1467-9671.00035 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0169-2046(04)00079-9 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0706568104 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0006-3207(95)90029-2 · DOI
- 10.1016/B978-012497781-5/50016-5 · DOI
- Morrison S. A., 2008, Implementing corridors in a connectivity endgame: some lessons from mountain lions, Conservation Biology
- National Highway Cooperative Research Program, 2004, Environmental stewardship practices, procedures, and policies for highway construction and maintenance
- National Research Council (NRC), 2005, Assessing and managing the ecological impacts of paved roads
- Newell S. L.2006.An evaluation of a science‐based approach to habitat linkage design.MS thesis. Northern Arizona University Flagstaff Arizona .
- 10.1017/CBO9780511754821.026 · DOI
- 10.1007/0-387-22648-6_17 · DOI
- Quinby P., 1999, Opportunities for wildlife habitat connectivity between Algonquin Provincial Park and the Adirondack Park
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00297.x · DOI
- Rubert L.2007.Identifying habitat suitability and potential linkages for swamp rabbit conservation in southern Illinois.MS thesis.Southern Illinois University Carbondale Illinois .
- 10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[1469:RBAOSH]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- Servheen C. J. S.Walker andP.Sandstrom.2001.Identification and management of linkage zones for grizzly bears between the large blocks of public land in the northern Rocky Mountains.Proceedings of International Conference on Ecology and Transportation161–179.
- 10.2737/PNW-RP-549 · DOI
- Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project, 2005, Linking Colorado's landscapes: a statewide assessment of wildlife linkages, phase I report
- 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00153-6 · DOI
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1981, Standards for the development of suitability index models
- 10.1034/j.1600-0587.2000.230512.x · DOI
- Ventura County, 2005, Guidelines for safe wildlife passage
- 10.1023/B:LAND.0000014492.50765.05 · DOI · Paper page
- Walker R. andL.Craighead.1997.Analyzing wildlife movement corridors in Montana using GIS. 1997.In Proceedings of the 1997 International ESRI Users conference.Environmental Sciences Research Institute Redlands California . Available fromhttp://gis.esri.com/library/userconf/proc97/proc97/to150/pap116/p116.htm(accessed January 2008).
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00145.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00080.x · DOI
- 10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00187-0 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Landscape connectivity for wildlife: development and validation of multispecies linkage maps
Koen, E. L., Bowman, J., Sadowski, C., & Walpole, A. A. (2014) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12197 · Cited by 293
Secondary extinctions of biodiversity
Brodie, J. F., Aslan, C. E., Rogers, H. S., Redford, K. H., Maron, J. L., Bronstein, J. L., & Groves, C. R. (2014) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2014.09.012 · Cited by 188
The effect of map boundary on estimates of landscape resistance to animal movement
Koen, E. L., Garroway, C. J., Wilson, P. J., & Bowman, J. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011785 · Cited by 148
Metadata
- Authors
- BEIER, P., MAJKA, D. R., & SPENCER, W. D.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-08
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 836-851
- ISSN
- 0888-8892
- 1523-1739
- Cited by
- 489
- References
- 1
- 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