Cited by 93Avian ecology and behaviorGenetic diversity and population structureWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation

Effects of habitat fragmentation on effective dispersal of Florida scrub-jays

COULON, AURÉLIE, FITZPATRICK, JOHN W., BOWMAN, REED, LOVETTE, IRBY J.·2010·Conservation Biology

Abstract

Studies comparing dispersal in fragmented versus unfragmented landscapes show that habitat fragmentation alters the dispersal behavior of many species. We used two complementary approaches to explore Florida Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) dispersal in relation to landscape fragmentation. First, we compared dispersal distances of color-marked individuals in intensively monitored continuous and fragmented landscapes. Second, we estimated effective dispersal relative to the degree of fragmentation (as inferred from two landscape indexes: proportion of study site covered with Florida Scrub-Jay habitat and mean distance to nearest habitat patch within each study site) by comparing genetic isolation-by-distance regressions among 13 study sites having a range of landscape structures. Among color-banded individuals, dispersal distances were greater in fragmented versus continuous landscapes, a result consistent with other studies. Nevertheless, genetic analyses revealed that effective dispersal decreases as the proportion of habitat in the landscape decreases. These results suggest that although individual Florida Scrub-Jays may disperse farther as fragmentation increases, those that do so are less successful as breeders than those that disperse short distances. Our study highlights the importance of combining observational data with genetic inferences when evaluating the complex biological and life-history implications of dispersal.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01438.x

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Augmented dispersal may not always translate into the establishment of stable local populations because some species may be unable to survive and successfully reproduce.

    “Augmented dispersal may not always translate into the establishment of stable local populations because some species may be unable to survive and successfully reproduce (Coulon et al., 2010).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. McGarigal K., 2002, FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps
  2. Woolfenden G. E., 1996, Birds of North America, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
COULON, A., FITZPATRICK, J. W., BOWMAN, R., & LOVETTE, I. J.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Archbold Biological Station (US)
Corresponding author
COULON, AURÉLIE
Venue
Conservation Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-07-15
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
1080-1088
ISSN
  • 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-1739
OpenAlex
W1598649379
Cited by
93
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 12
FWCI
8.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Conservation Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Keywords
habitat fragmentation, Florida scrub-jay, Aphelocoma coerulescens, dispersal distance, color marking, genetic isolation by distance, landscape structure, breeding success, life history
MeSH terms
Animals, Demography, Florida, Genetics, Population, Geography, Linear Models, Ecosystem, Songbirds, Gene Flow

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