The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Connectivity for conservation: a framework to classify network measures
Abstract
Graph theory, network theory, and circuit theory are increasingly being used to quantify multiple aspects of habitat connectivity and protected areas. There has been an explosive proliferation of network (connectivity) measures, resulting in over 60 measures for ecologists to now choose from. Conceptual clarification on the ecological meaning of these network measures and their interrelationships is overdue. We present a framework that categorizes network measures based on the connectivity property that they quantify (i.e., route-specific flux, route redundancy, route vulnerability, and connected habitat area) and the structural level of the habitat network to which they apply. The framework reveals a lack of network measures in the categories of "route-specific flux among neighboring habitat patches" and "route redundancy at the level of network components." We propose that network motif and path redundancy measures can be developed to fill the gaps in these categories. The value of this framework lies in its ability to inform the selection and application of network measures. Ultimately, it will allow a better comparison among graph, network, and circuit analyses, which will improve the design and management of connected landscapes.
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?
A large and growing number of studies employ network-based connectivity models representing a landscape as high-quality habitat nodes with links connecting pairs of nodes if movement is possible between them.
“A large and growing number of studies employ network-based connectivity models, in which a landscape is represented as a set of high-quality habitat nodes, with links connecting pairs of nodes if movement is possible between them [12]–[17].”
From Applying circuit theory for corridor expansion and management at regional scales: tiling, pinch points, and omnidirectional connectivity (2014) · cites this paper as [16]
There is a paucity of strategies to analyze the results of continuous connectivity maps compared to the many methods for patch-based analysis.
“Compared to the many methods that can be used to quantify the characteristics of a patch-based analysis represented with nodes and links [16] there is a paucity of strategies to analyze the results of continuous connectivity maps [60].”
From Applying circuit theory for corridor expansion and management at regional scales: tiling, pinch points, and omnidirectional connectivity (2014) · cites this paper as [16]
Citations
Cites
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
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: 63
- 10.1127/0340-269X/2003/0033-0623 · DOI
- 10.2307/5781 · DOI
- 10.1038/35014651 · DOI
- 10.1890/04-0923 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-006-9015-0 · DOI
- 10.1890/05-0860 · DOI
- 10.1086/589451 · DOI
- 10.1006/jema.2000.0373 · DOI
- 10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0529:ACGTCM]2.0.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/BF00125131 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2007.12.002 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144718 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.1130098 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.07.002 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1025362903620 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10021-007-9038-7 · DOI
- 10.2307/3677159 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-007-9121-7 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00213-5 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00287.x · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2005.3448 · DOI
- N. P Halpin, and A. G Bunn 2000 .Using GIS to compute a least-cost distance matrix: a comparison of terrestrial and marine ecological applications .Pages1 –19 in 20th Annual ESRI User Conference .ESRI, Redlands, California, USA.
- 10.2307/3546854 · DOI
- 10.2307/3546736 · DOI
- T Keitt, D Urban, and B. T Milne 1997 .Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes .Ecology and Society 1 (1) :4 .〈http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss1/art4/〉 · DOI
- 10.2307/3545542 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00870.x · DOI
- 10.1016/0169-5347(96)81094-9 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-008-9304-x · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.2133841100 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.0022-0477.2004.00908.x · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0706568104 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.1089167 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.298.5594.824 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1890/06-1073.1 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00871.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.07.004 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16291.x · DOI
- 10.1137/S003614450342480 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.12.014 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-006-0013-z · DOI
- 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.04.003 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.12.006 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-008-9303-y · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.tree.2005.04.004 · DOI
- 10.1086/284880 · DOI
- 10.1556/ComEc.1.2000.1.12 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00158551 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10666-005-4697-2 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.03.005 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01383.x · DOI
- 10.1038/ng881 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1011112719782 · DOI
- 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.900102.x · DOI
- 10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[3029:EOLSDA]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-007-9138-y · DOI
- 10.1890/04-0918 · DOI
- 10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[1205:LCAGTP]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01271.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1068/b250849 · DOI
- 10.2307/2389612 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10980-005-7757-8 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1008030215600 · 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
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
Self-citationEcosystem multifunctionality in metacommunities
Thompson, P. L., & Gonzalez, A. (2016) · Ecology · doi:10.1002/ecy.1502 · Cited by 64
Counter-Mapping Maroon Cartographies: GIS and Anticolonial Modeling in St. Croix
Dunnavant, J. P., Wernke, S. A., & Kohut, L. E. (2023) · ACME · doi:10.7202/1107310ar · Cited by 12
Omnidirectional and omnifunctional connectivity analyses with a diverse species pool
Tessier, D. L., Maranger, R., & Poisot, T. (2020) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.02.03.932095 · Cited by 4
Modeling Marronage: GIS Heuristics of Refuge Affordances in Colonial St. Croix
Kohut, L. E., Wernke, S. A., & Dunnavant, J. (2025) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-024-09680-7 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Rayfield, B., Fortin, M.-J., & Fall, A.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 847-858
- ISSN
- 0012-9658
- Cited by
- 391
- References
- 2
- 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