Cited by 391

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

Rayfield, Bronwyn, Fortin, Marie-Josée, Fall, Andrew·2011·Ecology

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

Crossref · 10.1890/09-2190.1

Cites

2 of 2 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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. 10.1127/0340-269X/2003/0033-0623 · DOI
  2. 10.2307/5781 · DOI
  3. 10.1038/35014651 · DOI
  4. 10.1890/04-0923 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s10980-006-9015-0 · DOI
  6. 10.1890/05-0860 · DOI
  7. 10.1086/589451 · DOI
  8. 10.1006/jema.2000.0373 · DOI
  9. 10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0529:ACGTCM]2.0.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1007/BF00125131 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2007.12.002 · DOI
  12. 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144718 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1126/science.1130098 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.07.002 · DOI
  15. 10.1023/A:1025362903620 · DOI
  16. 10.1007/s10021-007-9038-7 · DOI
  17. 10.2307/3677159 · DOI
  18. 10.1007/s10980-007-9121-7 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00213-5 · DOI
  20. 10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00287.x · DOI
  21. 10.1098/rspb.2005.3448 · DOI
  22. 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.
  23. 10.2307/3546854 · DOI
  24. 10.2307/3546736 · DOI
  25. 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
  26. 10.2307/3545542 · DOI
  27. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00870.x · DOI
  28. 10.1016/0169-5347(96)81094-9 · DOI
  29. 10.1007/s10980-008-9304-x · DOI
  30. 10.1073/pnas.2133841100 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.1111/j.0022-0477.2004.00908.x · DOI
  32. 10.1073/pnas.0706568104 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1126/science.1089167 · DOI
  34. 10.1126/science.298.5594.824 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1890/06-1073.1 · DOI
  36. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00871.x · DOI
  37. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.07.004 · DOI
  38. 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16291.x · DOI
  39. 10.1137/S003614450342480 · DOI · Paper page
  40. 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.12.014 · DOI
  41. 10.1007/s10980-006-0013-z · DOI
  42. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.04.003 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.12.006 · DOI
  44. 10.1007/s10980-008-9303-y · DOI · Paper page
  45. 10.1016/j.tree.2005.04.004 · DOI
  46. 10.1086/284880 · DOI
  47. 10.1556/ComEc.1.2000.1.12 · DOI
  48. 10.1007/BF00158551 · DOI
  49. 10.1007/s10666-005-4697-2 · DOI
  50. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.03.005 · DOI
  51. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01383.x · DOI
  52. 10.1038/ng881 · DOI
  53. 10.1023/A:1011112719782 · DOI
  54. 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.900102.x · DOI
  55. 10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[3029:EOLSDA]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  56. 10.1007/s10980-007-9138-y · DOI
  57. 10.1890/04-0918 · DOI
  58. 10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[1205:LCAGTP]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  59. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01271.x · DOI · Paper page
  60. 10.1068/b250849 · DOI
  61. 10.2307/2389612 · DOI
  62. 10.1007/s10980-005-7757-8 · DOI
  63. 10.1023/A:1008030215600 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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