Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 572

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Landscape Connectivity and Population Distributions in Heterogeneous Environments

With, Kimberly A., Gardner, Robert H., Turner, Monica G.·1997·Oikos

Abstract

Landscape connectivity refers to the functional relationship among habitat patches, owing to the spatial contagion of habitat and the movement responses of organisms to landscape structure. Heterogeneous landscapes provide a particular challenge for modelling population-level responses to habitat fragmentation, because individuals may be utilizing multiple habitats to varying degrees across the landscape. We apply neutral landscape models to understand how species' habitat affinities interacted with landscape structure (i.e., habitat abundance, distribution, and quality as measured by carrying capacity) to affect the redistribution of individuals. Two types of neutral models are presented: random maps, in which the distribution of habitat is spatially independent, and fractal maps, in which habitat exhibits an intermediate level of spatial dependence. The neutral landscapes comprised varying proportions of three habitat types, for which species exhibited a preference gradient (high, medium, low). We performed a series of simulation experiments as a factorial design of parameter states to tease apart the underlying factors responsible for population distributional patterns (random vs clumped) in spatially complex mosaics. Landscape connectivity is a threshold phenomenon, in which even a minimal loss of habitat near the critical threshold (p c ) is likely to disconnect the landscape, and which may have consequences for population distributions. The exact value of p c depends upon the spatial arrangement of habitat; fractal landscapes exhibited connectivity across a greater range of habitat abundance (p) than random maps (fractal p c = 0.29-0.50. random p c = 0.59). Although the spatial arrangement of habitat (random vs fractal) was the most important determinant of population distributional patterns, different landscape factors were important in structuring populations in the two types of maps. The relative abundance of habitat had the greatest effect on populations in random landscapes, whereas scale-dependent patterns were evident in fractal landscapes. At fine scales, population dispersion was determined by habitat abundance in both random and fractal maps, although populations were more aggregated (as measured by Morisita's Index, l m ) at this scale in random landscapes. But at coarse scales on fractal maps, population distribution was primarily influenced by species' habitat affinities. Assessment of the independent effects of habitat affinity and habitat carrying capacity on population distributions revealed that the differential interaction of species with landscape structure (i.e., different residence probabilities in each habitat type) was the primary determinant of distributional patterns. Neutral landscape models thus provide a useful tool for determining the relative importance of various components of landscape structure that affect population distributions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3545811

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 572

Metadata

Authors
With, K. A., Gardner, R. H., & Turner, M. G.
Venue
Oikos
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1997-02
Volume
78
Issue
1
Pages
151
ISSN
0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2164765688
Cited by
572
References
1
FWCI
26.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Landscape Connectivity and Population Distributions in Heterogeneous Environments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3545811
The paper
With, K. A., Gardner, R. H., & Turner, M. G. (1997). Landscape Connectivity and Population Distributions in Heterogeneous Environments. Oikos. https://doi.org/10.2307/3545811

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.