Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T23:04:26.233Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Impacts of corridors on populations and communities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2010

Kevin R. Crooks
Affiliation:
Colorado State University
M. Sanjayan
Affiliation:
The Nature Conservancy, Virginia
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

This chapter focuses specifically on the most popular approach to maintain connectivity in conservation and management, which is to create or maintain habitat corridors. The popularity of corridors in conservation derives from the direct and intuitive relationship to their purported function: by physically connecting otherwise isolated fragments, corridors should increase the movement of both individuals and genes. In doing so, corridors provide sources of immigrants to offset local extinction, and sources of genetic diversity to reduce harmful effects of inbreeding and drift. The most fundamental spatial models in ecology, including island biogeographic models (MacArthur and Wilson 1967) and metapopulation models (Levins 1969; Hanski 1999), predict that movement between patches will increase population size and persistence and, through the rescue of declining populations (Brown and Kodric-Brown 1977), maintain local species richness. We recognize that studies focusing on corridors represent only a small fraction of studies on connectivity, and the large literature examining effects of patch isolation on colonization and occupancy in metapopulations has been reviewed elsewhere (see Table 9.1 in Hanski 1999; Moilanen and Nieminen 2002; Molainen and Hanski Chapter 3). The goal of this chapter is to assess existing evidence for corridor effects on populations and communities, and to discuss future directions that would permit more rigorous evaluation of their use in conservation.

We focus on population and community impacts of corridors because evidence for the necessary prerequisite – that corridors increase movement and gene flow – has been growing and has also been reviewed elsewhere.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aars, J., and Ims, R. A.. 1999. The effect of habitat corridors on rates of transfer and interbreeding between vole demes. Ecology 80:1648–1655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, G. S., and B. J. Danielson. 1997. The effects of landscape composition and physiognomy on metapopulation size: the role of corridors. Landscape Ecology 12:261–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreassen, H. P., Halle, S., and Ims, R. A.. 1996. Optimal width of movement corridors for root voles: not too narrow and not too wide. Journal of Applied Ecology 33:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beier, P. 1995. Dispersal of juvenile cougars in fragmented habitat. Journal of Wildlife Management 59:228–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beier, P., and Noss, R. F.. 1998. Do habitat corridors really provide connectivity?Conservation Biology 12:1241–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berggren, A., Birath, B., and Kindvall, O.. 2002. Effects of corridors and habitat edges on dispersal behavior, movement rates, and movement angles in Roesel's bush-cricket (Metrioptera roeseli). Conservation Biology 16:1562–1569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bierregaard R. O., Jr., and C. Gaston. 2001. The Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments project: overview and history of a long-term conservation project. Pp. 5–12 in Bierregaard, R. O.., Gascon, C., Lovejoy, T. E., and Mesquita, R. C. G. (eds.) Lessons from Amazonia: The Ecology and Conservation of a Fragmented Forest. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Boudjemadi, K., Lecomte, J., and Clobert, J.. 1999. Influence of connectivity on demography and dispersal in two contrasting habitats: an experimental approach. Journal of Animal Ecology 68:1207–1224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowne, D. R., Peles, J. D., and Barrett, G. W.. 1999. Effects of landscape spatial structure on movement patterns of the hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus). Landscape Ecology 14:53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinkerhoff,, R. J., Haddad, N. M., and Orrock, J. L.. 2005. Corridors and olfactory predator cues affect small mammal behavior. Journal of Mammalogy 86:662–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. H., and Kodric-Brown, A.. 1977. Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58:445–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkey, T. V. 1997. Metapopulation extinction in fragmented landscapes: using bacteria and protozoa communities as model ecosystems. American Naturalist 150:568–591CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cadenasso, M. L., Pickett, S. T. A., Weathers, K. C., et al. 2003. An interdisciplinary and synthetic approach to ecological boundaries. BioScience 53:717–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caswell, H. 2001. Matrix Population Models: Construction, Analysis, and Interpretation, 2nd edn. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Coffman, C. J., Nichols, J. D., and Pollock, K. H.. 2001. Population dynamics of Microtus pennsylvanicus in corridor-linked patches. Oikos 93:3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collinge, S. K. 2000. Effects of grassland fragmentation on insect species loss, colonization, and movement patterns. Ecology 81:2211–2226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, W. M., Yao, J., Foster, B. L., Holt, R. D., and Patrick, L. B.. 2005. Secondary succession in an experimentally fragmented landscape: community patterns across space and time. Ecology 86:1267–1279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danielson, B. J., and Hubbard, M. W.. 2000. The influence of corridors on the movement behavior of individual Peromyscus polionotus in experimental landscapes. Landscape Ecology 15:323–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, J. B. Jr., Borgella, J. R., Clements, K., and Meffe, G. K.. 1995. Patch isolation, corridor effects, and colonization by a resident sparrow in a managed pine woodland. Conservation Biology 9:542–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Earn, D. J. D., Levin, S. A., and Rohani, P.. 2000. Coherence and conservation. Science 290:1360–1364CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fahrig, L. 2003. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics 34:487–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahrig, L., and Merriam, G.. 1985. Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66:1762–1768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraz G., G. J. Russell, P. C. Stouffer, et al. 2003. Rates of species loss from Amazonian forest fragments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 100:14069–14073CrossRef
Forney, K. A., and Gilpin, M. E.. 1989. Spatial structure and population extinction: a study with Drosophila flies. Conservation Biology 3:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, F., Gonzalez, A., and Evans-Freke, I.. 1998. Corridors maintain species richness in the fragmented landscape of a microecosystem. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 265:577–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez, A., and Chaneton, E. J.. 2002. Heterotroph species extinction, abundance and biomass dynamics in an experimentally fragmented microecosystem. Journal of Animal Ecology 71:594–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez, A., Lawton, J. H., Gilbert, F. S., Blackburn, T. M., and Evans-Freke, I.. 1998. Metapopulation dynamics, abundance, and distribution in a microecosystem. Science 281:2045–2047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grace, J. B., and Pugesek, B. H.. 1998. On the use of path analysis and related procedures for the investigation of ecological problems. American Naturalist 152:151–159CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haddad, N. M. 1999a. Corridor and distance effects on interpatch movements: a landscape experiment with butterflies. Ecological Applications 9:612–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, N. M. 1999b. Corridor use predicted from behaviors at habitat boundaries. American Naturalist 153:215–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, N. M., and Baum, K. A.. 1999. An experimental test of corridor effects on butterfly densities. Ecological Applications 9:623–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddad, N. M., Bowne, D. R., Cunningham, A., et al. 2003. Corridor use by diverse taxa. Ecology 84:609–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, M. L., Lurz, P. W. W., Shirley, M. D. F., et al. 2001. Impact of landscape management on the genetic structure of red squirrel populations. Science 293:2246–2248CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hannon, S. J., and Schmiegelow, F. K. A.. 2002. Corridors may not improve the conservation value of small reserves for most boreal birds. Ecological Applications 12:1457–1468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanski, I. 1999. Metapopulation Ecology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, S., and Bruna, E.. 1999. Habitat fragmentation and large-scale conservation: what do we know for sure?Ecography 22:225–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henein, K., and Merriam, G.. 1990. The elements of connectivity where corridor quality is variable. Landscape Ecology 4:157–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, G. R. 1996. Linking extinction to connectivity and habitat destruction in metapopulation models. American Naturalist 148:226–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holyoak, M. 2000. Habitat patch arrangement and metapopulation persistence of predators and prey. American Naturalist 156:378–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holyoak, M., and Lawler, S. P.. 1996. The role of dispersal in predator–prey metapopulation dynamics. Journal of Animal Ecology 65:640–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudgens, B. R., and Haddad, N. M.. 2003. Predicting which species will benefit from corridors in fragmented landscapes from population growth models. American Naturalist 161:808–820CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ims, R. A., and Andreassen, H. P.. 1999. Effects of experimental habitat fragmentation and connectivity on root vole demography. Journal of Animal Ecology 68:839–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchner, F., Ferdy, J., Andalo, C., Colas, B., and Moret, J.. 2003. Role of corridors in plant dispersal: an example with the endangered Ranunculus nodiflorus. Conservation Biology 17:401–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polla, V. N., and Barrett, G. W.. 1993. Effects of corridor width and presence on the population dynamics of the meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Landscape Ecology 8:25–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurance, S. G., and Laurance, W. F.. 1999. Tropical wildlife corridors: use of linear rainforest remnants by arboreal mammals. Biological Conservation 91:231–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurance, W. F., Laurance, S. G., Ferreira, L. V., et al. 1997. Biomass collapse in Amazonian forest fragments. Science 278:1117–1118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurance, W. F., Perez-Salicrup, D., Delamonica, P., et al. 2001. Rain forest fragmentation and the structure of Amazonian liana communities. Ecology 82:105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galliard, J., Ferrière, R., and Clobert, J.. 2003. Mother-offspring interactions affect natal dispersal in a lizard. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 270:1163–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levey,, D. J., Bolker, B. M., Tewlsbury, J. J., Sargent, S., and Haddad, N. M.. 2005. Effects of landscape corridors on seed dispersal by birds. Science 309:146–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levins, R. 1969. Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America 15:237–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, R. H., and Wilson, E. O. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
MacClintock, L., Whitcomb, R. F., and Whitcomb, B. L.. 1977. Island biogeography and the “habitat islands” of eastern forest. II. Evidence for the value of corridors and minimization of isolation in preservation of biotic diversity. American Birds 31:6–12Google Scholar
Mackenzie, D. I., Nichols, J. D., Royle, J. A., et al. 2006. Occupancy Estimation and Modeling: Inferring Patterns and Dynamics of Species Occurence. Boston, MA: Academic Press.
Machtans, C. S., Villard, M., and Hannon, S. J.. 1996. Use of riparian buffer strips as movement corridors by forest birds. Conservation Biology 10:1366–1379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansergh, I. M., and Scotts, D. J.. 1989. Habitat continuity and social organization of the mountain pygmy-possum restored by tunnel. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:701–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCallum, H., and Dobson, A.. 2002. Disease, habitat fragmentation and conservation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269:2041–2049CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mech, S. G., and Hallett, J. G.. 2001. Evaluating the effectiveness of corridors: a genetic approach. Conservation Biology 15:467–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moilanen, A., and Nieminen, M.. 2002. Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83:1131–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mönkkönen, M., and Mutanen, M.. 2003. Occurrence of moths in boreal forest corridors. Conservation Biology 17:468–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, W. F., and Doak, D. F.. 2002. Quantitative Conservation Biology: Theory and Practice of Population Viability Analysis. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Orrock, J. L., Danielson, B. J., Burns, M. J., and Levey, D. J.. 2003. Spatial ecology of predator–prey interactions: corridors and patch shape influence seed predation. Ecology 84:2589–2599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perault, D. R., and M. V. Lomolino. 2000. Corridors and mammal community structure across a fragmented, old-growth forest landscape. Ecological Monographs 70:401–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petchey, O. L., Gonzalez, A., and Wilson, H. B.. 1997. Effects on population persistence: the interaction between environmental noise colour, intraspecific competition and space. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 264:1841–1847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pryke, S. R., and Samways, M. J.. 2001. Width of grassland linkages for the conservation of butterflies in South African afforested areas. Biological Conservation 101:85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, D. K., Noon, B. R., Megahan, J. W., and Meslow, E. C.. 1998. Compensatory behavior of Ensatina eschscholtzii in biological corridors: a field experiment. Canadian Journal of Zoology 76:117–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmiegelow, F. K. A., and Mönkkönen, M.. 2002. Habitat loss and fragmentation in dynamic landscapes: avian perspectives from the boreal forest. Ecological Applications 12:375–389Google Scholar
Schmiegelow, F. K. A., Machtans, C. S., and Hannon, S. J.. 1997. Are boreal birds resilient to forest fragmentation? An experimental study of short-term community responses. Ecology 78:1914–1932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirley, M. D. F., and Sibly, R. M.. 2001. Metapopulation dynamics of fruit flies undergoing evolutionary change in patchy environments. Ecology 82:3257–3262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tewksbury, J. J., Levey, D. J., Haddad, N. M., et al. 2002. Corridors affect plants, animals, and their interactions in fragmented landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 99:12923–12926CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tilman D., C. L. Lehman, and P. Kareiva. 1997. Population dynamics in spatial habitats. Pp. 3–20 in Tilman, D., and Kareiva, P. (eds.) Spatial Ecology: The Role of Space in Population Dynamics and Interspecific Interactions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tischendorf, L., and Wissel, C.. 1997. Corridors as conduits for small animals: attainable distances depending on movement pattern, boundary reaction, and corridor width. Oikos 79:603–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villard, M., Trzcinski, M. K., and Merriam, G.. 1999. Fragmentation effects on forest birds: relative influence of woodland cover and configuration on landscape occupancy. Conservation Biology 13:774–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcove, D. S., Rothstein, D., Dubow, J., Phillips, A., and Losos, E.. 1998. Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. BioScience 48:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×