The effects of fragmentation per se on patch occupancy are stronger and more positive in a landscape with a higher quality and more homogeneous matrix

IF 5.4 1区环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

Ecography Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.1111/ecog.07462

Carmen Galán-Acedo, Lenore Fahrig

{"title":"The effects of fragmentation per se on patch occupancy are stronger and more positive in a landscape with a higher quality and more homogeneous matrix","authors":"Carmen Galán-Acedo, Lenore Fahrig","doi":"10.1111/ecog.07462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Habitat fragmentation per se - independent of habitat amount - often increases patch occupancy, possibly because patches are closer together in landscapes with higher fragmentation per se, which should increase dispersal success. Here, we ask whether this effect is influenced by the quality and/or heterogeneity of the landscape matrix, i.e. the non-habitat portion of the landscape. Specifically, we expect the positive effect of fragmentation per seshould be accentuated when matrix quality is high, reducing dispersal mortality. In contrast, when matrix quality is low, high dispersal mortality should lead to fewer colonisations, and accumulation of extinctions across the smaller patches in a more-fragmented landscape could lead to negative effects of fragmentation per se. Additionally, matrix heterogeneity could obscure fragmentation effects, as the link between habitat spatial distribution and between-patch dispersal becomes less predictable. We test these ideas using Glanville fritillary butterfly <i>Melitaea cinxia</i> occupancy data for 4291 habitat patches in the Åland Islands, Finland. Habitat patches for the study species are discrete and well-defined areas where at least one of the two host species occurs. Adult individuals disperse from habitat patches, spending time in the landscape matrix while searching for new habitat patches. Our predictions were mostly supported. Fragmentation effects were more strongly positive when matrix quality was high; however, we did not see the predicted negative effect of fragmentation per se in landscapes with low matrix quality. As predicted, fragmentation effects on patch occupancy were weaker in landscapes with a more heterogeneous matrix. Our findings may explain why fragmentation effects are often weak. They also suggest that the moderating effects of matrix quality and heterogeneity should be explicitly considered when interpreting effects of habitat fragmentation per se on species distributions.","PeriodicalId":51026,"journal":{"name":"Ecography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecography","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.07462","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Habitat fragmentation per se - independent of habitat amount - often increases patch occupancy, possibly because patches are closer together in landscapes with higher fragmentation per se, which should increase dispersal success. Here, we ask whether this effect is influenced by the quality and/or heterogeneity of the landscape matrix, i.e. the non-habitat portion of the landscape. Specifically, we expect the positive effect of fragmentation per seshould be accentuated when matrix quality is high, reducing dispersal mortality. In contrast, when matrix quality is low, high dispersal mortality should lead to fewer colonisations, and accumulation of extinctions across the smaller patches in a more-fragmented landscape could lead to negative effects of fragmentation per se. Additionally, matrix heterogeneity could obscure fragmentation effects, as the link between habitat spatial distribution and between-patch dispersal becomes less predictable. We test these ideas using Glanville fritillary butterfly Melitaea cinxia occupancy data for 4291 habitat patches in the Åland Islands, Finland. Habitat patches for the study species are discrete and well-defined areas where at least one of the two host species occurs. Adult individuals disperse from habitat patches, spending time in the landscape matrix while searching for new habitat patches. Our predictions were mostly supported. Fragmentation effects were more strongly positive when matrix quality was high; however, we did not see the predicted negative effect of fragmentation per se in landscapes with low matrix quality. As predicted, fragmentation effects on patch occupancy were weaker in landscapes with a more heterogeneous matrix. Our findings may explain why fragmentation effects are often weak. They also suggest that the moderating effects of matrix quality and heterogeneity should be explicitly considered when interpreting effects of habitat fragmentation per se on species distributions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在质量更高、基质更均匀的景观中，破碎化本身对斑块占有率的影响更强、更积极

与栖息地数量无关的栖息地破碎化本身往往会提高斑块占有率，这可能是因为在破碎化程度较高的景观中，斑块之间的距离更近，从而提高了扩散成功率。在此，我们想知道这种效应是否会受到景观基质（即景观中的非栖息地部分）的质量和/或异质性的影响。具体来说，我们预计当基质质量较高时，破碎化的积极作用会更加明显，从而降低扩散死亡率。相反，当基质质量较低时，较高的扩散死亡率应导致较少的定殖，而在较破碎的景观中，较小斑块上的灭绝累积可能会导致破碎本身的负面效应。此外，基质异质性可能会掩盖破碎化效应，因为栖息地空间分布与斑块间扩散之间的联系变得不那么可预测。我们使用芬兰奥兰群岛 4291 个栖息地斑块的格兰维尔蝶（Melitaea cinxia）占据数据来验证这些观点。研究物种的栖息地斑块是离散和明确界定的区域，其中至少有一种寄主物种出现。成年个体从栖息地斑块分散开，在寻找新的栖息地斑块的同时在景观基质中度过一段时间。我们的预测大多得到了支持。当基质质量较高时，破碎化效应具有更强的正效应；然而，在基质质量较低的景观中，我们并没有看到所预测的破碎化本身的负效应。正如预测的那样，在基质异质性较高的景观中，破碎化对斑块占有率的影响较弱。我们的发现可以解释为什么破碎化效应通常较弱。这些发现还表明，在解释生境破碎化本身对物种分布的影响时，应明确考虑基质质量和异质性的调节作用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Ecography 环境科学-生态学

CiteScore

11.60

自引率

3.40%

发文量

122

审稿时长

8-16 weeks

期刊介绍： ECOGRAPHY publishes exciting, novel, and important articles that significantly advance understanding of ecological or biodiversity patterns in space or time. Papers focusing on conservation or restoration are welcomed, provided they are anchored in ecological theory and convey a general message that goes beyond a single case study. We encourage papers that seek advancing the field through the development and testing of theory or methodology, or by proposing new tools for analysis or interpretation of ecological phenomena. Manuscripts are expected to address general principles in ecology, though they may do so using a specific model system if they adequately frame the problem relative to a generalized ecological question or problem. Purely descriptive papers are considered only if breaking new ground and/or describing patterns seldom explored. Studies focused on a single species or single location are generally discouraged unless they make a significant contribution to advancing general theory or understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes. Manuscripts merely confirming or marginally extending results of previous work are unlikely to be considered in Ecography. Papers are judged by virtue of their originality, appeal to general interest, and their contribution to new developments in studies of spatial and temporal ecological patterns. There are no biases with regard to taxon, biome, or biogeographical area.