How does landscape structure influence landscape connectivity

By B. Goodwin, L. Fahrig. 2002

256 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0c113ce8bb08d2b64a933be2772388548c9ac25e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Green corridors in urban landscapes affect the arthropod communities of domestic gardens (2012, background): “In our study, the sensitivity of metacommunities to isolation effects and, more generally, to landscape structure seems to depend on the dispersal capabilities of species (Goodwin and Fahrig, 2002; Holyoak et al., 2005).”
Is landscape connectivity a dependent or independent variable? (2003, unknown): “Modeling work has found similar complex interactions between landscape structure and some landscape connectivity metrics Tischendorf 2001; Goodwin and Fahrig 2002b .”
Movements of cactus bugs: Patch transfers, matrix resistance, and edge permeability (2004, background): “Understanding how the movement behavior of animals interacts with landscape structure to generate distribution patterns is a fundamental aim in spatial ecology Wiens et al. 1993a; With and Crist 1995; Turchin 1998; Goodwin and Fahrig 2002a .”
Analyzing the effect of stepping stones on target patch colonisation in structured landscapes for Eurasian lynx (2011, background): “Most theoretical studies guided by the metapopulation framework assume that a landscape consists of patches of suitable habitat within a ‘matrix’ of unsuitable habitat, but variations in matrix quality can have a wide range of effects on functional connectivity because different matrix types may con”
Causes and consequences of animal dispersal strategies: relating individual behaviour to spatial dynamics (2005, background): “…(fungus) at 40 cm (Bengtsson et al., 1994) and the gatekeeper butterfly at 85 m (Conradt et al., 2001) but a lack of orientation towards host plants was reported for goldenrod beetles, Trihabda borealis (Goodwin & Fahrig, 2002a) and the cabbage butterfly, Pieris rapae (Fahrig & Paloheimo, 1987).”
Does the type of matrix matter? A quantitative review of the evidence (2010, background): “…that the type of matrix influence individual survival and reproduction (e.g. Gustafson and Gardner 1996; Pither and Taylor 1998; Kindvall 1999; Goodwin and Fahrig 2002; Haynes et al. 2007a, b; Walters 2007), population and metapopulation structure and dynamics (e.g. Kareiva 1985; Moilanen and…”
Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes ‐ eight hypotheses (2012, background): “The extent and ease of movement will be determined by landscape configuration and composition (With & Crist, 1995; Ricketts, 2001; Goodwin & Fahrig, 2002; Damschen et al., 2006; Holzschuh et al., 2010).”
Genetic isolation by distance and landscape connectivity in the American marten (Martes americana) (2006, unknown): “How to quantify connectivity remains a subject of debate (Tischendorf and Fahrig 2000, 2001; Moilanen and Hanski 2001; Goodwin and Fahrig 2002), but a number of approaches require some information on movement or immigration/emigration rates.”
Landscape matrix and species traits mediate responses of Neotropical resident birds to forest fragmentation in Jamaica (2010, background): “Avoiding such conflation of factors is essential, because the influence due to habitat elements likely outweighs the influence of matrix elements (Goodwin and Fahrig 2002); thus, matrix effects can easily go undetected.”
The role of remnant trees in seed dispersal through the matrix: Being alone is not always so sad (2009, background): “Second, frugivores may be forced to use the scattered perches provided by remnant trees more extensively; perches thus acting as stepping stones, facilitating movement between fruiting patches in forest fragments (Date et al., 1991; Graham, 2001; but see also Goodwin and Fahrig, 2002).”
Corridors for Conservation: Integrating Pattern and Process (2006, background): “This simplistic, pattern-based view of corridors as habitats has resonated with ecologists because of its tractability (Goodwin 2003, Goodwin & Fahrig 2002) and scale versatility (Calabrese & Fagan 2004), but it has important limitations.”
Interpatch movement and edge effects: the role of behavioral responses to the landscape matrix (2006, unknown): “In addition to its effect on animal responses to the patch edge, the composition of the matrix can also affect patterns of movement while in transit between patches (Jonsen and Taylor 2000, Goodwin and Fahrig 2002b).”
Behavioral tradeoffs when dispersing across a patchy landscape (2005, background): “Other researchers have documented both strong (Wennergren et al. 1995, Goodwin and Fahrig 2002a ) and weak (Gustafson and Gardner 1996, Morales and Ellner 2002) behavioral effects of differences in patch arrangement in simulated landscapes.”
CONSERVING SPECIES IN A WORKING LANDSCAPE: LAND USE WITH BIOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC OBJECTIVES (2005, background): “August 2005 1401LAND USE, CONSERVATION, AND ECONOMICS Pressey, R. L. 1994.”