Metapopulation dynamics and conservation of the marsh fritillary butterfly: Population viability analysis and management options for a critically endangered species in Western Europe

122 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Cost distance modelling of landscape connectivity and gap‐crossing ability using radio‐tracking data (2010, background): “…and generally requires extensive data (Ims & Yoccoz 1997) based on capture–recapture (Lebreton et al. 2003; Mennechez, Schtickzelle & Baguette 2003; Schtickzelle et al. 2005), or on the direct observation of movements across specific barriers (Sieving, Willson & Santo 1996; Grubb & Doherty 1999).”
Risks of ignoring fish population spatial structure in fisheries management (2011, background): “…that metapopulations are common and their dynamics are strongly influenced by spatial attributes of habitat patches (Lindenmayer et al. 2001; Schtickzelle et al. 2005), life history patterns, and distances and dispersal rates among local subpopulations (Sawchik et al. 2002; Curtis and…”
Habitat use of the endangered butterfly Euphydryas maturna and forestry in Central Europe (2006, background): “Regardless, the mortality is high and, as in related species (Ford & Ford, 1930; Ehrlich, 1984; Schtickzelle et al., 2005), it likely contributes to remarkable oscillations in abundance.”
Patch occupancy of grassland specialists: Habitat quality matters more than habitat connectivity (2018, unknown): “In such small populations, adverse events of genetic or environmental stochasticity are much more likely to entail serious consequences than in large populations (Sutcliffe et al., 1997; Schtickzelle et al., 2005).”