Fine-scale movement behaviors of calopterygid damselflies are influenced by landscape structure: an experimental manipulation

By Ian D. Jonsen, P. Taylor. 2000

93 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1c443adbc94f18fd1ab81049e42997f934eb5dbf

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 Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Effect of landscape structure on the movement behaviour of a specialized goldenrod beetle, Trirhabda borealis (2002, background): “, high physiological stresses or high predation pressure) can demand movement behaviour aimed at minimizing risk (Rijnsdorp 1980; Taylor and Merriam 1995; Jonsen and Taylor 2000).”
MEASURING LANDSCAPE CONNECTIVITY: THE CHALLENGE OF BEHAVIORAL LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY (2005, background): “It follows that the functional connectivity of a landscape is likely to be both species and context-dependent (Pither and Taylor 1998, Jonsen and Taylor 2000, D’Eon et al. 2002).”
Scales of movement by elk (Cervus elaphus) in response to heterogeneity in forage resources and predation risk (2005, unknown): “Although CRW models can effectively predict the redistribution pattern of animals over short time scales they tend to fail over longer time horizons likely because behaviours change when different habitat conditions are encountered (Jonsen and Taylor 2000) or different activities are undertaken (Fir”
Know Thy Enemy: Experience Affects Elk Translocation Success in Risky Landscapes (2007, background): “To our knowledge, only experimental releases of readily tractable species have sufficiently overlapped variation in animal sources and release-site conditions to quantify how the two interact to influence the outcomes of translocations (e.g., Jonsen and Taylor 2000).”
Dispersal behaviour in fragmented landscapes: Routine or special movements? (2005, background): “So, landscape effects do matter for routine, explorative movements (e.g. Jonsen & Taylor, 2000), but it remains an assumption if we infer the same conclusion for fast, directed movements.”
Quantifying functional connectivity: Experimental evidence for patch-specific resistance in the Natterjack toad (Bufo calamita) (2004, background): “Ever if this result seems trivial for a ground-dwelling species, this effect of matrix composition has very rarely been documented, especially for ground-dwelling species, and only a few studies report on direct observations of such effects in ground-dwelling organisms: Wiens and Milne 1989; Crist e”
MATRIX HETEROGENEITY AND HOST–PARASITOID INTERACTIONS IN SPACE (2003, background): “To date, few landscape studies have looked beyond simply quantifying turnover rates among patches embedded in different matrices and have attempted to quantify the behavioral bases for matrix effects (but see Crist et al. 1992, Ims 1995, Wiens et al. 1995, 1997, Jonsen and Taylor 2000).”
Incorporating landscape elements into a connectivity measure: a case study for the Speckled wood butterfly (Pararge aegeria L.) (2003, background): “2000; Schultz and Crone 2001; Sutcliffe and Thomas 2001; damselflies: e.g. Pither and Taylor 1998; Jon- sen and Taylor 2000; crickets: e.g.”
How does landscape structure influence landscape connectivity (2002, background): “…movement behaviour (Baars 1979, Crist et al. 1992, Johnson et al. 1992, Matthysen et al. 1995, Charrier et al. 1997, Pither and Taylor 1998, Jonsen and Taylor 2000, Goodwin and Fahrig 2002) and movement risk (Charrier et al. 1997, Sakai and Noon 1997, St Clair et al. 1998, Zollner and Lima…”
Gap-crossing decisions by forest birds: an empirical basis for parameterizing spatially-explicit, individual-based models (2002, background): “A promising avenue to address this question is to incorporate the decision rules of moving birds into spatially-explicit, individual-based models (Bart 1995; Conroy et al. 1995; Dunning et al. 1995; Ruckelshaus et al. 1999; Baillie et al. 2000; Jonsen and Taylor 2000b; Travis and French 2000).”
Non‐optimal animal movement in human‐altered landscapes (2007, unknown): “…encounter a patch boundary, or a preference to move into the cover type on the other side of the boundary (e.g. Kuussaari, Nieminen & Hanski 1996; Jonsen & Taylor 2000; Conradt, Roper & Thomas 2001; Ries & Debinski 2001; Collinge & Palmer 2002; Norberg, Enfjall & Leimar 2002; Schtickzelle &…”
Interpatch movement and edge effects: the role of behavioral responses to the landscape matrix (2006, unknown): “Directed movement through pastures apparently underlies the higher colonization rate in the former landscape (Jonsen and Taylor 2000).”
MATRIX COMPOSITION AFFECTS THE SPATIAL ECOLOGY OF A PRAIRIE PLANTHOPPER (2003, background): “…different habitat types (K. J. Haynes and J. T. Cronin, unpublished data), we found that movement paths were meandering through nonhost grasses (complex matrix) and more linear through mudflats (simple matrix) (see also Zalucki and Kitching 1982, Jonsen and Taylor 2000, Goodwin and Fahrig 2002).”