Habitat fragmentation and species richness

By Ilkka Hanski. 2015

318 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/287854551560a32e8d7f50617662678e9e435c2a

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecological Modeling

1. J. Metzger
2. C. A. Peres
3. R. Pardini
4. L. Fahrig
5. Marianna Dixo
6. Cristina Banks‐Leite
7. M. Vieira
8. K. Ferraz

In Ecology

1. J. Metzger
2. R. Pardini
3. C. A. Peres
4. M. Tabarelli
5. L. Fahrig
6. Milton Cezar Ribeiro
7. Marianna Dixo
8. D. Faria

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. R. Pardini
2. J. Metzger
3. M. Tabarelli
4. C. A. Peres
5. L. Fahrig
6. Milton Cezar Ribeiro
7. I. Leal
8. M. Galetti

Citations in the corpus

• Accounting for the causal basis of collinearity when measuring the effects of habitat loss versus habitat fragmentation (2016, background): “A major reason for this is that 58 metrics of habitat loss and fragmentation are typically highly collinear, making it difficult to 59 tease apart their true effects (Koper, et al. 2007, Didham, et al. 2012, Pasher et al. 2013, Villard 60 and Metzger 2014, Hanski 2015).”
• Ecological Responses to Habitat Fragmentation Per Se (2017, background): “From that point to the present, habitat patchiness has been associated with the concept of habitat fragmentation and is generally considered to have a negative influence on population and community-level responses (Villard & Metzger 2014, Hanski 2015).”
• Protected areas do not mitigate biodiversity declines: A case study on butterflies (2018, unknown): “Potential causes of such declines are habitat loss (Sang, Teder, Helm, & Pärtel, 2010), frag‐ mentation (Hanski, 2015; Krauss et al., 2010), habitat degradation (Stefanescu, Peñuelas, & Filella, 2009) or climate change (Oliver et al., 2015; Schweiger, Settele, Kudrna, Klotz, & Kühn, 2008; Settele,…”
• Experimental evidence does not support the Habitat Amount Hypothesis (2017, unknown): “Habitat fragmentation and total habitat area act in concert; in landscapes where habitat has been lost, possibly beyond a threshold that has been estimated around 70%, fragmentation reduces species richness and degrades ecosystem function even further (Hanski 2015).”
• Indirect effects of habitat loss via habitat fragmentation: A cross-taxa analysis of forest-dependent species (2020, background): “mentation is relevant for local species extinction (Hanski, 2015; Fletcher Jr. et al., 2018).”
• High mammal species turnover in forest patches immersed in biofuel plantations (2017, background): “This is largely because these mammal assemblages have been partly replaced by exotic and non-forest dwelling species, so that the total species richness reflects the composite responses of all species across the meta-community (Hanski, 2015).”
• Testing the habitat amount hypothesis for South American small mammals (2017, background): “This result is inconsistent with Hanski's (2015) argument, because Melo (2015) was similar in design to a study (Pardini et al., 2010) cited by Hanski (2015) as an example of a situation where patch size effects should be important beyond the effects of habitat amount.”