Metapopulation persistence in dynamic landscapes: the role of dispersal distance

By Karin Johst, R. Brandl, S. Eber. 2002

290 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Species associated with transient habitats need efficient dispersal strategies to ensure their regional survival. Using a spatially explicit metapopulation model, we studied the effect of the dispersal range on the persistence of a metapopulation as a function of the local population and landscape dynamics (including habitat patch destruction and subsequent regeneration). Our results show that the impact of the dispersal range depends on both the local population and patch growth. This is due to interactions between dispersal and the dynamics of patches and populations via the number of potential dispersers. In general, long-range dispersal had a positive effect on persistence in a dynamic landscape compared to short-range dispersal. Long-range dispersal increases the number of couplings between the patches and thus the colonisation of regenerated patches. However, long-range dispersal lost its advantage for long-term persistence when the number of potential dispersers was low due to small population growth rates and/or small patch growth rates. Its advantage also disappeared with complex local population dynamics and in a landscape with clumped patch distribution.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6d3345208f31d5da7c92c74516b676fe9599b4d1

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Traits related to species persistence and dispersal explain changes in plant communities subjected to habitat loss (2012, background): “Compared with abiotic agents, which mostly exhibit random dispersal, animal agents preferentially deliver seeds towards suitable habitats (Johst et al., 2002; Purves & Dushoff, 2005).”
The relative importance of local, regional and historical factors determining the distribution of plants in fragmented riverine forests: an emergent group approach (2005, background): “The emergent group approach enhances the understanding of the relative influence of local, regional and historical factors by distinguishing between forest specialists from generalists or ‘matrix’ species, which have a masking effect.”
Dispersal traits determine plant response to habitat connectivity in an urban landscape (2011, background): “Translated to a functional perspective, this means that traits enabling a species to survive within and to move between habitat patches confer the ability to maintain viable (meta-) populations in fragmented landscapes (Johst et al. 2002; Verheyen et al. 2004).”
Comparative landscape dynamics of two anuran species: climate-driven interaction of local and regional processes (2009, background): “These patterns would be consistent with the predictions of Johst et al. (2002) if the chorus frog indeed does experience the landscape as more dynamic than the spring peeper with cyclic changes in weather conditions and average pond hydroperiod.”
The influences of landscape structure on butterfly distribution and movement: a review (2009, background): “…approaches much work on spatial ecology had tended to assume that the ‘matrix’ between the habitat ‘patches’ (Forman and Godron 1981) was uniform (Johst et al. 2002; Frank 2005); however, Dennis (2004) and Dennis and Hardy (2007) demonstrated that the matrix can contain resources for some…”
Integrating Landscape and Metapopulation Modeling Approaches: Viability of the Sharp‐Tailed Grouse in a Dynamic Landscape (2004, background): “…event) (Pulliam et al. 1992; Lindenmayer & Possingham 1995a, 1995b, 1996; Akçakaya & Atwood 1997; Stelter et al. 1997; Akçakaya & Raphael 1998; Gaff et al. 2000; Johst et al. 2002; Keith 2004; Kindvall & Bergman 2004) or by considering types of patches based on occupancy and suitability and…”