The Matrix Matters: Effective Isolation in Fragmented Landscapes

By Taylor H. Ricketts. American Naturalist, 2001

1,523 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a618bda415856d9104652ac044bb309979f0d438

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 Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Personality-dependent spatial ecology occurs independently from dispersal in wild burbot (Lota lota) (2015, background): “…in freshwater systems that are becoming increasingly fragmented, range expansion opportunities are likely restricted by connectivity bottlenecks (Ricketts 2001), and range expansion opportunity does not necessarily follow a linear pattern of increasing opportunity with distance from natal…”
Effects of landscape context on herbivory and parasitism at different spatial scales (2003, neutral): “Tscharntke 1999, Wiegand et al. 1999, Tischendorf and Fahrig 2000, Cadenasso and Pickett 2000, Ricketts 2001).”
Effect of habitat area and isolation on fragmented animal populations (2008, background): “These broad patterns are particularly striking because the hostility of a matrix can vary widely among species within a landscape (20), and we therefore did not expect to find consistent effects of matrix type across species.”
Microbial biogeography: putting microorganisms on the map (2006, background): “In some cases, one might want to weight the cell values of a geographic-distance matrix to account for potential barriers to dispersal 86 .”
A case for incorporating phylogeography and landscape genetics into species distribution modelling approaches to improve climate adaptation and conservation planning (2010, background): “Recent landscape ecological approaches (Hanski, 2004) no longer recognize elements of the landscape outside native habitat patches as uniform, but instead as a heterogeneous matrix in which some elements can enhance connectivity and gene flow between increasingly fragmented populations (Ricketts, 20”
Fragmented landscapes, road mortality and patch connectivity: modelling influences on the dispersal of Eurasian lynx (2004, neutral): “The connectivity of patches has often been considered as purely a function of distance (cf. Ricketts 2001; Verboom et al. 2001).”
Small mammals in a mosaic of forest remnants and anthropogenic habitats—evaluating matrix quality in an Atlantic forest landscape (2007, background): “…fragmentation studies have been based on, the matrix of altered habitats that surrounds remnants was first seen as homogeneous and inhospitable (Ricketts 2001; Vandermeer and F. Umetsu Department of Ecology, Institute of Biosciences, University of São Paulo, Rua do Matão, travessa 14, 101,…”
The re-expansion and improving status of the silver-spotted skipper butterfly (Hesperia comma) in Britain: a metapopulation success story (2005, background): “To assist the movement of species through the wider countryside, mosaics of suitable habitat need to be managed (Roland et al., 2000; Ricketts, 2001; Hill et al., 2001; Sutcliffe et al., 2003), either by conservation agencies or under agri-environment schemes.”
Does matrix resistance influence Red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris L. 1758) distribution in an urban landscape? (2003, methodology): “We compared different isolation measures Cost Distance, Euclidean distance, the widely used Hanski-measure Hanski 1994 and showed that including the matrix into the analyses yielded better models to predict presence/absence of squirrels in an urban environment see also Ricketts 2001 .”
Ecology of butterflies in Europe (2009, background): “However, since matrix matters (Ricketts, 2001), it is wise to avoid such simplification (Dennis et al.”
Towards a functional resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint (2003, background): “The assumption that the matrix has a neutral impact on migrating between patches is now known to be wrong (Ricketts 2001).”
Ferns, frogs, lizards, birds and bats in forest fragments and shade cacao plantations in two contrasting landscapes in the Atlantic forest, Brazil (2007, result): “Previous studies have demonstrated that the community structure of moths ( Ricketts 2001 ), birds (Alves 1990; Greenberg et al. 2000), terrestrial mammals (Estrada et al. 1994) and bats (Estrada et al. 1993; Faria and Baumgarten 2007) in shade plantations, as well as other agricultural habitats, are”
Effect of Vegetation Matrix on Animal Dispersal: Genetic Evidence from a Study of Endangered Skinks (2005, background): “For most organisms, however, long-term patterns of dispersal are difficult to measure by conventional means such as mark and recapture; consequently, most studies compare only short-term patterns of dispersal (e.g., Roland et al. 2000; Jonsen et al. 2001; Ricketts 2001).”
Diversity and community composition of butterflies and odonates in an ENSO-induced fire affected habitat mosaic: a case study from East Kalimantan, Indonesia (2004, positive): “As in Ricketts (2001) study we often observed butterflies such as various Arhopala spp. readily crossing boundaries between unburned and burned forest (from I2 to B1), but we failed to record most of these species in the more distant B2 landscape, and they were very rare in B1.”
Does the type of matrix matter? A quantitative review of the evidence (2010, background): “Nowadays, it appears to be common sense that the ‘‘matrix matters’’ (Ricketts 2001), and affects both within- and between-patch processes in heterogeneous landscapes (Stouffer and Bierregaard 1995b; Tworek 2004; Bender and Fahrig 2005; Fischer et al. 2005; Haynes et al. 2007a).”
Incorporating landscape elements into a connectivity measure: a case study for the Speckled wood butterfly (Pararge aegeria L.) (2003, methodology): “…birds: e.g. Cassady St. Clair et al. 1998; Brooker et al. 1999; amphibians: Vos et al. submitted; carabids: e.g. Vermeulen 1995; Tischendorf et al. 1998; butterflies: e.g. Haddad 1999; Conradt et al. 2000; Conradt et al. 2001; Dover and Fry 2001; Ricketts 2001; Ries and Debinski 2001; Roland at al.”
Pollination and other ecosystem services produced by mobile organisms: a conceptual framework for the effects of land-use change. (2007, neutral): “The response of bee individuals, populations and communities to land-use change is largely driven by the spatial and temporal distribution of ﬂoral, nesting and over-wintering”
Spatial scale of observation affects α, β and γ diversity of cavity‐nesting bees and wasps across a tropical land‐use gradient (2006, background): “, 1996; Cane, 2001); matrix composition (Ricketts, 2001; Dauber et al., 2003); landscape diversity (Steffan-Dewenter et al.”
Species in a dynamic world: Consequences of habitat network dynamics on conservation planning (2012, background): “Functional connectivity is influenced by the distance between habitat patches and by the permeability of the landscape between these patches, both of which are scaled by a species-specific perspective (Moilanen and Hanski, 2006; Ricketts, 2001; Vos et al., 2002).”