Landscape genetics: where are we now?

By Andrew Storfer, M. Murphy, Stephen F. Spear, R. Holderegger, L. Waits. Molecular Ecology, 2010

597 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Genetics, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c93385e7db3f5c19cacf8093899c5fbdec286b62

How researchers see this paper

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

In Genetics

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: considerations for parameterization and analysis (2010, background): “Our emphasis is on the use of resistance surfaces for terrestrial animals, as this is the group that most studies have focused on (Storfer et al. 2010).”
The spatial structure of Antarctic biodiversity (2014, background): “…and evolution, and how it may respond to environmental change driven by humans, requires a spatially explicit approach (Blackburn and Gaston 1998, Soberón 2007, Gaston et al. 2008, 2009, McRae et al. 2008, Thuiller et al. 2008, Storfer et al. 2010, Ellner et al. 2011, Bellard et al. 2012).”
ResistanceGA: An R package for the optimization of resistance surfaces using genetic algorithms (2014, background): “First coined in 2003, landscape genetics has experienced rapid growth in both the number of studies and range of analytical meth-ods utilized (Manel, Schwartz, Luikart, & Taberlet, 2003; Storfer, Murphy, Spear, Holderegger, & Waits, 2010).”
Seascape Genetics: Populations, Individuals, and Genes Marooned and Adrift (2013, background): “…have focused on selectively neutral processes such as the identification of barriers or resistance to gene exchange, although spatial sources of selection fall within the scope of landscape genetics as well (Manel et al. 2003; Holderegger & Wagner 2006; Manel et al. 2010; Storfer et al. 2010).”
Responses of Tropical Bats to Habitat Fragmentation, Logging, and Deforestation (2015, background): “Tropical taxa are generally underrepresented in landscape genetic studies (Storfer et al. 2010).”
Ecological connectivity research in urban areas (2015, background): “Furthermore, approaches from the rapidly growing field of landscape genetics (Manel et al. 2003; Storfer et al. 2010) appear highly suitable, because they make it possible to explicitly quantify the effects of urban landscape features on actual functional connectivity, rather than having to explain…”
Landscape Genomics: Understanding Relationships Between Environmental Heterogeneity and Genomic Characteristics of Populations (2017, methodology): “Regardless of how sampling units are defined, most studies use a distance-based analysis for their inferences (Storfer et al. 2010; DiLeo and Wagner 2016).”
Linking movement behavior and fine-scale genetic structure to model landscape connectivity for bobcats (Lynx rufus) (2013, unknown): “…to gene flow has been the correlation of genetic distances between individuals or populations with that of Euclidean (assuming a spatially homogenous landscape) or effective (assuming movement is influenced by landscape heterogeneity) geographic distances (Spear et al. 2010; Storfer et al. 2010).”
Individual dispersal, landscape connectivity and ecological networks (2013, background): “Besides, landscape genetics studies are also useful for revealing counterintuitive features that facilitate gene flow (Storfer et al., 2010).”
Putting the landscape into the genomics of trees: approaches for understanding local adaptation and population responses to changing climate (2013, background): “Traditionally, landscape genetics has used selectively neutral genetic markers and focused on the impact of landscape features in shaping movement of animals, gene movement of plants via seed and pollen, and geographic patterns of genetic variation, as discussed in numerous reviews on the topic (Bal”
Ecological genetics of invasive alien species (2011, background): “…tested for correlations with landscape or environmental features, allowing iden-tification of genetic continuity (or connectivity) between patches, or discontinuities resulting from barriers to dispersal (see e.g. Balkenhol et al. 2009; Guillot et al. 2009; Storfer et al. 2010, for recent reviews).”
Applications of landscape genetics in conservation biology: concepts and challenges (2010, methodology): “apply Bayesian clustering techniques to group samples into populations in a more objective way (Storfer et al. 2010).”
Testing environmental and genetic effects in the presence of spatial autocorrelation (2014, background): “…question in the recent literature is how to detect the effect of environmental features, rather than simply geographical distance, on genetic structure (landscape genetics, Guillot et al. 2009, Storfer et al. 2010), and similar questions arise in species distribution modelling (Algar et al. 2013).”
Isolation by environment (2014, background): “Over the last decade, landscape genetics has made remarkable progress in examining the impacts of landscape variation on gene flow and population dynamics (Sork & Waits 2010; Storfer et al. 2010).”
A conceptual framework for the spatial analysis of landscape genetic data (2013, background): “…of hypotheses and research questions, depending on the focal micro-evolutionary process (gene flow vs. selection), the ecological or evolutionary perspective (Storfer et al. 2010), and whether the intent is to study equilibrium conditions or transient dynamics after landscape change (Table 1).”
How river structure and biological traits influence gene flow: a population genetic study of two stream invertebrates with differing dispersal abilities (2012, background): “The effects of human-disrupted stream connectivity have also have been addressed, particularly focussing on fish (e.g. Yamamoto et al., 2004; Reid et al., 2008; Raeymaekers et al., 2009; Storfer et al., 2010).”