Interpatch movements in spatially structured populations: a literature review

By David R. Bowne, M. Bowers. Landscape Ecology, 2004

212 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cc0efa65d51d82043cd441814a0f04805a98c67a

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

Spring migration distances of some Central European amphibian species (2009, background): “Since amphibians are characterised by low mobility, habitat fragmentation has typically strong effects (deMaynadier and Hunter, 2000; Bowne and Bowers, 2004).”
Rethinking patch size and isolation effects: the habitat amount hypothesis (2013, background): “Even if patches could be delineated ‘correctly’, many studies have challenged the notion that patch boundaries contain or delimit populations (Harrison, 1991; reviewed in Bowne & Bowers, 2004).”
Analyzing the effect of stepping stones on target patch colonisation in structured landscapes for Eurasian lynx (2011, background): “A good understanding of the interplay between landscape structure and interpatch movement on population dynamics, i.e. functional connectivity, is crucial for focussing conservation efforts (Bowne and Bowers 2004; Vogt et al. 2009).”
Landscape connectivity and animal behavior: functional grain as a key determinant for dispersal (2007, unknown): “Anyway, the precise assignation of observed movements to the spatial scale shaping the landscape grain is an essential prerequisite that should allow to avoid the problematic confusion between routine movements and special dispersal movements (see, e.g., Bowne and Bowers 2004; Casula 2006; Hanski ”
Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on amphibians: A review and prospectus (2006, background): “Few studies report population level effects of inter-patch movement and few document movement rates ( Bowne and Bowers, 2004 ).”
Impacts of habitat loss and restoration on amphibian populations (2009, background): “Poor connectivity affects amphibians due to their generally low dispersal rates (Bowne and Bowers 2004), although that impact may differ among species according to their different mobility (e.”
Evolution of dispersal strategies and dispersal syndromes in fragmented landscapes (2017, background): “Dispersal between patches (Fahrig and Merriam 1994, Baguette et al. 2013), enables recolonization after local extinction and may even reduce the likelihood of stochastic extinctions (Fahrig and Merriam 1994, Bowne and Bowers 2004, Baguette et al. 2013).”
The pond network: can structural connectivity reflect on (amphibian) biodiversity patterns? (2011, background): “These specificities, combined with restricted dispersal ability (Bowne and Bowers 2004; Russell et al. 2005), demand a landscape level approach when planning for amphibian conservation measures and habitat management.”
Towards a biogeographic regionalization of the European biota (2010, background): “For example, the larger number of clusters for amphibians and reptiles clearly reflects that most species are narrowly distributed, which, in part, is probably explained by the limited dispersal of both taxa compared with the high vagility of birds and butterflies (Bowne & Bowers, 2004).”
Gene Flow in Complex Landscapes: Testing Multiple Hypotheses with Causal Modeling (2006, background): “Despite the clear importance of habitat connectivity for population persistence, specific factors mediating connectivity are largely unknown for most species (With et al. 1997; Bowne and Bowers 2004; Cushman 2006).”
Dispersal behaviour in fragmented landscapes: Routine or special movements? (2005, background): “Knowing that the field of dispersal is huge in terms of books and papers (e.g. Clobert et al., 2001; Bullock et al., 2002; Bowne & Bowers, 2004; among many others), this review is inevitably selective.”
Causes and consequences of animal dispersal strategies: relating individual behaviour to spatial dynamics (2005, background): “Up until recently, few models moved far from the assumption of a fixed fraction of individuals dispersing and few empirical studies have attempted simultaneously to study dispersal movements and their consequences for local population dynamics (Bowne & Bowers, 2004; Lecomte et al., 2004).”