Ecological networks as conceptual frameworks or operational tools in conservation.

作者: LUIGI BOITANI , ALESSANDRA FALCUCCI , LUIGI MAIORANO , CARLO RONDININI

DOI: 10.1111/J.1523-1739.2007.00828.X

关键词: Scale (chemistry)HabitatFunctional connectivityEnvironmental resource managementConceptual frameworkEcological networkMarket fragmentationStructure (mathematical logic)Structural compositionComputer science

摘要: The establishment of ecological networks (ENs) has been proposed as an ideal way to counteract the increasing fragmentation natural ecosystems and a necessary complement protected areas for biodiversity conservation. This conservation tool, which comprises core areas, corridors, buffer attracted attention several national European institutions. It is thought that ENs can connect habitat patches thus enable species move across unsuitable areas. In Europe, however, are oversimplification complex concepts, we maintain they limited use reasons. specific operate on species-dependent scales. addition, information needed their implementation only available handful species. To overcome these limitations, have landscape scale (and selected " focal" species), but there no indication structural composition could ensure functional connectivity improve viability more than few theory behind fails provide sufficient practical how build them (e.g., width, shape, structure, content). fact, EN so far validated in practice (ensuring overall conservation), signs validation will be possible near future. view it difficult justify spending economic political resources building systems at best working hypotheses cannot evaluated level.

参考文章(79)
Dean Urban, Timothy Keitt, LANDSCAPE CONNECTIVITY: A GRAPH-THEORETIC PERSPECTIVE Ecology. ,vol. 82, pp. 1205- 1218 ,(2001) , 10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[1205:LCAGTP]2.0.CO;2
P. E. Kauppi, J. H. Ausubel, J. Fang, A. S. Mather, R. A. Sedjo, P. E. Waggoner, Returning forests analyzed with the forest identity Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. ,vol. 103, pp. 17574- 17579 ,(2006) , 10.1073/PNAS.0608343103
Irene M. Bouwma, Ruud P. B. Foppen, Alexander J. F. M. Van Opstal, Ecological corridors on a European scale: a typology and identification of target species Ecological Networks and Greenways. pp. 94- 106 ,(2004) , 10.1017/CBO9780511606762.008
M. E. Soulé, B. G. Mackey, H. F. Recher, J. E. Williams, J. C. Z. Woinarski, Don Driscoll, W. C. Dennison, M. E. Jones, The Role of Connectivity in Australian Conservation Pacific Conservation Biology. ,vol. 10, pp. 266- 279 ,(2004) , 10.1071/PC040266
Reed F. Noss, Kathleen M. Daly, Incorporating connectivity into broad-scale conservation planning Connectivity Conservation. pp. 587- 619 ,(2006) , 10.1017/CBO9780511754821.026
Anantha Kumar Duraiappah, Shahid Naeem, Tundi Agardy, Neville J Ash, David Cooper, Sandra Díaz, Daniel P Faith, Georgina Mace, Jeffrey A McNeely, Harold A Mooney, Alfred A Oteng-Yeboah, Henrique Miguel Pereira, Stephen Polasky, Christian Prip, Walter V Reid, Cristián Samper, Peter Johan Schei, Robert Scholes, Frederik Schutyser, Albert Van Jaarsveld, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis WRI. ,vol. 2005, ,(2005)