Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
F. Langevelde (2000)
Scale of habitat connectivity and colonization in fragmented nuthatch populationsEcography, 23
J. Hanley, B. McNeil (1982)
The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Radiology, 143 1
P. Forey, C. Humphries, R. Vane-Wright (1994)
Systematics and conservation evaluation
D. Debinski, R. Holt (2000)
A Survey and Overview of Habitat Fragmentation ExperimentsConservation Biology, 14
J. Elith, M. Burgman, H. Regan (2002)
Mapping epistemic uncertainties and vague concepts in predictions of species distributionEcological Modelling, 157
M. Araújo, Paul Williams (2000)
Selecting areas for species persistence using occurrence dataBiological Conservation, 96
M. Cabeza (2003)
Habitat loss and connectivity of reserve networks in probability approaches to reserve designEcology Letters, 6
Paul Williams, Miguel Araújo (2002)
Apples, Oranges, and Probabilities: Integrating Multiple Factors into Biodiversity Conservation with ConsistencyEnvironmental Modeling & Assessment, 7
C. Heijnis, A. Lombard, R. Cowling, P. Desmet (1999)
Picking up the pieces: a biosphere reserve framework for a fragmented landscape – The Coastal Lowlands of the Western Cape, South AfricaBiodiversity & Conservation, 8
H. Regan, M. Colyvan, M. Burgman (2002)
A TAXONOMY AND TREATMENT OF UNCERTAINTY FOR ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGYEcological Applications, 12
J. Kirkpatrick (1983)
An iterative method for establishing priorities for the selection of nature reserves: An example from TasmaniaBiological Conservation, 25
M. Araújo, P. Williams, A. Turner (2002)
A sequential approach to minimise threats within selected conservation areasBiodiversity & Conservation, 11
A. Moilanen, M. Cabeza (2002)
Single‐species dynamic site selectionEcological Applications, 12
C. Margules, A. Nicholls, R. Pressey (1988)
Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversityBiological Conservation, 43
R. Reijnen, R. Jochem, M. Jong, M. Heer, H. Sierdsema (2001)
LARCH Vogels Nationaal; een expertsysteem voor het beoordelen van de ruimtelijke samenhang en de duurzaamheid van broedvogelpopulaties in Nederland
P.H. Williams, M.B. Araújo (2000)
Using probability of persistence to identify important areas for biodiversity conservationProc. Roy. Soc. Biol. Sci. Ser. B, 267
C. Margules, J. Stein (1989)
Patterns in the distributions of species and the selection of nature reserves: An example from Eucalyptus forests in South-eastern New South WalesBiological Conservation, 50
A. Nicholls, C. Margules (1993)
An upgraded reserve selection algorithmBiological Conservation, 64
R. D’eon, S. Glenn, Ian Parfitt, M. Fortin (2002)
Landscape Connectivity as a Function of Scale and Organism Vagility in a Real Forested LandscapeConservation Ecology, 6
J. Verboom, R. Foppen, P. Chardon, P. Opdam, P. Luttikhuizen (2001)
Introducing the key patch approach for habitat networks with persistent populations: an example for marshland birdsBiological Conservation, 100
R. Pouwels, M. Reijnen, J. Kalkhoven, J. Dirksen (2002)
Ecoprofielen voor soortanalyses van ruimtelijke samenhang met LARCH
S. Manel, H. Williams, S. Ormerod (2001)
Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalenceJournal of Applied Ecology, 38
F. Langevelde, A. Schotman, Frits Claassen, Gerard Sparenburg (2000)
Competing land use in the reserve site selection problemLandscape Ecology, 15
Mike Austin, R. Cunningham, P. Fleming (1984)
New approaches to direct gradient analysis using environmental scalars and statistical curve-fitting proceduresVegetatio, 55
A. Fielding, J. Bell (1997)
A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence modelsEnvironmental Conservation, 24
R. Pressey, C. Humphries, C. Margules, R. Vane-Wright, P. Williams (1993)
Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection.Trends in ecology & evolution, 8 4
M. Cabeza, A. Moilanen (2001)
Design of reserve networks and the persistence of biodiversity.Trends in ecology & evolution, 16 5
(1998)
Key sites for conservation: area-selection methods for biodiversity
J. Swets (1988)
Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems.Science, 240 4857
M. Cabeza, M. Araújo, R. Wilson, C. Thomas, M. Cowley, A. Moilanen (2004)
Combining probabilities of occurrence with spatial reserve designJournal of Applied Ecology, 41
B. Wintle, M. McCarthy, K. Parris, M. Burgman (2004)
PRECISION AND BIAS OF METHODS FOR ESTIMATING POINT SURVEY DETECTION PROBABILITIESEcological Applications, 14
K. Virolainen, Teija Virola, J. Suhonen, M. Kuitunen, Antti Lammi, P. Siikamäki (1999)
Selecting networks of nature reserves: methods do affect the long-term outcomeProceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 266
S. Ferrier, M. Drielsma, G. Manion, G. Watson (2002)
Extended statistical approaches to modelling spatial pattern in biodiversity in northeast New South Wales. II. Community-level modellingBiodiversity & Conservation, 11
P. Osborne, J. Alonso, Dr Bryant (2001)
Modelling landscape-scale habitat use using GIS and remote sensing : a case study with great bustardsJournal of Applied Ecology, 38
J. Pearce, S. Ferrier (2000)
Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regressionEcological Modelling, 133
C.R. Margules, R.L. Pressey, P.H. Williams (2002)
Representing biodiversity: data and procedures for identifying priority areas for conservationJ. Biosci., 27
N. Schumaker (1996)
Using Landscape Indices to Predict Habitat ConnectivityEcology, 77
C. Braak, C. Looman (2004)
Weighted averaging, logistic regression and the Gaussian response modelVegetatio, 65
Kimberly With, R. Gardner, M. Turner (1997)
Landscape connectivity and population distributions in heterogeneous environmentsOikos, 78
(1998)
Atlas van de Nederlandse broedvogels
I. Hanski (1994)
A Practical Model of Metapopulation DynamicsJournal of Animal Ecology, 63
A. Moilanen, M. Nieminen (2002)
SIMPLE CONNECTIVITY MEASURES IN SPATIAL ECOLOGYEcology, 83
A.S.L. Rodrigues, R.D. Gregory, K.J. Gaston (2000)
Robustness of reserve selection procedures under temporal species turnoverProc. Roy. Soc. Biol. Sci. Ser. B, 267
R. Woodroffe, J. Ginsberg (1998)
Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areasScience, 280 5372
S. Ferrier, G. Watson, J. Pearce, M. Drielsma (2004)
Extended statistical approaches to modelling spatial pattern in biodiversity in northeast New South Wales. I. Species-level modellingBiodiversity & Conservation, 11
Paul Williams, Miguel Araéjo (2000)
Using probability of persistence to identify important areas for biodiversity conservationProceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 267
R. Briers (2002)
Incorporating connectivity into reserve selection proceduresBiological Conservation, 103
J. Elith (2000)
Quantitative Methods for Modeling Species Habitat: Comparative Performance and an Application to Australian Plants
C. Grashof-Bokdam (1997)
Forest species in an agricultural landscape in The Netherlands: effects of habitat fragmentationJournal of Vegetation Science, 8
K.J. Gaston, R.L. Pressey, C.R. Margules (2002)
Persistence and vulnerability: retaining biodiversity in the landscape and in protected areasJ. Biosci., 27
(1994)
A scientific basis for establishing networks of protected areas
A. Rodrigues, R. Gregory, K. Gaston (2000)
Robustness of reserve selection procedures under temporal species turnoverProceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 267
(1998)
Integrating population abundance, dynamics and distribution into broad-scale priority setting
P. Howard, P. Viskanic, T. Davenport, F. Kigenyi, M. Baltzer, C. Dickinson, J. Lwanga, R. Matthews, A. Balmford (1998)
Complementarity and the use of indicator groups for reserve selection in UgandaNature, 394
I. Hanski (1999)
Metapopulation Ecology
P. Legendre, M. Dale, Marie-Josée Fortin, J. Gurevitch, M. Hohn, Donald Legendre, P. Dale, M. Fortin, M.-J Gurevitch, J. Hohn, M. Myers, P. Legendre, Marie-Josée Fortin
The Consequences of Spatial Structure for the Design and Analysis of Ecological Field Surveys
H. Possingham, I. Ball, S. Andelman (2000)
Mathematical Methods for Identifying Representative Reserve Networks
B. Csuti, S. Polasky, P. Williams, R. Pressey, J. Camm, M. Kershaw, A. Kiester, Brian Downs, Richard Hamilton, M. Huso, K. Sahr (1997)
A comparison of reserve selection algorithms using data on terrestrial vertebrates in OregonBiological Conservation, 80
M. Cabeza, A. Moilanen, H. Possingham (2004)
Metapopulation dynamics and reserve network design
R. Pouwels, M.J.S.M. Reijnen, J.T.R. Kalkhoven, J. Dirksen (2002)
Ecoprofielen voor soortanalyses van ruimtelijke samenhang met LARCH. Alterra rapport 493, Alterra
G. Mace, A. Balmford, J. Ginsberg (1999)
Conservation in a Changing World
D. Nalle, J. Arthur, J. Sessions (2002)
Designing compact and contiguous reserve networks with a hybrid heuristic algorithmForest Science, 48
S. Ferson, M. Burgman (2002)
Quantitative Methods for Conservation BiologyEcology
M. Cabeza, A. Moilanen (2003)
Site‐Selection Algorithms and Habitat LossConservation Biology, 17
Reserve selection methods are often based on information on species’ occurrence. This can be presence–absence data, or probabilities of occurrence estimated with species distribution models. However, the effect of the choice of distribution model on the outcome of a reserve selection method has been ignored. Here we test a range of species distribution models with three different reserve selection methods. The distribution models had different combinations of variables related to habitat quality and connectivity (which incorporates the effect of spatial habitat configuration on species occurrence). The reserve selection methods included (i) a minimum set approach without spatial considerations; (ii) a clustering reserve selection method; and (iii) a dynamic approach where probabilities of occurrence are re-evaluated according to the spatial pattern of selected sites. The sets of selected reserves were assessed by re-computing species probability of occurrence in reserves using the best probability model and assuming loss of non-selected habitat. The results show that particular choices of distribution model and selection method may lead to reserves that overestimate the achieved target; in other words, species may seem to be represented but the reserve network may actually not be able to support them in the long-term. Instead, the use of models that incorporated connectivity as a variable resulted in the selection of aggregated reserves with higher potential for species long-term persistence. As reserve design aims at the long-term protection of species, it is important to be aware of the uncertainties related to model and method choice and their implications.
Biodiversity and Conservation – Springer Journals
Published: Mar 23, 2006
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.