A Comment on Quinn and Hastings: Extinction in Subdivided Habitats

A Comment on Quinn and Hastings: Extinction in Subdivided Habitats Department of Biology ( G O 16) University of California at San Diego L Jolla, CA 92093, USA. a In a review of the question of habitat subdivision for the conservation of a target species, Quinn and Hastings (Conservation Biology 1:198-208) review the SLOSS (Single Large Or Several Small) controversy and add a new view of their own. By likening reserve design to production line engineering and species to failure-prone components, they conclude that redundancy is the best policy in planning reliably for the persistence of a species. Following models of stochastic population growth developed by Leigh ( 1981), they derive a formula that specifies that the number of equally sized subdivided habitat patches be equal to the square root of the numeric carrying capacity of the target species. For example, given sufficient habitat to support 1000 individuals, it would be best to divide this habitat into 32 small patches of 32 individuals each. For black rhinos, down to about 8000 individuals, this works out to 90 reserves of 90 rhinos each. Thus, they push the old controversy of SLOSS to a more extreme dichotomy, SLOPP (Single Large Or Plentifully Patchy). While they do caution that their square http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

A Comment on Quinn and Hastings: Extinction in Subdivided Habitats

Conservation Biology, Volume 2 (3) – Sep 1, 1988

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/a-comment-on-quinn-and-hastings-extinction-in-subdivided-habitats-LHH3HDVQkn
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
"Copyright © 1988 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company"
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
DOI
10.1111/j.1523-1739.1988.tb00186.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Department of Biology ( G O 16) University of California at San Diego L Jolla, CA 92093, USA. a In a review of the question of habitat subdivision for the conservation of a target species, Quinn and Hastings (Conservation Biology 1:198-208) review the SLOSS (Single Large Or Several Small) controversy and add a new view of their own. By likening reserve design to production line engineering and species to failure-prone components, they conclude that redundancy is the best policy in planning reliably for the persistence of a species. Following models of stochastic population growth developed by Leigh ( 1981), they derive a formula that specifies that the number of equally sized subdivided habitat patches be equal to the square root of the numeric carrying capacity of the target species. For example, given sufficient habitat to support 1000 individuals, it would be best to divide this habitat into 32 small patches of 32 individuals each. For black rhinos, down to about 8000 individuals, this works out to 90 reserves of 90 rhinos each. Thus, they push the old controversy of SLOSS to a more extreme dichotomy, SLOPP (Single Large Or Plentifully Patchy). While they do caution that their square

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Sep 1, 1988

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off