LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY OF MAMMALS: RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN DENSITY AND PATCH SIZE

A much discussed issue in landscape ecology is how processes that operate within spatially subdivided subpopulations scale-up to create a larger, landscape-level dynamic. A first step in answering this question is to ask to what degree subpopulations within a landscape vary in performance. Here we test the null hypothesis that densities of mammalian populations are constant over patches of varied size, i.e., that performance, as estimated via density, does not covary with patch area. Using a composite database from published studies, we found that densities of 20 of 32 species did not vary with patch area, while five showed increasing and seven decreasing density-area relationships. Studies reporting significant density-area relationships tended to include a greater number of patches of a greater range of sizes than those that reported no relationship, suggesting that statistical power may be an issue. Landscapes comprised of smaller, less-isolated patches tended to have negative density-area relationships and landscapes with larger, more isolated patches tended to have positive density-area relationships. Our results suggest that no consistent density-area relationship operates over all systems of patches. Instead, the patterns appear to be scale-dependent : frequent movement of individuals in the process of selecting habitats (patches) over smaller-scaled landscapes produced negative density-area relationships; movement of individuals among more isolated patches appeared to involve larger- and longer-scale population processes involving colonization and extinction and positive density-area relationships. Despite the fact that patches represent a central focus in landscape ecology, they appear to be a construct of human convenience rather than biological entities with a set number and kind of processes.

[1]  A. Łomnicki.  Population ecology of individuals. , 1988, Monographs in population biology.

[2]  Lenore Fahrig,et al.  Spatial characteristics of habitat patches and population survival , 1985 .

[3]  R. B. Root.  Organization of a Plant-Arthropod Association in Simple and Diverse Habitats: The Fauna of Collards (Brassica Oleracea) , 1973 .

[4]  Daniel Simberloff,et al.  The Contribution of Population and Community Biology to Conservation Science , 1988 .

[5]  M. Rosenzweig,et al.  Habitat Selection and Population Interactions: The Search for Mechanism , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[6]  R. Macarthur,et al.  The Theory of Island Biogeography , 1969 .

[7]  G. Merriam,et al.  Patchy environments and species survival: Chipmunks in an agricultural mosaic , 1985 .

[8]  M. Gaines,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF A SUCCESSIONAL HABITAT MOSAIC ON A SMALL MAMMAL COMMUNITY , 1991 .

[9]  Andrew T. Smith,et al.  Population Structure of Everglades Rodents: Responses to a Patchy Environment , 1979 .

[10]  N. Stenseth,et al.  The importance of population dynamics in heterogeneous landscapes: Management of vertebrate pests and some other animals , 1981 .

[11]  I. Hanski,et al.  Turnover of Breeding Birds in Small Forest Fragments: The "Sampling" Colonization Hypothesis Corroborated , 1993 .

[12]  H. Pulliam,et al.  Sources, Sinks, and Population Regulation , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[13]  G. Barrett,et al.  Effects of habitat patch shape on population dynamics of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) , 1993 .

[14]  L. Fahrig,et al.  Habitat Patch Connectivity and Population Survival , 1985 .

[15]  S. Risch.  INSECT HERBIVORE ABUNDANCE IN TROPICAL MONOCULTURES AND POLYCULTURES: AN EXPERIMENTAL TEST OF TWO HYPOTHESES' , 1981 .

[16]  M. Turner,et al.  LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY : The Effect of Pattern on Process 1 , 2002 .

[17]  V. V. Krishnan,et al.  The Effects of Habitat Geometry on Territorial Defense Costs: Intruder Pressure in Bounded Habitats , 1987 .

[18]  H. Andrén,et al.  Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review , 1994 .

[19]  N. Stenseth,et al.  Divided the fruitflies fall , 1989, Nature.

[20]  D. Padilla,et al.  Ecological neighborhoods: scaling environmental patterns , 1987 .

[21]  B. M. Gottfried.  Small Mammal Populations in Woodlot Islands , 1979 .

[22]  R. O'Neill.  A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. , 1986 .

[23]  W. Laurance.  Comparative Responses of Five Arboreal Marsupials to Tropical Forest Fragmentation , 1990 .

[24]  Paul Opdam,et al.  European Nuthatch Metapopulations in a Fragmented Agricultural Landscape , 1991 .

[25]  Andrew T. Smith.  THE DISTRIBUTION AND DISPERSAL OF PIKAS: CONSEQUENCES OF INSULAR POPULATION STRUCTURE' , 1974 .

[26]  N. B. Kotliar,et al.  Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity , 1990 .

[27]  B. Weddell.  Distribution and Movements of Columbian Ground Squirrels (Spermophilus columbianus (Ord)): Are Habitat Patches Like Islands? , 1991 .

[28]  M. Gilpin,et al.  Metapopulation dynamics: a brief his-tory and conceptual domain , 1991 .

[29]  B. V. Horne,et al.  DENSITY AS A MISLEADING INDICATOR OF HABITAT QUALITY , 1983 .

[30]  Variation in responses of arboreal marsupials to fragmentation of tropical rainforest in north eastern Australia , 1988 .

[31]  Mark V. Lomolino.  Mammalian community structure on islands: the importance of immigration, extinction and interactive effects , 1986 .

[32]  M. L. Cadenasso,et al.  Landscape Ecology: Spatial Heterogeneity in Ecological Systems , 1995, Science.

[33]  J. Tellería,et al.  Abundance and Food-Searching Intensity of Wood Mice (Apodemus sylvaticus) in Fragmented Forests , 1991 .

[34]  S. Harrison,et al.  Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation , 1991 .

[35]  S. Levin.  The problem of pattern and scale in ecology , 1992 .

[36]  R. Holt,et al.  CHAPTER 14 – Small-Mammal Community Patterns in Old Fields: Distinguishing Site-Specific from Regional Processes , 1996 .

[37]  N. Stenseth,et al.  Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology , 1993 .

[38]  J. L. Dooley,et al.  Influences of Patch Size and Microhabitat on the Demography of Two Old-Field Rodents , 1996 .

[39]  R. Hobbs,et al.  Biological Consequences of Ecosystem Fragmentation: A Review , 1991 .

[40]  Michael S. Gaines,et al.  Habitat Fragmentation and Movements of Three Small Mammals (Sigmodon, Microtus, and Peromyscus) , 1995 .

[41]  Uno Wennergren,et al.  Connecting landscape patterns to ecosystem and population processes , 1995, Nature.