Evaluating the metapopulation consequences of ecological traps

Ecological traps occur when environmental changes cause maladaptive habitat selection. Despite their relevance to metapopulations, ecological traps have been studied predominantly at local scales. How these local impacts scale up to affect the dynamics of spatially structured metapopulations in heterogeneous landscapes remains unexplored. We propose that assessing the metapopulation consequences of traps depends on a variety of factors that can be grouped into four categories: the probability of encounter, the likelihood of selection, the fitness costs of selection and species-specific vulnerability to these costs. We evaluate six hypotheses using a network-based metapopulation model to explore the relative importance of factors across these categories within a spatial context. Our model suggests (i) traps are most severe when they represent a large proportion of habitats, severely reduce fitness and are highly attractive, and (ii) species with high intrinsic fitness will be most susceptible. We provide the first evidence that (iii) traps may be beneficial for metapopulations in rare instances, and (iv) preferences for natal-like habitats can magnify the effects of traps. Our study provides important insight into the effects of traps at landscape scales, and highlights the need to explicitly consider spatial context to better understand and manage traps within metapopulations.

[1]  D. Hik,et al.  Influence of habitat quality, patch size and connectivity on colonization and extinction dynamics of collared pikas Ochotona collaris , 2004 .

[2]  Robert S Schick,et al.  Graph models of habitat mosaics. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[3]  Otso Ovaskainen,et al.  The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape , 2000, Nature.

[4]  Olivier Honnay,et al.  Interactions between plant life span, seed dispersal capacity and fecundity determine metapopulation viability in a dynamic landscape , 2006, Landscape Ecology.

[5]  Will F. Figueira,et al.  Defining patch contribution in source-sink metapopulations: the importance of including dispersal and its relevance to marine systems , 2009, Population Ecology.

[6]  A. Saltelli,et al.  Importance measures in global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear models , 1996 .

[7]  F. Thompson,et al.  MODELING THE ECOLOGICAL TRAP HYPOTHESIS: A HABITAT AND DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS FOR MIGRANT SONGBIRDS , 2001 .

[8]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  A Stochastic Metapopulation Model with Variability in Patch Size and Position , 1995 .

[9]  H. Van Dyck,et al.  Landscape Structure Shapes Habitat Finding Ability in a Butterfly , 2012, PloS one.

[10]  D. Boag,et al.  Ducks nesting in association with gulls—an ecological trap? , 1972 .

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

[12]  S. L. Lima,et al.  Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[13]  Can settlement in natal-like habitat explain maladaptive habitat selection? , 2013, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  A. Sih Understanding variation in behavioural responses to human-induced rapid environmental change: a conceptual overview , 2013, Animal Behaviour.

[15]  Miguel Delibes,et al.  Effects of an Attractive Sink Leading into Maladaptive Habitat Selection , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[16]  R. Hobbs,et al.  A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[17]  M. Whittingham,et al.  Do habitat association models have any generality? Predicting skylark Alauda arvensis abundance in different regions of southern England , 2003 .

[18]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Latin Hypercube Sampling and the Propagation of Uncertainty in Analyses of Complex Systems , 2002 .

[19]  Nicolas Schtickzelle,et al.  Costs of dispersal , 2012, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[20]  O. Kindvall Habitat Heterogeneity and Survival in a Bush Cricket Metapopulation , 1996 .

[21]  C. Margules,et al.  Predictors of Species Sensitivity to Fragmentation , 2004, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[22]  Jeremy M. Davis Patterns of Variation in the Influence of Natal Experience on Habitat Choice , 2008, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[23]  J. Tella,et al.  Dispersal within a spatially structured population of lesser kestrels: the role of spatial isolation and conspecific attraction , 2003 .

[24]  G. Horváth,et al.  Why do mayflies lay their eggs en masse on dry asphalt roads? Water-imitating polarized light reflected from asphalt attracts Ephemeroptera. , 1998, The Journal of experimental biology.

[25]  J. Stamps,et al.  The effect of natal experience on habitat preferences. , 2004, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[26]  J. Friedman Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. , 2001 .

[27]  Nicolas Perrin,et al.  Effects of cognitive abilities on metapopulation connectivity , 2006 .

[28]  B Rotenberg,et al.  Highly confined ions store charge more efficiently in supercapacitors , 2013, Nature Communications.

[29]  H. Kokko,et al.  Ecological traps in changing environments: Ecological and evolutionary consequences of a behaviourally mediated Allee effect , 2001 .

[30]  J. Battin When Good Animals Love Bad Habitats: Ecological Traps and the Conservation of Animal Populations , 2004 .

[31]  N. Haddad,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF PATCH SHAPE ON INDIGO BUNTINGS: EVIDENCE FOR AN ECOLOGICAL TRAP , 2005 .

[32]  Bruce A. Robertson,et al.  Ecological novelty and the emergence of evolutionary traps. , 2013, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[33]  Bruce A. Robertson,et al.  How the type of anthropogenic change alters the consequences of ecological traps , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[34]  S. Harrison,et al.  Bat activity affected by sewage effluent in Irish rivers , 2009 .

[35]  I. Sobola,et al.  Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates , 2001 .

[36]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  Spatial Interaction Modelling , 2003 .

[37]  Oscar E. Gaggiotti,et al.  Ecology, genetics, and evolution of metapopulations , 2004 .

[38]  A. Saltelli,et al.  The role of sensitivity analysis in ecological modelling , 2007 .

[39]  Martin Drechsler,et al.  Predicting metapopulation lifetime from macroscopic network properties. , 2009, Mathematical biosciences.

[40]  Gábor Horváth,et al.  Dragonflies Find Crude Oil Visually More Attractive than Water: Multiple-Choice Experiments on Dragonfly Polarotaxis , 1998, Naturwissenschaften.

[41]  Malka Gorfine,et al.  Sensitivity analysis for complex ecological models - A new approach , 2011, Environ. Model. Softw..

[42]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Metapopulation mean life time within complex networks , 2010 .

[43]  Gábor Horváth,et al.  Multiple-Choice Experiments on Dragonfly Polarotaxis , 2004 .

[44]  Hiroyuki Yokomizo,et al.  Meta-models as a straightforward approach to the sensitivity analysis of complex models , 2013, Population Ecology.

[45]  James H. Brown,et al.  Turnover Rates in Insular Biogeography: Effect of Immigration on Extinction , 1977 .

[46]  W. Kristan The role of habitat selection behavior in population dynamics: source -sink systems and ecological traps , 2003 .

[47]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Implementation and evaluation of nonparametric regression procedures for sensitivity analysis of computationally demanding models , 2009, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[48]  G. De’ath Boosted trees for ecological modeling and prediction. , 2007, Ecology.

[49]  M. Holderied,et al.  A test of the senses: fish select novel habitats by responding to multiple cues. , 2012, Ecology.

[50]  E. Treml,et al.  How do dispersal costs and habitat selection influence realized population connectivity? , 2012, Ecology.

[51]  H. Van Dyck,et al.  Maladaptive Habitat Selection of a Migratory Passerine Bird in a Human-Modified Landscape , 2011, PloS one.

[52]  Bruce A. Robertson,et al.  A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. , 2006, Ecology.

[53]  P. C. Dias,et al.  Sources and sinks in population biology. , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[54]  Wiley M. Kitchens,et al.  Network modularity reveals critical scales for connectivity in ecology and evolution , 2013, Nature Communications.

[55]  W. Resetarits,et al.  Patch quality and context, but not patch number, drive multi-scale colonization dynamics in experimental aquatic landscapes , 2013, Oecologia.

[56]  H. MacIsaac,et al.  Evaluation of stochastic gravity model selection for use in estimating non-indigenous species dispersal and establishment , 2011, Biological Invasions.

[57]  P. Sherman,et al.  Ecological and evolutionary traps. , 2002 .