Dynamic connectivity of temporary wetlands in the southern Great Plains

We quantified fluctuations in the status of individual patches (wetlands) in supporting connectivity within a network of playas, temporary wetlands of the southern Great Plains of North America that are loci for regional biodiversity. We used remote sensing imagery to delineate the location of surface waters in >8,000 playa basins in a ~31,900 km2 portion of Texas and quantified connectivity in this region from 2007 to 2011. We ranked playas as stepping-stones, cutpoints, and hubs at different levels of environmental conditions (regionally wet, dry, and average periods of precipitation) for dispersal distances ranging from 0.5 to 34 km, representing a range of species’ vagilities, to provide baseline dynamics within an area likely to experience disrupted connectivity due to anthropogenic activities. An individual playa’s status as a stepping-stone, cutpoint, or hub was highly variable over time (only a single playa was a top 20 stepping-stone, cutpoint, or hub in >50 % of all of the dates examined). Coalescence of the inundated playa network usually occurred at ≥10 km dispersal distance and depended on wetland density, indicating that critical thresholds in connectivity arose from synergistic effects of dispersal ability (spatial scale) and wet playa occurrence (a function of precipitation). Organisms with dispersal capabilities limited to <10 km routinely experienced effective isolation during our study. Connectivity is thus a dynamic emergent landscape property, so management to maintain connectivity for wildlife within ephemeral habitats like inundated playas will need to move beyond a patch-based focus to a network focus by including connectivity as a dynamic landscape property.

[1]  D. Williams The Ecology of Temporary Waters , 1987 .

[2]  Harold L. Schramm,et al.  Playa lakes: prairie wetlands of the Southern High Plains , 1989 .

[3]  L. Fahrig,et al.  Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure , 1993 .

[4]  D. Haukos,et al.  The importance of playa wetlands to biodiversity of the Southern High Plains , 1994 .

[5]  S. Sader,et al.  Accuracy of landsat-TM and GIS rule-based methods for forest wetland classification in Maine , 1995 .

[6]  A. Farmer,et al.  Effects of the Landscape on Shorebird Movements at Spring Migration Stopovers , 1997 .

[7]  Bruce T. Milne,et al.  Detecting Critical Scales in Fragmented Landscapes , 1997 .

[8]  J. Metzger,et al.  The structural connectivity threshold : an hypothesis in conservation biology at the landscape scale , 1997 .

[9]  P. Corbet Dragonflies: Behavior and Ecology of Odonata , 1999 .

[10]  I. Hanski Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapes , 1999 .

[11]  L. Fahrig,et al.  On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity , 2000 .

[12]  Timothy H. Keitt,et al.  Landscape connectivity: A conservation application of graph theory , 2000 .

[13]  G. Woodward Dragonflies: Behaviour and Ecology of Odonata , 2001 .

[14]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Karin Johst,et al.  Metapopulation persistence in dynamic landscapes: the role of dispersal distance , 2002 .

[16]  Robert G. D'Eon,et al.  Landscape Connectivity as a Function of Scale and Organism Vagility in a Real Forested Landscape , 2002 .

[17]  M. Brinson,et al.  Temperate freshwater wetlands: types, status, and threats , 2002, Environmental Conservation.

[18]  H. Décamps,et al.  Landscape ecology in theory and practice , 2003 .

[19]  Loren M. Smith Playas of the Great Plains , 2003 .

[20]  H. W. Miller,et al.  BREEDING DUCKS AND THEIR HABITATS IN THE HIGH PLAINS OF TEXAS , 2003 .

[21]  Stacy L. Ozesmi,et al.  Satellite remote sensing of wetlands , 2002, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[22]  James T. Cronin,et al.  THE MATRIX ENHANCES THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CORRIDORS AND STEPPING STONES , 2004 .

[23]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[24]  F. Jordán,et al.  Characterizing the importance of habitat patches and corridors in maintaining the landscape connectivity of a Pholidoptera transsylvanica (Orthoptera) metapopulation , 2003, Landscape Ecology.

[25]  M. Fortin,et al.  Spatial Analysis: A Guide for Ecologists 1st edition , 2005 .

[26]  M. Smith,et al.  Dispersal and the metapopulation paradigm in amphibian ecology and conservation : are all amphibian populations metapopulations? , 2005 .

[27]  D. Williams The biology of temporary waters. , 2005 .

[28]  Gábor Csárdi,et al.  The igraph software package for complex network research , 2006 .

[29]  T. Bailey Spatial Analysis: A Guide for Ecologists , 2006 .

[30]  Santiago Saura,et al.  Impact of spatial scale on the identification of critical habitat patches for the maintenance of landscape connectivity , 2007 .

[31]  Dean L Urban,et al.  Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. , 2007, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[32]  R. Schooley,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity in Habitat Quality and Cross-Scale Interactions in Metapopulations , 2007, Ecosystems.

[33]  Marie-Josée Fortin,et al.  Spatial Graphs: Principles and Applications for Habitat Connectivity , 2007, Ecosystems.

[34]  Dean L Urban,et al.  A Graph‐Theory Framework for Evaluating Landscape Connectivity and Conservation Planning , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

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

[36]  Elisabeth B. Webb,et al.  Effects of Local and Landscape Variables on Wetland Bird Habitat Use During Migration Through the Rainwater Basin , 2010 .

[37]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Conservation planning for connectivity across marine, freshwater, and terrestrial realms , 2010 .

[38]  Marie-Josée Fortin,et al.  From Graphs to Spatial Graphs , 2010 .

[39]  Santiago Saura,et al.  Ranking individual habitat patches as connectivity providers: Integrating network analysis and patch removal experiments , 2010 .

[40]  Andrew A. Bishop,et al.  Effects of Surrounding Land use on Playa Inundation following Intense Rainfall , 2011, Wetlands.

[41]  Andrew Fall,et al.  Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: A guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation , 2011 .

[42]  Andrew Fall,et al.  Connectivity for conservation: a framework to classify network measures. , 2011, Ecology.

[43]  D. Haukos,et al.  Ecosystem services provided by playas in the High Plains: potential influences of USDA conservation programs , 2011 .

[44]  Hadley Wickham,et al.  The Split-Apply-Combine Strategy for Data Analysis , 2011 .

[45]  A. Laita,et al.  Graph-theoretic connectivity measures: what do they tell us about connectivity? , 2011, Landscape Ecology.

[46]  Santiago Saura,et al.  Assessing the importance of individual habitat patches as irreplaceable connecting elements: An analysis of simulated and real landscape data , 2012 .

[47]  D. Haukos,et al.  Physical loss and modification of Southern Great Plains playas. , 2012, Journal of environmental management.

[48]  Geoffrey M. Henebry,et al.  Hydrological dynamics of temporary wetlands in the southern Great Plains as a function of surrounding land use , 2014 .

[49]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[50]  R. Gardner,et al.  Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice , 2015, Springer New York.