Habitat loss is often considered the greatest near‐term threat to biodiversity, while the impact of habitat fragmentation remains intensely debated. A key issue of this debate centers on the problem of scale–landscape or patch–at which to assess the consequences of fragmentation. Yet patterns are often confounded across scales, and experimental designs that could solve this scaling problem remain scarce. We conducted two field experiments in 30 experimental landscapes in which we manipulated habitat loss, fragmentation, and patch size for a community of four insect herbivores that specialize on the cactus
Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Landscape experiments unlock relationships among habitat loss, fragmentation, and patch‐size effectsmore » « less
Abstract Opuntia . In the first experiment, we destroyed 2088Opuntia patches in either aggregated or random patterns and compared the relative effects of landscape‐scale loss and fragmentation to those of local patch size on species occurrence. This experiment focused on manipulating the relative separation of remaining patches, where we hypothesized that aggregated loss would disrupt dispersal more than random loss, leading to lower occurrence. In the second experiment, we destroyed 759Opuntia patches to generate landscapes that varied in patch number and size for a given amount of habitat loss and assessed species occurrence. This experiment focused on manipulating the subdivision of remaining habitat, where we hypothesized that an increase in the number of patches for a given amount of loss would lead to negative effects on occurrence. For both, we expected that occurrence would increase with patch size. We find strong evidence for landscape‐scale effects of habitat fragmentation, with aggregated loss and a larger number of patches for a given amount of habitat loss leading to a lower frequency of patches occupied in landscapes. In both experiments, occurrence increased with patch size, yet interactions of patch size and landscape‐scale loss and fragmentation drove species occurrence in patches. Importantly, the direction of effects were consistent across scales and effects of patch size were sufficient to predict the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation across entire landscapes. Our experimental results suggest that changes at both the patch and landscape scales can impact populations, but that a long‐standing pattern—the patch‐size effect—captures much of the key variation shaping patterns of species occurrence. -
more » « less
Abstract Fragmentation and scale Although habitat loss has well‐known impacts on biodiversity, the effects of habitat fragmentation remain intensely debated. It is often argued that the effects of habitat fragmentation, or the breaking apart of habitat for a given habitat amount, can be understood only at the scale of entire landscapes composed of multiple habitat patches. Yet, fragmentation also impacts the size, isolation and habitat edge for individual patches within landscapes. Addressing the problem of scale on fragmentation effects is crucial for resolving how fragmentation impacts biodiversity.
Scaling framework We build upon scaling concepts in ecology to describe a framework that emphasizes three “dimensions” of scale in habitat fragmentation research: the scales of phenomena (or mechanisms), sampling and analysis. Using this framework, we identify ongoing challenges and provide guidance for advancing the science of fragmentation.
Implications We show that patch‐ and landscape‐scale patterns arising from habitat fragmentation for a given amount of habitat are fundamentally related, leading to interdependencies among expected patterns arising from different scales of phenomena. Aggregation of information when increasing the grain of sampling (e.g., from patch to landscape) creates challenges owing to biases created from the modifiable areal unit problem. Consequently, we recommend that sampling strategies use the finest grain that captures potential underlying mechanisms (e.g., plot or patch). Study designs that can capture phenomena operating at multiple spatial extents offer the most promise for understanding the effects of fragmentation and its underlying mechanisms. By embracing the interrelationships among scales, we expect more rapid advances in our understanding of habitat fragmentation.
