Landcover characterizations and Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) population dynamics David R. Breininger a,b, * , Brian Toland c , Donna M. Oddy a , Michael L. Legare d a Dyn-2, Dynamac Corporation, NASA Ecological Programs, Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899, USA b Department of Biology, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd., Orlando, FL 32816-2368, USA c Toland Environmental Consulting, 4092 Sparrow Hawk, Melbourne, FL 32934, USA d US Fish and Wildlife Service, Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge, 16450 NW 31st Place, Chiefland Road, FL, 32626, USA ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received 4 October 2004 Received in revised form 19 September 2005 Accepted 20 September 2005 Published on line xx xxx xxxx Keywords: Mapping Fire Fragmentation Demography Dispersal ABSTRACT Landcover maps demarcate habitat but might underestimate it where species select fea- tures smaller than minimum mapping units used to produce maps. Habitat loss is magni- fied by fragmentation, which produces edge effects, alters dispersal and natural processes (i.e., fire). We quantified how Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) habitat varied using traditional landcover maps and methods that considered small focal habitat features (e.g., scrub ridges <2 ha) within an otherwise unsuitable matrix. We collected 7 years of data on color banded Florida scrub-jays to quantify dispersal and investigate how reproductive suc- cess and survival varied with habitat potential (scrub ridges), edge effects, and fire history. Landcover maps that identified only large scrub ridges resulted in a potential population of 354 pairs. Including small scrub ridges within an otherwise unsuitable matrix resulted in a potential population >774 pairs. Florida scrub-jays occupied less than half the potential habitat, and their population declined most from disrupted fire regimes. Almost 90% of all breeding dispersers remained within the same cluster of territories that they hatched in emphasizing the need to maximize local habitat quantity and quality. Reduced habitat quality, caused by disrupted fire regimes, was a major fragmentation effect that greatly magnified impacts of habitat loss. The disruption of natural processes is seldom identified as a major fragmentation effect, but studies worldwide have accumulated to demonstrate its significance. We advocated specific mapping approaches for species influenced by small habitat features and species dependent on matrix habitats that advance natural processes, such as fire. Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Managing landcover change is paramount for conservation and requires mapping (Dale et al., 2000). Conserving biological diversity also requires approaches to sustain natural pro- cesses (Pressey et al., 2003). Landcover maps usually distin- guish only general habitat features larger than 2–40 ha (Scott et al., 1993), but many species respond to habitat arrangement and small or specialized habitat features (Rou- get, 2003). Florida scrub-jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens) are threatened with extinction and are an indicator species for scrub, which 0006-3207/$ - see front matter Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.026 * Corresponding author: Tel.: +1 321 476 4128; fax; +1 321 853 2939. E-mail address: [email protected](D.R. Breininger). BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION xxx (2005) xxx – xxx available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon ARTICLE IN PRESS
13
Embed
Landcover characterizations and Florida scrub-jay ... · Landcover characterizations and Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) population dynamics ... within an otherwise unsuitable
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
B I O L O G I C A L C O N S E R VAT I O N x x x ( 2 0 0 5 ) x x x –x x x
Landcover characterizations and Floridascrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) population dynamics
David R. Breiningera,b,*, Brian Tolandc, Donna M. Oddya, Michael L. Legared
aDyn-2, Dynamac Corporation, NASA Ecological Programs, Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899, USAbDepartment of Biology, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd., Orlando, FL 32816-2368, USAcToland Environmental Consulting, 4092 Sparrow Hawk, Melbourne, FL 32934, USAdUS Fish and Wildlife Service, Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge, 16450 NW 31st Place, Chiefland Road,
FL, 32626, USA
A R T I C L E I N F O
Article history:
Received 4 October 2004
Received in revised form 19
September 2005
Accepted 20 September 2005
Published on line xx xxx xxxx
Keywords:
Mapping
Fire
Fragmentation
Demography
Dispersal
0006-3207/$ - see front matter � 2005 Elsevidoi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.026
for conservation not only requires delineating features that
make them unique but also identifying features that sustain
processes, such as fire and prey production (Noss et al., 1997).
Identifying potential habitat that could function as a
source was more important than identifying only occupied
habitat because there were large areas of potentially optimal,
unoccupied habitat because of disrupted fire regimes. Map-
ping potential habitat and restoring its habitat quality is often
important to maximize population size, exchange rates
among populations, and resilience to catastrophes (Komdeur
and Pels, 2005; Powell et al., 2005). We showed that the most
influential declines in habitat quality that resulted from hab-
itat fragmentation were not restricted to edges because habi-
tat loss disrupted fire propagation far beyond edges (Duncan
and Schmalzer, 2004). The disruption of natural processes
caused by fragmentation greatly magnified the impacts of
habitat loss and required greater recognition; these impacts
needed mitigation using prescribed fire.
Acknowledgments
The US Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida Department of Envi-
ronmental Protection, Florida Fire Science Team, and Brevard
Zoo funded this study. J. Elseroad provided great field assis-
tance. We thank Brevard County Environmentally Endangered
Lands Program, Brevard County Natural Resources Manage-
ment Office, St. Johns River Water Management District, and
Endangered Lands Management Corporation, D. Zattau, K.
Fisher, Wade, S. Grace, B. Summerfield, K. Gorman, G. Carter,
A. Birch, R. Bowman, D. DeVos, D., B. Duncan, J. Fitzpatrick, C.
Hall, R. Hinkle, P. Henn, M. Knight, Z. Nations, R. Noss, Z. Pru-
sak, T. Robinson, P. Schmalzer, B. Stith, H. Swain, E. Stolen,
and G. Woolfenden.
R E F E R E N C E S
Bowman, R., Woolfenden, G.E., 2001. Nest success and thetiming of nest failure of Florida scrub-jays in suburban andwildland habitats. In: Marzluff, J.M., Bowman, R., Donnelly,R.E. (Eds.), Avian Conservation and Ecology in an Urbaniz-ing World. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, pp. 383–402.
Breininger, D.R., 1999. Florida scrub-jay demography and dis-persal in a fragmented landscape. Auk 116, 520–527.
Breininger, D.R., Carter, G.M., 2003. Territory quality transitionsand source–sink dynamics in a Florida scrub-jay population.Ecological Applications 13, 516–529.
Breininger, D.R., Oddy, D.M., 2004. Do habitat potential, popula-tion density, and fires influence Florida scrub-jay source–sinkdynamics? Ecological Applications 14, 1079–1089.
Breininger, D.R., Burgman, M.A., Stith, B.M., 1999. Influence ofhabitat, catastrophes, and population size on extinction riskon Florida scrub-jay populations. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27,810–822.
12 B I O L O G I C A L C O N S E R VAT I O N x x x ( 2 0 0 5 ) x x x –x x x
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Breininger, D.R., Duncan, B.W., Dominy, N.J., 2002. Relationshipsbetween fire frequency and vegetation type in pine flatwoodsof east-central Florida, USA. Natural Areas Journal 22, 186–193.
Breininger, D.R., Legare, M.L., Smith, R.B., 2004. Edge effects andpopulation viability of Eastern Indigo Snakes in Florida. In:Akcakaya, H.R., Burgman, M., Kindvall, O., Sjorgren-Gulve, P.,Hatfield, J., McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Species Conservation andManagement: Case Studies. Oxford University Press, NewYork, pp. 299–311.
Breininger, D.R., Provancha, M.J., Smith, R.B., 1991. MappingFlorida scrub jay habitat for purposes of land-use manage-ment. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 57,1467–1474.
Breininger, D.R., Larson, V.L., Duncan, B.W., Smith, R.B., Oddy,D.M., Goodchild, M., 1995. Landscape patterns in Florida scrubjay habitat preference and demography. Conservation Biology9, 1442–1453.
Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R., 2002. Model Selection and Multi-model Inference: A Practical Information – TheoreticApproach, second ed. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Cox, J., Engstrom, R.T., 2001. Influence of the spatial pattern ofconserved lands on the persistence of a large population ofred-cockaded woodpeckers. Biological Conservation 100, 137–150.
Dale, V.H., Brown, S., Haeuber, R.A., Hobbs, N.T., Huntly, N.,Naiman, R.J., Riebsame, W.E., Turner, M.G., Valone, T.J., 2000.Ecological principles and guideline for managing the use ofthe land. Ecological Applications 10, 670–939.
Dias, P.C., 1996. Sources and sinks in population biology. Trends inEvolutionary Ecology 11, 326–330.
Drechsler, M., Wissel, C., 1998. Trade-offs between local andregional scale management of metapopulations. BiologicalConservation 83, 31–41.
Duncan, B.W., Schmalzer, P.A., 2004. Anthropogenic influences onpotential fire spread in a pyrogenic ecosystem of Florida.Landscape Ecology 19, 153–165.
Duncan, B.W., Larson, V.L., Schmalzer, P.A., 2004. Historic andrecent landscape change in the North Indian River Lagoonwatershed, Florida. Natural Areas Journal 24, 198–215.
Duncan, B.W., Boyle, S.R., Breininger, D.R., Schmalzer, P.A., 1999.Coupling past management practice and historical landscapechange on John F. Kennedy Space Center. Landscape Ecology14, 291–309.
Duncan, B.W., Breininger, D.R., Schmalzer, P.A., Larson, V.L., 1995.Validating a Florida scrub-jay habitat suitability model, usingdemography data on Kennedy Space Center. PhotogrammetricEngineering and Remote Sensing 56, 1361–1370.
ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute), 1999. ARC/INFOCommand Reference and Users Guide 7.0, The GeographicInformation Systems Software. Redlands, California.
Fahrig, L., 2003. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity.Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 34, 487–515.
Fitzpatrick, J.W., Woolfenden, G.E., Kopeny, M.T., 1991. Ecologyand development-related habitat requirements for the Floridascrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens). Florida Game and FreshWater Fish Commission Nongame Wildlife Report No. 8.Tallahassee, Florida.
Fitzpatrick, J.W., Woolfenden, G.E., Bowman, R., 1999. Dispersaldistance and its demographic consequences in the Floridascrub-jay. In: Adams, N.J., Slotow, R.H. (Eds.), Proceedings ofthe 22 International Ornithological Conference, Durban, SouthAfrica, pp. 2465–2479.
Gavashelishvili, A., 2004. Habitat selection by East Caucasian tur(Capra cylindricornis). Biological Conservation 120, 391–398.
Gibb, H., Hochuli, D.F., 2002. Habitat fragmentation in an urbanenvironment: large and small fragments support differentarthropod assemblages. Biological Conservation 106, 91–100.
Groves, C.R., 2003. Drafting a Conservation Blueprint: A Practi-tioner�s Guide to Biodiversity. Island Press, Washington D.C.
Harrison, S., Bruna, E., 1999. Habitat fragmentation and largescale conservation: what do we know for sure? Ecography 22,225–323.
Herrmann, H.K., Babbitt, K.J., Baber, M.J., Congalton, R.G., 2005.Effects of landscape characteristics on amphibian distributionin a forest-dominated landscape. Biological Conservation 123,139–149.
Hokit, D.G., Stith, B.M., Branch, L.C., 1999. Effects of landscapestructure in Florida scrub: a population perspective. EcologicalApplications 9, 124–135.
Huckle, H.F., Dollar, H.D., Pendleton, R.F., 1974. Soil Survey ofBrevard County, Florida. US Department of Agriculture, SoilConservation Service, Washington, DC.
Joly, K., Myers, W.L., 2001. Patterns of mammalian speciesrichness and habitat associations in Pennsylvania. BiologicalConservation 99, 253–260.
Kemper, J., Cowling, R.M., Richardson, D.M., 1999. Fragmentationof South African renostervel shrublands: effects on plantcommunity structure and conservation implications. Biologi-cal Conservation 90, 103–111.
Komdeur, J., Pels, M.D., 2005. Rescue of the Seychelles warbler onCousin Island, Seychelles: The role of habitat restoration.Biological Conservation 124, 15–26.
Krauss, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Tscharntke, T., 2004. Landscapeoccupancy and local population size depends on host plantdistribution in the butterfly Cupido minimus. Biological Con-servation 120, 355–361.
Latta, S.C., Sondreal, M.L., Brown, R.C., 2000. A hierarchicalanalysis of nesting and foraging habitat for the conservationof the Hispaniolan white-winged crossbill (Loxia leucopteramegaplaga). Biological Conservation 96, 139–150.
Leach, M.K., Givnish, T.L., 1996. Ecological determinants ofspecies loss in remnant prairies. Science 273, 1555–1558.
Leturque, H., Rousset, F., 2002. Dispersal, kin competition, andideal free distribution in a spatially heterogeneous population.Theoretical Population Biology 62, 169–180.
Linderman,M., Bearer, S.A.L., An, L., Tan, T., Ouyang, Z., Liu, J., 2005.The effects of understory bamboo on broad-scale estimate ofgiant panda habitat. Biological Conservation 121, 383–390.
Menges, E.S., Hawkes, C.V., 1998. Interactive effects of fire andmicrohabitat on plants of Florida scrub. Ecological Applica-tions 8, 935–946.
Moler, P.E., Franz, R., 1987. Wildlife values of small, isolatedwetlands in the southeastern coastal plain. In: Odom, R.R.,Riddleberger, K.A., Ozier, J.C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the ThirdSoutheastern Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Symposium.Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Athens, Georgia,pp. 234–238.
Mumme, R.L., Schoech, S.J., Woolfenden, G.E., Fitzpatrick, J.W.,2000. Life and death in the fast lane: demographic conse-quences of road mortality in the Florida scrub-jay. Conserva-tion Biology 14, 501–512.
Noss, R.F., O� Connell, M.A., Murphy, D.D., 1997. The Science ofConservation Planning. Island Press, Washington D.C.
Powell, M., Accad, A., Shapcott, A., 2005. Geographic informationsystem (GIS) predictions of past, present habitat distributionand areas for re-introduction of the endangered subtropicalrainforest shrub Triunia robusta (Proteaceae) from south-eastQueensland, Australia. Biological Conservation 2005, 165–175.
B I O L O G I C A L C O N S E R VAT I O N x x x ( 2 0 0 5 ) x x x –x x x 13
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Pressey, R.L., Cowling, R.M., Rouget, M., 2003. Formulating con-servation targets for biodiversity pattern and process in theCape Floristic Region, Africa. Biological Conservation 112, 99–127.
Pringle, R.M., Webb, J.K., Shine, R., 2003. Canopy structure,microclimate, and habitat selection by a nocturnal ecotherm.Ecology 84, 2668–2679.
Quintana-Ascencio, P.F., Menges, E.S., 1996. Inferring metapopu-lation dynamics from patch-level incidence of Florida scrubplants. Conservation Biology 10, 1210–1219.
Ross, K.A., Fox, B.J., Fox, M.D., 2002. Changes to plant speciesrichness in forest fragments: fragment age, disturbance, andfire history may be as important as area. Journal of Biogeog-raphy 29, 749–765.
Root, K.V., 1998. The effects of habitat quality, connectivity, andcatastrophes on a threatened species. Ecological Applications8, 854–865.
Rouget, M., 2003. Measuring conservation value at fine and broadscales: implications for a diverse and fragmented region, theAgulhas Plain. Biological Conservation 112, 217–232.
Roy, R.S., Tomar, S., 2000. Biodiversity characterization at land-scape level using geospatial modeling technique. BiologicalConservation 95, 95–109.
Rudolph, C., Burgdorf, S., Conner R., Schaefer R., 1999. Preliminaryevaluation of the impact of roads and associated vehiculartraffic on snake populations in eastern Texas. In: Evink, G.L.,Garrett, P., Ziegler, D. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third Interna-tional Conference on Wildlife Ecology and Transportation, FL-ER-73-99. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee,Florida, pp. 129–136.
Saarinen, K., Valtonen, A., Jantunen, J., Saarnio, S., 2005. Butter-flies and diurnal moths along road verges: Does road typeaffect diversity and abundance? Biological Conservation 123,403–412.
Saveraid, E.H., Debinski, D.M., Kindscher, K., Jacubauskas, M.E.,2001. A comparison of satellite data and landscape variables inpredicting species occurrences in the Greater YellowstoneEcosystem, USA. Landscape Ecology 16, 71–83.
Schmalzer, P.A., 2003. Growth and recovery of oak-saw palmettoscrub through ten years after fire. Natural Areas Journal 23, 5–13.
Schmalzer, P.A., Boyle, S.R., 1998. Restoring long-unburned oak-mesic flatwoods requires mechanical cutting and prescribedburning. Restoration and Management Notes 16, 96–97.
Schmalzer, P.A., Hinkle, C.R., 1992. Species composition andstructure of oak-saw palmetto scrub vegetation. Castanea 57,220–251.
Schmalzer, P.A., Boyle, S.R., Swain, H.M., 1999. Scrub ecosystemsof Brevard County, Florida: a regional characterization. FloridaScientist 62, 13–47.
Scott, J.M., Davis, F., Csuti, B., Noss, R., Butterfield, B., Groves, C.,Anderson, H., Caicco, S., D�Erchia, F., Edwards Jr., T.C., Ulliman,J., Wright, R.G., 1993. Gap analysis: a geographic approach toprotection of biological diversity. Wildlife Monographs 123, 1–41.
Stephens, S.S., Koons, D.N., Rotella, J.J., Willey, D.W., 2003. Effectsof habitat fragmentation on avian nesting success: a review ofthe evidence at multiple scales. Biological Conservation 115,101–110.
Stith, B.M., 1999. Metapopulation dynamics and landscape ecol-ogy of the Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens). Ph.D.Thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Stith, B.M., Fitzpatrick, J.W., Woolfenden, G.E., Pranty, B., 1996.Classification and conservation of metapopulations: a casestudy of the Florida scrub-jay. In: McCullough, D.R. (Ed.),Metapopulations and Wildlife Conservation. Island Press,Covelo, California, pp. 187–216.
SPSS, Inc., 2003. SPSS/PC + Statistics. Version 9.0. SPSS, Chicago,Illinois.
Thaxton, J.E., Hingtgen, T.M., 1996. Effects of suburbanization andhabitat fragmentation on Florida scrub-jay dispersal. FloridaField Naturalist 24, 25–37.
Walters, J.R., Ford, H.A., Cooper, C.B., 1999. The ecological basis ofsensitivity of brown treecreepers to habitat fragmentation: apreliminary assessment. Biological Conservation 90, 13–20.
With, K.A., King, A.W., 2001. Analysis of landscape sources andsinks: the effect of spatial pattern on avian demography.Biological Conservation 1000, 78–88.
Woolfenden, G.E., Fitzpatrick, J.W., 1984. The Florida Scrub Jay:Demography of a Cooperative-Breeding Bird. Princeton Uni-versity Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Woolfenden, G.E., Fitzpatrick, J.W., 1991. Florida scrub jay ecologyand conservation. In: Perrins, C.M., Lebreton, J.D., Hirons,G.J.M. (Eds.), Bird Population Studies. Oxford University Press,New York, pp. 542–565.
Yahr, R., Menges, E.S., Berry, D., 2000. Effects of drainage, fireexclusion, and time-since-fire on endemic cutthroat grasscommunities in central Florida. Natural Areas Journal 20, 3–11.
Yates, C.Y., Broadhurst, L.M., 2002. Assessing limitations onpopulation growth in two critically endangered Acacia taxa.Biological Conservation 2002, 13–26.