Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Maintaining or restoring connectivity of modified landscapes: evaluating the least-cost path model with multiple sources of ecological information

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Habitat connectivity is an important element of functioning landscapes for mobile organisms. Maintenance or creation of movement corridors is one conservation strategy for reducing the negative effects of habitat fragmentation. Numerous spatial models exist to predict the location of movement corridors. Few studies, however, have investigated the effectiveness of these methods for predicting actual movement paths. We used an expert-based model and a resource selection function (RSF) to predict least-cost paths of woodland caribou. Using independent data for model evaluation, we found that the expert-based model was a poor predictor of long-distance animal movements; in comparison, the RSF model was effective at predicting habitat selection by caribou. We used the Path Deviation Index (PDI), cumulative path cost, and sinuosity to quantitatively compare the spatial differences between inferred caribou movement paths and predicted least-cost paths, and quasi-random null models of directional movement. Predicted movement paths were on average straighter than inferred movement paths for collared caribou. The PDI indicated that the least-cost paths were no better at predicting the inferred paths than either of two null models—straight line paths and randomly generated paths. We found statistically significant differences in cumulative cost scores for the main effects of model and path type; however, post-hoc comparisons were non-significant suggesting no difference among inferred, random, and predicted least cost paths. Paths generated from an expert based cost surface were more sinuous than those premised on the RSF model, but neither differed from the inferred path. Although our results are specific to one species, they highlight the importance of model evaluation when planning for habitat connectivity. We recommend that conservation planners adopt similar techniques when validating the effectiveness of movement corridors for other populations and species.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Apps CD, McLellan BN (2006) Factors influencing the dispersion and fragmentation of endangered mountain caribou populations. Biol Conserv 130:84–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Beier P, Majka DR, Spencer WD (2008) Forks in the road: choices in procedures for designing wildland linkages. Conserv Biol 22:836–851

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer HL (2004) Hawth’s analysis tools for ArcGIS. http://www.spatialecology.com/htools

  • Boyce MS, Vernier PR, Nielsen SE, Schmiegelow FKA (2002) Evaluating resource selection functions. Ecol Model 157:281–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Chetkiewicz CLB, Boyce MS (2009) Use of resource selection functions to identify conservation corridors. J Appl Ecol 46:1036–1047

    Google Scholar 

  • Chetkiewicz CLB, St. Clair CC, Boyce MS (2006) Corridors for conservation: integrating pattern and process. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 37:317–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Clevenger AP, Wierzchowski J, Chruszcz B, Gunson K (2002) GIS-generated expert based models for identifying wildlife habitat linkages and mitigation passage planning. Conserv Biol 16:503–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Couvet D (2002) Deleterious effects of restricted gene flow in fragmented populations. Conserv Biol 16:369–376

    Google Scholar 

  • Csuti B (1991) Conservation corridors: countering habitat fragmentation. In: Hudson WE (ed) Landscape linkages and biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, pp 81–90

    Google Scholar 

  • de Smith MJ (2004) Distance and path: the development, interpretation and application of distance measurement in mapping and spatial modelling. PhD thesis, University of London, University College, Department of Geography, London

  • Eastman JR (2004) IDRISI Kilimanjaro, version 14.01. Clark University Laboratory, Clark University, Worcester

    Google Scholar 

  • ESRI (2005) ArcGIS—ArcInfo, version 9.1. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc, Redlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortin D, Beyer HL, Boyce MS, Smith DW, Duchesne T, Mao JS (2005) Wolves influence elk movements: behavior shapes a trophic cascade in Yellowstone National Park. Ecology 86:1320–1330

    Google Scholar 

  • Goncalves AB (2010) An extension of GIS-based least cost path modelling to the location of wide paths. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 24:983–996

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris LD (1984) The fragmented forest: island biogeography theory and the preservation of biotic diversity. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra JM, Boucher TM, Ricketts TH, Roberts C (2005) Confronting a biome crisis: global disparities of habitat loss and protection. Ecol Lett 8:23–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley MV, Rapaport EK, Johnson CJ (2009) Utility of expert-based knowledge for predicting wildlife-vehicle collisions. J Wild Manag 73:278–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Jan O, Horowitz AJ, Peng Z-R (1999) Using GPS data to understand variations in path choice. Paper presented at the 78th meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington

  • Jenness J (2004) Alternate animal movement routes (altroutes.avx) extension for ArcView 3.x, v. 2.1. Jenness Enterprises. http://www.jennessent.com/arcview/alternate_routes.htm

  • Johnson CJ, Gillingham MP (2004) Mapping uncertainty: sensitivity of wildlife habitat ratings to variation in expert opinion. J Appl Ecol 41:1032–1041

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Gillingham MP (2005) An evaluation of mapped species distribution models used for conservation planning. Environ Conserv 32:117–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Heard DC, Parker KL (2002a) Expectations and realities of GPS animal location collars: results of three years in the field. Wild Biol 8:153–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Parker KL, Heard DC, Gillingham MP (2002b) A multiscale behavioural approach to understanding the movements of woodland caribou. Ecol Appl 12:1840–1860

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Parker KL, Heard DC, Gillingham MP (2002c) Movement parameters of ungulates and scale-specific responses to the environment. J Anim Ecol 71:225–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Alexander ND, Wheate RD, Parker KL (2003) Characterizing woodland caribou habitat in sub-boreal and boreal forests. For Ecol Manag 180:241–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CJ, Seip DR, Boyce MS (2004) A quantitative approach to conservation planning: using resource selection functions to identify important habitats for mountain caribou. J Appl Ecol 41:238–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Kautz R, Kawula R, Hoctor T, Comiskey J, Jansen D, Jennings D, Kasbohm J, Mazzotti F, McBride R, Richardson L, Root K (2006) How much is enough? Landscape-scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biol Conserv 130:118–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Kehoe NM (1995) Grizzly bear distribution in the north fork of the Flathead River valley: a test of the linkage zone prediction model. MS thesis. University of Montana, Missoula

  • Kindall JL, Van Manen FT (2007) Identifying habitat linkages for American black bears in North Carolina, USA. J Wild Manag 71:487–495

    Google Scholar 

  • Manly BFJ, McDonald LL, Thomas DL, McDonald TL, Erickson WP (2002) Resource selection by animals: statistical design and analysis for field studies. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Menard S (1995) Applied logistic regression analysis. Quantitative applications in the social sciences series no. 07-106. Sage University, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam G (1991) Corridors and connectivity: animal populations in heterogeneous environments. In: Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ (eds) Nature conservation 2: the role of corridors. Surrey Beatty and Sons Pty Ltd, Chipping Norton, pp 133–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray JV, Goldizen AW, O’Leary RA, McAlpine CA, Possingham HP, Choy SL (2009) How useful is expert opinion for predicting the distribution of a species within and beyond the region of expertise? A case study using brush-tailed rock-wallabies Petrogale penicillata. J Appl Ecol 46:842–851

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss RF (1991) Landscape connectivity: different functions at difference scales. In: Hudson W (ed) Landscape linkages and biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, pp 27–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace F (1991) The Klamath corridors: preserving biodiversity in the Klamath National Forest. In: Hudson W (ed) Landscape linkages and biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, pp 105–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce J, Ferrier S (2000) Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecol Model 133:225–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole KG, Heard DC, Mowat G (2000) Habitat use by woodland caribou near Takla Lake in central British Columbia. Can J Zool 78:1552–1561

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray N, Lehmann A, Joly P (2002) Modeling spatial distribution of amphibian populations: a GIS approach based on habitat matrix permeability. Biodivers Conserv 11:2143–2165

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard Y, Armstrong DP (2010) Cost distance modelling of landscape connectivity and gap-crossing ability using radio-tracking data. J Appl Ecol 47:603–610

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricketts TH (2002) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158:87–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouget M, Cowling RM, Lombard AT, Knight AT, Graham IHK (2006) Designing large-scale conservation corridors for pattern and process. Conserv Biol 20:549–561

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15:234–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Saher DJ, Schmiegelow FKA (2005) Movement pathways and habitat selection by woodland caribou during spring migration. Rangifer 16:143–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff DS, Cox J (1987) Consequences and costs of conservation corridors. Conserv Biol 1:63–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff DS, Farr JA, Cox J, Mehiman DW (1992) Movement corridors: conservation bargains or poor investments? Conserv Biol 6:493–504

    Google Scholar 

  • Singleton PH, Gaines WL, Lehmkuhl JF (2002) Landscape permeability for large carnivores in Washington: a geographic information system weighted-distance and least-cost corridor assessment. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Soulé ME, Mackey BG, Recher HF, Williams JE, Woinarski JCZ, Driscoll D, Dennison WC, Jones ME (2004) The role of connectivity in Australian conservation. Pac Conserv Biol 10:266–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker R, Craighead L (1997) Least-cost-path corridor analysis: analyzing wildlife movement corridors in Montana using GIS. In: Proceedings of the ESRI user’s conference, San Diego

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank M. Gillingham and J. Kirkpatrick for insightful comments during the development of this paper. P. Beier and two anonymous reviewers provided a thorough review of the manuscript. Following submission, the Coordinating Editor, H. Wagner, skilfully navigated the paper through the review process and was instrumental in improving the final version. S. McNay kindly donated unpublished caribou locations that allowed us to evaluate the predictions of the RSF and expert-based models.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 78, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia

    Michael G. Pullinger

  2. Ecosystem Science and Management Program, University of Northern British Columbia, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, V2N 4Z9, Canada

    Chris J. Johnson

Authors
  1. Michael G. Pullinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chris J. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris J. Johnson.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pullinger, M.G., Johnson, C.J. Maintaining or restoring connectivity of modified landscapes: evaluating the least-cost path model with multiple sources of ecological information. Landscape Ecol 25, 1547–1560 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-010-9526-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-010-9526-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation