4.6 Article

Towards the use of ecological heterogeneity to design reserve networks: a case study from Dadia National Park, Greece

期刊

BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION
卷 19, 期 6, 页码 1585-1597

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10531-010-9788-y

关键词

Biodiversity surrogates; Complementarity; Ecological heterogeneity; Ecological networks; Indicator; Landscape metrics; Mediterranean; Reserve design; Vegetation complexity; Vertical structure

资金

  1. PYTHAGORAS II [KE 1329-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we present a novel approach for using ecological heterogeneity in reserve design. We measured five ecological heterogeneity indices (EHI) and we used a database of six biological groups (woody plants, orchids, orthopterans, aquatic and terrestrial herpetofauna and passerine birds) across 30 sites in a Mediterranean reserve (Greece). We found that all the five EHI were significantly related to the overall species richness and to the species richness of woody plants and birds. Two indices, measuring vertical vegetation complexity (1/D) and horizontal heterogeneity of landcover types (SIDI) in terms of Simpson's index, predicted well overall species richness and had significantly higher values inside the complementary reserve networks designed after five of the six biological groups. We compared five methods of forming reserve networks. The method of ecological heterogeneity (selecting those sites with the greatest 1/D and then SIDI) was less efficient (non-significantly) than the species-based methods (scoring and complementary networks) but significantly more efficient than the random method (randomly selected network). We also found that the method of complementary ecological heterogeneity (selecting those sites where each EHI had its maximum value) was not that efficient, as it did not differ significantly from the random method. These results underline the potential of the ecological heterogeneity method as an alternative tool in reserve design.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据