Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28738077›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Consequences of severe habitat fragmentation on density, genetics, and spatial capture-recapture analysis of a small bear population.

Sean M Murphy, Ben C Augustine, Wade A Ulrey, Joseph M Guthrie, Brian K Scheick, J Walter McCown, John J Cox

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
13.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Habitat occupancy of sloth bearEcology and evolution · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sean M MurphyDepartment of Forestry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9404-8878
Ben C AugustineDepartment of Fish and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, United States of America.
Wade A UlreyDepartment of Forestry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.
Joseph M GuthrieDepartment of Forestry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.
Brian K ScheickFish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
J Walter McCownFish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
John J CoxDepartment of Forestry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, United States of America.
University of Kentucky · USFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission · USVirginia Tech · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Loss and fragmentation of natural habitats caused by human land uses have subdivided several formerly contiguous large carnivore populations into multiple small and often isolated subpopulations, which can reduce genetic variation and lead to precipitous population declines. Substantial habitat loss and fragmentation from urban development and agriculture expansion relegated the Highlands-Glades subpopulation (HGS) of Florida, USA, black bears (Ursus americanus floridanus) to prolonged isolation; increasing human land development is projected to cause ≥ 50% loss of remaining natural habitats occupied by the HGS in coming decades. We conducted a noninvasive genetic spatial capture-recapture study to quantitatively describe the degree of contemporary habitat fragmentation and investigate the consequences of habitat fragmentation on population density and genetics of the HGS. Remaining natural habitats sustaining the HGS were significantly more fragmented and patchier than those supporting Florida's largest black bear subpopulation. Genetic diversity was low (AR = 3.57; HE = 0.49) and effective population size was small (NE = 25 bears), both of which remained unchanged over a period spanning one bear generation despite evidence of some immigration. Subpopulation density (0.054 bear/km2) was among the lowest reported for black bears, was significantly female-biased, and corresponded to a subpopulation size of 98 bears in available habitat. Conserving remaining natural habitats in the area occupied by the small, genetically depauperate HGS, possibly through conservation easements and government land acquisition, is likely the most important immediate step to ensuring continued persistence of bears in this area. Our study also provides evidence that preferentially placing detectors (e.g., hair traps or cameras) primarily in quality habitat across fragmented landscapes poses a challenge to estimating density-habitat covariate relationships using spatial capture-recapture models. Because habitat fragmentation and loss are likely to increase in severity globally, further investigation of the influence of habitat fragmentation and detector placement on estimation of this relationship is warranted.

Indexed as

AnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemFloridaGenetics, PopulationGenetic VariationHumansPopulation DensityPopulation DynamicsSpatial AnalysisUrsidae

Identifiers

PMID28738077
PMCPMC5524351
OpenAlexW2737143330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.