ArticlePloS one2021
Landscape fragmentation of the Natura 2000 network and its surrounding areas.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Past and Present in the Ecological Connectivity of Protected Areas Through Land Cover and Graph-Based Metrics.Environmental management · 2025Article
- Indices of human impacts on landscapes: How do they reflect the proportions of natural habitats?Open life sciences · 2025Article
- Grassland restoration on linear landscape elements - comparing the effects of topsoil removal and topsoil transfer.BMC ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Spatiotemporal Patterns of Reptile and Amphibian Road Fatalities in a Natura 2000 Area: A 12-Year Monitoring of the Lake Karla Mediterranean Wetland.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Habitat loss from anthropogenic development has led to an unprecedented decline in global biodiversity. Protected areas (PAs) exist to counteract this degradation of ecosystems. In the European Union, the Natura 2000 (N2k) network is the basis for continent-wide conservation efforts. N2k is the world's largest coordinated network of protected areas. However, threats to ecosystems do not stop at the borders of PAs. As measured by a landscape fragmentation metric, anthropogenic development can affect the interiors of PAs. To ensure the long-term viability of the N2k network of PAs, this paper attempts to quantify the degree to which N2k sites are insulated from development pressures. We use a comprehensive dataset of effective mesh density (seff) to measure aggregate fragmentation inside and within a 5 km buffer surrounding N2k sites. Our results show a strong correlation (R² = 0.78) between fragmentation (seff) within and around N2k sites. This result applies to all biogeographical regions in Europe. Only a narrow majority (58.5%) of N2k sites are less fragmented than their surroundings. Remote and mountainous regions in northern Europe, the Alps, parts of Spain, and parts of eastern Europe show the lowest levels of fragmentation. These regions tend to hold the largest N2k sites as measured by area. In contrast, central and western Europe show the highest fragmentation levels within and around N2k sites. 24.5% of all N2k sites are classified as highly to very-highly fragmented. N2k PA age since initial protection does not correlate with the difference in exterior and interior fragmentation of N2k PAs. These results indicate that PAs in Europe are not sheltered from anthropogenic pressures leading to fragmentation. Hence, we argue that there is a high potential for improving PA efficacy by taking pre-emptive action against encroaching anthropogenic fragmentation and by targeting scarce financial resources where fragmentation pressures can be mitigated through enforced construction bans inside PAs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.