ArticleLandscape ecology2024
Identifying restoration priorities for habitat defragmentation: a case study in Alberta's oil sands.
Article in Landscape ecology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Context: Anthropogenic habitat loss and fragmentation are major threats to ecosystems and a focus in conservation. However, conservation is often limited to considerations of site-level processes neglecting the effect of the surrounding landscape that might limit the effectiveness of restoration efforts. Objectives: Using seismic lines in Alberta's oil sands as a case study, we demonstrate an approach that integrates spatial configuration of anthropogenic footprints to prioritize habitat defragmentation. Methods: We quantified the effects of seismic line density and configuration on functional footprints for caribou, butterfly diversity, and vascular plant diversity, to predict whether edge effects are more pronounced under different line densities and configurations. We then estimated the portion of the original functional footprint that would persist in the landscape due to the co-occurrence with other anthropogenic activities. Results: We found that functional footprint for caribou grows rapidly as habitat loss increases. In contrast, butterflies and plants exhibited a more gradual and linear growth in functional footprints at more local scales. This effect varies based on configuration of lines, either suppressing or facilitating the effect of habitat loss on functional habitats. Finally, restoration of all seismic lines without considering other footprints would reduce the original functional footprint by only 57% for caribou. Conclusions: Restoration efforts for habitat defragmentation rarely consider the spatial configuration of linear features, particularly as it relates to the co-occurrence of other footprints that are not being restored. Our functional approach to defragmentation of habitat encompasses different spatial concepts related to anthropogenic forest fragmentation and allows up to a 25-fold gain in cost-effectiveness for seismic lines restoration. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-024-01972-3.
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.