ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2025
Isolating the role of the matrix at patch and landscape scales.
Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Landscape quality drives ecological responses to habitat loss and fragmentation.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026Article
- Isolating the role of the matrix at patch and landscape scales.The Journal of animal ecology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Global increases in habitat loss and fragmentation have resulted in non-habitat landcover, or the matrix, becoming an increasingly prominent feature of landscapes. The matrix can influence the population dynamics of species in fragments by modifying processes operating locally on individual patches (e.g. edge effects on survival) or at landscape scales (e.g. inter-patch dispersal). However, the relative magnitude of patch- vs. landscape-scale matrix effects on the populations found in patches remains unclear. We established 12 experimental landscapes in which we controlled for habitat amount and fragmentation while manipulating the quality of the matrix around (i) individual habitat patches and (ii) across the entire landscape in a factorial design. We then compared the magnitude of local- and landscape-scale matrix effects on a specialist herbivore, Chelinidea vittiger (Hemiptera: Coreidae). Population size in fragments was influenced by both patch- and landscape-scale treatments: Population size increased in patches surrounded by high-quality matrix, but only in landscapes dominated by low-quality matrix, due in part to decreased inter-patch movements in these landscapes. In contrast, the effects on both survival and reproductive output were solely at the patch-scale, with both lower in patches surrounded by low-quality matrix. Our results underscore the outsized importance of matrix habitat immediately adjacent to fragment edges-despite the fact that patch-scale manipulations affected only a fraction (3%) of the area that landscape-scale manipulations did, patch-scale effects were more common. The relationship between dispersal, population size and scale-dependent effects of matrix quality emphasizes the need to explicitly consider the spatial scale at which different processes operate when predicting responses to habitat fragmentation. Our results also suggest the matrix immediately adjacent to habitat remnants is of particular importance when considering alternative strategies for landscape conservation or restoration.
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.