ArticlePloS one2026
A predictive approach to integrating connectivity into landscape scale protected areas planning.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
It has been recognized that protecting at least 30% of terrestrial lands by 2030 (30x30) in systems of well-connected protected areas will be necessary for halting global biodiversity loss. While significant effort has been made to increase the coverage of global protected areas, connectivity has been found to fall short of what is needed to maintain proper ecological function. We present methods to explicitly incorporate connectivity into planning of future protected areas, using the protected area network in Ontario, Canada as a case study. We first carried out a series of connectivity analyses with simulated, generic parks, and estimated the effect of each new park on network connectivity. We then built and evaluated a set of regression models to determine characteristics of these generic parks that are predictors of optimal protected area placement for improving network connectivity. We found that in all cases, adding a generic park resulted in improved network connectivity; however, some park placements lead to greater improvements. The top model suggested that protected areas should have the greatest benefit to connectivity of the network when they have a low edge-to-area ratio, are close to the center of the landscape and to a network node, have a low degree of internal anthropogenic influence, but a close proximity to developed landscapes. We demonstrated an application of this approach by using the model to prioritize an independent set of candidate parks by their predicted benefit to network connectivity. The resulting model provides a tool with which Indigenous communities, land trust managers, and protected area planners can evaluate and prioritize candidate sites based on their expected benefit to improving connectivity of a given protected area network. As efforts to increase area-based conservation are ramped up to help meet national 30x30 targets, this should be an important tool for ensuring connectivity is explicitly incorporated into protected areas planning.
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.