Is habitat fragmentation good for biodiversity?
Is habitat fragmentation good for biodiversity?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.biocon.2018.07.022
复制
发表时间：
2018-10-01
影响因子：
5.9
通讯作者：
Haddad, Nick M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fletcher, Robert J., Jr.;Didham, Raphael K.;Haddad, Nick M.
栖息地丧失是对全球生物多样性的主要威胁，但随之而来的是关于栖息地破碎化“本身”（即，改变了栖息地的空间配置，以减少一定数量的栖息地）。根据对大规模调查的回顾，Fahrig（2017;对栖息地碎片化本身的生态反应。Annual Review of Ecology，Evolution，and Systematics 48：1-23）报告说，生物多样性对栖息地破碎化的反应“本身”往往是积极的，而不是消极的，并得出结论认为，普遍认为负面的破碎化效应是一个“僵尸想法”。我们表明，Fahrig的结论是从一个狭窄的和潜在的偏见的子集，现有的证据，忽略了许多的观察，实验和理论证据改变栖息地配置的负面影响。因此，我们认为，Fahrig的结论应谨慎解释，因为他们可能会被误解的政策制定者和管理人员，我们提供了六个参数，为什么他们不应该被应用在保护决策。消除科学分歧，更有效地宣传保护，将需要超越统计和相关方法的研究。这包括更谨慎地使用数据和概念模型，适当地划分栖息地丧失和空间配置改变的直接与间接影响，并更清楚地区分任何变化的基础机制。阐明这些问题将提供更大的机械理解和更多的预测能力，以解决栖息地丧失和破碎化所产生的保护问题。
Habitat loss is a primary threat to biodiversity across the planet, yet contentious debate has ensued on the importance of habitat fragmentation 'per se' (i.e., altered spatial configuration of habitat for a given amount of habitat loss). Based on a review of landscape-scale investigations, Fahrig (2017; Ecological responses to habitat fragmentation per se. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 48:1-23) reports that biodiversity responses to habitat fragmentation 'per se' are more often positive rather than negative and concludes that the widespread belief in negative fragmentation effects is a 'zombie idea'. We show that Fahrig's conclusions are drawn from a narrow and potentially biased subset of available evidence, which ignore much of the observational, experimental and theoretical evidence for negative effects of altered habitat configuration. We therefore argue that Fahrig's conclusions should be interpreted cautiously as they could be misconstrued by policy makers and managers, and we provide six arguments why they should not be applied in conservation decision-making. Reconciling the scientific disagreement, and informing conservation more effectively, will require research that goes beyond statistical and correlative approaches. This includes a more prudent use of data and conceptual models that appropriately partition direct vs indirect influences of habitat loss and altered spatial configuration, and more clearly discriminate the mechanisms underpinning any changes. Incorporating these issues will deliver greater mechanistic understanding and more predictive power to address the conservation issues arising from habitat loss and fragmentation.