FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2100259768> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2100259768 abstract "Landscape design – the particular placement of areas devoted to restoration of native vegetation at landscape scales – is a primary approach to climate adaptation for biodiversity management. It may facilitate the maintenance of larger populations as well as shifts in species distributions, both of which should help native species adjust to changing climates. However, it is unclear exactly how to design landscapes to best achieve these goals, particularly because a range of possible changes in land uses and shifts in species distributions are expected under climate change and these could interact with landscape design approaches for biodiversity. We investigated whether one or more current approaches to landscape design would be robust to future climates – would tend to improve the likelihood of persistence for native species (and decrease the likelihood of persistence for key invasive species) across a range of plausible futures. Specifically, we selected two case study landscapes in south-eastern and north-eastern New South Wales and modelled 48 future landscapes for each. Future landscapes were constructed from four storylines of land-use change based on different future climates, two global climate models applied with future climates to model future vegetation communities, and three current approaches to landscape design plus controls for both spatial planning and total amount of restoration. We then used a metapopulation capacity model to evaluate the change in each landscape’s capacity to support viable populations relative to the current landscape. We modelled four native species groups: native orchids, fauna that specialise on wet forest environments, and two groups of fauna that specialise on grassy woodland and dry forest environments. We also modelled two invasive species, red fox (Vulpes vulpes) and peppercorn tree (Schinus molle). We then analysed whether the change in metapopulation capacity across all future landscapes for all species was influenced by landscape design principles. We used Generalised Linear Models and compared 14 candidate models based on alternative hypotheses using Akaike’s Information Criterion. We found no effect of detailed spatial placement of restoration projects on the change in metapopulation capacity of our future landscapes. Only our positive control – restoring landscapes to ~30% native vegetation cover – improved future landscapes relative to current landscapes. All current design approaches failed to fully compensate for losses in metapopulation capacity resulting from climate-related changes in land use and native vegetation communities. However, the effect of design principles differed across species. The capacity of landscapes to support wet forest specialist fauna declined regardless of landscape design, and the invasive peppercorn tree increased with landscape improvements for native species. Improvement in metapopulation capacity also depended on land-use change storyline, so spatial planning of changes in land use may provide an additional management lever that is currently underutilised. We suggest that current approaches to landscape planning may not be sufficient to serve as climate adaptation strategies for biodiversity. A variety of new approaches need to be explored even if they may be challenging to implement. Greater concentration of effort in priority corridors, with local actions to match local goals, may be the best immediate action until new solutions are developed. Please cite this report as: Doerr, V, Williams, K, Drielsma, M, Doerr, E, Davies, M, Love, J, Langston, A, Low Choy, S, Manion, G, Cawsey, M, McGinness, H, Jovanovic, T, Crawford, D, Austin, M, Ferrier, S 2013 Designing landscapes for biodiversity under climate change, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, pp. 276. Abstract Landscape design – the particular placement of areas devoted to restoration of native vegetation at landscape scales – is a primary approach to climate adaptation for biodiversity management. It may facilitate the maintenance of larger populations as well as shifts in species distributions, both of which should help native species adjust to changing climates. However, it is unclear exactly how to design landscapes to best achieve these goals, particularly because a range of possible changes in land uses and shifts in species distributions are expected under climate change and these could interact with landscape design approaches for biodiversity. We investigated whether one or more current approaches to landscape design would be robust to future climates – would tend to improve the likelihood of persistence for native species (and decrease the likelihood of persistence for key invasive species) across a range of plausible futures. Specifically, we selected two case study landscapes in south-eastern and north-eastern New South Wales and modelled 48 future landscapes for each. Future landscapes were constructed from four storylines of land-use change based on different future climates, two global climate models applied with future climates to model future vegetation communities, and three current approaches to landscape design plus controls for both spatial planning and total amount of restoration. We then used a metapopulation capacity model to evaluate the change in each landscape’s capacity to support viable populations relative to the current landscape. We modelled four native species groups: native orchids, fauna that specialise on wet forest environments, and two groups of fauna that specialise on grassy woodland and dry forest environments. We also modelled two invasive species, red fox (Vulpes vulpes) and peppercorn tree (Schinus molle). We then analysed whether the change in metapopulation capacity across all future landscapes for all species was influenced by landscape design principles. We used Generalised Linear Models and compared 14 candidate models based on alternative hypotheses using Akaike’s Information Criterion. We found no effect of detailed spatial placement of restoration projects on the change in metapopulation capacity of our future landscapes. Only our positive control – restoring landscapes to ~30% native vegetation cover – improved future landscapes relative to current landscapes. All current design approaches failed to fully compensate for losses in metapopulation capacity resulting from climate-related changes in land use and native vegetation communities. However, the effect of design principles differed across species. The capacity of landscapes to support wet forest specialist fauna declined regardless of landscape design, and the invasive peppercorn tree increased with landscape improvements for native species. Improvement in metapopulation capacity also depended on land-use change storyline, so spatial planning of changes in land use may provide an additional management lever that is currently underutilised. We suggest that current approaches to landscape planning may not be sufficient to serve as climate adaptation strategies for biodiversity. A variety of new approaches need to be explored even if they may be challenging to implement. Greater concentration of effort in priority corridors, with local actions to match local goals, may be the best immediate action until new solutions are developed." @default.
• W2100259768 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2100259768 creator A5047764225 @default.
• W2100259768 creator A5064421076 @default.
• W2100259768 creator A5079427989 @default.
• W2100259768 date "2013-05-26" @default.
• W2100259768 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2100259768 title "Designing landscapes for biodiversity under climate change" @default.
• W2100259768 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2100259768 type Work @default.
• W2100259768 sameAs 2100259768 @default.
• W2100259768 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2100259768 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2100259768 hasAuthorship W2100259768A5047764225 @default.
• W2100259768 hasAuthorship W2100259768A5064421076 @default.
• W2100259768 hasAuthorship W2100259768A5079427989 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C107826830 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C130217890 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C132651083 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C39432304 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConcept C91375879 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C107826830 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C130217890 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C132651083 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C18903297 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C205649164 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C39432304 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C86803240 @default.
• W2100259768 hasConceptScore W2100259768C91375879 @default.
• W2100259768 hasLocation W21002597681 @default.
• W2100259768 hasOpenAccess W2100259768 @default.
• W2100259768 hasPrimaryLocation W21002597681 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W1856990696 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W1991935796 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2003701627 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2137287000 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2149189597 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2328770366 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2602018646 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2610114228 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2785471901 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2805357168 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2878279850 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2889430036 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2890179550 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W2994664319 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W3035532372 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W3092218923 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W3137972268 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W3177996115 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W3201538335 @default.
• W2100259768 hasRelatedWork W400671631 @default.
• W2100259768 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2100259768 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2100259768 magId "2100259768" @default.
• W2100259768 workType "article" @default.