How do we know if Habitat Connectivity Corridors really work?

Sometimes scientific research can be hard to read. Too often they
become obsessed with their methods and forget about conclusions. The
excerpts from the paper below is an extreme in that the methods of the
researcher appear to be the actual goal / conclusion of the research.
So if you’re studying habitat connectivity corridors, this guy’s
methods may carry greater credibility than older more dated methods.
–Editor, Forest Policy Research
——
A favored strategy is to connect large habitat areas with landscape
corridors. Yet, the scientific question remains: Do corridors actually
work to promote dispersal and conserve biodi- versity?

In this issue
of PNAS, Gillies and St. Clair’s answers this question with a clever
behavioral experiment that offers new insights into the circumstances
under which corridors benefit species. corridors were assumed to
benefit most species in a landscape. This is simply not true. Of most
immediate interest is whether corridors are used by species of
conservation concern. Because of the difficulty in measuring
dispersal, corridor studies are typically conducted on a narrow range
of (usually common) species. Other studies have shown that many
animals and plants disperse preferentially through corridors, but
Gillies and St. Clair’s study goes on to provide answers to 3 critical
questions about corridor effectiveness. First, do corridors work in
large landscapes? Second, what aspects of habitat quality within
corridors are most important to conserve or restore? Third, for what
groups of species do corridors work?
http://www.pnas.org/content/105/50/19569.extract

— Posted to http://forestpolicyresearch.com via gmail to posterous and
also to forestpolicyresearch@yahoogroups.com

Posted via email from Deane’s posterous