» Articles » PMID: 18173465

Ecological Networks As Conceptual Frameworks or Operational Tools in Conservation

Overview
Journal Conserv Biol
Date 2008 Jan 5
PMID 18173465
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The establishment of ecological networks (ENs) has been proposed as an ideal way to counteract the increasing fragmentation of natural ecosystems and as a necessary complement to the establishment of protected areas for biodiversity conservation. This conservation tool, which comprises core areas, corridors, and buffer areas, has attracted the attention of several national and European institutions. It is thought that ENs can connect habitat patches and thus enable species to move across unsuitable areas. In Europe, however, ENs are proposed as an oversimplification of complex ecological concepts, and we maintain that they are of limited use for biodiversity conservation for several reasons. The ENs are species specific and operate on species-dependent scales. In addition, the information needed for their implementation is only available for a handful of species. To overcome these limitations, ENs have been proposed on a landscape scale (and for selected "focal" species), but there is no indication that the structural composition of core areas, corridors, and buffer areas could ensure the functional connectivity and improve the viability of more than a few species. The theory behind ENs fails to provide sufficient practical information on how to build them (e.g., width, shape, structure, content). In fact, no EN so far has been validated in practice (ensuring connectivity and increasing overall biodiversity conservation), and there are no signs that validation will be possible in the near future. In view of these limitations, it is difficult to justify spending economic and political resources on building systems that are at best working hypotheses that cannot be evaluated on a practical level.

Citing Articles

Construction and Optimization of an Ecological Network in the Yellow River Source Region Based on MSPA and MCR Modelling.

Liu J, Chen J, Yang Y, You H, Han X Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(4).

PMID: 36834418 PMC: 9961823. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20043724.


Ecology of large felids and their prey in small reserves of the Yucatán Peninsula of Mexico.

Pina-Covarrubias E, Chavez C, Chapman M, Morales M, Elizalde-Arellano C, Doncaster C J Mammal. 2023; 104(1):115-127.

PMID: 36818686 PMC: 9936502. DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyac090.


Spatial ecological networks: planning for sustainability in the long-term.

Gonzalez A, Thompson P, Loreau M Curr Opin Environ Sustain. 2018; 29:187-197.

PMID: 29696070 PMC: 5912508. DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.03.012.


A Composite Network Approach for Assessing Multi-Species Connectivity: An Application to Road Defragmentation Prioritisation.

Santini L, Saura S, Rondinini C PLoS One. 2016; 11(10):e0164794.

PMID: 27768718 PMC: 5074507. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164794.


Using historical woodland creation to construct a long-term, large-scale natural experiment: the WrEN project.

Watts K, Fuentes-Montemayor E, Macgregor N, Peredo-Alvarez V, Ferryman M, Bellamy C Ecol Evol. 2016; 6(9):3012-25.

PMID: 27217949 PMC: 4863024. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.2066.