Meta-analysis on a Decade of Testing Corridor Efficacy: What New Have we Learned? Abstract Purpose of Review Corridors are widely considered as a strategy to mitigate effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. There are, however, lingering concerns about whether corridors work as intended and whether managing for connectivity in fragmented landscapes is even important for biodiversity conservation. In response, numerous manipulative and natural experiments have been conducted to test the effectiveness of corridors. Gilbert-Norton et al. Conserv Biol. 2010;24(3):660-8 (2010) reviewed such studies published between 1985 and 2008 and concluded that corridors are generally effective at increasing inter-patch movement. The authors noted a lack of studies measuring responses at the population and community levels, responses that would better approximate corridor effects on population persistence and aspects of biodiversity. Here I explored what new insights can be gained on corridor effectiveness from studies published in the last decade, particularly with an eye toward insights going beyond effects on inter-patch movement. Recent Findings Following the same selection criteria as Gilbert-Norton et al. Conserv Biol. 2010;24(3):660-8 (2010), I reviewed studies published between 2008 and 2018 that tested corridor effectiveness by comparing ecological response variables from patches connected and not connected by corridors. Analysis of effect sizes showed that corridors increase response variables, reinforcing earlier conclusions that corridors function as intended. Whereas the previous review mainly included corridor effects on dispersal, recent research shows support for corridor efficacy at a variety of levels of organization, from individuals to communities. Summary These findings provide further support for the conclusion that efforts spent creating and maintaining corridors are worthwhile for biodiversity conservation.

Landscape Ecology in the Rocky Intertidal: Opportunities for Advancing Discovery and Innovation in Intertidal Research Abstract Purpose of Review In this paper, I review the development of landscape-based studies in rocky intertidal communities. The rocky intertidal has served as the site of a number of influential studies in ecology that have helped demonstrate the importance of biological and physical structuring processes in nature. Owing to its ease of access and preponderance of sessile species, the intertidal has also played an important role in studies that monitor the health of coastal systems. Traditional data gathering approaches such as meter tapes and quadrats provide limited capacity to capture data at the spatial and temporal scales across which intertidal systems are currently changing. New approaches and methods are now needed to more efficiently record data across the organizational scales within which ecological processes structure the intertidal. Recent Findings Recent developments in landscape-based theory have expanded the types of research questions asked by intertidal ecologists. The subsequent incorporation of geospatial technologies into field studies that test the predictions of emerging landscape theory has revealed emergent patterns in intertidal communities and previously unrecognized relationships between species and habitat across multiple scales of ecological organization. Summary New landscape-based approaches will improve our capacity to collect and analyze data and improve quantitative inferences on how habitat complexity affects patterns of species abundance in the intertidal. The continued integration of landscape ecology into rocky intertidal research can help advance discovery science and provide a platform for bridging basic discovery science with conservation and management efforts centered about this important marine habitat.

Anthropogenic Landscape Changes and Their Impacts on Terrestrial and Freshwater Soundscapes Abstract Purpose of Review Quantifying the effects of anthropogenic sounds on wildlife at the landscape scale of observation has been notoriously difficult because these sounds are often confounded with the presence of infrastructure and loss of habitat through resource exploitation activities. In this paper, we review how anthropogenic landscape changes affect the power level and propagation of sounds in both terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems, as well as the behavioural response of organisms to novel acoustic habitats. Recent Findings Resource exploitation and other human activities change soundscapes both directly, by affecting sound production and propagation, and indirectly, by modifying landscape structure and species distribution patterns. Intermittent anthropogenic sounds are concentrated in the lower frequencies, tend to be louder than enduring sounds of the same origin and create more patchy soundscapes. We identified key sensorial traits that are related to the auditory acuity of species in different taxonomic groups, including fish, birds, anurans, stridulating insects and small mammals, and which may help us understand why certain species are more sensitive to anthropogenic changes to soundscapes. Summary Prioritizing research in an increasingly noisy world requires a proper understanding of the auditory sensitivity of species, the characteristics of anthropogenic sounds (i.e. intermittent or enduring), and how sound production and propagation is affected by landscape structure. Further research on species’ sensorial traits would provide a framework with which to scale responses to anthropogenic sounds from individuals to communities and better predict the impact of human activities on terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems.

Temporal Lag in Ecological Responses to Landscape Change: Where Are We Now? Abstract Purpose of the Review The loss or gain of biodiversity and/or ecosystem functions and services can occur with a substantial delay following landscape change. We have first revisited the key concepts used to refer to those delayed ecological responses to landscape change and then reviewed the literature aiming to summarize (i) methodological approaches used to empirically evaluate the existence of delayed ecological responses, (ii) empirical evidences of delayed ecological responses, and (iii) current understanding of the main mechanisms that can explain those delayed responses. Recent Findings We identified that key concepts used to refer to delayed ecological responses are very confusing as many different terms are used to refer to a single delayed ecological response. So, we propose here a unified vocabulary to support future research. Our review showed that there is plenty of empirical evidence that delayed ecological responses to landscape change are common in nature. However, current knowledge is mostly restricted to biodiversity responses to adverse landscape changes. Few studies have investigated for ecosystem functions and/or services delayed responses or delayed ecological gains after landscape structure improvements such as increase in habitat amount. We verified that some progress occurred in recent years. We identified the use of three new methodological approaches to empirically evaluate the existence of delayed ecological responses, and we also verified an increase in our understanding about the mechanisms that explain delayed ecological responses. As expected, we observed high levels of support for delayed ecological responses in landscapes that have undergone recent changes and for habitat specialist species. Other hypotheses have been less frequently tested. Some of them have a low level of support (no clear relationship between strength of landscape change and delayed responses), while others have a good level of support but still need more evidences (relationships between species longevity and dispersal capability with delayed responses). Summary Our understanding about delayed ecological responses to landscape change is still at an early stage and seems to be increasing slowly while human-altered landscapes are increasing rapidly worldwide. There are still important knowledge gaps to be filled. Beyond providing better support for some explanatory hypotheses, we still need to explore (1) ecosystem functions and services delayed responses to landscape change, and (2) the delayed ecological gains after positive landscape changes.

Recent Advances and Current Challenges in Applying Source-Sink Theory to Species Conservation Abstract Purpose of Review The source-sink paradigm has been a powerful tool for focusing theoretical and empirical explorations of population dynamics in heterogeneous landscapes. The prevalence of suspected source-sink dynamics in empirical studies would lead to the conclusion that sources and sinks are common. However, important questions remain about how source-sink dynamics have been assessed in past studies and the degree to which current approaches apply to atypical populations and dynamic landscapes. Recent Findings We reviewed 432 papers that directly addressed source-sink dynamics between 1985 and 2018. We found that the majority of studies focused on birds, mammals, and forested systems. In recent years, however, the number of aquatic invertebrate and marine studies increased, as did the tendency to focus on conservation or management goals and to report population trends. Although 79% of papers claimed to identify source-sink dynamics, only 13% of studies based their assessment on all four measures of reproduction, mortality, immigration, and emigration. Nearly 23% of all studies used neither demographic nor movement metrics to make conclusions about the presence of source-sink dynamics. Summary Source-sink theory and practice has matured and is increasingly relevant for species conservation and management. However, we lack a clear understanding of the conditions under which limited data can defensibly support source-sink assessments and be scaled up to the extent at which resource decisions are made. In the absence of this, future studies will need to take a more rigorous approach to defining sources and sinks to better gauge the prevalence of source-sink dynamics.

Rough Around the Edges: Lessons Learned and Future Directions in Marine Edge Effects Studies Abstract Purpose of Review After several decades of research on edge effects in marine habitats, we still have little understanding of how organisms respond to marine ecotones, and methodological gaps appear to be limiting our progress. Using recent literature (2010–2018), we synthesized responses and processes of organisms across several marine habitats. Specifically, we examined the uniformity of studies across biogenic habitats, the scales selected for exploring edge effects, the experimental approaches used, and the confounding influences that muddle our interpretation of results. Recent Findings The majority of edge effect studies are still conducted in seagrass systems and focused on response patterns. We found that the majority of studies were equally likely to report an increase, decrease, neutral, or equivocal effect depending on the context of the organism or habitat. Additionally, only a single measure, or a few related responses, is assessed and causal mechanisms are rarely tested. We note that most studies quantitatively defined an edge habitat as a linear distance from a habitat boundary (e.g., < 1 m, < 5 m), but the distances were not usually scaled to the size, trophic level, or mobility of focal organisms. Summary We provide a conceptual diagram as a roadmap for researchers for navigating the myriad influences that affect floral and faunal responses to marine habitat edges. Future efforts should seek to move beyond mensurative searches, explicitly incorporate potentially confounding variables, and more consistently test putative causal factors when known or hypothesized. Additionally, we advise expanding research on habitat types other than seagrasses (e.g., mangroves, shellfish, corals) and adjusting observational scales to more appropriately match mechanisms. Ultimately, we should move beyond pattern description, repeated in a limited subset of nearshore habitats, and toward a quantitative understanding of the processes acting in these unique and potentially impactful marine ecotones.

Countryside Biogeography: the Controls of Species Distributions in Human-Dominated Landscapes Abstract Purpose of Review Countryside biogeography seeks to explain the distribution of wildlife in human-dominated landscapes. We review the theoretical and empirical progress towards this goal, assessing what forces control the presence, abundance, and richness of species in anthropogenic and natural habitats, based on characteristics of the landscape and the species themselves. Recent Findings Recent modifications of species-area relationships that incorporate multiple habitat types have improved understanding of species diversity in countryside landscapes. Attempts to understand why species affiliate with human-modified habitats have been met with only partial success. Though traits frequently explain associations with human-modified habitats within studies, explanatory traits are only rarely shared between studies, regions, or taxa. Nonetheless, greater attention to the regional and climatological context of countryside landscapes has uncovered that (i) species that associate with human-modified habitats within landscapes tend to occur primarily in warm and/or dry biomes at regional scales and (ii) species that rely exclusively on human-modified habitats in cool or wet regions may be restricted to natural habitats in warm or dry regions. Summary There remains a pressing need to determine how biodiversity can best be supported within landscapes to preserve nature and maximize ecosystem service benefits for humans. Future work in countryside biogeography must identify how land-use change interacts with other global stressors (e.g., climate change), determine how extinction debt and population sinks influence diversity, quantify the cascading effects of community changes on ecosystem services, and elucidate the evolutionary history and origins of species that today dwell in the countryside.

Selecting a Landscape Model for Natural Resource Management Applications Abstract Purpose of Review Climate change and associated ecological impacts have challenged many conventional, observation-based approaches for predicting ecosystem and landscape responses to natural resource management. Complex spatial ecological models provide powerful, flexible tools which managers and others can use to make inferences about management impacts on future, no-analog landscape conditions. However, land managers who wish to use ecosystem and landscape models for natural resource applications are faced with the difficult task of deciding among many models that differ in important ways. Here, we summarize a process to aid managers in the selection of an appropriate model for natural resource management. Recent Findings To guide management planning, scientifically credible information on how landscapes will respond to management actions under changing climate is required. Landscape models are increasingly used in a management context to evaluate of impacts of changing climate and interacting stressors on ecosystems and to test effects of alternative management options on desired conditions. However, the wide range of available models makes selection of appropriate and viable models a complex process. Summary We present a series of preliminary steps to define critical scales of time, space, and ecological organization to guide an experimental design for a modeling project and then list a set of criteria for selecting a landscape or ecological model. Material presented includes the preliminary steps (crafting modeling objective, designing modeling project), organizational concerns (resources available, expertise on hand, timelines), and modeling details (complexity, design, documentation) of model selection.

Landscape Connectivity Planning for Adaptation to Future Climate and Land-Use Change Abstract Purpose of Review We examined recent literature on promoting habitat connectivity in the context of climate change (CC) and land-use change (LUC). These two global change forcings have wide-reaching ecological effects that are projected to worsen in the future. Improving connectivity is a common adaptation strategy, but CC and LUC can also degrade planned connections, potentially reducing their effectiveness. We synthesize advances in connectivity design approaches, identify challenges confronted by researchers and practitioners, and offer suggestions for future research. Recent Findings Recent studies incorporated future CC into connectivity design more often than LUC and rarely considered the two drivers jointly. When considering CC, most studies have focused on relatively broad spatial and temporal extents and have included either species-based targets or coarse-filter targets like geodiversity and climate gradients. High levels of uncertainty about future LUC and lack of consistent, readily available model simulations are likely hindering its inclusion in connectivity modeling. This high degree of uncertainty extends to efforts to jointly consider future CC and LUC. Summary We argue that successful promotion of connectivity as a means to adapt to CC and LUC will depend on (1) the velocity of CC, (2) the velocity of LUC, and (3) the degree of existing landscape fragmentation. We present a new conceptual framework to assist in identifying connectivity networks given these three factors. Given the high uncertainty associated with future CC and LUC, incorporating insights from decision science into connectivity planning will facilitate the development of more robust adaptation strategies.

Changing Thermal Landscapes: Merging Climate Science and Landscape Ecology through Thermal Biology Abstract Climate change and habitat modification both alter thermal environments and species distributions. However, these drivers of global change are rarely studied together, even though many species are experiencing climate change and habitat modification simultaneously. Here we review existing literature and propose avenues for merging the largely disparate lines of climate and landscape ecological research using temperature exposure and species’ thermal sensitivity as a shared framework. The integration of research on climate and landscape change is in the early stages and lags behind research focused solely on the ecological effects of climate change. Recent studies highlight important mismatches between the resolution of widely used climate datasets and ecological processes, which can be addressed through detailed mapping of thermal landscapes and the microclimates within them. Furthermore, the thermal niches of species, evolved under past climates, can predict the responses of species to changing microclimates associated with habitat modification; this suggests that microclimates and thermal niches may together act as a common filter, reassembling communities in response to both climate and landscape change. There is a need to further integrate microclimate and thermal niche data into landscape ecological research to advance our basic understanding of the combined effects of landscape and climate change and to provide actionable data for climate adaptation strategies that largely focus on activities at landscape scales.