DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Corridor and Network Analyses of Forest Bird Habitats in a Metropolitan Area of South Korea

수도권 지역 산림성 조류 서식지의 통로와 연결망 분석

  • Kang, Wanmo (Forest Ecology Division, Korea Forest Research Institute) ;
  • Park, Chan-Ryul (Forest Ecology Division, Korea Forest Research Institute)
  • 강완모 (국립산림과학원 산림생태연구과) ;
  • 박찬열 (국립산림과학원 산림생태연구과)
  • Received : 2015.04.29
  • Accepted : 2015.07.06
  • Published : 2015.09.30

Abstract

Measuring and mapping connectivity among habitats is a key component of sustainable urban planning and design process. In this study, we examined how functional corridors connect forest bird habitats in a metropolitan area of Korea using graph theory-based techniques. High-quality forest habitat was defined as a function of forest cover, presence of residential areas, and road networks. We then constructed a network of high-quality forest habitats using the FunConn (functional connectivity) tools, and computed metrics ($T_i$) of patch importance based on the minimum ($Q_1$) and the 25th percentile ($Q_{25}$) rank least-cost distance values. We investigated the relative influence of two values of patch importance on forest bird species richness. As a result, the patch importance index based on the $Q_{25}$ effective distance threshold was most positively correlated with species richness (P < 0.001) after controlling for the area effect. Thus, using the $Q_{25}$ effective distance threshold, we mapped not only the locations of important habitat patches and functional corridors, but also the network backbone of forest bird habitats. The network developed in this study can help guide urban planning for biodiversity conservation.

서식지 연결성을 정량적으로 평가하고 지도화하는 것은 지속가능한 도시 계획과 설계 과정에 있어 필수적이다. 이 연구에서는 그래프 이론을 적용하여 서울 을 포함하는 수도권 지역을 대상으로 산림성 조류의 이동 통로들이 서식지들을 어떻게 연결 하는지 알아보고자 하였다. 산림 피복율과 인간 간섭을 의미하는 거주지역, 도로 네트워크의 영향을 고려하여 양질의 산림 서식지를 추출하였다. ArcGIS 파이썬 패키지 FunConn을 활용하여 서식지 연결망을 구축하고, 서식지 간 최소비용거리($Q_1$)와 25번째 백분위수 비용거리($Q_{25}$)에서의 조각 중요도를 산출하였다. 10개 지역에서 조사된 산림성 조류 종의 풍부도와 $Q_1$$Q_{25}$ 비용거리에 따른 조각 중요도 값, 서식지 면적 간 스피어만 상관분석을 하였다. 서식지 면적의 효과를 통제했을 때, $Q_{25}$에서의 조각의 중요도 값이 종 풍부도와 가장 높은 양의 상관관계를 나타냈다(P<0.001). 따라서 25번째 백분위수 비용거리를 통해 연결성 유지에 중요한 역할을 하는 조각들과 통로의 위치, 연결망의 중추적 경로를 도출하였다. 연구에서 제시된 연결망은 향후 도시 생물다양성 보호와 증진을 위한 핵심 보전지역의 설정과 생태통로의 조성과 관리에 유용하게 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Andersson, E. and O. Bodin, 2009: Practical tool for landscape planning? An empirical investigation of network based models of habitat fragmentation. Ecography 32, 123-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05435.x
  2. Andren, H., 1994: Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71, 355-366. https://doi.org/10.2307/3545823
  3. Alberti, M., 2005: The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem function. International Regional Science Review 28, 168-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017605275160
  4. Baguette, M. and H. Van Dyck, 2007: Landscape connectivity and animal behavior: functional grain as a key determinant for dispersal. Landscape Ecology 22(8), 1117-1129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-007-9108-4
  5. Beier, P., D. R. Majka, and W. D. Spencer, 2008: Forks in the road: choices in procedures for designing wildland linkages. Conservation Biology 22(4), 836-851. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00942.x
  6. Bibby, C. J., N. D. Burgess, D. A. Hill, and S. H. Mustoe, 2000: Bird census techniques. Academic Press, 302pp.
  7. Crooks, K. R. and M. Sanjayan, 2006: Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press, 712pp.
  8. Drinnan, I., 2005: The search for fragmentation thresholds in a southern Sydney suburb. Biological Conservation 124, 339-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.01.040
  9. Erritzoe, J., T. D. Mazgajski, and L. Rejt, 2003: Bird casualties on European roads a review. Acta Ornithologica 38, 77-93. https://doi.org/10.3161/068.038.0204
  10. Faeth, S. H., P. S. Warren, E. Shochat, and W. A. Marussich, 2005: Trophic dynamics in urban communities. Bioscience 55, 399-407. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0399:TDIUC]2.0.CO;2
  11. Fahrig, L., 2001: How much habitat is enough? Biological Conservation 100, 65-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00208-1
  12. Fall, A., M. Fortin, M. Manseau, and D. O'Brien, 2007: Spatial graphs: principles and applications for habitat connectivity. Ecosystems 10, 448-461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-007-9038-7
  13. Forman, R. T. T. and L. E. Alexander, 1998: Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 29, 207-231. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207
  14. Hansen, A. J., R. L. Knight, J. M. Marzluf, S. Powell, K. Brown, P. H. Gude, and K. Jones, 2005: Effects of exurban development on biodiversity: patterns, mechanisms, and research needs. Ecological Applications 15, 1893-1905. https://doi.org/10.1890/05-5221
  15. Hilty, J., W. Lidicker, A. Merenlender, and A. Dobson, 2006: Corridor ecology: the science and practice of linking landscapes for biodiversity conservation. Island Press, 344pp.
  16. Kang, W., 2013: Network analyses of habitat connectivity for biodiversity of urban forest birds, forest mammals, and a threatened tree species. Ph. D. Dissertation. Seoul National University.
  17. Kang, W. and C. R. Park, 2011: Quantitative analysis of Seoul green space network with the application of graph theory. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology 25(3), 412-420. (in Korean with English abstract)
  18. Kang, W., D. Lee, and C. R. Park, 2012: Nest distribution of magpies Pica pica sericea as related to habitat connectivity in an urban environment. Landscape and Urban Planning 104, 212-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.10.014
  19. Kang, W., J. Kim, C. R. Park, and J. H. Sung, 2014: Comparing connectivity in forest networks of seven metropolitan cities of South Korea. Korean Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 16, 93-102. (in Korean with English abstract) https://doi.org/10.5532/KJAFM.2014.16.2.93
  20. Kim, J., K. Lee, C. Park, J. Seo, Y. Son, K. Kim, H. Youn, C. Park, S. Lee, and J. Oh, 2006: Valuation of nonmarket forest resources. Journal of Korean Institute of Forest Recreation 10(2), 7-15. (in Korean with English abstract)
  21. Korea Forest Service, 2010: Basic forest statistics. Korea Forest Service, 363pp. (in Korean)
  22. Koskimies, P., 1989: Birds as a tool in environmental monitoring. Annales Zoologici Fennici 26, 153-166.
  23. Laita, A., J. S. Kotiaho, and M. Monkkonen, 2011: Graphtheoretic connectivity measures: what do they tell us about connectivity? Landscape Ecology 26, 951-967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-011-9620-4
  24. Lee, D., G. Baek, C. Park, and H. Kim, 2011: Spatial planning of climate adaptation zone to promote climate change adaptation for endangered species. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 14(6), 111-117. (in Korean with English abstract)
  25. Lee, D., W. Song, and S. Jeon, 2008: Regional ecological network design for wild animals' movement using landscape permeability and least-cost path methods in the metropolitan area of Korea. Journal of the Korea Society of Environmental Restoration Technology 11(3): 94-106. (in Korean with English abstract)
  26. McKinney, M. L., 2002: Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 52(10), 883-890. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0883:UBAC]2.0.CO;2
  27. McRae, B. H., B. G. Dickson, T. H. Keitt, and V. B. Shah, 2008: Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology 89, 2712-2724. https://doi.org/10.1890/07-1861.1
  28. McRae, B. H., S. A. Hall, P. Beier, and D. M. Theobald, 2012: Where to restore ecological connectivity? Detecting barriers and quantifying restoration benefits. PloS one 7(12): e52604. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052604
  29. Minor, E. and D. Urban, 2007: Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecological Applications 17(6), 1771-1782. https://doi.org/10.1890/06-1073.1
  30. Minor, E. and D. Urban, 2008: A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conservation Biology. 22(2), 297-307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00871.x
  31. Minor, E. and D. Urban, 2010: Forest bird communities across a gradient of urban development. Urban Ecosystems 13, 51-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-009-0103-1
  32. Opdam, P. and D. Wascher, 2004: Climate change meets habitat fragmentation: linking landscape and biogeographical scale levels in research and conservation. Biological Conservation 117, 285-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2003.12.008
  33. Pinto, N. and T. H. Keitt, 2009: Beyond the least-cost path: evaluating corridor redundancy using a graph-theoretic approach. Landscape Ecology 24(2), 253-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-008-9303-y
  34. Radford, J. Q., A. F. Bennett, and G. J. Cheers, 2005: Landscape-level thresholds of habitat cover for woodland birds. Biological Conservation 124(3), 317-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.01.039
  35. Sapoval, B., A. Baldassarri, and A. Gabrielli, 2004: Selfstabilised fractality of sea-coasts through damped erosion. Physical Review Letters 99, 098501-098511.
  36. Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG), 2008: A survey report on urban forest ecosystems in Seoul: stage 2. Seoul Metropolitan Government, 515pp. (in Korean)
  37. Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG), 2009: A survey report on urban forest health and biodiversity in Seoul (2nd year). Seoul Metropolitan Government, 702pp. (in Korean)
  38. Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG), 2010: A survey report on urban forest ecosystems in Seoul: stage 3. Seoul Metropolitan Government, 547pp. (in Korean)
  39. Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG), 2011: A survey report on urban forest ecosystems in Seoul: Group 4. Seoul Metropolitan Government, 702pp. (in Korean)
  40. Shanahan, D. F., C. Miller, H. P. Possingham, and R. A. Fuller, 2011: The influence of patch area and connectivity on avian communities in urban revegetation. Biological Conservation 144, 722-729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.10.014
  41. Spencer, W. D., P. Beier, K. Penrod, K. Winters, C. Paulman, H. Rustigian-Romsos, J. Strittholt, M. Parisi, and A. Pettler, 2010: California essential habitat connectivity project: a strategy for conserving a connected California. Report prepared for California Department of Transportation and California Department of Fish and Game, 179pp.
  42. Taylor, P., L. Fahrig, K. Henein, and G. Merriam, 1993: Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68(3), 571-573. https://doi.org/10.2307/3544927
  43. Teng, M., C. Wu, Z. Zhou, E. Lord, and Z. Zheng, 2011: Multipurpose greenway planning for changing cities: a framework integrating priorities and a least-cost path model. Landscape and Urban. Planning 103, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.05.007
  44. Theobald, D. M., 2006: Exploring the functional connectivity of landscapes using landscape networks. Connectivity conservation: maintaining connections for nature, K. R. Crooks and M. A. Sanjayan (Eds.), Cambridge University Press, 416-443.
  45. Theobald, D. M., J. B. Norman, and M. R. Sherburne, 2006: FunConn v1 user''s manual: ArcGIS tools for functional connectivity modeling. Natural Resource Ecology Lab. Colorado State University.
  46. Theobald, D. M., K. R. Crooks, and J. B. Norman, 2011: Assessing effects of land use on landscape connectivity: loss and fragmentation of western U.S. forests. Ecological Applications 21, 2445-2458. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-1701.1
  47. Thomas, P. J., A. K. Labrosse, A. C. Pomeroy, and K. A. Otter, 2011: Effects of weather on avian migration at proposed ridgeline wind energy sites. Journal of Wildlife Management 75, 805-815. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.119
  48. Tryjanowski, P., T. H. Sparks, S. Ku niak, P. Czechowski, and L. Jerzak, 2013: Bird migration advances more strongly in urban environments. PLoS ONE 8(5), e63482. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0063482
  49. Urban, D., E. Minor, E. Treml, and R. Schick, 2009: Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecology Letters 12, 260-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01271.x
  50. Urban D. and T. Keitt, 2001: Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82, 1205-1218. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[1205:LCAGTP]2.0.CO;2
  51. Walker, R. and L. Craighead, 1997: Analysis of wildlife movement corridors in Montana using GIS. Proceedings of the 1997 ESRI Users conference, Copenhagen, 1-18.