Abstract
Like other pond-breeding amphibians, the natterjack toad (Bufo calamita) typically presents a patchy distribution. Because the species experiences high probabilities of local population extinction, its persistence within landscapes relies on both local and landscape-scale processes [dispersal allowing the (re)colonization of habitat patches]. However, the structure and composition of the matrix surrounding local populations can alter the dispersal rates between populations. As shown previously (Landscape Ecol 19:829–842, 2004), the locomotor performances of individuals at the dispersal stage depend on the nature of the component crossed: some landscape components offer high resistance to movement (high resistance or high viscosity components) whereas others allow high efficiency of movement (low resistance components). We now examine the ability of individuals to discriminate between landscape components and select low-resistance components. Our experimental study investigates the ways in which young natterjack toads choose from among landscape components common to southern Belgium. Toadlets (the dispersal stage) were experimentally confronted with boundaries between surrogates of sandy soils, roads, forests, agricultural fields and intensive pastures. Our results show: 1 the ability of toadlets to react to boundaries between landscape components, 2 differences in permeability among boundaries, and 3 our inability to predict correctly the permeability of the boundaries from the patch-specific resistance assessed previously. Toadlets showed a preference for bare environments and forests, whereas they avoided the use of agricultural environments. This pattern could not be explained in terms of patch-specific resistance only, and is discussed in terms of mortality risks and resource availability in the various landscape components, with particular attention to repercussions on conservation strategies.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baguette M, Stevens VM (2003) Local populations and metapopulations are both natural and operational categories. Oikos 101:661–663
Beebee TJC (1983) The natterjack toad. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Brown JA, Kodrick-Brown A (1977) Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58:445–449
Burel F, Baudry J (1999) Ecologie du paysage. Concepts, méthodes et applications. Tec and Doc, Paris
Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Charrier S, Petit S, Burel F (1997) Movements of Abax parallelepipedus (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in woody habitats of a hedgerow network landscape: a radio-tracing study. Agric Ecosyst Environ 61:133–144
Denton JS, Beebee TJC (1996) Habitat occupancy by juvenile natterjack toads (Bufo calamita) on grazed and ungrazed heathland. Herpetol J 6:49–52
Doncaster CP, Rondinini C, Johnson PCD (2001) Field test for environmental correlates of dispersal in hedgehogs Erinaceus europaeus. J Anim Ecol 70:33–46
Driscoll DA (1997) Mobility and metapopulation structure of Geocrinia alba and Geocrinia vitellina, two endangered frog species from Southwestern Australia. Aust J Ecol 22:185–195
Fahrig L (2002) Effect of habitat fragmentation on the extinction threshold: a synthesis. Ecol Appl 12:346–353
Fahrig L, Merriam G (1985) Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66:1762–1768
Ficetola GF, De Bernardi F (2004) Amphibians in a human-dominated landscape: the community structure is related to habitat features and isolation. Biol Conserv 119:219–230
Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. Wiley, New York
Gathoye JL (1998) Calamites sur Hez. Reserves Nat 4:4
Gibbs JP (1998) Amphibian movements in response to forest edges, roads, and streambeds in southern New England. J Wildl Manage 62:584–589
Goodwin BJ, Fahrig L (2002) How does landscape structure influence landscape connectivity? Oikos 99:552–570
Haddad NM (1999) Corridor and distance effects on interpatch movements: a landscape experiment with butterflies. Ecol Appl 9:612–622
Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics. Nature 396:41–49
Hanski I (1999) Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapes. Oikos 87:209–219
Hanski I, Gilpin ME (1997) Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics, and evolution. Academic Press, New York
Harrison S (1994) Metapopulations and conservation. In: Edwards PJ, May RM, Webb NR (eds) Large-scale ecology and conservation biology. Blackwell, UK pp 111–128
Hels T, Buchwald E (2001) The effect of road kills on amphibian populations. Biol Conserv 99:331–340
Ims RA, Yoccoz NG (1997) Studying transfer processes in metapopulations: emigration, migration, and colonization. In: Hanski I, Gilpin ME (eds) Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics, and evolution. Academic Press, London pp 247–265
Johnson AR, Wiens JA, Milne BT, Crist TO (1992) Animal movements and population-dynamics in heterogeneous landscapes. Landsc Ecol 7:63–75
Johst K, Brandl R, Eber S (2002) Metapopulation persistence in dynamic landscapes: the role of dispersal distance. Oikos 98:263–270
Joly P, Miaud C, Lehmann A, Grolet O (2001) Habitat matrix effects on pond occupancy in newts. Conserv Biol 15:239–248
Jonsen ID, Taylor PD (2000) Fine-scale movement behaviors of calopterygid damselflies are influenced by landscape structure: an experimental manipulation. Oikos 88:553–562
Jordan F, Baldi A, Orci KM, Racz I, Varga Z (2003) Characterizing the importance of habitat patches and corridors in maintaining the landscape connectivity of a Pholidoptera transsylvanica (Orthoptera) metapopulation. Landsc Ecol 18:83–92
Keller LF, Waller DM (2002) Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol Evol 17:230–241
Lima SL, Zollner PA (1996) Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. Trends Ecol Evol 11:131–135
Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD (1996) SAS system for mixed models. SAS, Cary, N.C.
Marsh DM, Trenham PC (2001) Metapopulation dynamics and amphibian conservation. Conserv Biol 15:40–49
Mauremooto JR, Wratten SD, Worner SP, Fry GLA (1995) Permeability of hedgerows to predatory carabid beetles. Agric Ecosyst Environ 52:141–148
McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models. Chapman and Hall, New York
Merriam G, Kosakiewicz M, Tsuchiya E, Hawley K (1989) Barriers as boundaries for metapopulations and demes. Landsc Ecol 2:227–235
Miaud C, Sanuy D (2005) Terrestrial habitat preferences of the natterjack toad during and after the breeding season in a landscape of intense agricultural activity. Amphib Reptil 26:359–366
Miaud C, Sanuy D, Avrillier JN (2000) Terrestrial movements of the natterjack toad Bufo calamita (Amphibia, Anura) in a semi-arid, agricultural landscape. Amphib Reptil 21:357–369
Percsy C, Jacob JP, Percsy N, deWavrin H, Remacle A (1997) Projet d’atlas herpétologique pour la Wallonie et Bruxelles. AVES
Ricketts TH (2001) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158:87–99
Ries L, Debinski DM (2001) Butterfly responses to habitat edges in the highly fragmented prairies of Central Iowa. J Anim Ecol 70:840–852
Rothermel BB, Semlitsch RD (2002) An experimental investigation of landscape resistance of forest versus old-field habitats to emigrating juvenile amphibians. Conserv Biol 16:1324–1332
Ruckelshaus M, Hartway C, Kareiva P (1997) Assessing the data requirements of spatially explicit dispersal models. Conserv Biol 11:1298–1306
Rustigian HL, Santelmann MV, Schumaker NH (2003) Assessing the potential impacts of alternative landscape designs on amphibian population dynamics. Landsc Ecol 18:65–81
Schtickzelle N, Baguette M (2003) Behavioural responses to habitat patch boundaries restrict dispersal and generate emigration–patch area relationships in fragmented landscapes. J Anim Ecol 72:533–545
Semlitsch RD (2002) Critical elements for biologically based recovery plans of aquatic-breeding amphibians. Conserv Biol 16:619–629
Sinsch U (1991) The orientation behavior of amphibians. Herpetol J 1:541–544
Sinsch U (1997) Postmetamorphic dispersal and recruitment of first breeders in a Bufo calamita metapopulation. Oecologia 112:42–47
Stamps JA, Buechner M, Krishnan VV (1987) The effects of edge permeability and habitat geometry on emigration from patches of habitat. Am Nat 129:533–552
Stevens VM, Polus E, Wesselingh RA, Schtickzelle N, Baguette M (2004) Quantifying functional connectivity: experimental evidence for patch-specific resistance in the natterjack toad (Bufo calamita). Landsc Ecol 19:829–842
Stevens VM, Verkenne C, Vandewoestijne S, Wesselingh RA, Baguette M (2006) Gene flow and functional connectivity. Mol Ecol 15(9):2333–2344
Stevens VM, Wesselingh RA, Baguette M (2003) Demographic processes in a small, isolated population of natterjack toads (Bufo calamita) in southern Belgium. Herpetol J 13:59–67
Van Dyck H, Baguette M (2005) Dispersal behaviour in fragmented landscapes: routine or special movements? Basic Appl Ecol 9:535–545
Walker RS, Novaro AJ, Branch LC (2003) Effects of patch attributes, barriers, and distance between patches on the distribution of a rock-dwelling rodent (Lagidium viscacia). Landsc Ecol 18:187–194
Wiens JA, Schooley RL, Weeks RD (1997) Patchy landscapes and animal movements: do beetles percolate? Oikos 78:257–264
Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48:607–615
Wilcox B, Murphy DD (1985) Conservation strategy: the effects of fragmentation on extinction. Am Nat 125:879–887
With KA (1994) Ontogenic shifts in how grasshoppers interact with landscape structure—an analysis of movement patterns. Funct Ecol 8:477–485
With KA, Cadaret SJ, Davis C (1999) Movement responses to patch structure in experimental fractal landscapes. Ecology 80:1340–1353
Wolfinger R, O’Connell M (1993) Generalized linear mixed models: a pseudo-likelihood approach. J Stat Comput Simul 48
Acknowledgements
We thank Jézabel Lamoureux and Vincent Gary who helped with the experimental manipulations and the handling of toadlets. We are also grateful to Michel Pirnay and Jean-Pierre Motte for the design and the building of the experimental devices and for their care of the toadlets. We are greatly indebted to Hans Van Dyck, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter, Pierre Joly, Anssi Laurila and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments on the first drafts of this paper. The Walloon Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Affairs funded the study and gave permission to handle the toads. This is contribution BRC100 from the Biodiversity Research Centre at the Catholic University of Louvain.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Anssi Laurila.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stevens, V.M., Leboulengé, É., Wesselingh, R.A. et al. Quantifying functional connectivity: experimental assessment of boundary permeability for the natterjack toad (Bufo calamita). Oecologia 150, 161–171 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0500-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0500-6