About: Fragmentation (computing) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 4811 publications have been published within this topic receiving 104352 citations.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors suggest that the term "fragmentation" should be reserved for the breaking apart of habitat, independent of habitat loss, and that fragmentation per se has much weaker effects on biodiversity that are at least as likely to be positive as negative.
Abstract: ■ Abstract The literature on effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity is huge. It is also very diverse, with different authors measuring fragmentation in different ways and, as a consequence, drawing different conclusions regarding both the magnitude and direction of its effects. Habitat fragmentation is usually defined as a landscape-scale process involving both habitat loss and the breaking apart of habitat. Results of empirical studies of habitat fragmentation are often difficult to interpret because (a) many researchers measure fragmentation at the patch scale, not the landscape scale and (b) most researchers measure fragmentation in ways that do not distinguish between habitat loss and habitat fragmentation per se, i.e., the breaking apart of habitat after controlling for habitat loss. Empirical studies to date suggest that habitat loss has large, consistently negative effects on biodiversity. Habitat fragmentation per se has much weaker effects on biodiversity that are at least as likely to be positive as negative. Therefore, to correctly interpret the influence of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity, the effects of these two components of fragmentation must be measured independently. More studies of the independent effects of habitat loss and fragmentation per se are needed to determine the factors that lead to positive versus negative effects of fragmentation per se. I suggest that the term “fragmentation” should be reserved for the breaking apart of habitat, independent of habitat loss.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors focus on the biogeograpbic consequences of the creation of habitat islands of different sizes and have provided little of practical value to managers in the field of landscape management.
Abstract: . Abstract Research on fragmented ecosystems has focused mostly on the biogeograpbic consequences of the creation of habitat “islands” of different sizes and has provided little of practical value to managers. However, ecosystem fragmentation causes large changes in the physical environment as well as biogeograpbic changes. Fragmentation generally results in a landscape that consists of remnant areas of native vegetation surrounded by a matrix of agricultural or other developed land. As a result fluxes of radiation, momentum (La, wind), water, and nutrients across the landscape are altered significantly. These in turn can have important influences on biota within remnant areas, especially at or near the edge between the remnant and the surrounding matrix. The isolation of remnant areas by clearing also has important consequences for the biota. These consequences vary with the time since isolation distance from other remnants, and degree of connectivity with other remnants. The influences of physical and biogeographic changes are modified by the size, shape, and position in the landscape of individual remnant, with larger remnants being less adversely affected by the fragmentation process. The Dynamics of remnant areas are predominantly driven by factors arising in the surrounding landscape. Management of, and research on, fragmented ecosystems should be directed at understanding and controlling these external influences as much as at the biota of the remnants themselves. There is a strong need to develop an integrated approach to landscape management that places conservation reserves in the context of the overall landscape
TL;DR: In this article, the authors focus on the biogeograpbic consequences of the creation of habitat islands of different sizes and have provided little of practical value to managers in the field of landscape management.
Abstract: . Abstract Research on fragmented ecosystems has focused mostly on the biogeograpbic consequences of the creation of habitat “islands” of different sizes and has provided little of practical value to managers. However, ecosystem fragmentation causes large changes in the physical environment as well as biogeograpbic changes. Fragmentation generally results in a landscape that consists of remnant areas of native vegetation surrounded by a matrix of agricultural or other developed land. As a result fluxes of radiation, momentum (La, wind), water, and nutrients across the landscape are altered significantly. These in turn can have important influences on biota within remnant areas, especially at or near the edge between the remnant and the surrounding matrix. The isolation of remnant areas by clearing also has important consequences for the biota. These consequences vary with the time since isolation distance from other remnants, and degree of connectivity with other remnants. The influences of physical and biogeographic changes are modified by the size, shape, and position in the landscape of individual remnant, with larger remnants being less adversely affected by the fragmentation process. The Dynamics of remnant areas are predominantly driven by factors arising in the surrounding landscape. Management of, and research on, fragmented ecosystems should be directed at understanding and controlling these external influences as much as at the biota of the remnants themselves. There is a strong need to develop an integrated approach to landscape management that places conservation reserves in the context of the overall landscape
TL;DR: An analysis of global forest cover is conducted to reveal that 70% of remaining forest is within 1 km of the forest’s edge, subject to the degrading effects of fragmentation, indicating an urgent need for conservation and restoration measures to improve landscape connectivity.
Abstract: We conducted an analysis of global forest cover to reveal that 70% of remaining forest is within 1 km of the forest’s edge, subject to the degrading effects of fragmentation. A synthesis of fragmentation experiments spanning multiple biomes and scales, five continents, and 35 year sd emonstrates that habitatfragmentation reduces biodiversity by 13 to 75% and impairs key ecosystem functions by decreasing biomass and altering nutrient cycles. Effects are greatest in the smallest and most isolated fragments, and they magnify with the passage of time. These findings indicate an urgent need for conservation and restoration measures to improve landscape connectivity, which will reduce extinction rates and help maintain ecosystem services.
TL;DR: This work reviews the extensive literature on species responses to habitat fragmentation, and detail the numerous ways in which confounding factors have either masked the detection, or prevented the manifestation, of predicted fragmentation effects.
Abstract: Habitat loss has pervasive and disruptive impacts on biodiversity in habitat remnants. The magnitude of the ecological impacts of habitat loss can be exacerbated by the spatial arrangement -- or fragmentation -- of remaining habitat. Fragmentation per se is a landscape-level phenomenon in which species that survive in habitat remnants are confronted with a modified environment of reduced area, increased isolation and novel ecological boundaries. The implications of this for individual organisms are many and varied, because species with differing life history strategies are differentially affected by habitat fragmentation. Here, we review the extensive literature on species responses to habitat fragmentation, and detail the numerous ways in which confounding factors have either masked the detection, or prevented the manifestation, of predicted fragmentation effects. Large numbers of empirical studies continue to document changes in species richness with decreasing habitat area, with positive, negative and no relationships regularly reported. The debate surrounding such widely contrasting results is beginning to be resolved by findings that the expected positive species-area relationship can be masked by matrix-derived spatial subsidies of resources to fragment-dwelling species and by the invasion of matrix-dwelling species into habitat edges. Significant advances have been made recently in our understanding of how species interactions are altered at habitat edges as a result of these changes. Interestingly, changes in biotic and abiotic parameters at edges also make ecological processes more variable than in habitat interiors. Individuals are more likely to encounter habitat edges in fragments with convoluted shapes, leading to increased turnover and variability in population size than in fragments that are compact in shape. Habitat isolation in both space and time disrupts species distribution patterns, with consequent effects on metapopulation dynamics and the genetic structure of fragment-dwelling populations. Again, the matrix habitat is a strong determinant of fragmentation effects within remnants because of its role in regulating dispersal and dispersal-related mortality, the provision of spatial subsidies and the potential mediation of edge-related microclimatic gradients. We show that confounding factors can mask many fragmentation effects. For instance, there are multiple ways in which species traits like trophic level, dispersal ability and degree of habitat specialisation influence species-level responses. The temporal scale of investigation may have a strong influence on the results of a study, with short-term crowding effects eventually giving way to long-term extinction debts. Moreover, many fragmentation effects like changes in genetic, morphological or behavioural traits of species require time to appear. By contrast, synergistic interactions of fragmentation with climate change, human-altered disturbance regimes, species interactions and other drivers of population decline may magnify the impacts of fragmentation. To conclude, we emphasise that anthropogenic fragmentation is a recent phenomenon in evolutionary time and suggest that the final, long-term impacts of habitat fragmentation may not yet have shown themselves.