...
首页> 外文期刊>Ecology and Evolution >Edge responses are different in edges under natural versus anthropogenic influence: a meta-analysis using ground beetles
【24h】

Edge responses are different in edges under natural versus anthropogenic influence: a meta-analysis using ground beetles

机译:在自然和人为影响下,边缘反应的边缘是不同的:使用地面甲虫进行的荟萃分析

获取原文

摘要

Abstract Most edges are anthropogenic in origin, but are distinguishable by their maintaining processes (natural vs. continued anthropogenic interventions: forestry, agriculture, urbanization). We hypothesized that the dissimilar edge histories will be reflected in the diversity and assemblage composition of inhabitants. Testing this ?¢????history-based edge effect?¢???? hypothesis, we evaluated published information on a common insect group, ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in forest edges. A meta-analysis showed that the diversity-enhancing properties of edges significantly differed according to their history. Forest edges maintained by natural processes had significantly higher species richness than their interiors, while edges with continued anthropogenic influence did not. The filter function of edges was also essentially different depending on their history. For forest specialist species, edges maintained by natural processes were penetrable, allowing these species to move right through the edges, while edges still under anthropogenic interventions were impenetrable, preventing the dispersal of forest specialists out of the forest. For species inhabiting the surrounding matrix (open-habitat and generalist species), edges created by forestry activities were penetrable, and such species also invaded the forest interior. However, natural forest edges constituted a barrier and prevented the invasion of matrix species into the forest interior. Preserving and protecting all edges maintained by natural processes, and preventing anthropogenic changes to their structure, composition, and characteristics are key factors to sustain biodiversity in forests. Moreover, the increasing presence of anthropogenic edges in a landscape is to be avoided, as they contribute to the loss of biodiversity. Simultaneously, edges under continued anthropogenic disturbance should be restored by increasing habitat heterogeneity.
机译:摘要大多数边缘起源于人为因素,但可以通过其维持过程加以区分(自然与持续的人为干预措施:林业,农业,城市化)。我们假设不同的边缘历史将反映在居民的多样性和聚集组成中。测试这种基于历史的边缘效应吗?假设下,我们评估了关于常见昆虫群(森林边缘的地面甲虫(鞘翅目:Carabidae))的公开信息。荟萃分析显示,边缘的多样性增强特性根据其历史而显着不同。由自然过程维持的森林边缘物种丰富度明显高于其内部,而具有持续人为影响的边缘则没有。边缘的过滤功能也因历史而异。对于森林专业物种,由自然过程维持的边缘是可穿透的,使这些物种可通过边缘直接移动,而仍在人为干预下的边缘则无法穿透,从而阻止了森林专家从森林中扩散出去。对于居住在周围基质中的物种(开放式栖息地和通才种),林业活动产生的边缘很容易穿透,这些物种也侵入了森林内部。但是,天然的森林边缘构成了障碍,并阻止了基质物种侵入森林内部。保留和保护自然过程维持的所有边缘,防止人为改变其结构,组成和特征,是维持森林生物多样性的关键因素。此外,应避免景观中人为边缘的增加,因为它们加剧了生物多样性的丧失。同时,在持续的人为干扰下的边缘应通过增加栖息地的异质性来恢复。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号