Identifying habitat corridors for Armenian wild sheep (Ovis orientalis gmelini) in Khangroms and Almoblagh Protected Areas in Hamadan Province

Document Type : (original research)

Authors

1 Department of Environment, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Malayer University, Malayer, Iran

2 Department of Environment, Institute of Civil Engineering and Development, Hamedan, Iran

Abstract

Habitat fragmentation is the most important dynamic process that changes the habitat pattern in landscape. Today, the greatest threat to biodiversity worldwide is the destruction of parts of the habitat. The creation of corridors for communication between landscapes of fragmented lands for animal movement is emphasized that is important to prevent biodiversity loss. In this study, the Maxent methods was used to create a habitat suitability map and The least cost path analysis was used to identify and design the corridors. Eight habitat factors were selected based on studies, as well as behavioral and ecological characteristics of the species and study area, to investigate the impact of biological and non-biological variables on Armenian wild sheep habitat. Including slope, elevation, distance from main road, distance from wolf, distance from village, distance from water sources and aspect. According to MaxEnt analysis and the results of the Jack-Knife test 4 variables of distance from wolf, altitude, distance from village and distance from water sources have the most influence or role and direction variable has the least role. Finally, according to the surveys on the maps and field studies, three output routes were selected. The first route is not suitable because of the long distance and being in the middle of the village and having less height and being close to the main roads. The second and third paths are suitable because they eventually lead to one path and can be considered as the main corridor.

Keywords

References

  1. Beier, P.; Majka, D.R. and Spencer, W.D., 2002. Forks in the Road: Choices in procedures for designing wildland linkages. Conservation Biology. Vol. 33, No. 2, pp: 122-128.
  2. Beier, P. and Noss, R.F., 1998. Do habitat corridors provide connectivity? Conservation Biology Vol. 12, No. 6, pp: 1241-1252.
  3. Beier, P.; Majka, D.R. and Wayaned, S., 2008b. Forks in the Road: Choices in Procedures for Designing Wildland Linkages. Conservation Biology. Vol. 22, No. 4, pp: 836-851.
  4. Beier, P.; Spencer, W. and Baldwin, R.F., 2011. Toward best practices for developing regional connectivity maps Conservation Biology. Vol. 25, No. 5, pp:879-892.
  5. Beirer, P.; Garding, E. and Majka, D.R., 2008a. Arizona missing linkages Gila Bend- Sierra Estr Linkage Design Report. School of Forestry Arizona Game and Fish Department. Northern Arizona University. 109 p.
  6. Belote, R.T.; Dietz, M.S.; McRae, B.H.; Theobald, D.M.; McClure, M.L.; Irwin, G.H.; McKinley, P.S.; Gage, J.A. and Aplet, G.H., 2016. Identifying Corridors Among Large Protected Areas in the United States. PLOS ONE. Vol. 11, No. 4, pp: 1-16.
  7. Bennett, A.F., 2003. Linkages in the landscape, the role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 262 P.
  8. Bond, A., 2003. Principles of Wildlife Corridor Design. Centre for Biological Diversity, Tucson. 4 p.
  9. Brotons, L.; Manosa, S. and Estrada, J., 2004. Modeling the effects of irrigation schemes on the distribution of steppe birds in Mediterranean farmland. Biodiversity and Conservation. Vol. 13, No. 5, pp: 1039-1058.
  10. Chetkiewicz, C.L.B. and Boyce, M.S., 2009. Use of resource selection functions to identify conservation corridors. Journal of Applied Ecology. Vol. 46, No. 5, pp: 1036-1047.
  11. Crooks, K.R., 2002. Relative sensitivities of mammalian carnivores to habitat fragmentation. Journal of conservation biodiversity. Vol. 16, No. 2, pp: 488-502.
  12. Forman. R.T.T.; Dramstad, W.E. and Olson, J.D., 1996. Landscape ecology principles in landscape architecture and land- use planning. Harvard University. 79 P.
  13. Hirzel, A.H., 2001. When GIS come to life, Linking landscape and population ecology for large population management modeling: The case of ibex (capra ibex) in Switzerland. PhD thesis. Institue of Ecology, Laboratory for Conservation Biology University of Lausanne.
  14. McRae, B.H.B.; Dickson, T.H.; Keitt, M. and Shah, V., 2008. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution and conservation. Journal of Ecology. Vol. 89, No. 10, pp:2712-2724.
  15. Mech, S.G. and Hallett. J.G., 2001. Evaluating the effectiveness of corridors: a genetic approach. Conservation Biology. Vol. 15, No. 2, pp:467-474.
  16. Philips, J.S.; Dudik, M. and Schapire, E., 2006. A maximum entropy approach to species distribution modeling. Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference of Machin Learning, Banff, Alberta, Canada. 7p.
  17. Seoane, J.; Carrascal, L.M.; Palomino, D. and Alonso, C.L., 2010. Population size and habitat relationships of Black-bellied Sandgrouse (Pterocles orientalis) in the Canary Islands, Spain. Bird Conservation International. Vol. 20, No. 2, pp: 161-175.
  18. Simberloff, D. and Cox, J., 1987. Consequences and costs of conservation corridors. Conservation Biology. Vol. 1, No. 1, pp: 63-71.
  19. Singleton, P.H.; Gianes, W.L. and Lehmkukhl, J.F., 2002. Landscape Permeability for Large Carnivores in Washington: A Geographic Information System Weighted- Distance and Least Cost Corridor Assessment United States Department of Agriculture. 549 p.
Journal of Animal Environment
Volume 12, Issue 4
December 2020
Pages 9-16

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics