Urban planning for wildlife connectivity: A multispecies assessment of urban sprawl and SLOSS renaturalization strategies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Urban areas are under constant pressure to accommodate more people, leading to an increase in built surface, further reducing and fragmenting wildlife habitat areas within and around cities. Nonetheless, wildlife populations may persist by using a network of habitat fragments, such as urban green areas, but only if functionally interconnected. Therefore, a proactive approach considering prospective landscape connectivity changes, following proposed developments, and potential mitigation strategies is needed. We predicted present‐day and prospective landscape connectivity for six taxa, in the Greater Toronto Area, under landscape changes across three future scenarios which include the conversion of agriculture to developed land with (1) no mitigation strategies, (2) renaturalization of single‐large areas and (3) renaturalization of small and widespread areas. We used Omniscape to identify shared movement corridors across taxa, and Graphab to estimate the importance of each habitat patch for the overall connectivity ( IIC k ), the isolation degree of habitat patches (node degree) and the distribution of stepping‐stone pressure (betweenness centrality). We validated our connectivity assessment through a road mortality risk assessment near the predicted present‐day movement corridors. Without mitigation strategies, the proposed developments will increase the isolation of currently near‐isolated patches and the importance of nearby patches as stepping‐stones. There will be a shift in the distribution of movement corridors to remnant green areas within newly developed land, and the fragmentation of three key corridors connecting peripheral areas to inner‐city forested areas. Mitigation strategies with small and widespread renaturalized green areas provided the best outcome in terms of connectivity and can compensate habitat loss following new developments. The validation analysis supported our connectivity modelling assessment and revealed that road mortality risk was elevated near roads intersecting movement corridors. This finding strongly indicates that roads act as barriers to connectivity and should be explicitly addressed in wildlife connectivity strategies, such as natural heritage or greenspace planning. Synthesis and applications . Notably, smaller but widely distributed natural areas can serve as a practical and effective management strategy for balancing the trade‐offs among economic costs, urban expansion and habitat conservation. To effectively support biodiversity conservation goals, such as the 30 × 30 target, these smaller natural areas should ideally be connected to nearby larger natural areas through natural corridors or mitigation infrastructure.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».