Editor Dr. Richard Zabel
Extinction risk and tradeoffs in reserve site selection for species of different body sizes
Article first published online: 15 MAR 2013
©2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Volume 6, Issue 5, pages 341–349, September/October 2013
How to Cite
Kitzes, J. and Merenlender, A. (2013), Extinction risk and tradeoffs in reserve site selection for species of different body sizes. Conservation Letters, 6: 341–349. doi: 10.1111/conl.12015
- Issue published online: 8 OCT 2013
- Article first published online: 15 MAR 2013
- Accepted manuscript online: 13 FEB 2013 12:21PM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 22 JAN 2013
- Manuscript Received: 17 SEP 2012
Disclaimer: Supplementary materials have been peer-reviewed but not copyedited.
S1: Influence of model parameters on extinction risk for a 1 kg species in two-patch landscapes with different patch areas (hectares) and inter-patch distances (km). Each subfigure shows isoclines of 35% probability of persistence to year 100 in black lines, with 25% and 45% isoclines in surrounding gray lines, for three different levels of (a) yearly reproductive output, y, (b) population density, s, (c) maximum dispersal distance, x, and (d) environmental stochasticity parameter, . In the first three subfigures, model parameters were set to 0.2, 1, and 5 times the value drawn from the allometric regressions. Note that the lowest absolute extinction risk occurs for an intermediate level of y in these models, as very high reproductive rates have the potential to lead to overshoots of carrying capacity followed by population crashes (see Eqs. S1 and S7).
S2: Probability of persistence to year 100 for species of (a) 0.1 kg, (b) 1 kg, and (c) 10 kg, and (d) 100 kg body masses in a reference network (solid line) consisting of the four largest patches in the empirical landscape and a clustered network (dashed line) (see Figure 3, inset). The three smaller bodied species have a higher probability of persistence in the clustered network across all values of , while the 100 kg species has a higher probability of persistence in the reference network for all . So long as survival is neither ensured nor impossible in both networks, the preferred reserve network design for each species is thus independent of the chosen level of environmental stochasticity. Results for the 0.01 kg species are not shown (persistence probabilities in the two networks are very similar for all levels of for this species).
S3: As in Figure 2, but with all inter-patch distances increased artificially by a factor of five (distances not shown to scale). Color scale gives the fraction of replicate reserve network design simulations in which a patch was selected. As predicted by the match between species’ dispersal distances and inter-patch distances, the reserve network selected for the 10 kg species now demonstrates a clustered design similar to that of the reserve network formerly selected for the 1 kg species, and the network selected for the 1 kg species is now more similar to the reference network.
S4: Allometric relationships for terrestrial mammals based on data from Jones et al. 2009 (Ecological Archives E090-184-D1). (a) Maximum yearly reproductive output, y (female young per adult female per year), calculated as one-half the product of litter size and litters per year, as a function of body mass, m (g), for terrestrial mammals (n = 813). The shape of the log-log relationship between y and m has substantial scatter and is arguably not linear, and a reasonable alternative would be to set log10y for all species to a global mean near 0.5. As characteristic range is relatively insensitive to y, this change would affect absolute probabilities of extinction for each species but not preferred reserve networks (see Figure S2a). (b) Population density, s (females per hectare), as a function of body mass, m (g), for terrestrial mammals (n = 927).
Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.