4.6 Article

Modification of the third phase in the framework for vertebrate species persistence in urban mosaic environments

Journal

AMBIO
Volume 50, Issue 10, Pages 1866-1878

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13280-021-01501-5

Keywords

Anthropogenic landscape change; Birds; Ecological flexibility; Mammals; Phenotypic plasticity; Reptiles

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation [98404]
  2. University of KwaZulu-Natal
  3. Hans Hohesien Trust
  4. Rufford Trust (UK)
  5. Ethekwini Municipality D'RAP partnership

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urbanisation is rapidly changing natural landscapes and impacting biodiversity, with little documentation on how African wildlife respond to this. Studies in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa show that connected habitat mosaics of natural and anthropogenic green spaces are crucial for the persistence of urban wildlife.
Urbanisation is rapidly transforming natural landscapes with consequences for biodiversity. Little is documented on the response of African wildlife to urbanisation. We reviewed case studies of vertebrate species' responses to urbanisation in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa to determine trends. Connected habitat mosaics of natural and anthropogenic green spaces are critical for urban wildlife persistence. We present a novel modification to the final of three phases of the framework described by Evans et al. (2010), which documents this sequence for vertebrate species persistence, based on the perspective of our research. Species in suburbia exhibit an initial phase where behavioural and ecological flexibility, life-history traits and phenotypic plasticity either contribute to their success, or they stay at low numbers. Where successful, the next phase is a rapid increase in populations and distribution; anthropogenic food resources and alternate breeding sites are effectively exploited. The modified third phase either continues to spread, plateau or decline.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available