4.7 Article

Andean forest fragmentation and the representativeness of protected natural areas in the eastern Andes, Colombia

Journal

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
Volume 113, Issue 2, Pages 245-256

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3207(02)00359-2

Keywords

Colombia; ecosystems; Andean forest; representativeness; fragmentation; GIS; protected natural areas

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biodiversity characterization at the landscape level based on remote sensing and geographic information systems data has become increasingly important for conservation planning. We present the results of a study of the fragmentation of Andean forests and other ecosystems and an assessment of the representativeness at the ecosystem level of protected natural areas in the eastern Andes of Colombia. We used satellite remote sensing data to characterize ecosystems and undertook ground truthing at six sites. The I I identified ecosystem types were analyzed within existing protected areas to assess the representativeness of these sites within the region. Five ecosystems were well-represented and six of them had <10% of their area protected. Highland ecosystems were the best represented in protected areas due to the preponderance of highland parks in the eastern Andes. However Andean and sub Andean forests have less than 4.5 and 6.4% of their original pre-Columbian extent currently protected. Fragmentation parameters such as patch size, patch shape, number of patches, mean nearest neighbor distance and landscape shape index were also analyzed. Andean, sub Andean and dry forests are highly fragmented ecosystems but there is a clear latitudinal gradient of fragmentation. Our findings suggested that conservation efforts should be directed first toward the conservation of dry and oak forests in the center of the eastern Andes, and then Andean and sub Andean montane forests toward the south near the border with Ecuador. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available