3.8 Article

Patch metrics of roosting site selection by Lyle's flying fox (Pteropus lylei Andersen, 1908) in a human-dominated landscape in Thailand

期刊

FOLIA OECOLOGICA
卷 46, 期 1, 页码 63-72

出版社

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.2478/foecol-2019-0009

关键词

Lyle's flying fox; MaxEnt; patch metrics; roosting site selection; species distribution modeling

类别

资金

  1. Cluster and Program Management Office (CPMO) [P-15-50535]
  2. National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), Thailand
  3. American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) [AID-OAA-A-14-00102]
  4. Defense Threat Reduction Agency Biological Threat Reduction Program (DTRA BTRP) [HDTRA1-17-C-0004 P00001]
  5. Centre for Advanced Studies in Tropical Natural Resources, National Research University, Kasetsart University, (CASTNAR, NRU-KU) Thailand
  6. [P-13-01091]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The association between patch metrics and roosting site (n = 31) suitability of Lyle's flying fox (Pteropus lylei) in 26 Central Eastern and Western provinces of Thailand was quantified. Land use classes with 90-m resolution were identified based on various vegetation and land cover types to calculate patch metrics using FRAGSTATS. Then, Maximum Entropy Modeling (MaxEnt) was performed using patch metrics covariates to produce a predictive potential distribution map. The results indicated that patch contiguity (contiguity index, 63.7%), patch area (29.3%), and patch shape complexity (shape index, 5.7%) are the most influential patch metrics, all of which have negative effects on roosting site suitability. In total, 13,222 small patches were considered highly suitable patches, with a mean area of 0.921 +/- 0.698 (SD) ha, which accounted for 122,090 ha (2.04%) of the study area. Roosting sites predicted from the model were consistently associated with occurrences of roosting sites observed in temples; such habitats likely provide shelter from external threats for colonies roosting in a human-dominated landscape.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据