How should we measure landscape connectivity?

The methods for measuring landscape connectivity have never been compared or tested for their responses to habitat fragmentation. We simulated movement, mortality and boundary reactions across a wide range of landscape structures to analyze the response of landscape connectivity measures to habitat fragmentation. Landscape connectivity was measured as either dispersal success or search time, based on immigration into all habitat patches in the landscape. Both measures indicated higher connectivity in more fragmented landscapes, a potential for problematic conclusions for conservation plans. We introduce cell immigration as a new measure for landscape connectivity. Cell immigration is the rate of immigration into equal-sized habitat cells in the landscape. It includes both within- and between-patch movement, and shows a negative response to habitat fragmentation. This complies with intuition and existing theoretical work. This method for measuring connectivity is highly robust to reductions in sample size (i.e., number of habitat cells included in the estimate), and we hypothesize that it therefore should be amenable to use in empirical studies. The connectivity measures were weakly correlated to each other and are therefore generally not comparable. We also tested immigration into a single patch as an index of connectivity by comparing it to cell immigration over the landscape. This is essentially a comparison between patch-scale and landscape-scale measurement, and revealed some potential for patch immigration to predict connectivity at the landscape scale. However, this relationship depends on the size of the single patch, the dispersal characteristics of the species, and the amount of habitat in the landscape. We conclude that the response of connectivity measures to habitat fragmentation should be understood before deriving conclusions for conservation management.