English   español  
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/126745
COMPARTIR / IMPACTO:
Estadísticas
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:
Título

Meta-analysis of the effects of forest fragmentation on interspecific interactions

AutorMagrach, Ainhoa; Laurance, William F.; Larrinaga, Asier R.; Santamaría, Luis
Palabras claveAntagonism
Edge effects
Forest fragmentation
Fragment size
Meta-analysis
Mutualism
Species interactions
Fecha de publicación11-abr-2014
EditorBlackwell Publishing
CitaciónConservation Biology 28(5): 1342-1348 (2014)
Resumen© 2014 Society for Conservation Biology. Forest fragmentation dramatically alters species persistence and distribution and affects many ecological interactions among species. Recent studies suggest that mutualisms, such as pollination and seed dispersal, are more sensitive to the negative effects of forest fragmentation than antagonisms, such as predation or herbivory. We applied meta-analytical techniques to evaluate this hypothesis and quantified the relative contributions of different components of the fragmentation process (decreases in fragment size, edge effects, increased isolation, and habitat degradation) to the overall effect. The effects of fragmentation on mutualisms were primarily driven by habitat degradation, edge effects, and fragment isolation, and, as predicted, they were consistently more negative on mutualisms than on antagonisms. For the most studied interaction type, seed dispersal, only certain components of fragmentation had significant (edge effects) or marginally significant (fragment size) effects. Seed size modulated the effect of fragmentation: species with large seeds showed stronger negative impacts of fragmentation via reduced dispersal rates. Our results reveal that different components of the habitat fragmentation process have varying impacts on key mutualisms. We also conclude that antagonistic interactions have been understudied in fragmented landscapes, most of the research has concentrated on particular types of mutualistic interactions such as seed dispersal, and that available studies of interspecific interactions have a strong geographical bias (arising mostly from studies carried out in Brazil, Chile, and the United States).
Versión del editorhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12304
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/126745
DOI10.1111/cobi.12304
Identificadoresdoi: 10.1111/cobi.12304
issn: 1523-1739
Aparece en las colecciones: (IMEDEA) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
accesoRestringido.pdf15,38 kBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Mostrar el registro completo
 

Artículos relacionados:


NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.