An assessment of relative habitat use as a metric for species’ habitat association and degree of specialization
(2022) In Ecological Indicators 135.- Abstract
In order to understand species’ sensitivity to habitat change, we must correctly determine if a species is associated with a habitat or not, and if it is associated, its degree of specialization for that habitat. However, definitions of species’ habitat association and specialization are often static, categorical classifications that coarsely define species as either habitat specialists or generalists and can fail to account for potential temporal or spatial differences in association or specialization. In contrast, quantitative metrics can provide a more nuanced assessment, defining species’ habitat associations and specialization along a continuous scale and accommodate for temporal or spatial variation, but these approaches are less... (More)
In order to understand species’ sensitivity to habitat change, we must correctly determine if a species is associated with a habitat or not, and if it is associated, its degree of specialization for that habitat. However, definitions of species’ habitat association and specialization are often static, categorical classifications that coarsely define species as either habitat specialists or generalists and can fail to account for potential temporal or spatial differences in association or specialization. In contrast, quantitative metrics can provide a more nuanced assessment, defining species’ habitat associations and specialization along a continuous scale and accommodate for temporal or spatial variation, but these approaches are less widely used. Here we explore relative habitat use (RHU) as a metric for quantifying species’ association with and degree of specialization for different habitat types. RHU determines the extent of a species’ association with a given habitat by comparing its abundance in that habitat relative to its mean abundance across all other habitats. Using monitoring data for breeding birds across Europe from 1998 to 2017; we calculate RHU scores for 246 species for five habitat types and compared them to the literature-based classifications of their association with and specialization for each of these habitats. We also explored the temporal variation in species’ RHU scores for each habitat and assessed how this varied according to association and degree of specialization. In general, species’ RHU and literature-derived classifications were well aligned, as RHU scores for a given habitat increased in line with reported association and specialization. In addition, temporal variation in RHU scores were influenced by association and degree of specialization, with lower scores for those associated with, and those more specialized to, a given habitat. As a continuous metric, RHU allows a detailed assessment of species’ association with and degree of specialization for different habitats that can be tailored to specific temporal and/or spatial requirements. It has the potential to be a valuable tool for identifying indicator species and in supporting the design, implementation and monitoring of conservation management actions.
(Less)
- author
- O'Reilly, Enya
; Gregory, Richard D.
; Aunins, Ainars
; Brotons, Lluís
; Chodkiewicz, Tomasz
; Escandell, Virginia
; Foppen, Ruud P.B.
; Gamero, Anna
; Herrando, Sergi
; Jiguet, Frédéric
; Kålås, John A.
; Kamp, Johannes
; Klvaňová, Alena
; Lehikoinen, Aleksi
; Lindström, Åke
LU
; Massimino, Dario
; Jostein Øien, Ingar
; Reif, Jiří
; Šilarová, Eva
; Teufelbauer, Norbert
; Trautmann, Sven
; van Turnhout, Chris
; Vikstrøm, Thomas
; Voříšek, Petr
and Butler, Simon J.
(Less) - organization
- publishing date
- 2022-02
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Biodiversity loss, European birds, Habitat specialization, Monitoring, Relative habitat use, Specialist species
- in
- Ecological Indicators
- volume
- 135
- article number
- 108521
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85121970057
- ISSN
- 1470-160X
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108521
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- additional info
- Publisher Copyright: © 2021
- id
- 2087179e-9c9a-4d93-92e0-4d392ac7cb17
- date added to LUP
- 2022-01-26 20:20:58
- date last changed
- 2024-05-04 20:39:27
@article{2087179e-9c9a-4d93-92e0-4d392ac7cb17,
abstract = {{<p>In order to understand species’ sensitivity to habitat change, we must correctly determine if a species is associated with a habitat or not, and if it is associated, its degree of specialization for that habitat. However, definitions of species’ habitat association and specialization are often static, categorical classifications that coarsely define species as either habitat specialists or generalists and can fail to account for potential temporal or spatial differences in association or specialization. In contrast, quantitative metrics can provide a more nuanced assessment, defining species’ habitat associations and specialization along a continuous scale and accommodate for temporal or spatial variation, but these approaches are less widely used. Here we explore relative habitat use (RHU) as a metric for quantifying species’ association with and degree of specialization for different habitat types. RHU determines the extent of a species’ association with a given habitat by comparing its abundance in that habitat relative to its mean abundance across all other habitats. Using monitoring data for breeding birds across Europe from 1998 to 2017; we calculate RHU scores for 246 species for five habitat types and compared them to the literature-based classifications of their association with and specialization for each of these habitats. We also explored the temporal variation in species’ RHU scores for each habitat and assessed how this varied according to association and degree of specialization. In general, species’ RHU and literature-derived classifications were well aligned, as RHU scores for a given habitat increased in line with reported association and specialization. In addition, temporal variation in RHU scores were influenced by association and degree of specialization, with lower scores for those associated with, and those more specialized to, a given habitat. As a continuous metric, RHU allows a detailed assessment of species’ association with and degree of specialization for different habitats that can be tailored to specific temporal and/or spatial requirements. It has the potential to be a valuable tool for identifying indicator species and in supporting the design, implementation and monitoring of conservation management actions.</p>}},
author = {{O'Reilly, Enya and Gregory, Richard D. and Aunins, Ainars and Brotons, Lluís and Chodkiewicz, Tomasz and Escandell, Virginia and Foppen, Ruud P.B. and Gamero, Anna and Herrando, Sergi and Jiguet, Frédéric and Kålås, John A. and Kamp, Johannes and Klvaňová, Alena and Lehikoinen, Aleksi and Lindström, Åke and Massimino, Dario and Jostein Øien, Ingar and Reif, Jiří and Šilarová, Eva and Teufelbauer, Norbert and Trautmann, Sven and van Turnhout, Chris and Vikstrøm, Thomas and Voříšek, Petr and Butler, Simon J.}},
issn = {{1470-160X}},
keywords = {{Biodiversity loss; European birds; Habitat specialization; Monitoring; Relative habitat use; Specialist species}},
language = {{eng}},
publisher = {{Elsevier}},
series = {{Ecological Indicators}},
title = {{An assessment of relative habitat use as a metric for species’ habitat association and degree of specialization}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108521}},
doi = {{10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108521}},
volume = {{135}},
year = {{2022}},
}