1 Citation 1.3K Views 368 Downloads
Habitat destruction is the single greatest anthropogenic threat to
biodiversity. Decades of research on this issue have led to the
accumulation of hundreds of data sets comparing species assemblages in
larger, intact, habitats to smaller, more fragmented, habitats. Despite
this, little synthesis or consensus has been achieved, primarily because
of non‐standardized sampling methodology and analyses of notoriously
scale‐dependent response variables (i.e., species richness). To be able to
compare and contrast the results of habitat fragmentation on species'
assemblages, it is necessary to have the underlying data on species
abundances and sampling intensity, so that standardization can be
achieved. To accomplish this, we systematically searched the literature
for studies where abundances of species in assemblages (of any taxa) were
sampled from many habitat patches that varied in size. From these, we
extracted data from several studies, and contacted authors of studies
where appropriate data were collected but not published, giving us 117
studies that compared species assemblages among habitat fragments that
varied in area. Less than half (41) of studies came from tropical forests
of Central and South America, but there were many studies from temperate
forests and grasslands from all continents except Antarctica. Fifty‐four
of the studies were on invertebrates (mostly insects), but there were
several studies on plants (15), birds (16), mammals (19), and reptiles and
amphibians (13). We also collected qualitative information on the length
of time since fragmentation. With data on total and relative abundances
(and identities) of species, sampling effort, and affiliated meta‐data
about the study sites, these data can be used to more definitively test
hypotheses about the role of habitat fragmentation in altering patterns of
biodiversity.
1,299 views reported since publication in 2019.