Abstract
ContextStructural and functional connectivity, as subconcepts of landscape connectivity, are key factors in biodiversity conservation and management. Previous studies have focused on the consequences of connectivity for populations of terrestrial organisms, which may not be appropriate for aquatic organisms.ObjectivesAs landscape connectivity critically affects the potential value of ponds for biodiversity, here we used diving beetles (Dytiscidae), an indicator taxon of wetland biodiversity, to investigate how structural connectivity affects functional connectivity to aquatic invertebrates in an urban landscape.MethodsWe assessed pairwise similarities of dytiscid community, i.e. the variation of species composition between clustered and isolated ponds in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area, Finland. We investigated how dytiscid community similarity is affected by Euclidean distances between ponds, as an indicator of structural connectivity.ResultsWe found that clustered ponds shared more species than isolated ponds. Dytiscid species community similarity responded negatively to increasing Euclidean distance between ponds. Effectively dispersing species were widely distributed across the landscape, while poor dispersers were scarcely distributed in the same landscape.ConclusionsStructural connectivity determines which species are able to disperse successfully, with poor dispersers restricted to well-connected ponds. The different responses of effective dispersers and poor dispersers to the same structural connectivity indicate that functional connectivity determines species composition. We recommend providing well-connected aquatic habitats in urban landscapes and the implementation of measures to reduce isolation of wetland assemblages. Even clustered ponds need dispersal from other habitats to ensure their contribution to urban biodiversity.
Highlights
Landscape connectivity refers to “the degree to which the landscape facilitates or impedes movement among1 3 Vol.: (0123456789)resource patches” (Taylor et al 1993)
Structural connectivity determines which species are able to disperse successfully, with poor dispersers restricted to well-connected ponds
Structural connectivity refers to the physical structure of the landscape, such as the spatial relationship between habitat patches, while functional connectivity accounts for behavioural responses of organisms to the landscape structure (Taylor et al 2006)
Summary
Landscape connectivity refers to “the degree to which the landscape facilitates or impedes movement among1 3 Vol.: (0123456789)resource patches” (Taylor et al 1993). Landscape connectivity refers to “the degree to which the landscape facilitates or impedes movement among. Structural connectivity and functional connectivity are subconcepts within the topic of landscape connectivity. Structural connectivity refers to the physical structure of the landscape, such as the spatial relationship between habitat patches, while functional connectivity accounts for behavioural responses of organisms to the landscape structure (Taylor et al 2006). Landscapes are highly fragmented and vulnerable to habitat loss, resulting in decreasing structural connectivity and increasing isolation of habitats (Concepción et al 2015). Impermeable surfaces and structures, such as buildings and roads, constitute ecological traps and movement barriers, obstructing the dispersal of organisms and thereby decreasing functional connectivity of habitats (Horváth et al 2009; Muñoz et al 2015). Most research about structural and functional connectivity has focused on organisms in terrestrial ecosystems, which can differ considerably from the needs of aquatic organisms (Pringle 2006; Villalobos-Jimenez et al 2016)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
