Where Do The Animals Go When They Lose Their Habitat

Process past which a natural habitat becomes incapable of supporting its native species

Map of the world'southward biodiversity hot spots, all of which are heavily threatened by habitat loss and degradation

Habitat destruction (too termed habitat loss and habitat reduction) is the procedure by which a natural habitat becomes incapable of supporting its native species. The organisms that previously inhabited the site are displaced or dead, thereby reducing biodiversity and species affluence.^{[one] [2]} Habitat destruction is the leading cause of biodiversity loss.^[3] Fragmentation and loss of habitat have become one of the most of import topics of enquiry in ecology as they are major threats to the survival of endangered species.^[four]

Activities such as harvesting natural resources, industrial production and urbanization are human being contributions to habitat devastation. Pressure from agriculture is the chief human being cause. Some others include mining, logging, trawling, and urban sprawl. Habitat devastation is currently considered the primary cause of species extinction worldwide.^[5] Environmental factors can contribute to habitat destruction more indirectly. Geological processes, climate modify,^[2] introduction of invasive species, ecosystem nutrient depletion, water and noise pollution are some examples. Loss of habitat tin exist preceded past an initial habitat fragmentation.

Attempts to address habitat destruction are in international policy commitments embodied past Sustainable Development Goal 15 "Life on Land" and Sustainable Evolution Goal 14 "Life Below Water". However, the United Nations Environs Programme report on "Making Peace with Nature" released in 2021 found that about of these efforts had failed to come across their internationally agreed upon goals.^[6]

Impacts on organisms [edit]

When a habitat is destroyed, the carrying capacity for indigenous plants, animals, and other organisms is reduced and then that populations refuse, sometimes up to the level of extinction.^[7]

Habitat loss is possibly the greatest threat to organisms and biodiversity.^[8] Temple (1986) found that 82% of endangered bird species were significantly threatened by habitat loss. Most amphibian species are likewise threatened by native habitat loss,^[9] and some species are now merely breeding in modified habitat.^[10] Endemic organisms with express ranges are most affected by habitat destruction, mainly because these organisms are not found anywhere else within the world, and thus have less risk of recovering. Many endemic organisms have very specific requirements for their survival that tin only be found within a sure ecosystem, resulting in their extinction. Extinction may too take identify very long after the destruction of habitat, a phenomenon known as extinction debt. Habitat destruction tin also decrease the range of certain organism populations. This can consequence in the reduction of genetic diverseness and perchance the production of infertile youths, as these organisms would have a higher possibility of mating with related organisms within their population, or different species. Ane of the most famous examples is the touch on upon China'due south giant panda, one time institute in many areas of Sichuan. Now information technology is only found in fragmented and isolated regions in the southwest of the state, as a event of widespread deforestation in the 20th century.^[11]

As habitat destruction of an surface area occurs, the species variety offsets from a combination of habitat generalists and specialists to a population primarily consisting of generalist species.^[iii] Invasive species are oftentimes generalists that are able to survive in much more than diverse habitats.^[12] Habitat destruction leading to climate change offsets the residual of species keeping upward with the extinction threshold leading to a higher likelihood of extinction.^[13]

Habitat loss is ane of the main environmental causes of the decline of biodiversity on local, regional, and global scales. Many believe that habitat fragmentation is also a threat to biodiversity still some believe that information technology is secondary to habitat loss.^[14] The reduction of the amount of habitat available results in specific landscapes that are made of isolated patches of suitable habitat throughout a hostile environment/matrix. This process is mostly due to pure habitat loss every bit well as fragmentation effects. Pure habitat loss refers to changes occurring in the composition of the landscape that causes a subtract in individuals. Fragmentation furnishings refers to an add-on of furnishings occurring due to the habitat changes.^[four] Habitat loss can result in negative furnishings on the dynamic of species richness. The genus Hymenoptera are a diverse grouping of plant pollinators who are highly susceptible to the negative effects of habitat loss, this could upshot in a domino effect between the plant-pollinator interactions leading to major conservation implications within this genus.^[15]

Destruction of populations [edit]

Habitat fragmentation has a major bear on on animal specie populations because it deprives species of what they are naturally accustomed to. This makes the species isolated, reduces the area where they can live, and creates new ecological boundaries. Some studies have shown that changes in the abiotic and biotic parameters have caused a greater impact on the ecology than the reduction in habitat size itself. They concluded that crowding a species into one space will eventually lead to the extinction of that species.^[16]

The destruction and fragmentation of natural habitats are currently the leading factors in species extinction. This is considering the loss and fragmentation of habitats results in much smaller populations. Reduced population sizes ends upwards creating college chances of extinction.^[17]

Studies have shown that at that place is no relationship between habitat patch and species number when it comes to habitat specialist plants species located in fragmented landscapes. This could potentially be due to drastic declines of constitute species areas due to changes in the surrounding state.^[14]

Predators affecting the population of the prey [edit]

In recent times the destruction of habitat has been the cause of the loss of many species. Sometimes the area may be pocket-size of devastation but equally time goes by slowly that volition crusade an increase in extinction. Loss of habitat is non always the direct crusade of extinction; at that place are other reasons causes for extinction that connect back to the loss of habitat. For example, if the sole predator in an ecosystem were to go extinct, prey populations would increase, which could perhaps effect in overpopulation. A higher amount of any species that tin can crusade them to apply besides much of their resource. Since many species depend on limited natural resources, with the overuse they will eventually run out degrade their habitat.^[18]

Habitat destruction and fragmentation are the 2 most important factors in species extinction. The negative effects of decreasing size and increasing isolation of habitat are misinterpreted by fragmentation, but in reality they are much more larger furnishings on the population. Fragmentation generally has either no consequence or a negative effect on population survival. Since habitat loss of fragmentation typically occurs together information technology is withal not clear which process has a larger effect on extinction. Increasing isolation and habitat loss with fragmentation are all connected in a way that has negatively affected the environment.^[19]

Geography [edit]

Biodiversity hotspots are chiefly tropical regions that feature high concentrations of owned species and, when all hotspots are combined, may contain over half of the world's terrestrial species.^[21] These hotspots are suffering from habitat loss and destruction. Most of the natural habitat on islands and in areas of loftier human being population density has already been destroyed (WRI, 2003). Islands suffering farthermost habitat devastation include New Zealand, Madagascar, the Philippines, and Japan.^[22] South and E Asia—peculiarly China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Nihon—and many areas in Westward Africa have extremely dense man populations that allow little room for natural habitat. Marine areas close to highly populated coastal cities too face degradation of their coral reefs or other marine habitat. These areas include the eastern coasts of Asia and Africa, northern coasts of South America, and the Caribbean area Sea and its associated islands.^[22]

Regions of unsustainable agriculture or unstable governments, which may get mitt-in-paw, typically experience high rates of habitat devastation. South Asia, Primal America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Amazonian tropical rainforest areas of South America are the main regions with unsustainable agronomical practices and/or regime mismanagement.^[22]

Areas of high agricultural output tend to have the highest extent of habitat destruction. In the U.S., less than 25% of native vegetation remains in many parts of the E and Midwest.^[23] Just 15% of state area remains unmodified by human being activities in all of Europe.^[22]

Currently, changes occurring in unlike environments around the world are changing the specific geographical habitats that are suitable for plants to abound. Therefore, the power for plants to migrate to suitable environment areas will have a strong touch on the distribution of plant diversity. However, at the moment, the rates of plant migration that are influenced by habitat loss and fragmentation are non likewise understood as they could be.^[24]

Ecosystems [edit]

Jungle burned for agronomics in southern Mexico

Tropical rainforests have received most of the attending concerning the destruction of habitat. From the approximately xvi million foursquare kilometers of tropical rainforest habitat that originally existed worldwide, less than 9 1000000 square kilometers remain today.^[22] The current rate of deforestation is 160,000 square kilometers per year, which equates to a loss of approximately i% of original forest habitat each year.^[25]

Other forest ecosystems have suffered every bit much or more devastation as tropical rainforests. Deforestation for farming and logging have severely disturbed at least 94% of temperate broadleaf forests; many sometime growth wood stands take lost more than than 98% of their previous surface area because of human activities.^[22] Tropical deciduous dry forests are easier to clear and burn down and are more suitable for agriculture and cattle ranching than tropical rainforests; consequently, less than 0.ane% of dry forests in Cardinal America'due south Pacific Coast and less than 8% in Madagascar remain from their original extents.^[25]

Plains and desert areas have been degraded to a bottom extent. Only 10–20% of the earth's drylands, which include temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands, scrub, and deciduous forests, take been somewhat degraded.^[26] Just included in that 10–twenty% of land is the approximately 9 million square kilometers of seasonally dry-lands that humans have converted to deserts through the process of desertification.^[22] The tallgrass prairies of N America, on the other hand, accept less than 3% of natural habitat remaining that has non been converted to farmland.^[27]

Chelonia mydas on a Hawaiian coral reef. Although the endangered species is protected, habitat loss from man evolution is a major reason for the loss of green turtle nesting beaches.

Wetlands and marine areas have endured high levels of habitat destruction. More 50% of wetlands in the U.S. have been destroyed in but the last 200 years.^[23] Betwixt 60% and lxx% of European wetlands have been completely destroyed.^[28] In the United Kingdom, there has been an increment in need for coastal housing and tourism which has caused a decline in marine habitats over the last 60 years. The rising sea levels and temperatures have caused soil erosion, littoral flooding, and loss of quality in the Uk marine ecosystem.^[29] Well-nigh ane-fifth (xx%) of marine littoral areas have been highly modified by humans.^[xxx] One-fifth of coral reefs have too been destroyed, and another fifth has been severely degraded by overfishing, pollution, and invasive species; ninety% of the Philippines' coral reefs alone have been destroyed.^[31] Finally, over 35% of the mangrove ecosystems worldwide have been destroyed.^[31]

Natural causes [edit]

Habitat destruction through natural processes such equally volcanism, fire, and climatic change is well documented in the fossil tape.^[2] One study shows that habitat fragmentation of tropical rainforests in Euramerica 300 meg years ago led to a great loss of amphibian diverseness, but simultaneously the drier climate spurred on a burst of diversity amidst reptiles.^[ii]

Human causes [edit]

The charge per unit of global tree cover loss has approximately doubled since 2001, to an almanac loss approaching an area the size of Italy.^[33]

Habitat devastation caused by humans includes land conversion from forests, etc. to arable state, urban sprawl, infrastructure development, and other anthropogenic changes to the characteristics of country. Habitat deposition, fragmentation, and pollution are aspects of habitat devastation caused by humans that do not necessarily involve over devastation of habitat, notwithstanding result in habitat collapse. Desertification, deforestation, and coral reef deposition are specific types of habitat devastation for those areas (deserts, forests, coral reefs).^{[ citation needed ]}

Geist and Lambin (2002) assessed 152 case studies of net losses of tropical forest comprehend to determine whatsoever patterns in the proximate and underlying causes of tropical deforestation. Their results, yielded every bit percentages of the case studies in which each parameter was a significant factor, provide a quantitative prioritization of which proximate and underlying causes were the near significant. The proximate causes were clustered into wide categories of agricultural expansion (96%), infrastructure expansion (72%), and wood extraction (67%). Therefore, according to this study, forest conversion to agronomics is the master country use change responsible for tropical deforestation. The specific categories reveal further insight into the specific causes of tropical deforestation: transport extension (64%), commercial forest extraction (52%), permanent tillage (48%), cattle ranching (46%), shifting (slash and fire) tillage (41%), subsistence agriculture (xl%), and fuel wood extraction for domestic apply (28%). One result is that shifting cultivation is not the chief cause of deforestation in all world regions, while transport extension (including the construction of new roads) is the largest single proximate factor responsible for deforestation.^[34]

Global warming [edit]

Rising global temperatures, acquired past the greenhouse effect, contribute to habitat destruction, endangering various species, such as the polar conduct.^[35] Melting ice caps promote rising body of water levels and floods which threaten natural habitats and species globally.^{[36] [37]}

Drivers [edit]

While the above-mentioned activities are the proximal or direct causes of habitat destruction in that they actually destroy habitat, this however does non identify why humans destroy habitat. The forces that crusade humans to destroy habitat are known as drivers of habitat devastation. Demographic, economic, sociopolitical, scientific and technological, and cultural drivers all contribute to habitat destruction.^[31]

Demographic drivers include the expanding human population; charge per unit of population increase over time; spatial distribution of people in a given area (urban versus rural), ecosystem type, and country; and the combined effects of poverty, age, family planning, gender, and education status of people in sure areas.^[31] Most of the exponential human population growth worldwide is occurring in or shut to biodiversity hotspots.^[21] This may explicate why human being population density accounts for 87.9% of the variation in numbers of threatened species beyond 114 countries, providing indisputable evidence that people play the largest role in decreasing biodiversity.^[38] The boom in man population and migration of people into such species-rich regions are making conservation efforts not only more urgent but likewise more likely to conflict with local human interests.^[21] The loftier local population density in such areas is directly correlated to the poverty status of the local people, about of whom defective an education and family planning.^[34]

Co-ordinate to the Geist and Lambin (2002) study, the underlying driving forces were prioritized as follows (with the per centum of the 152 cases the factor played a significant role in): economic factors (81%), institutional or policy factors (78%), technological factors (70%), cultural or socio-political factors (66%), and demographic factors (61%). The main economic factors included commercialization and growth of timber markets (68%), which are driven past national and international demands; urban industrial growth (38%); low domestic costs for land, labor, fuel, and timber (32%); and increases in product prices mainly for cash crops (25%). Institutional and policy factors included formal pro-deforestation policies on country development (40%), economical growth including colonization and infrastructure comeback (34%), and subsidies for state-based activities (26%); property rights and country-tenure insecurity (44%); and policy failures such equally corruption, lawlessness, or mismanagement (42%). The main technological gene was the poor application of engineering in the forest industry (45%), which leads to wasteful logging practices. Inside the broad category of cultural and sociopolitical factors are public attitudes and values (63%), individual/household behavior (53%), public unconcern toward forest environments (43%), missing basic values (36%), and unconcern by individuals (32%). Demographic factors were the in-migration of colonizing settlers into sparsely populated forest areas (38%) and growing population density—a result of the first factor—in those areas (25%).

In that location are too feedbacks and interactions amid the proximate and underlying causes of deforestation that can amplify the procedure. Road construction has the largest feedback effect, because information technology interacts with—and leads to—the establishment of new settlements and more people, which causes a growth in wood (logging) and nutrient markets.^[34] Growth in these markets, in turn, progresses the commercialization of agriculture and logging industries. When these industries become commercialized, they must become more efficient by utilizing larger or more modern machinery that often has a worse effect on the habitat than traditional farming and logging methods. Either way, more land is cleared more rapidly for commercial markets. This common feedback example manifests but how closely related the proximate and underlying causes are to each other.^{[ citation needed ]}

Impact on human population [edit]

The draining and development of littoral wetlands that previously protected the Gulf Coast contributed to astringent flooding in New Orleans, Louisiana, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.^[39]

Habitat devastation tin can vastly increase an expanse'due south vulnerability to natural disasters like overflowing and drought, crop failure, spread of disease, and water contamination.^{[31] [ page needed ]} On the other hand, a salubrious ecosystem with skillful management practices can reduce the chance of these events happening, or will at least mitigate adverse impacts.^[forty] Eliminating swamps—the habitat of pests such as mosquitoes—has contributed to the prevention of diseases such as malaria.^[41] Completely depriving an infectious amanuensis (such equally a virus) of its habitat—by vaccination, for case—can result in eradicating that infectious agent.^[42]

Agricultural state tin can suffer from the destruction of the surrounding landscape. Over the by 50 years, the destruction of habitat surrounding agronomical land has degraded approximately forty% of agricultural land worldwide via erosion, salinization, compaction, food depletion, pollution, and urbanization.^[31] Humans also lose straight uses of natural habitat when habitat is destroyed. Artful uses such equally birdwatching, recreational uses similar hunting and fishing, and ecotourism normally^{[ quantify ]} rely upon relatively undisturbed habitat. Many^{[ quantify ]} people value the complexity of the natural world and express concern at the loss of natural habitats and of animal or plant species worldwide.^[43]

Probably the nigh profound touch on that habitat destruction has on people is the loss of many valuable ecosystem services. Habitat devastation has contradistinct nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, and carbon cycles, which has increased the frequency and severity of acid rain, algal blooms, and fish kills in rivers and oceans and contributed tremendously to global climate change.^{[31] [ need quotation to verify ]} One ecosystem service whose significance is condign better understood is climate regulation. On a local scale, trees provide windbreaks and shade; on a regional scale, found transpiration recycles rainwater and maintains constant annual rainfall; on a global scale, plants (peculiarly copse in tropical rainforests) around the globe counter the aggregating of greenhouse gases in the temper by sequestering carbon dioxide through photosynthesis.^[22] Other ecosystem services that are diminished or lost birthday as a result of habitat destruction include watershed management, nitrogen fixation, oxygen production, pollination (see pollinator reject),^[44] waste matter treatment (i.e., the breaking downwards and immobilization of toxic pollutants), and nutrient recycling of sewage or agronomical runoff.^[22]

The loss of copse from tropical rainforests solitary represents a substantial diminishing of Earth's ability to produce oxygen and to use upward carbon dioxide. These services are becoming even more important every bit increasing carbon dioxide levels is one of the main contributors to global climatic change.^[40] The loss of biodiversity may non directly impact humans, but the indirect effects of losing many species besides as the diversity of ecosystems in full general are enormous. When biodiversity is lost, the environment loses many species that perform valuable and unique roles in the ecosystem. The environment and all its inhabitants rely on biodiversity to recover from extreme environmental weather condition. When too much biodiversity is lost, a catastrophic effect such as an earthquake, flood, or volcanic eruption could crusade an ecosystem to crash, and humans would plainly endure from that.^{[ citation needed ]} Loss of biodiversity likewise means that humans are losing animals that could have served equally biological-control agents and plants that could potentially provide college-yielding crop varieties, pharmaceutical drugs to cure existing or future diseases (such as cancer), and new resistant crop-varieties for agricultural species susceptible to pesticide-resistant insects or virulent strains of fungi, viruses, and bacteria.^[22]

The negative effects of habitat devastation normally impact rural populations more straight than urban populations.^[31] Beyond the globe, poor people suffer the most when natural habitat is destroyed, considering less natural habitat means fewer natural resources per capita, yet wealthier people and countries can merely pay more to continue to receive more than than their per capita share of natural resources.

Another style to view the negative effects of habitat destruction is to look at the opportunity toll of destroying a given habitat. In other words, what do people lose out on with the removal of a given habitat? A country may increase its nutrient supply past converting wood country to row-crop agriculture, but the value of the same land may exist much larger when it tin supply natural resources or services such as clean h2o, timber, ecotourism, or alluvion regulation and drought control.^{[31] [ need quotation to verify ]}

Outlook [edit]

The rapid expansion of the global human population is increasing the world's food requirement substantially. Elementary logic dictates that more than people volition require more food. In fact, equally the world'due south population increases dramatically, farm production will need to increment by at least 50%, over the next 30 years.^[45] In the past, continually moving to new land and soils provided a boost in food product to meet the global nutrient demand. That piece of cake fix will no longer be available, however, as more than 98% of all country suitable for agronomics is already in use or degraded beyond repair.^[46]

The impending global food crisis will exist a major source of habitat destruction. Commercial farmers are going to become desperate to produce more food from the same amount of land, so they will utilize more fertilizers and show less concern for the environs to meet the market demand. Others will seek out new state or will convert other land-uses to agriculture. Agricultural intensification will get widespread at the cost of the environment and its inhabitants. Species will be pushed out of their habitat either directly by habitat destruction or indirectly by fragmentation, degradation, or pollution. Any efforts to protect the world's remaining natural habitat and biodiversity volition compete directly with humans' growing need for natural resources, especially new agricultural lands.^[45]

Solutions [edit]

Tropical deforestation: In near cases of tropical deforestation, three to iv underlying causes are driving two to three proximate causes.^[34] This ways that a universal policy for decision-making tropical deforestation would not be able to address the unique combination of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation in each country.^[34] Before whatsoever local, national, or international deforestation policies are written and enforced, governmental leaders must acquire a detailed agreement of the complex combination of proximate causes and underlying driving forces of deforestation in a given expanse or country.^[34] This concept, along with many other results of tropical deforestation from the Geist and Lambin study, tin can easily be practical to habitat destruction in full general.

Shoreline erosion: Coastal erosion is a natural process equally storms, waves, tides and other water level changes occur. Shoreline stabilization can exist done by barriers between land and water such every bit seawalls and bulkheads. Living shorelines are gaining attending as new stabilization method. These can reduce damage and erosion while simultaneously providing ecosystem services such as food product, nutrient and sediment removal, and water quality improvement to order^[47]

Instance of human being acquired habitat destruction probable capable of reversing if further disturbance is halted. Uganda.

Natural vegetation along this littoral shoreline in Northward Carolina, US, is being used to reduce the effects of shoreline erosion while providing other benefits to the natural ecosystem and the human community.

To foreclose an expanse from losing its specialist species to generalist invasive species depends on the extent of the habitat destruction that has already taken place. In areas where habitat is relatively undisturbed, halting further habitat destruction may be enough.^[3] In areas where habitat destruction is more extreme (fragmentation or patch loss), Restoration ecology may be needed.^[48]

Education of the general public is possibly the best manner to prevent farther human being habitat devastation.^[49] Changing the dull creep of ecology impacts from being viewed as acceptable to being seen a reason for change to more sustainable practices.^[49] Didactics virtually the necessity of family unit planning to slow population growth is important as greater population leads to greater human being caused habitat devastation.^[50]

The preservation and creation of habitat corridors can link isolated populations and increment pollination.^[51] Corridors are also known to reduce the negative impacts of habitat destruction.^[51]

The biggest potential to solving the issue of habitat destruction comes from solving the political, economical and social issues that get along with it such as, private and commercial textile consumption,^[49] sustainable extraction of resources,^[52] conservation areas,^[49] restoration of degraded state^[53] and addressing climate change.^[13]

Governmental leaders need to take action past addressing the underlying driving forces, rather than merely regulating the proximate causes. In a broader sense, governmental bodies at a local, national, and international scale need to emphasize:

1. Because the irreplaceable ecosystem services provided past natural habitats.
2. Protecting remaining intact sections of natural habitat.
3. Finding ecological means to increment agricultural output without increasing the total land in production.
4. Reducing human population and expansion. Apart from improving access to contraception globally, furthering gender equality also has a great benefit. When women have the same pedagogy (controlling power), this more often than not leads to smaller families.

Information technology is argued that the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation can be counteracted by including spatial processes in potential restoration management plans. However, even though spatial dynamics are incredibly important in the conservation and recovery of species, a limited amount of management plans are taking the spatial effects of habitat restoration and conservation into consideration.^[54]

Notes [edit]

1. ^ Calizza, Edoardo; Costantini, Maria Letizia; Careddu, Giulio; Rossi, Loreto (17 June 2017). "Upshot of habitat degradation on competition, carrying capacity, and species assemblage stability". Ecology and Evolution. Wiley. 7 (15): 5784–5796. doi:10.1002/ece3.2977. ISSN 2045-7758. PMC5552933. PMID 28811883.
2. ^ ^{a b c d} Sahney, Southward; Benton, Michael J.; Falcon-Lang, Howard J. (1 December 2010). "Rainforest collapse triggered Pennsylvanian tetrapod diversification in Euramerica" (PDF). Geology. 38 (12): 1079–1082. Bibcode:2010Geo....38.1079S. doi:ten.1130/G31182.1. Archived from the original on 11 October 2011. Retrieved 29 November 2010 – via GeoScienceWorld.
3. ^ ^{a b c} Marvier, Michelle; Kareiva, Peter; Neubert, Michael G. (2004). "Habitat Destruction, Fragmentation, and Disturbance Promote Invasion by Habitat Generalists in a Multispecies Metapopulation". Risk Assay. 24 (4): 869–878. doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00485.x. ISSN 0272-4332. PMID 15357806. S2CID 44809930. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved 18 March 2021.
4. ^ ^{a b} WIEGAND, THORSTEN; REVILLA, ELOY; MOLONEY, KIRK A. (February 2005). "Effects of Habitat Loss and Fragmentation on Population Dynamics". Conservation Biological science. nineteen (1): 108–121. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00208.x. ISSN 0888-8892. S2CID 33258495.
5. ^ Pimm & Raven, 2000, pp. 843–845.
6. ^ United Nations Surround Programme (2021). Making Peace with Nature: A scientific pattern to tackle the climate, biodiversity and pollution emergencies. Nairobi. https://www.unep.org/resources/making-peace-nature Archived 2021-03-23 at the Wayback Machine
7. ^ Scholes & Biggs, 2004.
8. ^ Barbault & Sastrapradja, 1995.
9. ^ Beebee, Trevor J.C.; Griffiths, Richard A. (31 May 2005). "The amphibian decline crisis: A watershed for conservation biology?". Biological Conservation. 125 (3): 271. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.04.009.
10. ^ Borzée, Amaël; Jang, Yikweon (28 Apr 2015). "Clarification of a seminatural habitat of the endangered Suweon treefrog Hyla suweonensis". Beast Cells and Systems. 19 (three): 216. doi:x.1080/19768354.2015.1028442. S2CID 86565631.
11. ^ "The Panda'south Forest: Biodiversity Loss". 24 Baronial 2011. Archived from the original on 23 September 2011. Retrieved 6 September 2011.
12. ^ Evangelista, Paul H.; Kumar, Sunil; Stohlgren, Thomas J.; Jarnevich, Catherine South.; Crall, Alycia W.; Norman III, John B.; Barnett, David T. (2008). "Modelling invasion for a habitat generalist and a specialist plant species". Multifariousness and Distributions. 14 (v): 808–817. doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00486.ten. ISSN 1366-9516. S2CID 14148713. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved 18 March 2021.
13. ^ ^{a b} Travis, J. 1000. J. (7 March 2003). "Climate change and habitat devastation: a deadly anthropogenic cocktail". Proceedings of the Majestic Guild of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. 270 (1514): 467–473. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2246. ISSN 0962-8452. PMC1691268. PMID 12641900.
14. ^ ^{a b} Helm, Aveliina; Hanski, Ilkka; Partel, Meelis (9 November 2005). "Boring response of plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation". Ecology Letters. ix (one): 72–77. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00841.x. ISSN 1461-023X. PMID 16958870.
15. ^ Spiesman, Brian J.; Inouye, Brian D. (December 2013). "Habitat loss alters the architecture of establish–pollinator interaction networks". Ecology. 94 (12): 2688–2696. doi:10.1890/xiii-0977.i. ISSN 0012-9658. PMID 24597216.
16. ^ Ewers, Didham, Robert M., Raphael K. (15 March 2007). "Misreckoning factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation". Wiley Online Library. Vol. 81. p. 117. doi:10.1017/S1464793105006949. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 15 March 2021.
17. ^ Fahrig, Lenore (1997). "Relative Effects of Habitat Loss and Fragmentation on Population Extinction". The Journal of Wildlife Management. 61 (three): 603–610. doi:10.2307/3802168. ISSN 0022-541X. JSTOR 3802168.
18. ^ Nakagiri, Tainaka, Nariyuki, Kei-ichi (1 May 2004). "Indirect effects of habitat devastation in model ecosystems". Science Direct. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
19. ^ Fahrig, Lenore (July 1997). "Relative Effects of Habitat Loss and Fragmentation on Population Extinction". JOURNAL ARTICLE. JSTOR 3802168. Archived from the original on fifteen April 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
20. ^ "Tierras Bajas Deforestation, Bolivia". Newsroom. Photo taken from the International Space Station on April 16, 2001. NASA Globe Observatory. 16 April 2001. Archived from the original on 20 September 2008. Retrieved 11 Baronial 2008.
21. ^ ^{a b c} Cincotta & Engelman, 2000.
22. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j} Primack, 2006.
23. ^ ^{a b} Stein et al., 2000.
24. ^ Higgins, Steven I.; Lavorel, Sandra; Revilla, Eloy (25 Apr 2003). "Estimating institute migration rates under habitat loss and fragmentation". Oikos. 101 (two): 354–366. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12141.x. hdl:10261/51883. ISSN 0030-1299.
25. ^ ^{a b} Laurance, 1999.
26. ^ Kauffman & Pyke, 2001.
27. ^ White et al., 2000.
28. ^ Ravenga et al., 2000.
29. ^ "United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland: Environmental Bug, Policies and Clean Applied science". AZoCleantech.com. 8 June 2015. Archived from the original on 30 March 2019. Retrieved 12 December 2017.
30. ^ Burke et al., 2000.
31. ^ ^{a b c d e f chiliad h i} Millennium Ecological Assessment, 2005.
32. ^ "File:Burnt forest GJ.jpg", Wikipedia, archived from the original on 23 July 2021, retrieved 18 March 2021
33. ^ Butler, Rhett A. (31 March 2021). "Global woods loss increases in 2020". Mongabay. Archived from the original on one April 2021. ● Mongabay graphing WRI data from "Forest Loss / How much tree comprehend is lost globally each yr?". research.WRI.org. World Resource Institute — Global Forest Review. Jan 2021. Archived from the original on x March 2021.
34. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Geist & Lambin, 2002.
35. ^ Durner, George One thousand.; Douglas, David C.; Nielson, Ryan M.; Amstrup, Steven C.; McDonald, Trent L.; Stirling, Ian; Mauritzen, Mette; Built-in, Erik Westward.; Wiig, Øystein; Deweaver, Eric; Serreze, Marking C.; Belikov, Stanislav East.; Holland, Marika 1000.; Maslanik, James; Aars, Jon; Bailey, David A.; Derocher, Andrew E. (2009). "Predicting 21st-century polar bear habitat distribution from global climate models". Ecological Monographs. 79: 25–58. doi:10.1890/07-2089.1. S2CID 85677324.
36. ^ Baker, Jason D.; Littnan, Charles L.; Johnston, David W. (24 May 2006). "Potential effects of sea level rise on the terrestrial habitats of endangered and endemic megafauna in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands". Endangered Species Research. ii: 21–30. doi:10.3354/esr002021. ISSN 1863-5407.
37. ^ Galbraith, H.; Jones, R.; Park, R.; Clough, J.; Herrod-Julius, S.; Harrington, B.; Folio, G. (1 June 2002). "Global Climate change and Sea Level Rise: Potential Losses of Intertidal Habitat for Shorebirds". Waterbirds. 25 (two): 173–183. doi:10.1675/1524-4695(2002)025[0173:GCCASL]2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1524-4695. S2CID 86365454.
38. ^ McKee et al., 2003.
39. ^ Tibbetts, 2006.
40. ^ ^{a b} Mumba, Musonda; Munang, Richard; Rivington, Mike (27 June 2013). "Ecosystem Direction: The Need to Adopt a Different Arroyo Under a Changing Climate". Resources Report. United Nations Environment Program/Macaulay Land Use Research Constitute. Archived from the original on xv Apr 2021. Retrieved xv Apr 2021.
41. ^ Balderdash, David (1982). A Growing Problem: Pesticides and the 3rd Earth Poor. OXFAM. p. 29. ISBN9780855980641. Archived from the original on 24 April 2021. Retrieved 24 April 2021. It was drainage of swampland which eradicated the disease [malaria] from the Fenlands in Britain and the Pontine marshes of Italian republic.
42. ^ Reiter, Paul (1997). "Surveillance and Control of Urban Dengue Vectors". In Gubler, Duane J.; Ooi, Eng Eong; Vasudevan, Subhash; Farrar, Jeremy (eds.). Dengue and Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever. CAB books (two, revised ed.). Wallingford, Oxfordshire: CABI (published 2014). p. 504. ISBN9781845939649 . Retrieved 30 September 2021. The eradication of smallpox virus [...] is as well a perfect example of habitat destruction: smallpox vaccination gives life-long amnesty, and humans are the only host. Mass vaccination therefore resulted in total elimination of the habitat of the virus.
43. ^ "Valuing nature". Globe Wild fauna Foundation. WWF. Archived from the original on 25 April 2021. Retrieved 15 April 2021.
44. ^ Benoît Geslin; Benoit Gauzens; Elisa Thébault; Isabelle Dajoz (2013). "Plant Pollinator Networks forth a Gradient of Urbanisation". PLOS 1. 8 (5): e63421. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...863421G. doi:x.1371/journal.pone.0063421. PMC3661593. PMID 23717421.
45. ^ ^{a b} Tilman et al., 2001.
46. ^ Sanderson et al., 2002.
47. ^ "Living Shorelines". NOAA Habitat Design. Archived from the original on eighteen March 2021. Retrieved 23 March 2021.
48. ^ Liao, Jinbao; Bearup, Daniel; Wang, Yeqiao; Nijs, Ivan; Bonte, Dries; Li, Yuanheng; Brose, Ulrich; Wang, Shaopeng; Blasius, Bernd (two May 2017). "Robustness of metacommunities with omnivory to habitat devastation: disentangling patch fragmentation from patch loss". Ecology. 98 (6): 1631–1639. doi:x.1002/ecy.1830. hdl:10067/1418100151162165141. ISSN 0012-9658. PMID 28369715. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved 18 March 2021.
49. ^ ^{a b c d} Morrison, M.50. (1999), "Habitat and habitat destruction", Environmental Geology. Encyclopedia of Globe Science, Encyclopedia of Earth Science, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 308–309, doi:ten.1007/1-4020-4494-1_165, ISBN0-412-74050-8
50. ^ Ehrlich, P. R.; Pringle, R. Thou. (11 August 2008). "Where does biodiversity go from here? A grim business organisation-as-usual forecast and a hopeful portfolio of partial solutions". Proceedings of the National University of Sciences. 105 (Supplement 1): 11579–11586. doi:ten.1073/pnas.0801911105. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC2556413. PMID 18695214.
51. ^ ^{a b} Townsend, Patricia A.; Levey, Douglas J. (2002). "An Experimental Test of Whether Habitat Corridors Affect Pollen Transfer". Environmental. 86 (2): 466–475. doi:x.1890/03-0607. ISSN 0012-9658. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved 18 March 2021.
52. ^ Bringezu, Stefan (2009), "Visions of a sustainable resource apply", Sustainable Resource Direction: Global Trends, Visions and Policies, Greenleaf Publishing Limited, pp. 155–215, doi:10.9774/gleaf.978-one-907643-07-1_5, ISBN978-one-907643-07-1 , retrieved eighteen March 2021
53. ^ Elmarsdottir, Asrun; Aradottir, Asa 50.; Trlica, Chiliad. J. (26 September 2003). "Microsite availability and establishment of native species on degraded and reclaimed sites". Journal of Practical Environmental. xl (5): 815–823. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.2003.00848.x. ISSN 0021-8901.
54. ^ Huxel, Gary R.; Hastings, Alan (September 1999). "Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, and Restoration". Restoration Ecology. 7 (3): 309–315. doi:ten.1046/j.1526-100x.1999.72024.10. ISSN 1061-2971. S2CID 86235090.

References [edit]

• Barbault, R. and S. D. Sastrapradja. 1995. Generation, maintenance and loss of biodiversity. Global Biodiversity Assessment, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge pp. 193–274. ISBN 9780521564816
• Burke, L.; Y. Kura; K. Kassem; C. Ravenga; M. Spalding; D. McAllister (2000). Pilot Assessment of Global Ecosystems: Coastal Ecosystems. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C. ISBN9781569734582. Archived from the original on four May 2018. Retrieved 19 February 2020.
• Cincotta, R.P., and R. Engelman. 2000. Nature'south place: human population density and the hereafter of biological variety. Population Action International. Washington, D.C.
• Geist H. J.; Lambin E. Eastward. (2002). "Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation". BioScience. 52 (2): 143–150. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:PCAUDF]2.0.CO;2.
• Kauffman, J. B. and D. A. Pyke. 2001. Range ecology, global livestock influences. In S. A. Levin (ed.), Encyclopedia of Biodiversity 5: 33–52. Bookish Press, San Diego, CA.
• Laurance W. F. (1999). "Reflections on the tropical deforestation crisis". Biological Conservation. 91 (2–iii): 109–117. CiteSeerX10.1.1.501.3004. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00088-9.
• McKee J. K.; Sciulli P.Due west.; Fooce C. D.; Waite T. A. (2003). "Forecasting global biodiversity threats associated with human being population growth". Biological Conservation. 115: 161–164. doi:x.1016/s0006-3207(03)00099-5.
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Program). 2005. Ecosystems and Homo Well-Being Archived 2016-06-x at the Wayback Motorcar. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press, Covelo, CA.
• Primack, R. B. 2006. Essentials of Conservation Biology. 4th Ed. Habitat destruction, pages 177–188. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
• Pimm Stuart Fifty.; Raven Peter (2000). "Biodiversity: Extinction by numbers". Nature. 403 (6772): 843–845. Bibcode:2000Natur.403..843P. doi:10.1038/35002708. PMID 10706267. S2CID 4310784.
• Ravenga, C., J. Brunner, Northward. Henninger, M. Kassem, and R. Payne. 2000. Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems: Wetland Ecosystems. Earth Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.
• Sahney S.; Benton M.J.; Falcon-Lang H.J. (2010). "Rainforest collapse triggered Pennsylvanian tetrapod diversification in Euramerica". Geology. 38 (12): 1079–1082. Bibcode:2010Geo....38.1079S. doi:x.1130/G31182.1.
• Sanderson E. West.; Jaiteh Thousand.; Levy Thou. A.; Redford K. H.; Wannebo A. Five.; Woolmer G. (2002). "The human footprint and the last of the wild". BioScience. 52 (x): 891–904. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0891:thfatl]2.0.co;2.
• Scholes, R. J. and R. Biggs (eds.). 2004. Ecosystem services in Southern Africa: a regional assessment. The regional scale component of the Southern African Millennium Ecosystem Cess. Archived 2020-x-02 at the Wayback Car CSIR, Pretoria, Southward Africa.
• Stein, B. A., L. S. Kutner, and J. S. Adams (eds.). 2000. Precious Heritage: The Status of Biodiversity in the U.s.a.. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Temple S. A. (1986). "The trouble of avian extinctions". Current Ornithology. Ornithology. Vol. iii. pp. 453–485. doi:ten.1007/978-1-4615-6784-4_11. ISBN978-one-4615-6786-eight.
• Tibbetts John (2006). "Louisiana's Wetlands: A Lesson in Nature Appreciation". Environ Wellness Perspect. 114 (1): A40–A43. doi:10.1289/ehp.114-a40. PMC1332684. PMID 16393646.
• Tilman D.; Fargione J.; Wolff B.; D'Antonio C.; Dobson A.; Howarth R.; Schindler D.; Schlesinger W. H.; Simberloff D.; et al. (2001). "Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change". Science. 292 (5515): 281–284. Bibcode:2001Sci...292..281T. doi:10.1126/science.1057544. PMID 11303102. S2CID 23847498.
• White, R. P., S. Murray, and M. Rohweder. 2000. Airplane pilot Assessment of Global Ecosystems: Grassland Ecosystems. World Resource Found, Washington, D. C.
• WRI. 2003. World Resource 2002–2004: Decisions for the World: Residual, voice, and power. 328 pp. Earth Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_destruction

Posted by: johnsonyoustion.blogspot.com

Share this post