What Happens When Animals Are Taken Out Of Their Natural Habitat

Procedure by which a natural habitat becomes incapable of supporting its native species

Habitat devastation (also termed habitat loss and habitat reduction) is the process 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 abundance.^{[1] [2]} Habitat devastation is the leading cause of biodiversity loss.^[three] Fragmentation and loss of habitat take go one of the about of import topics of inquiry in ecology as they are major threats to the survival of endangered species.^[four]

Activities such every bit harvesting natural resource, industrial production and urbanization are human contributions to habitat destruction. Pressure from agriculture is the principal human being cause. Some others include mining, logging, trawling, and urban sprawl. Habitat destruction is currently considered the master cause of species extinction worldwide.^[5] Environmental factors can contribute to habitat destruction more indirectly. Geological processes, climate change,^[ii] introduction of invasive species, ecosystem nutrient depletion, water and noise disturbance are some examples. Loss of habitat can exist preceded by an initial habitat fragmentation.

Attempts to address habitat destruction are in international policy commitments embodied past Sustainable Evolution Goal 15 "Life on Land" and Sustainable Development Goal 14 "Life Beneath Water". Nonetheless, the United Nations Surroundings Programme report on "Making Peace with Nature" released in 2021 found that most of these efforts had failed to meet 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 so that populations decline, sometimes up to the level of extinction.^[7]

Habitat loss is maybe the greatest threat to organisms and biodiversity.^[viii] Temple (1986) found that 82% of endangered bird species were significantly threatened by habitat loss. Most amphibian species are also threatened by native habitat loss,^[nine] and some species are at present only breeding in modified habitat.^[ten] Endemic organisms with limited ranges are most affected by habitat devastation, mainly because these organisms are not establish anywhere else within the world, and thus have less chance of recovering. Many owned organisms have very specific requirements for their survival that can but be found within a sure ecosystem, resulting in their extinction. Extinction may likewise accept place very long afterwards the destruction of habitat, a phenomenon known as extinction debt. Habitat destruction tin can also subtract the range of certain organism populations. This can upshot in the reduction of genetic diverseness and perchance the production of infertile youths, as these organisms would accept a college possibility of mating with related organisms within their population, or different species. One of the most famous examples is the impact upon China'due south behemothic panda, in one case found in many areas of Sichuan. Now information technology is only institute in fragmented and isolated regions in the southwest of the state, as a result of widespread deforestation in the 20th century.^[11]

Equally habitat destruction of an area occurs, the species diverseness offsets from a combination of habitat generalists and specialists to a population primarily consisting of generalist species.^[3] Invasive species are frequently generalists that are able to survive in much more than diverse habitats.^[12] Habitat destruction leading to climatic change offsets the balance of species keeping up with the extinction threshold leading to a higher likelihood of extinction.^[13]

Habitat loss is i of the chief environmental causes of the decline of biodiversity on local, regional, and global scales. Many believe that habitat fragmentation is also a threat to biodiversity however some believe that information technology is secondary to habitat loss.^[fourteen] The reduction of the corporeality of habitat available results in specific landscapes that are made of isolated patches of suitable habitat throughout a hostile environment/matrix. This process is by and large due to pure habitat loss equally well as fragmentation effects. Pure habitat loss refers to changes occurring in the composition of the mural that causes a subtract in individuals. Fragmentation furnishings refers to an add-on of effects occurring due to the habitat changes.^[4] Habitat loss can result in negative furnishings on the dynamic of species richness. The genus Hymenoptera are a various group of constitute pollinators who are highly susceptible to the negative effects of habitat loss, this could result in a domino effect between the plant-pollinator interactions leading to major conservation implications within this genus.^[15]

Devastation of populations [edit]

Habitat fragmentation has a major bear upon on fauna specie populations because it deprives species of what they are naturally accustomed to. This makes the species isolated, reduces the area where they tin alive, and creates new ecological boundaries. Some studies accept shown that changes in the abiotic and biotic parameters have acquired a greater impact on the ecology than the reduction in habitat size itself. They concluded that crowding a species into one infinite 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 because the loss and fragmentation of habitats results in much smaller populations. Reduced population sizes ends up creating higher chances of extinction.^[17]

Studies have shown that there 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 desperate declines of plant species areas due to changes in the surrounding state.^[14]

Predators affecting the population of the prey [edit]

In recent times the devastation of habitat has been the crusade of the loss of many species. Sometimes the area may exist small of devastation but every bit fourth dimension goes past slowly that will crusade an increase in extinction. Loss of habitat is not always the direct cause of extinction; in that location are other reasons causes for extinction that connect dorsum to the loss of habitat. For example, if the sole predator in an ecosystem were to become extinct, casualty populations would increase, which could possibly consequence in overpopulation. A higher amount of any species that can cause them to use too much of their resource. Since many species depend on limited natural resources, with the overuse they volition somewhen run out degrade their habitat.^[xviii]

Habitat destruction and fragmentation are the two most important factors in species extinction. The negative effects of decreasing size and increasing isolation of habitat are misinterpreted past fragmentation, only in reality they are much more larger effects on the population. Fragmentation generally has either no outcome or a negative effect on population survival. Since habitat loss of fragmentation typically occurs together it is however not articulate which process has a larger event on extinction. Increasing isolation and habitat loss with fragmentation are all connected in a mode that has negatively affected the surround.^[19]

Geography [edit]

Biodiversity hotspots are importantly tropical regions that feature high concentrations of endemic 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. Nigh of the natural habitat on islands and in areas of high human population density has already been destroyed (WRI, 2003). Islands suffering farthermost habitat destruction include New Zealand, Republic of madagascar, the Philippines, and Japan.^[22] S and East Asia—especially Prc, Republic of india, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Japan—and many areas in West Africa have extremely dense human being populations that allow little room for natural habitat. Marine areas shut to highly populated coastal cities as well 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 agronomics or unstable governments, which may go hand-in-hand, typically feel loftier rates of habitat destruction. Cardinal America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Amazonian tropical rainforest areas of South America are the main regions with unsustainable agricultural practices and/or government 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 East and Midwest.^[23] Only 15% of country area remains unmodified by man activities in all of Europe.^[22]

Currently, changes occurring in unlike environments around the earth are changing the specific geographical habitats that are suitable for plants to grow. Therefore, the ability for plants to migrate to suitable environs areas will have a stiff impact on the distribution of institute diverseness. However, at the moment, the rates of establish migration that are influenced by habitat loss and fragmentation are not besides understood as they could be.^[24]

Ecosystems [edit]

Jungle burned for agriculture in southern Mexico

Tropical rainforests have received most of the attention concerning the destruction of habitat. From the approximately 16 one thousand thousand square kilometers of tropical rainforest habitat that originally existed worldwide, less than ix 1000000 square kilometers remain today.^[22] The current charge per unit of deforestation is 160,000 square kilometers per twelvemonth, which equates to a loss of approximately 1% of original woods habitat each year.^[25]

Other woods ecosystems take suffered every bit much or more destruction as tropical rainforests. Deforestation for farming and logging have severely disturbed at least 94% of temperate broadleaf forests; many old growth forest stands have lost more 98% of their previous expanse because of human activities.^[22] Tropical deciduous dry forests are easier to clear and burn and are more suitable for agriculture and cattle ranching than tropical rainforests; consequently, less than 0.i% of dry out forests in Central 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'southward drylands, which include temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands, scrub, and deciduous forests, have been somewhat degraded.^[26] But included in that x–20% of state is the approximately nine million foursquare kilometers of seasonally dry out-lands that humans have converted to deserts through the procedure of desertification.^[22] The tallgrass prairies of North America, on the other hand, have less than 3% of natural habitat remaining that has not been converted to farmland.^[27]

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

Wetlands and marine areas accept endured high levels of habitat destruction. More 50% of wetlands in the U.S. take been destroyed in just the last 200 years.^[23] Between 60% and seventy% of European wetlands accept been completely destroyed.^[28] In the Britain, in that location has been an increase in demand for littoral housing and tourism which has acquired a decline in marine habitats over the final 60 years. The ascension sea levels and temperatures have acquired soil erosion, littoral flooding, and loss of quality in the United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland marine ecosystem.^[29] About 1-fifth (20%) of marine coastal areas take been highly modified by humans.^[30] One-fifth of coral reefs have too been destroyed, and another fifth has been severely degraded past overfishing, pollution, and invasive species; xc% of the Philippines' coral reefs solitary take been destroyed.^[31] Finally, over 35% of the mangrove ecosystems worldwide have been destroyed.^[31]

Natural causes [edit]

Habitat devastation through natural processes such as volcanism, burn, and climatic change is well documented in the fossil record.^[2] I study shows that habitat fragmentation of tropical rainforests in Euramerica 300 meg years ago led to a great loss of amphibian diversity, but simultaneously the drier climate spurred on a burst of diversity among reptiles.^[2]

Human causes [edit]

The rate of global tree cover loss has approximately doubled since 2001, to an annual loss approaching an expanse the size of Italian republic.^[33]

Habitat destruction caused by humans includes land conversion from forests, etc. to arable land, urban sprawl, infrastructure development, and other anthropogenic changes to the characteristics of land. Habitat degradation, fragmentation, and pollution are aspects of habitat destruction caused by humans that do not necessarily involve over destruction of habitat, yet result in habitat plummet. Desertification, deforestation, and coral reef degradation 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 encompass to determine any patterns in the proximate and underlying causes of tropical deforestation. Their results, yielded as 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 most significant. The proximate causes were amassed into broad categories of agricultural expansion (96%), infrastructure expansion (72%), and forest extraction (67%). Therefore, according to this report, forest conversion to agriculture is the main land apply 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 cultivation (48%), cattle ranching (46%), shifting (slash and burn) tillage (41%), subsistence agronomics (twoscore%), and fuel forest extraction for domestic use (28%). One upshot is that shifting cultivation is non the primary crusade 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]

Rise global temperatures, acquired past the greenhouse effect, contribute to habitat destruction, endangering various species, such equally the polar bear.^[35] Melting ice caps promote ascent bounding main levels and floods which threaten natural habitats and species globally.^{[36] [37]}

Drivers [edit]

While the above-mentioned activities are the proximal or straight causes of habitat destruction in that they really destroy habitat, this however does not place why humans destroy habitat. The forces that cause humans to destroy habitat are known every bit drivers of habitat destruction. Demographic, economic, sociopolitical, scientific and technological, and cultural drivers all contribute to habitat destruction.^[31]

Demographic drivers include the expanding man population; charge per unit of population increment over time; spatial distribution of people in a given area (urban versus rural), ecosystem type, and country; and the combined furnishings of poverty, age, family planning, gender, and education condition of people in certain areas.^[31] Most of the exponential human population growth worldwide is occurring in or close to biodiversity hotspots.^[21] This may explicate why homo population density accounts for 87.9% of the variation in numbers of threatened species across 114 countries, providing indisputable prove that people play the largest role in decreasing biodiversity.^[38] The nail in human population and migration of people into such species-rich regions are making conservation efforts not only more than urgent but also more probable to conflict with local homo interests.^[21] The high local population density in such areas is directly correlated to the poverty condition of the local people, most of whom lacking an educational activity and family planning.^[34]

Co-ordinate to the Geist and Lambin (2002) report, the underlying driving forces were prioritized as follows (with the percent of the 152 cases the factor played a significant office in): economic factors (81%), institutional or policy factors (78%), technological factors (seventy%), cultural or socio-political factors (66%), and demographic factors (61%). The principal economical factors included commercialization and growth of timber markets (68%), which are driven by national and international demands; urban industrial growth (38%); low domestic costs for land, labor, fuel, and timber (32%); and increases in production prices mainly for cash crops (25%). Institutional and policy factors included formal pro-deforestation policies on country development (40%), economic growth including colonization and infrastructure improvement (34%), and subsidies for land-based activities (26%); property rights and land-tenure insecurity (44%); and policy failures such as corruption, lawlessness, or mismanagement (42%). The primary technological factor was the poor application of technology in the wood manufacture (45%), which leads to wasteful logging practices. Within the broad category of cultural and sociopolitical factors are public attitudes and values (63%), private/household behavior (53%), public unconcern toward forest environments (43%), missing basic values (36%), and unconcern past 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 start gene—in those areas (25%).

In that location are also feedbacks and interactions among the proximate and underlying causes of deforestation that can dilate the process. Route construction has the largest feedback result, because it interacts with—and leads to—the institution of new settlements and more people, which causes a growth in wood (logging) and food 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 past utilizing larger or more modern machinery that often has a worse issue on the habitat than traditional farming and logging methods. Either manner, more state is cleared more quickly for commercial markets. This common feedback case manifests just how closely related the proximate and underlying causes are to each other.^{[ citation needed ]}

Touch on on man population [edit]

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

Habitat devastation can vastly increment an expanse's vulnerability to natural disasters like inundation and drought, crop failure, spread of disease, and water contamination.^{[31] [ page needed ]} On the other hand, a good for you ecosystem with good direction practices can reduce the chance of these events happening, or will at to the lowest degree mitigate adverse impacts.^[40] Eliminating swamps—the habitat of pests such every bit mosquitoes—has contributed to the prevention of diseases such as malaria.^[41] Completely depriving an infectious agent (such every bit a virus) of its habitat—by vaccination, for example—can result in eradicating that infectious amanuensis.^[42]

Agricultural land tin suffer from the destruction of the surrounding mural. Over the past 50 years, the devastation of habitat surrounding agricultural country has degraded approximately forty% of agricultural state worldwide via erosion, salinization, compaction, nutrient depletion, pollution, and urbanization.^[31] Humans likewise lose directly uses of natural habitat when habitat is destroyed. Aesthetic uses such as birdwatching, recreational uses like hunting and fishing, and ecotourism usually^{[ quantify ]} rely upon relatively undisturbed habitat. Many^{[ quantify ]} people value the complexity of the natural globe and limited concern at the loss of natural habitats and of animal or plant species worldwide.^[43]

Probably the nearly profound touch on that habitat destruction has on people is the loss of many valuable ecosystem services. Habitat destruction has contradistinct nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, and carbon cycles, which has increased the frequency and severity of acrid rain, algal blooms, and fish kills in rivers and oceans and contributed tremendously to global climate change.^{[31] [ need quotation to verify ]} 1 ecosystem service whose significance is condign meliorate understood is climate regulation. On a local scale, trees provide windbreaks and shade; on a regional calibration, plant transpiration recycles rainwater and maintains constant annual rainfall; on a global scale, plants (especially copse in tropical rainforests) around the globe counter the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by sequestering carbon dioxide through photosynthesis.^[22] Other ecosystem services that are diminished or lost altogether as a effect of habitat devastation include watershed management, nitrogen fixation, oxygen production, pollination (run into pollinator turn down),^[44] waste matter treatment (i.eastward., the breaking down and immobilization of toxic pollutants), and nutrient recycling of sewage or agricultural runoff.^[22]

The loss of trees from tropical rainforests alone represents a substantial diminishing of Earth'southward ability to produce oxygen and to use up carbon dioxide. These services are becoming even more than important as increasing carbon dioxide levels is one of the main contributors to global climatic change.^[twoscore] The loss of biodiversity may non directly bear upon humans, but the indirect effects of losing many species as well as the variety of ecosystems in general are enormous. When biodiversity is lost, the environment loses many species that perform valuable and unique roles in the ecosystem. The environs and all its inhabitants rely on biodiversity to recover from extreme environmental conditions. When likewise much biodiversity is lost, a catastrophic event such as an convulsion, alluvion, or volcanic eruption could cause an ecosystem to crash, and humans would obviously suffer from that.^{[ citation needed ]} Loss of biodiversity besides means that humans are losing animals that could take served as biological-command agents and plants that could potentially provide higher-yielding crop varieties, pharmaceutical drugs to cure existing or time to come diseases (such as cancer), and new resistant crop-varieties for agronomical species susceptible to pesticide-resistant insects or virulent strains of fungi, viruses, and bacteria.^[22]

The negative effects of habitat destruction unremarkably affect rural populations more direct than urban populations.^[31] Beyond the globe, poor people suffer the well-nigh when natural habitat is destroyed, because less natural habitat ways fewer natural resources per capita, nonetheless wealthier people and countries can merely pay more to keep to receive more than their per capita share of natural resources.

Another way to view the negative effects of habitat destruction is to wait 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 increment its nutrient supply by converting forest land to row-crop agriculture, but the value of the same land may be much larger when it can supply natural resources or services such every bit make clean water, timber, ecotourism, or flood regulation and drought control.^{[31] [ demand quotation to verify ]}

Outlook [edit]

The rapid expansion of the global homo population is increasing the globe's food requirement essentially. Uncomplicated logic dictates that more people will require more food. In fact, as the world's population increases dramatically, agronomical output will need to increase by at least 50%, over the next 30 years.^[45] In the past, continually moving to new land and soils provided a heave in nutrient product to meet the global food demand. That like shooting fish in a barrel gear up will no longer be available, however, as more than than 98% of all land suitable for agriculture is already in employ or degraded beyond repair.^[46]

The impending global food crisis will be a major source of habitat destruction. Commercial farmers are going to become drastic to produce more than food from the same amount of state, and then they will utilize more fertilizers and show less business organization for the environment to see the market need. Others will seek out new land or volition convert other country-uses to agriculture. Agronomical intensification will become widespread at the cost of the surroundings and its inhabitants. Species volition be pushed out of their habitat either directly by habitat destruction or indirectly by fragmentation, degradation, or pollution. Whatsoever efforts to protect the world'south remaining natural habitat and biodiversity will compete directly with humans' growing demand for natural resources, especially new agronomical lands.^[45]

Solutions [edit]

Tropical deforestation: In almost cases of tropical deforestation, three to four underlying causes are driving two to three proximate causes.^[34] This means that a universal policy for decision-making tropical deforestation would non be able to address the unique combination of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation in each state.^[34] Before any local, national, or international deforestation policies are written and enforced, governmental leaders must larn a detailed understanding of the circuitous combination of proximate causes and underlying driving forces of deforestation in a given area or country.^[34] This concept, forth with many other results of tropical deforestation from the Geist and Lambin study, tin can easily be applied to habitat destruction in general.

Shoreline erosion: Coastal erosion is a natural process as storms, waves, tides and other water level changes occur. Shoreline stabilization tin exist done by barriers between land and h2o such equally seawalls and bulkheads. Living shorelines are gaining attention as new stabilization method. These can reduce damage and erosion while simultaneously providing ecosystem services such as food product, nutrient and sediment removal, and h2o quality improvement to social club^[47]

Case of man caused habitat devastation likely capable of reversing if further disturbance is halted. Uganda.

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

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

Education of the general public is possibly the best style to forbid farther human habitat devastation.^[49] Changing the dull creep of environmental impacts from beingness viewed as adequate to being seen a reason for change to more sustainable practices.^[49] Pedagogy well-nigh the necessity of family unit planning to slow population growth is important as greater population leads to greater human acquired habitat devastation.^[50]

The preservation and creation of habitat corridors can link isolated populations and increase 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 problems that get along with it such as, individual and commercial cloth consumption,^[49] sustainable extraction of resource,^[52] conservation areas,^[49] restoration of degraded land^[53] and addressing climate change.^[13]

Governmental leaders need to take activeness by addressing the underlying driving forces, rather than simply regulating the proximate causes. In a broader sense, governmental bodies at a local, national, and international calibration need to emphasize:

1. Considering the irreplaceable ecosystem services provided by natural habitats.
2. Protecting remaining intact sections of natural habitat.
3. Finding ecological ways to increase 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 teaching (controlling power), this generally leads to smaller families.

It is argued that the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation can exist counteracted past including spatial processes in potential restoration management plans. Still, fifty-fifty though spatial dynamics are incredibly important in the conservation and recovery of species, a express 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). "Event of habitat degradation on competition, carrying capacity, and species assemblage stability". Ecology and Evolution. Wiley. seven (15): 5784–5796. doi:ten.1002/ece3.2977. ISSN 2045-7758. PMC5552933. PMID 28811883.
2. ^ ^{a b c d} Sahney, S; Benton, Michael J.; Falcon-Lang, Howard J. (i Dec 2010). "Rainforest collapse triggered Pennsylvanian tetrapod diversification in Euramerica" (PDF). Geology. 38 (12): 1079–1082. Bibcode:2010Geo....38.1079S. doi:x.1130/G31182.ane. 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 Devastation, Fragmentation, and Disturbance Promote Invasion by Habitat Generalists in a Multispecies Metapopulation". Run a risk Analysis. 24 (four): 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. 19 (1): 108–121. doi:x.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00208.x. ISSN 0888-8892. S2CID 33258495.
5. ^ Pimm & Raven, 2000, pp. 843–845.
6. ^ United nations Environs 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 biological science?". Biological Conservation. 125 (3): 271. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.04.009.
10. ^ Borzée, Amaël; Jang, Yikweon (28 April 2015). "Description of a seminatural habitat of the endangered Suweon treefrog Hyla suweonensis". Brute Cells and Systems. 19 (3): 216. doi:x.1080/19768354.2015.1028442. S2CID 86565631.
11. ^ "The Panda's Forest: Biodiversity Loss". 24 August 2011. Archived from the original on 23 September 2011. Retrieved half-dozen September 2011.
12. ^ Evangelista, Paul H.; Kumar, Sunil; Stohlgren, Thomas J.; Jarnevich, Catherine S.; Crall, Alycia W.; Norman 3, John B.; Barnett, David T. (2008). "Modelling invasion for a habitat generalist and a specialist plant species". Diversity 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. M. J. (7 March 2003). "Climate change and habitat devastation: a deadly anthropogenic cocktail". Proceedings of the Royal Lodge 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). "Slow response of constitute species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation". Ecology Messages. 9 (ane): 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 constitute–pollinator interaction networks". Ecology. 94 (12): 2688–2696. doi:10.1890/13-0977.1. ISSN 0012-9658. PMID 24597216.
16. ^ Ewers, Didham, Robert M., Raphael K. (15 March 2007). "Confounding factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation". Wiley Online Library. Vol. 81. p. 117. doi:x.1017/S1464793105006949. Archived from the original on xv Apr 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 (iii): 603–610. doi:ten.2307/3802168. ISSN 0022-541X. JSTOR 3802168.
18. ^ Nakagiri, Tainaka, Nariyuki, Kei-ichi (one May 2004). "Indirect effects of habitat devastation in model ecosystems". Science Directly. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
19. ^ Fahrig, Lenore (July 1997). "Relative Furnishings 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. Photograph taken from the International Space Station on Apr 16, 2001. NASA World Observatory. xvi Apr 2001. Archived from the original on 20 September 2008. Retrieved 11 August 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 April 2003). "Estimating plant migration rates under habitat loss and fragmentation". Oikos. 101 (2): 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: Ecology Issues, Policies and Clean Technology". 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 g 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 forest loss increases in 2020". Mongabay. Archived from the original on ane April 2021. ● Mongabay graphing WRI data from "Forest Loss / How much tree cover is lost globally each year?". research.WRI.org. World Resources Institute — Global Forest Review. January 2021. Archived from the original on x March 2021.
34. ^ ^{a b c d due east f} Geist & Lambin, 2002.
35. ^ Durner, George M.; Douglas, David C.; Nielson, Ryan M.; Amstrup, Steven C.; McDonald, Trent 50.; Stirling, Ian; Mauritzen, Mette; Born, Erik Due west.; Wiig, Øystein; Deweaver, Eric; Serreze, Mark C.; Belikov, Stanislav Due east.; Holland, Marika M.; 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.ane. S2CID 85677324.
36. ^ Baker, Jason D.; Littnan, Charles L.; Johnston, David Westward. (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, South.; Harrington, B.; Folio, G. (i June 2002). "Global Climate Change and Sea Level Rising: Potential Losses of Intertidal Habitat for Shorebirds". Waterbirds. 25 (ii): 173–183. doi:10.1675/1524-4695(2002)025[0173:GCCASL]2.0.CO;ii. 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 Management: The Need to Prefer a Different Approach Under a Changing Climate". Resource Study. Un Environment Programme/Macaulay State Use Enquiry Institute. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 15 April 2021.
41. ^ Bull, David (1982). A Growing Problem: Pesticides and the Tertiary World Poor. OXFAM. p. 29. ISBN9780855980641. Archived from the original on 24 April 2021. Retrieved 24 Apr 2021. Information technology was drainage of swampland which eradicated the disease [malaria] from the Fenlands in Britain and the Pontine marshes of Italy.
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 (2, revised ed.). Wallingford, Oxfordshire: CABI (published 2014). p. 504. ISBN9781845939649 . Retrieved 30 September 2021. The eradication of smallpox virus [...] is also a perfect example of habitat destruction: smallpox vaccination gives life-long immunity, and humans are the but host. Mass vaccination therefore resulted in total elimination of the habitat of the virus.
43. ^ "Valuing nature". World Wildlife Foundation. WWF. Archived from the original on 25 April 2021. Retrieved xv April 2021.
44. ^ Benoît Geslin; Benoit Gauzens; Elisa Thébault; Isabelle Dajoz (2013). "Plant Pollinator Networks along a Gradient of Urbanisation". PLOS 1. eight (five): e63421. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...863421G. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0063421. PMC3661593. PMID 23717421.
45. ^ ^{a b} Tilman et al., 2001.
46. ^ Sanderson et al., 2002.
47. ^ "Living Shorelines". NOAA Habitat Pattern. Archived from the original on 18 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 destruction: disentangling patch fragmentation from patch loss". Ecology. 98 (6): 1631–1639. doi:10.1002/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.L. (1999), "Habitat and habitat destruction", Ecology Geology. Encyclopedia of Earth Science, Encyclopedia of World Scientific discipline, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 308–309, doi:10.1007/1-4020-4494-1_165, ISBN0-412-74050-viii
50. ^ Ehrlich, P. R.; Pringle, R. M. (eleven August 2008). "Where does biodiversity go from here? A grim business-as-usual forecast and a hopeful portfolio of partial solutions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105 (Supplement one): 11579–11586. doi:10.1073/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 Touch on Pollen Transfer". Ecology. 86 (2): 466–475. doi:10.1890/03-0607. ISSN 0012-9658. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved 18 March 2021.
52. ^ Bringezu, Stefan (2009), "Visions of a sustainable resource use", Sustainable Resources Management: Global Trends, Visions and Policies, Greenleaf Publishing Limited, pp. 155–215, doi:10.9774/gleaf.978-i-907643-07-1_5, ISBN978-1-907643-07-one , retrieved 18 March 2021
53. ^ Elmarsdottir, Asrun; Aradottir, Asa Fifty.; Trlica, M. J. (26 September 2003). "Microsite availability and establishment of native species on degraded and reclaimed sites". Journal of Practical Ecology. 40 (v): 815–823. doi:x.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 (iii): 309–315. doi:10.1046/j.1526-100x.1999.72024.x. 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
• Shush, L.; Y. Kura; One thousand. Kassem; C. Ravenga; Grand. Spalding; D. McAllister (2000). Pilot Assessment of Global Ecosystems: Coastal Ecosystems. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C. ISBN9781569734582. Archived from the original on iv May 2018. Retrieved xix February 2020.
• Cincotta, R.P., and R. Engelman. 2000. Nature's identify: human population density and the future of biological variety. Population Activeness International. Washington, D.C.
• Geist H. J.; Lambin E. E. (2002). "Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation". BioScience. 52 (2): 143–150. doi:x.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:PCAUDF]2.0.CO;ii.
• Kauffman, J. B. and D. A. Pyke. 2001. Range environmental, global livestock influences. In Due south. A. Levin (ed.), Encyclopedia of Biodiversity v: 33–52. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
• Laurance W. F. (1999). "Reflections on the tropical deforestation crisis". Biological Conservation. 91 (2–3): 109–117. CiteSeerXten.1.1.501.3004. doi:x.1016/S0006-3207(99)00088-9.
• McKee J. Thou.; Sciulli P.Due west.; Fooce C. D.; Waite T. A. (2003). "Forecasting global biodiversity threats associated with human population growth". Biological Conservation. 115: 161–164. doi:10.1016/s0006-3207(03)00099-v.
• Millennium Ecosystem Cess (Program). 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being Archived 2016-06-x at the Wayback Motorcar. Millennium Ecosystem Cess. Island Press, Covelo, CA.
• Primack, R. B. 2006. Essentials of Conservation Biological science. 4th Ed. Habitat destruction, pages 177–188. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
• Pimm Stuart L.; 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, North. Henninger, Thou. Kassem, and R. Payne. 2000. Airplane pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems: Wetland Ecosystems. Earth Resources Found, Washington, D.C.
• Sahney S.; Benton K.J.; Falcon-Lang H.J. (2010). "Rainforest collapse triggered Pennsylvanian tetrapod diversification in Euramerica". Geology. 38 (12): 1079–1082. Bibcode:2010Geo....38.1079S. doi:ten.1130/G31182.1.
• Sanderson East. Westward.; Jaiteh M.; Levy G. A.; Redford M. H.; Wannebo A. Five.; Woolmer G. (2002). "The human footprint and the last of the wild". BioScience. 52 (ten): 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 Assessment. Archived 2020-10-02 at the Wayback Machine CSIR, Pretoria, South Africa.
• Stein, B. A., L. S. Kutner, and J. Due south. Adams (eds.). 2000. Precious Heritage: The Status of Biodiversity in the United States. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Temple S. A. (1986). "The trouble of avian extinctions". Current Ornithology. Ornithology. Vol. 3. pp. 453–485. doi:ten.1007/978-1-4615-6784-4_11. ISBN978-one-4615-6786-8.
• Tibbetts John (2006). "Louisiana's Wetlands: A Lesson in Nature Appreciation". Environ Health Perspect. 114 (1): A40–A43. doi:ten.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:x.1126/science.1057544. PMID 11303102. S2CID 23847498.
• White, R. P., S. Murray, and M. Rohweder. 2000. Pilot Assessment of Global Ecosystems: Grassland Ecosystems. World Resource Found, Washington, D. C.
• WRI. 2003. Earth Resources 2002–2004: Decisions for the Globe: Residual, voice, and ability. 328 pp. World Resource Institute, Washington, D.C.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_destruction#:~:text=When%20a%20habitat%20is%20destroyed,threat%20to%20organisms%20and%20biodiversity.

Posted by: ericksonforkabounce.blogspot.com

Share this post