Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-788cddb947-rnj55 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-08T22:22:12.765Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

23 - Sources and sinks: what is the reality?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2011

By
John A. Wiens  and
Beatrice Van Horne
Edited by
Jianguo Liu ,
Vanessa Hull ,
Anita T. Morzillo  and
John A. Wiens
John A. Wiens
Affiliation:
PRBO Conservation Science
Beatrice Van Horne
Affiliation:
Pacific Northwest Research Station, OR
Jianguo Liu
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Vanessa Hull
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Anita T. Morzillo
Affiliation:
Oregon State University
John A. Wiens
Affiliation:
PRBO Conservation Science
Get access

Summary

We consider four “realities” that may affect the usefulness of source–sink theory and thinking as applied to conservation and resource management. First, documenting source–sink systems requires detailed information on demography, dispersal, and habitat selection – information that is hard to come by. Second, source and sink patches are embedded in heterogeneous landscape mosaics, in which the details of spatial relationships are important. Third, source–sink systems are dynamic: what is a source or a sink can change with variations in regional population abundance or environmental conditions. And fourth, considering source–sink systems at too fine a spatial or temporal scale may artificially truncate their dynamics, while viewing them at too broad a scale may obscure or average away the critical interactions between sources and sinks; source–sink dynamics are scale-dependent. The upshot of these realities is that populations in different parts of a landscape may have quite different dynamics, which may change with time or changes in scale. Conserving or managing such populations requires direct or indirect information about landscape-specific demography and dispersal. It also means that protected areas should be established and managed with regard to current and future source–sink dynamics, including adequate landscape heterogeneity at a sufficient scale to allow source–sink dynamics to play out.

Type
Chapter
Information
Sources, Sinks and Sustainability , pp. 507 - 519
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Antolin, M. F., Van Horne, B., Berger, M. D., Holloway, A. K., Roach, J. L. and Weeks, R. D. (2001). Effective size and genetic structure of a Piute ground squirrel population (Spermophilus mollis). Canadian Journal of Zoology 79: 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crooks, K. R. and Sanjayan, M. (2006). Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. M. and Stamps, J. A. (2004). The effect of natal experience on habitat preferences. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 411–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elith, J. and Leathwick, J. (2009). Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 40: 677–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foppen, R. P. B., Chardon, J. P. and Liefveld, W. (2000). Understanding the role of sink patches in source–sink metapopulations: reed warbler in an agricultural landscape. Conservation Biology 14: 1881–1892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortin, M.-J. and Dale, M. R. T. (2005). Spatial Analysis: A Guide for Ecologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambrige, UK.Google Scholar
Franklin, A. B., Gutierrez, R. J., Noon, B. R. and Ward, J. P. (1996). Demographic characteristics and trends of northern spotted owl populations in northwestern California. In Demography of the Northern Spotted Owl (Forsman, E. D., DeStefano, S., Raphael, M. G. and Gutierrez, R. J., eds.). Studies in Avian Biology No. 17, Allen Press, Lawrence, KS:83–91.Google Scholar
Fretwell, S. D. and Lucas, H. L. (1969). On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheoretica 19: 16–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frouz, J. and Kindlmann, P. (2001). The role of sink to source re-colonisation in the population dynamics of insects living in unstable habitats: an example of terrestrial chironomids. Oikos 93: 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinz, S. K., Wissel, C., Conradt, L. and Frank, K. (2006). Integrating individual movement behavior into dispersal functions. Journal of Theoretical Biology 245: 601–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hilty, J. A., Lidicker, W. and Merenlender, A. (2006). Corridor Ecology: The Science and Practice of Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity Conservation. Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Holt, R. D., Barfield, M. and Gonzalez, A. (2003). Impacts of environmental variability in open populations and communities: “inflation” in sink environments. Theoretical Population Biology 64: 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, W. E. (1960). Innate and environmental dispersal of individual vertebrates. American Midland Naturalist 63: 152–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, G. E. (1957). Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 22: 415–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ims, R. A. and Hjermann, D. Ø. (2001). Condition-dependent dispersal. In Dispersal (Clobert, J., Dachin, E., Dhondt, A. A. and Nichols, J. D., eds.). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK: 203–216.Google Scholar
Janzen, D. H. (1983). No park is an island: increase in interference from outside as park size decreases. Oikos 41: 402–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lidicker, W. Z., Jr. (1975). The role of dispersal in the demography of small mammals. In Small Mammals: Their Productivity and Population Dynamics (Golley, F. B., Petrusewicz, K. and Ryszkowski, L., eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK: 103–128.Google Scholar
Okubo, A. (1980). Diffusion and Ecological Problems: Mathematical Models. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Pulliam, H. R. (1988). Sources, sinks, and population regulation. American Naturalist 132: 652–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulliam, H. R. (2000). On the relationship between niche and distribution. Ecology Letters 3: 349–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pulliam, H. R. and Danielson, B. J. (1991). Sources, sinks, and habitat selection: a landscape perspective on population dynamics. American Naturalist 137(Suppl.): S50–S66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J. M., Abbitt, R. J. F. and Groves, C. R. (2001). What are we protecting? The United States Conservation Portfolio. Conservation Biology in Practice 2: 18–19.Google Scholar
Turchin, P. (1998). Quantitative Analysis of Movement: Measuring and Modeling Population Redistribution in Animals and Plants. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar
Van Horne, B. (1983). Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. Journal of Wildlife Management 47: 893–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Horne, B., Olson, G. S., Schooley, R. L., Corn, J. G. and Burnham, K. P. (1997). Effects of drought and prolonged winter on Townsend’s ground squirrel demography in shrubsteppe habitats. Ecological Monographs 67: 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkinson, A. R. and Sutherland, W. J. (1995). Sources, sinks and pseudo-sinks. Journal of Animal Ecology 64: 126–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiens, J. A. (2001). The landscape context of dispersal. In Dispersal: Individual, Population, and Community (Clobert, J., Danchin, E., Dhondt, A. A. and Nichols, J. D., eds.). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK: 96–109.Google Scholar
Wiens, J. and Moss, M. (eds.) (2005). Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRef
Wiens, J. A., Stenseth, N. C., Van Horne, B. and Ims, R. A. (1993). Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos 66: 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiens, J. A., Stralberg, D., Jongsomjit, D., Howell, C. A. and Snyder, M. A. (2009). Niches, models, and climate change: assessing the assumptions and uncertainties. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106(Suppl. 2): 19729–19736.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiens, J. D., Noon, B. R. and Reynolds, R. T. (2006). Post-fledging survival of northern goshawks: the importance of prey abundance, weather, and dispersal. Ecological Applications 16: 406–418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×