Information About The Animal/habitat/place How Is It Valuable? Why Is It In Danger?

Process past 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 destruction is the leading cause of biodiversity loss.^[three] Fragmentation and loss of habitat accept get one of the most of import topics of research in environmental as they are major threats to the survival of endangered species.^[4]

Activities such every bit harvesting natural resources, industrial production and urbanization are human contributions to habitat destruction. Pressure from agronomics is the principal human crusade. Some others include mining, logging, trawling, and urban sprawl. Habitat destruction is currently considered the primary cause of species extinction worldwide.^[v] Ecology factors can contribute to habitat destruction more indirectly. Geological processes, climate change,^[2] introduction of invasive species, ecosystem nutrient depletion, water and noise pollution are some examples. Loss of habitat can be preceded by an initial habitat fragmentation.

Attempts to address habitat devastation are in international policy commitments embodied by Sustainable Development Goal 15 "Life on State" and Sustainable Development Goal 14 "Life Beneath Water". However, the United Nations Environment Program report on "Making Peace with Nature" released in 2021 institute that nearly of these efforts had failed to meet their internationally agreed upon goals.^[6]

Impacts on organisms [edit]

When a habitat is destroyed, the conveying capacity for indigenous plants, animals, and other organisms is reduced so that populations decline, sometimes up to the level of extinction.^[seven]

Habitat loss is perhaps the greatest threat to organisms and biodiversity.^[eight] Temple (1986) found that 82% of endangered bird species were significantly threatened by habitat loss. Near amphibian species are also threatened past native habitat loss,^[9] and some species are now only convenance in modified habitat.^[x] Endemic organisms with limited ranges are most affected past habitat devastation, mainly because these organisms are non found anywhere else within the world, and thus take less take chances of recovering. Many owned organisms accept very specific requirements for their survival that can only be found within a certain ecosystem, resulting in their extinction. Extinction may likewise take identify very long later on the destruction of habitat, a phenomenon known as extinction debt. Habitat destruction can too decrease the range of certain organism populations. This can event in the reduction of genetic diversity and mayhap the production of infertile youths, as these organisms would have a college possibility of mating with related organisms within their population, or different species. One of the most famous examples is the touch upon China'southward behemothic panda, once found in many areas of Sichuan. Now it is simply found in fragmented and isolated regions in the southwest of the state, as a result of widespread deforestation in the 20th century.^[eleven]

As habitat devastation 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 diverse habitats.^[12] Habitat destruction leading to climate change offsets the balance of species keeping up with the extinction threshold leading to a higher likelihood of extinction.^[13]

Habitat loss is one 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 it is secondary to habitat loss.^[14] The reduction of the amount of habitat bachelor results in specific landscapes that are fabricated of isolated patches of suitable habitat throughout a hostile environment/matrix. This process is more often than not due to pure habitat loss also every bit fragmentation effects. Pure habitat loss refers to changes occurring in the composition of the landscape that causes a decrease in individuals. Fragmentation furnishings refers to an addition of effects occurring due to the habitat changes.^[4] Habitat loss tin can consequence in negative effects on the dynamic of species richness. The genus Hymenoptera are a diverse group of plant pollinators who are highly susceptible to the negative effects of habitat loss, this could outcome in a domino event between the found-pollinator interactions leading to major conservation implications within this genus.^[fifteen]

Devastation of populations [edit]

Habitat fragmentation has a major impact on brute specie populations considering 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 ended that crowding a species into 1 infinite will eventually lead to the extinction of that species.^[xvi]

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 constitute species areas due to changes in the surrounding land.^[xiv]

Predators affecting the population of the prey [edit]

In recent times the destruction of habitat has been the crusade of the loss of many species. Sometimes the area may exist small-scale of destruction but equally fourth dimension goes by slowly that will crusade an increase in extinction. Loss of habitat is non e'er the direct cause of extinction; there 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 result in overpopulation. A higher corporeality of any species that can cause them to use too much of their resources. Since many species depend on limited natural resources, with the overuse they volition eventually run out dethrone their habitat.^[xviii]

Habitat destruction and fragmentation are the two almost of import 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 effect or a negative result on population survival. Since habitat loss of fragmentation typically occurs together it is withal non clear which process has a larger effect on extinction. Increasing isolation and habitat loss with fragmentation are all connected in a mode that has negatively affected the environs.^[19]

Geography [edit]

Biodiversity hotspots are chiefly tropical regions that characteristic high concentrations of owned species and, when all hotspots are combined, may contain over half of the world'due south terrestrial species.^[21] These hotspots are suffering from habitat loss and devastation. Almost of the natural habitat on islands and in areas of high homo population density has already been destroyed (WRI, 2003). Islands suffering extreme habitat destruction include New Zealand, Madagascar, the Philippines, and Nippon.^[22] South and East asia—especially China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Japan—and many areas in West Africa have extremely dumbo human being populations that allow little room for natural habitat. Marine areas close to highly populated coastal cities also face up degradation of their coral reefs or other marine habitat. These areas include the eastern coasts of Asia and Africa, northern coasts of Due south America, and the Caribbean area Bounding main and its associated islands.^[22]

Regions of unsustainable agriculture or unstable governments, which may go hand-in-mitt, typically experience loftier rates of habitat destruction. Key America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Amazonian tropical rainforest areas of South America are the main regions with unsustainable agricultural practices and/or regime mismanagement.^[22]

Areas of loftier agricultural production 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 land area remains unmodified past human activities in all of Europe.^[22]

Currently, changes occurring in different environments effectually the world are changing the specific geographical habitats that are suitable for plants to abound. Therefore, the ability for plants to migrate to suitable environment areas volition accept a strong touch on on the distribution of institute diversity. Even so, 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 agriculture in southern Mexico

Tropical rainforests have received nearly of the attention apropos the destruction of habitat. From the approximately 16 million square kilometers of tropical rainforest habitat that originally existed worldwide, less than 9 one thousand thousand square kilometers remain today.^[22] The electric current rate of deforestation is 160,000 foursquare kilometers per year, which equates to a loss of approximately one% of original wood habitat each year.^[25]

Other woods ecosystems have suffered equally 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 area because of human activities.^[22] Tropical deciduous dry forests are easier to clear and fire and are more suitable for agriculture and cattle ranching than tropical rainforests; consequently, less than 0.one% of dry forests in Key America'south Pacific Coast and less than 8% in Republic of madagascar remain from their original extents.^[25]

Plains and desert areas have been degraded to a bottom extent. Only x-twenty% of the globe'southward drylands, which include temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands, scrub, and deciduous forests, take been somewhat degraded.^[26] Simply included in that 10-twenty% of land is the approximately ix 1000000 foursquare kilometers of seasonally dry out-lands that humans have converted to deserts through the process of desertification.^[22] The tallgrass prairies of Due north America, on the other hand, have less than iii% 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 human development is a major reason for the loss of green turtle nesting beaches.

Wetlands and marine areas take endured high levels of habitat destruction. More than fifty% of wetlands in the U.S. have been destroyed in merely the last 200 years.^[23] Between 60% and lxx% of European wetlands have been completely destroyed.^[28] In the United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, there has been an increase in demand for coastal housing and tourism which has acquired 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 United kingdom marine ecosystem.^[29] About one-5th (20%) of marine coastal areas have been highly modified by humans.^[30] One-fifth of coral reefs accept too been destroyed, and some other fifth has been severely degraded by overfishing, pollution, and invasive species; ninety% of the Philippines' coral reefs lone accept 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, burn down, and climate change is well documented in the fossil tape.^[2] One study shows that habitat fragmentation of tropical rainforests in Euramerica 300 one thousand thousand years ago led to a great loss of amphibian diversity, merely simultaneously the drier climate spurred on a burst of diversity among reptiles.^[ii]

Man causes [edit]

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

Habitat destruction acquired by humans includes land conversion from forests, etc. to abundant land, urban sprawl, infrastructure development, and other anthropogenic changes to the characteristics of land. Habitat degradation, fragmentation, and pollution are aspects of habitat devastation caused by humans that practice non necessarily involve over destruction of habitat, yet result in habitat collapse. Desertification, deforestation, and coral reef degradation are specific types of habitat destruction for those areas (deserts, forests, coral reefs).^{[ citation needed ]}

Geist and Lambin (2002) assessed 152 case studies of net losses of tropical wood cover to make up one's mind any patterns in the proximate and underlying causes of tropical deforestation. Their results, yielded as percentages of the instance studies in which each parameter was a pregnant gene, provide a quantitative prioritization of which proximate and underlying causes were the most significant. The proximate causes were clustered into broad categories of agronomical expansion (96%), infrastructure expansion (72%), and wood extraction (67%). Therefore, according to this study, woods conversion to agriculture is the main state use change responsible for tropical deforestation. The specific categories reveal further insight into the specific causes of tropical deforestation: transport extension (64%), commercial woods extraction (52%), permanent cultivation (48%), cattle ranching (46%), shifting (slash and burn) cultivation (41%), subsistence agriculture (40%), and fuel wood extraction for domestic use (28%). One consequence is that shifting tillage is not the primary 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, caused by the greenhouse result, contribute to habitat destruction, endangering various species, such as the polar bear.^[35] Melting water ice caps promote rise sea 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 really destroy habitat, this even so does non identify why humans destroy habitat. The forces that crusade humans to destroy habitat are known equally drivers of habitat destruction. Demographic, economical, 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 land; and the combined effects of poverty, age, family unit planning, gender, and didactics 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 human population density accounts for 87.9% of the variation in numbers of threatened species across 114 countries, providing indisputable evidence that people play the largest role in decreasing biodiversity.^[38] The boom in homo population and migration of people into such species-rich regions are making conservation efforts not only more urgent but too more than likely to conflict with local human being interests.^[21] The high local population density in such areas is direct correlated to the poverty condition of the local people, most of whom lacking an education and family unit planning.^[34]

Co-ordinate to the Geist and Lambin (2002) written report, the underlying driving forces were prioritized as follows (with the percent of the 152 cases the factor played a significant function 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 by 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 greenbacks crops (25%). Institutional and policy factors included formal pro-deforestation policies on land development (40%), economic growth including colonization and infrastructure improvement (34%), and subsidies for country-based activities (26%); holding 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 woods manufacture (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 past individuals (32%). Demographic factors were the in-migration of colonizing settlers into sparsely populated forest areas (38%) and growing population density—a outcome of the commencement factor—in those areas (25%).

There are also feedbacks and interactions amid the proximate and underlying causes of deforestation that tin can amplify the procedure. Road construction has the largest feedback effect, considering 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 plough, progresses the commercialization of agronomics and logging industries. When these industries become commercialized, they must become more than efficient by utilizing larger or more than modern machinery that often has a worse effect on the habitat than traditional farming and logging methods. Either style, more land is cleared more rapidly for commercial markets. This mutual feedback example manifests just how closely related the proximate and underlying causes are to each other.^{[ citation needed ]}

Impact on human population [edit]

The draining and development of coastal 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 destruction tin vastly increase an area's vulnerability to natural disasters like alluvion and drought, crop failure, spread of disease, and water contamination.^{[31] [ page needed ]} On the other hand, a salubrious ecosystem with adept management practices can reduce the chance of these events happening, or will at least mitigate adverse impacts.^[twoscore] 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 as a virus) of its habitat—by vaccination, for case—can result in eradicating that infectious agent.^[42]

Agronomical land can suffer from the destruction of the surrounding landscape. Over the past 50 years, the devastation of habitat surrounding agronomical land has degraded approximately xl% of agricultural land worldwide via erosion, salinization, compaction, nutrient depletion, pollution, and urbanization.^[31] Humans as well lose straight 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 express business concern at the loss of natural habitats and of animal or institute species worldwide.^[43]

Probably the most profound bear on that habitat devastation 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 pelting, algal blooms, and fish kills in rivers and oceans and contributed tremendously to global climatic change.^{[31] [ need quotation to verify ]} One ecosystem service whose significance is becoming amend understood is climate regulation. On a local scale, copse provide windbreaks and shade; on a regional scale, plant transpiration recycles rainwater and maintains abiding annual rainfall; on a global scale, plants (especially trees in tropical rainforests) around the earth 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 result of habitat devastation include watershed management, nitrogen fixation, oxygen production, pollination (meet pollinator decline),^[44] waste treatment (i.e., the breaking downward and immobilization of toxic pollutants), and nutrient recycling of sewage or agronomical runoff.^[22]

The loss of copse from tropical rainforests alone represents a substantial diminishing of Earth's ability to produce oxygen and to employ up carbon dioxide. These services are becoming even more than important equally increasing carbon dioxide levels is one of the main contributors to global climate change.^[40] The loss of biodiversity may not directly bear upon humans, but the indirect effects of losing many species as well every bit the diversity of ecosystems in general are enormous. When biodiversity is lost, the surround loses many species that perform valuable and unique roles in the ecosystem. The surround 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, flood, or volcanic eruption could cause an ecosystem to crash, and humans would obviously suffer from that.^{[ citation needed ]} Loss of biodiversity likewise means that humans are losing animals that could have served as biological-command agents and plants that could potentially provide college-yielding crop varieties, pharmaceutical drugs to cure existing or futurity 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 usually impact rural populations more directly than urban populations.^[31] Across the globe, poor people suffer the most when natural habitat is destroyed, because less natural habitat means fewer natural resources per capita, yet wealthier people and countries can just pay more to continue to receive more than their per capita share of natural resources.

Some other manner to view the negative effects of habitat devastation 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 by converting forest land to row-crop agronomics, simply the value of the same land may be much larger when it tin supply natural resources or services such every bit clean water, timber, ecotourism, or flood regulation and drought command.^{[31] [ demand quotation to verify ]}

Outlook [edit]

The rapid expansion of the global man population is increasing the world's food requirement substantially. Simple logic dictates that more people will require more than food. In fact, every bit the world's population increases dramatically, agricultural output volition need to increase by at least 50%, over the side by side 30 years.^[45] In the past, continually moving to new country and soils provided a boost in food product to meet the global food demand. That like shooting fish in a barrel fix will no longer exist available, all the same, equally more than 98% of all land suitable for agriculture is already in use or degraded beyond repair.^[46]

The impending global food crisis will exist a major source of habitat devastation. Commercial farmers are going to get desperate to produce more nutrient from the same amount of state, so they will use more than fertilizers and prove less business organisation for the environment to meet the market demand. Others will seek out new land or volition convert other country-uses to agriculture. Agronomical intensification volition get widespread at the toll of the environment and its inhabitants. Species will exist pushed out of their habitat either directly past habitat destruction or indirectly by fragmentation, deposition, or pollution. Whatever efforts to protect the world's remaining natural habitat and biodiversity volition compete straight with humans' growing demand for natural resources, especially new agronomical lands.^[45]

Solutions [edit]

Tropical deforestation: In nigh cases of tropical deforestation, three to four underlying causes are driving two to three proximate causes.^[34] This means that a universal policy for controlling tropical deforestation would non be able to accost the unique combination of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation in each state.^[34] Earlier any 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 surface area or country.^[34] This concept, along with many other results of tropical deforestation from the Geist and Lambin study, can easily be practical to habitat destruction in general.

Shoreline erosion: Coastal erosion is a natural procedure as storms, waves, tides and other water level changes occur. Shoreline stabilization tin be done by barriers between country and water such as seawalls and bulkheads. Living shorelines are gaining attending as new stabilization method. These can reduce harm and erosion while simultaneously providing ecosystem services such every bit food production, nutrient and sediment removal, and water quality comeback to society^[47]

Example of human caused habitat destruction likely capable of reversing if further disturbance is halted. Uganda.

Natural vegetation along this coastal shoreline in North Carolina, U.s., 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 surface area from losing its specialist species to generalist invasive species depends on the extent of the habitat devastation 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 than extreme (fragmentation or patch loss), Restoration environmental may be needed.^[48]

Educational activity of the general public is possibly the best manner to preclude further human habitat destruction.^[49] Changing the dull creep of environmental impacts from beingness viewed equally acceptable to being seen a reason for modify to more sustainable practices.^[49] Pedagogy nearly the necessity of family planning to ho-hum population growth is of import as greater population leads to greater human acquired habitat destruction.^[50]

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

The biggest potential to solving the upshot of habitat destruction comes from solving the political, economical and social bug that go along with information technology such as, individual and commercial material consumption,^[49] sustainable extraction of resources,^[52] conservation areas,^[49] restoration of degraded land^[53] and addressing climatic change.^[13]

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

1. Considering the irreplaceable ecosystem services provided past natural habitats.
2. Protecting remaining intact sections of natural habitat.
3. Finding ecological means to increase agronomical output without increasing the total land in product.
4. Reducing human population and expansion. Apart from improving admission to contraception globally, furthering gender equality also has a swell benefit. When women have the same pedagogy (decision-making power), this generally leads to smaller families.

It is argued that the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation tin can be counteracted by including spatial processes in potential restoration direction plans. However, fifty-fifty though spatial dynamics are incredibly important in the conservation and recovery of species, a express amount of direction 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 (June 17, 2017). "Effect of habitat deposition 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, S; Benton, Michael J.; Falcon-Lang, Howard J. (1 Dec 2010). "Rainforest collapse triggered Pennsylvanian tetrapod diversification in Euramerica" (PDF). Geology. 38 (12): 1079–1082. Bibcode:2010Geo....38.1079S. doi:ten.1130/G31182.ane. Archived from the original on 2011-10-xi. Retrieved 2010-11-29 – 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". Chance Analysis. 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 2021-07-23. Retrieved 2021-03-18 .
4. ^ ^{a b} WIEGAND, THORSTEN; REVILLA, ELOY; MOLONEY, KIRK A. (February 2005). "Furnishings of Habitat Loss and Fragmentation on Population Dynamics". Conservation Biology. 19 (1): 108–121. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00208.10. ISSN 0888-8892. S2CID 33258495.
5. ^ Pimm & Raven, 2000, pp. 843-845.
6. ^ United Nations Environs Plan (2021). Making Peace with Nature: A scientific pattern to tackle the climate, biodiversity and pollution emergencies. Nairobi. https://world wide web.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 April 2015). "Description of a seminatural habitat of the endangered Suweon treefrog Hyla suweonensis". Animal Cells and Systems. 19 (3): 216. doi:10.1080/19768354.2015.1028442. S2CID 86565631.
11. ^ "The Panda's 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 Due west.; Norman Three, John B.; Barnett, David T. (2008). "Modelling invasion for a habitat generalist and a specialist found species". Variety and Distributions. 14 (5): 808–817. doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00486.10. ISSN 1366-9516. S2CID 14148713. Archived from the original on 2021-07-23. Retrieved 2021-03-eighteen .
13. ^ ^{a b} Travis, J. M. J. (2003-03-07). "Climate alter and habitat devastation: a mortiferous anthropogenic cocktail". Proceedings of the Royal Society 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 (2005-11-09). "Slow response of establish species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation". Ecology Letters. ix (1): 72–77. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00841.10. ISSN 1461-023X. PMID 16958870.
15. ^ Spiesman, Brian J.; Inouye, Brian D. (December 2013). "Habitat loss alters the architecture of plant–pollinator interaction networks". Ecology. 94 (12): 2688–2696. doi:10.1890/xiii-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:ten.1017/S1464793105006949. Archived from the original on 15 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 (3): 603–610. doi:10.2307/3802168. ISSN 0022-541X. JSTOR 3802168.
18. ^ Nakagiri, Tainaka, Nariyuki, Kei-ichi (1 May 2004). "Indirect effects of habitat destruction in model ecosystems". Science Directly. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved thirty 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 15 April 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
20. ^ "Tierras Bajas Deforestation, Bolivia". Newsroom. Photo taken from the International Space Station on April 16, 2001. NASA Earth Observatory. 2001-04-sixteen. Archived from the original on 2008-09-20. Retrieved 2008-08-11 .
21. ^ ^{a b c} Cincotta & Engelman, 2000.
22. ^ ^{a b c d e f m h i j} Primack, 2006.
23. ^ ^{a b} Stein et al., 2000.
24. ^ Higgins, Steven I.; Lavorel, Sandra; Revilla, Eloy (2003-04-25). "Estimating plant migration rates under habitat loss and fragmentation". Oikos. 101 (2): 354–366. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12141.10. 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: Environmental Bug, Policies and Clean Engineering". AZoCleantech.com. 2015-06-08. Archived from the original on 2019-03-30. Retrieved 2017-12-12 .
30. ^ Burke et al., 2000.
31. ^ ^{a b c d east f thousand h i} Millennium Ecological Assessment, 2005.
32. ^ "File:Burnt woods GJ.jpg", Wikipedia, archived from the original on 2021-07-23, retrieved 2021-03-xviii
33. ^ Butler, Rhett A. (31 March 2021). "Global wood loss increases in 2020". Mongabay. Archived from the original on 1 April 2021. ● Mongabay graphing WRI data from "Wood Loss / How much tree comprehend is lost globally each year?". enquiry.WRI.org. World Resource Plant — Global Forest Review. Jan 2021. Archived from the original on 10 March 2021.
34. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Geist & Lambin, 2002.
35. ^ Durner, George Grand.; Douglas, David C.; Nielson, Ryan M.; Amstrup, Steven C.; McDonald, Trent L.; Stirling, Ian; Mauritzen, Mette; Born, Erik Westward.; Wiig, Øystein; Deweaver, Eric; Serreze, Mark C.; Belikov, Stanislav E.; The netherlands, Marika M.; Maslanik, James; Aars, Jon; Bailey, David A.; Derocher, Andrew East. (2009). "Predicting 21st-century polar bear habitat distribution from global climate models". Ecological Monographs. 79: 25–58. doi:10.1890/07-2089.1.
36. ^ Baker, Jason D.; Littnan, Charles L.; Johnston, David W. (2006-05-24). "Potential effects of sea level ascent on the terrestrial habitats of endangered and endemic megafauna in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands". Endangered Species Research. 2: 21–30. doi:10.3354/esr002021. ISSN 1863-5407.
37. ^ Galbraith, H.; Jones, R.; Park, R.; Clough, J.; Herrod-Julius, S.; Harrington, B.; Page, G. (2002-06-01). "Global Climate Modify and Sea Level Rise: Potential Losses of Intertidal Habitat for Shorebirds". Waterbirds. 25 (2): 173–183. doi:10.1675/1524-4695(2002)025[0173:GCCASL]2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1524-4695.
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 Adopt a Different Arroyo Nether a Irresolute Climate". Resource Report. United Nations Environment Program/Macaulay Land Employ Research Institute. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved 15 Apr 2021.
41. ^ Bull, David (1982). A Growing Problem: Pesticides and the Third World 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 affliction [malaria] from the Fenlands in Britain and the Pontine marshes of Italia.
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 xxx September 2021. The eradication of smallpox virus [...] is also a perfect instance of habitat destruction: smallpox vaccination gives life-long immunity, and humans are the only host. Mass vaccination therefore resulted in total elimination of the habitat of the virus.
43. ^ "Valuing nature". Earth 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 forth a Slope of Urbanisation". PLOS ONE. eight (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 Pattern. Archived from the original on 2021-03-eighteen. Retrieved 2021-03-23 .
48. ^ Liao, Jinbao; Bearup, Daniel; Wang, Yeqiao; Nijs, Ivan; Bonte, Dries; Li, Yuanheng; Brose, Ulrich; Wang, Shaopeng; Blasius, Bernd (2017-05-02). "Robustness of metacommunities with omnivory to habitat devastation: disentangling patch fragmentation from patch loss". Environmental. 98 (6): 1631–1639. doi:10.1002/ecy.1830. hdl:10067/1418100151162165141. ISSN 0012-9658. PMID 28369715. Archived from the original on 2021-07-23. Retrieved 2021-03-xviii .
49. ^ ^{a b c d} Morrison, M.L. (1999), "Habitat and habitat destruction", Ecology Geology. Encyclopedia of Earth Science, Encyclopedia of Earth Science, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 308–309, doi:10.1007/1-4020-4494-1_165, ISBN0-412-74050-8
50. ^ Ehrlich, P. R.; Pringle, R. M. (2008-08-xi). "Where does biodiversity become from here? A grim business-equally-usual forecast and a hopeful portfolio of fractional solutions". Proceedings of the National University of Sciences. 105 (Supplement 1): 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 Affect Pollen Transfer". Ecology. 86 (2): 466–475. doi:x.1890/03-0607. ISSN 0012-9658. Archived from the original on 2021-07-23. Retrieved 2021-03-18 .
52. ^ Bringezu, Stefan (2009), "Visions of a sustainable resource use", Sustainable Resource Management: Global Trends, Visions and Policies, Greenleaf Publishing Limited, pp. 155–215, doi:ten.9774/gleaf.978-ane-907643-07-1_5, ISBN978-1-907643-07-1 , retrieved 2021-03-xviii
53. ^ Elmarsdottir, Asrun; Aradottir, Asa 50.; Trlica, Chiliad. J. (2003-09-26). "Microsite availability and establishment of native species on degraded and reclaimed sites". Periodical of Practical Environmental. 40 (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 Environmental. 7 (3): 309–315. doi:10.1046/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
• Shush, L.; Y. Kura; K. Kassem; C. Ravenga; M. Spalding; D. McAllister (2000). Pilot Assessment of Global Ecosystems: Coastal Ecosystems. World Resources Found, Washington, D.C. ISBN9781569734582. Archived from the original on 2018-05-04. Retrieved 2020-02-19 .
• Cincotta, R.P., and R. Engelman. 2000. Nature's place: human population density and the future of biological diversity. Population Activity 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]two.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. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
• Laurance Westward. F. (1999). "Reflections on the tropical deforestation crisis". Biological Conservation. 91 (2–three): 109–117. CiteSeerX10.i.i.501.3004. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00088-nine.
• McKee J. K.; Sciulli P.West.; Fooce C. D.; Waite T. A. (2003). "Forecasting global biodiversity threats associated with human population growth". Biological Conservation. 115: 161–164. doi:x.1016/s0006-3207(03)00099-five.
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Program). 2005. Ecosystems and Human being Well-Being Archived 2016-06-10 at the Wayback Motorcar. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Printing, Covelo, CA.
• Primack, R. B. 2006. Essentials of Conservation Biological science. 4th Ed. Habitat devastation, 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, N. Henninger, Grand. Kassem, and R. Payne. 2000. Airplane pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems: Wetland Ecosystems. Globe 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:10.1130/G31182.1.
• Sanderson Due east. W.; Jaiteh One thousand.; Levy M. A.; Redford 1000. H.; Wannebo A. V.; Woolmer Thou. (2002). "The man footprint and the last of the wild". BioScience. 52 (x): 891–904. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0891:thfatl]2.0.co;ii.
• 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-x-02 at the Wayback Automobile CSIR, Pretoria, South Africa.
• Stein, B. A., L. S. Kutner, and J. South. Adams (eds.). 2000. Precious Heritage: The Condition of Biodiversity in the United States. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Temple S. A. (1986). "The problem of avian extinctions". Current Ornithology. Ornithology. Vol. iii. pp. 453–485. doi:ten.1007/978-1-4615-6784-4_11. ISBN978-i-4615-6786-viii.
• Tibbetts John (2006). "Louisiana's Wetlands: A Lesson in Nature Appreciation". Environ Health Perspect. 114 (1): A40–A43. doi:x.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 ecology change". Science. 292 (5515): 281–284. Bibcode:2001Sci...292..281T. doi:10.1126/science.1057544. PMID 11303102. S2CID 23847498.
• White, R. P., Due south. Murray, and M. Rohweder. 2000. Pilot Cess of Global Ecosystems: Grassland Ecosystems. Globe Resources Found, Washington, D. C.
• WRI. 2003. Globe Resources 2002-2004: Decisions for the Globe: Balance, vox, and ability. 328 pp. World Resources Found, Washington, D.C.

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

Posted by: perrywhearommens.blogspot.com

Share this post