Disciplina Discipline BIE5770
Ecologia de Paisagens para a Conservação e Restauração da Biodiversidade e de Serviços Ecossistêmicos

Landscape Ecology for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Conservation and Restoration

Área de Concentração: 41134

Concentration area: 41134

Criação: 09/12/2021

Creation: 09/12/2021

Ativação: 09/12/2021

Activation: 09/12/2021

Nr. de Créditos: 6

Credits: 6

Carga Horária:

Workload:

Teórica

(por semana)

Theory

(weekly)

Prática

(por semana)

Practice

(weekly)

Estudos

(por semana)

Study

(weekly)

Duração Duration Total Total
4 1 4 10 semanas 10 weeks 90 horas 90 hours

Docente Responsável:

Professor:

Leandro Reverberi Tambosi

Objetivos:

Apresentar os principais conceitos relacionados à ecologia de paisagens, desenvolvendo a capacidade de interpretação de trabalhos com abordagens que incorporem análises da estrutura e da dinâmica das paisagens. Desenvolver o pensamento crítico e as habilidades necessárias para compreender e utilizar abordagens de ecologia de paisagens em projetos de pesquisa científica e para a tomada de decisões em gestão de recursos naturais.

Objectives:

Presenting the main concepts of landscape ecology, developing students’ skills in interpreting studies based on landscape structure and dynamics. Train students to adopt a landscape ecology perspective to design scientific research projects and to support decision making to manage natural resources.

Justificativa:

Trata-se de uma disciplina com diversas interfaces com outras disciplinas da Ecologia, que contribui para o entendimento de padrões e processos ecológicos em um contexto espacial. Por conta destas características a ecologia de paisagens tem amplas implicações para a conservação e restauração da biodiversidade e de seus serviços ecossistêmicos, sendo cada vez mais utilizada em projetos científicos e na gestão de recursos naturais. A oferta desta disciplina abordando apenas aspectos teóricos viabilizará a oferta remota, permitindo a participação de alunos de diferentes regiões do país e de professores convidados que atualmente estão em instituições internacionais, enriquecendo as discussões e a experiência dos alunos.

Rationale:

Landscape ecology has interfaces with multiple ecological research fields and helps understanding the ecological patterns and processes under a spatial perspective. Landscape ecology importance is increasing in the fields of biodiversity and ecosystem services conservation and restoration, becoming essential in research project design and decision making processes. This course will address theoretical aspects of landscape ecology and will have virtual classes. This strategy will allow the enrolment of students from different states and also the involvement of guest professors currently abroad.

Conteúdo:

1-Definições, conceitos e origens da ecologia de paisagens; 2-Perda e a fragmentação de habitats, dimensões temporais, limiares e implicações para conservação de espécies; 3-Conectividade da paisagem estrutural, funcional e implicações para movimentação de espécies; 4-Matriz da paisagem, heterogeneidade da matriz, importância como fonte de recursos e implicações para movimentação e persistência de espécies; 5-Estrutura da paisagem e provisão de serviços ecossistêmicos, variação espacial e temporal dos serviços ecossistêmicos; 6-Ecologia de paisagens e conservação da biodiversidade, métricas de paisagem como indicadores de biodiversidade e priorização de conservação; 7-Ecologia de paisagem e restauração ecológica, importância para recolonização, regeneração e sucesso da restauração, restauração de paisagens multifuncionais; 8-Ferramentas para análises de paisagens, métricas estruturais e funcionais, teoria dos grafos e teoria de circuitos 9-Delineamento de projetos em ecologia de paisagens 10- Abordagens para tomada de decisão para conservação e restauração de paisagens

Content:

1-Landscape ecology origins, definitions and key concepts; 2-Habitat loss and fragmentation, temporal and spatial dimensions, thresholds and implications for species conservation; 3- Structural and functional landscape connectivity, implications for species movement; 4-Landscape matrix, matrix heterogeneity, matrix importance as a source of resources, importance for species movement and persistence; 5-Landscape structure and ecosystem services provision, spatial and temporal variation of ecosystem services; 6- Landscape ecology and biodiversity conservation, landscape metrics as biodiversity indicator and conservation prioritization; 7-Landscape ecology and restoration ecology, importance for recolonization, regeneration and restoration success. Restoration of multifunctional landscapes; 8-Tools for landscape analysis, structural and functional landscape metrics, graph theory, circuit theory; 9-Project design in landscape ecology, methods, criteria and limitations; 10-Landscape ecology approachs for decision making in conservation and landscape restoration.

Forma de Avaliação:

Estratégias de avaliação: desempenho nas discussões em aula (33% da nota), apresentação de seminários propostos pelo docente (33% da nota), desempenho em trabalho final (34% da nota).

Type of Assessment:

Student performance in discussions (33% of the final grade), oral presentation suggested topics (33% of the final grade), development of a final essay (34% of the final grade).

Observação:

A disciplina será ofertada de maneira 100% não presencial, não havendo a necessidade da presença dos docentes e/ou alunos na Universidade. Serão disponibilizadas vídeo-aulas previamente preparadas pelos docentes abordando os tópicos de cada aula, bem como material de leitura. A preparação das tarefas a serem desenvolvidas em grupos de 2-3 alunos (ex.: seminários) deverá ocorrer da maneira escolhida pelos próprios grupos de alunos. A interação entre professores e alunos ocorrerá nos períodos de aula e, se necessário, esclarecimentos por fórum no site da disciplina. Durante as 4 horas de aulas diárias, atividades síncronas poderão ocorrer por períodos seguidos de 1 a 1:30 horas, com intervalos de 10 minutos entre os períodos. As discussões com os alunos serão síncronas, havendo disponibilização posterior do material gravado. O material da disciplina (pdf das aulas, textos de apoio e de leitura obrigatória, gravações) ficará disponível no Moodle. A principio, a plataforma usada para as aulas será o Google Meet, disponível a todos os membros da USP. Se necessário o uso de outra plataforma para alguma atividade especifica, será escolhida uma de acesso gratuito. A frequência em aulas será verificada pela presença efetiva dos alunos em aula, verificada em tela. Portanto, no formato de aulas remotas é necessário que os alunos tenham acesso à câmera, microfone e internet. No formato de aulas remotas, é necessário acesso à câmera e microfone. Preferencialmente, assistir as aulas em computador.

Notes/Remarks:

The course will be offered 100% online, with no need for the presence of professors and/or students at the University. Video lessons and suggested reading material about each topic will be made available in advance by the teachers. The oral presentations by students will be carried out in groups of 2-3 students (eg seminars). The interaction between teachers and students will take place during class periods and, if necessary, by online forum in the course website. During the 4 hours of daily classes, synchronous activities can take place for consecutive periods up to 1:30 hours, with 10-minute breaks between periods. Discussions with students will be synchronous, with the recorded material being made available later. The course material (pdf of the classes, support and mandatory reading texts, recordings) will be available on Moodle. The platform used for the classes will be Google Meet, available to all USP members. If necessary an alternative free access platform will be chosen. Attendance in classes will be verified by the effective presence of students during synchronous atcivities, verified on screen. Therefore, in the form of remote classes it is necessary that students have access to the camera, microphone and internet. In remote lecture format, access to camera and microphone is required. It is recommended that participation during discussions is made by using computers instead of mobile phones.

Bibliografia:

Banks-Leite, C. et al. 2014. Using ecological thresholds to evaluate the costs and benefits of set-asides in a biodiversity hotspot. Science 345:1041–1045. Bélisle, M. Measuring landscape connectivity: the challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology 2005 86:1988-1995. Castellón, T.D. & Sieving, K. E. 2006. An experimental test of matrix permeability and corridor use by an endemic understory bird. Conservation Biology 20: 135-145. Chetkiewicz, C.-L. B., Clair, C. C. St & Boyce, M. S. 2006. Corridors for conservation: Integrating pattern and process. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 37: 317-342 Boesing, A.L., Nichols, E., Metzger, J.P. 2017. Effects of landscape structure on avian-mediated insect pest control services: a review. Landscape ecology 32:931-944. Chazdon, R.L. 2008 Beyond Deforestation: Restoring Forests and Ecosystem Services on Degraded Lands. Science 320: 1458-1460. Ewers, R.M. et al. 2013. Using landscape history to predict biodiversity patterns in fragmented landscapes. Ecology Letters 16:1221–1233. Fahrig, L. 2003. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34:487–515. Jackson, H.B.; Fahrig, L. 2012. What size is a biologically relevant landscape? Landscape Ecology 27: 929-941. Kuussaari, M., Bommarco, R., Heikkinen, R. K., Helm, A., Krauss, J., Lindborg, R., Öckinger, E., Pärtel, M., Pino, J., Rodà, F., Stefanescu, C., Teder, T., Zobel, M., Steffan-Dewenter, I. 2009. Extinction debt: a challenge for biodiversity conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 24: 564-71. Loyola, R. D. et al. 2013. A straightforward conceptual approach for evaluating spatial conservation priorities under climate change. Biodiversity and conservation 22:483-495. Martensen, A.C., Pimentel, R.G., Metzger, J.P., 2008. Relative effects of fragment size and connectivity on bird community in the Atlantic Rain Forest: implications for conservation. Biological Conservation 141, 2184-2192. Martensen, A.C., Saura, S., Fortin, M. 2017. Spatio-temporal connectivity: assessing the amount of reachable habitat in dynamic landscapes. Methods in ecology and evolution 8:1253-1264. McRae B.H., Dickson, B.G., Keitt T.H., Shah, V.B. 2008. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology 89:2712–2724. Metzger, J. P. 2001. O que é ecologia de paisagens? Biota Neotropica 1:1–9. Metzger, JP, et al. 2009. Time-lag in biological responses to landscape changes in a highly dynamic Atlantic forest region. Biological Conservation 142: 1166-1177. Tilman, D., May, R.M., Lehman, C.L., Nowak, M.A., 1994. Habitat destruction and extinction debt. Nature 371, 65-66. Mitchell, M.G.E. et al. 2015. Reframing landscape fragmentation's effects on Saura, S., & Rubio, L. 2010. A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography, 33:523-537. Strassburg, B.B.N. et al. 2019. Strategic approaches to restoring ecosystems can triple conservation gains and halve costs. Nature Ecology & Evolution 3:62-70. Swift, T.L., Hannon, S.J. 2010. Critical thresholds associated with habitat loss: a review of the concepts, evidence, and applications. Biological Review 85, 35-53. Villard, M-A, Metzger, J.P. The fragmentation paradox: habitat amount and configuration as foci of conservation planning and research. In review. * Pardini, R, Bueno, A, Gardner, T, Prado, PI, Metzger, JP. 2010. Beyond the fragmentation threshold hypothesis: regime shifts in biodiversity across fragmented landscapes. Plos One 5 (10): 1-10 Tambosi, L.R., Martensen,. A.C., Ribeiro, M.C., Metzger, J.P. 2014. A Framework to Optimize Biodiversity Restoration Efforts Based on Habitat Amount and Landscape Connectivity. Restoration Ecology 22: 169-177. Taylor, P. et al. 1993. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68:571–573. Tilman,D. et al. 1994. Habitat destruction and the extinction debt. Nature 371:65–66. Turner M.G., Gardner R.H. & O'Neill R.V. 2001. Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. Springer, New York. Turner, M. G. 2005. Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36:319–344. Villard, M.-A. & J. P. Metzger. 2014. Beyond the fragmentation debate: a conceptual model to predict when habitat configuration really matters. Journal of Applied Ecology 51:309–318. Wiens, J. & Moss, M. (eds.). 2005. Studies in landscape ecology: issues and perspectives in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Wu, J. & Hobbs, R. (eds). 2007. Key topics in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK Metzger, J.P. 2001. O que é ecologia de paisagens? Biota Neotropica (http://www.biotaneotropica.org.br/v1n12)

Bibliography:

Banks-Leite, C. et al. 2014. Using ecological thresholds to evaluate the costs and benefits of set-asides in a biodiversity hotspot. Science 345:1041–1045. Bélisle, M. Measuring landscape connectivity: the challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology 2005 86:1988-1995. Castellón, T.D. & Sieving, K. E. 2006. An experimental test of matrix permeability and corridor use by an endemic understory bird. Conservation Biology 20: 135-145. Chetkiewicz, C.-L. B., Clair, C. C. St & Boyce, M. S. 2006. Corridors for conservation: Integrating pattern and process. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 37: 317-342 Boesing, A.L., Nichols, E., Metzger, J.P. 2017. Effects of landscape structure on avian-mediated insect pest control services: a review. Landscape ecology 32:931-944. Chazdon, R.L. 2008 Beyond Deforestation: Restoring Forests and Ecosystem Services on Degraded Lands. Science 320: 1458-1460. Ewers, R.M. et al. 2013. Using landscape history to predict biodiversity patterns in fragmented landscapes. Ecology Letters 16:1221–1233. Fahrig, L. 2003. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34:487–515. Jackson, H.B.; Fahrig, L. 2012. What size is a biologically relevant landscape? Landscape Ecology 27: 929-941. Kuussaari, M., Bommarco, R., Heikkinen, R. K., Helm, A., Krauss, J., Lindborg, R., Öckinger, E., Pärtel, M., Pino, J., Rodà, F., Stefanescu, C., Teder, T., Zobel, M., Steffan-Dewenter, I. 2009. Extinction debt: a challenge for biodiversity conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 24: 564-71. Loyola, R. D. et al. 2013. A straightforward conceptual approach for evaluating spatial conservation priorities under climate change. Biodiversity and conservation 22:483-495. Martensen, A.C., Pimentel, R.G., Metzger, J.P., 2008. Relative effects of fragment size and connectivity on bird community in the Atlantic Rain Forest: implications for conservation. Biological Conservation 141, 2184-2192. Martensen, A.C., Saura, S., Fortin, M. 2017. Spatio-temporal connectivity: assessing the amount of reachable habitat in dynamic landscapes. Methods in ecology and evolution 8:1253-1264. McRae B.H., Dickson, B.G., Keitt T.H., Shah, V.B. 2008. Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology 89:2712–2724. Metzger, J. P. 2001. O que é ecologia de paisagens? Biota Neotropica 1:1–9. Metzger, JP, et al. 2009. Time-lag in biological responses to landscape changes in a highly dynamic Atlantic forest region. Biological Conservation 142: 1166-1177. Tilman, D., May, R.M., Lehman, C.L., Nowak, M.A., 1994. Habitat destruction and extinction debt. Nature 371, 65-66. Mitchell, M.G.E. et al. 2015. Reframing landscape fragmentation's effects on Saura, S., & Rubio, L. 2010. A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography, 33:523-537. Strassburg, B.B.N. et al. 2019. Strategic approaches to restoring ecosystems can triple conservation gains and halve costs. Nature Ecology & Evolution 3:62-70. Swift, T.L., Hannon, S.J. 2010. Critical thresholds associated with habitat loss: a review of the concepts, evidence, and applications. Biological Review 85, 35-53. Villard, M-A, Metzger, J.P. The fragmentation paradox: habitat amount and configuration as foci of conservation planning and research. In review. * Pardini, R, Bueno, A, Gardner, T, Prado, PI, Metzger, JP. 2010. Beyond the fragmentation threshold hypothesis: regime shifts in biodiversity across fragmented landscapes. Plos One 5 (10): 1-10 Tambosi, L.R., Martensen,. A.C., Ribeiro, M.C., Metzger, J.P. 2014. A Framework to Optimize Biodiversity Restoration Efforts Based on Habitat Amount and Landscape Connectivity. Restoration Ecology 22: 169-177. Taylor, P. et al. 1993. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68:571–573. Tilman,D. et al. 1994. Habitat destruction and the extinction debt. Nature 371:65–66. Turner M.G., Gardner R.H. & O'Neill R.V. 2001. Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. Springer, New York. Turner, M. G. 2005. Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36:319–344. Villard, M.-A. & J. P. Metzger. 2014. Beyond the fragmentation debate: a conceptual model to predict when habitat configuration really matters. Journal of Applied Ecology 51:309–318. Wiens, J. & Moss, M. (eds.). 2005. Studies in landscape ecology: issues and perspectives in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Wu, J. & Hobbs, R. (eds). 2007. Key topics in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK Metzger, J.P. 2001. O que é ecologia de paisagens? Biota Neotropica (http://www.biotaneotropica.org.br/v1n12)

Tipo de oferecimento da disciplina:

Não-Presencial

Class type:

Não-Presencial