dc.contributor.author |
Huang, Ryan M.
|
|
dc.contributor.author |
Van Aarde, Rudi J.
|
|
dc.contributor.author |
Pimm, Stuart L.
|
|
dc.contributor.author |
Chase, Michael
|
|
dc.contributor.author |
Leggett, Keith
|
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2022-11-07T10:21:21Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2022-11-07T10:21:21Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2022-09-11 |
|
dc.description |
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT : Telemetry data cannot be shared publicly because they contain the locations of an endangered and highly poached species. The environmental and human data necessary for reproducing our results are available at: https://osf.io/eyanr/. Much of these data have also been published under Loarie et al (2009). |
en_US |
dc.description |
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL : S1 Table. Telemetry sample size.
Table of the number of males and female elephants providing telemetry data broken down by conservation cluster of occurrences. Included are the major protected areas in each cluster.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s001 |
en_US |
dc.description |
S2 Table. Area of layer intersection.
Table providing amount of area considered suitable within each country of interest for each data layer used in addition to the combined data.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s002 |
en_US |
dc.description |
S1 Fig. Map of suitable landscapes.
High resolution map showing areas that are both environmentally suitable for elephants and currently experience low human activity.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s003 |
en_US |
dc.description |
S2 Fig. Distribution of slope across conservation clusters.
Histogram of elephant telemetry points at various slopes for each metapopulation cluster. The red dashed line indicates the threshold (3°) of preference for suitability.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s004 |
en_US |
dc.description |
S3 Fig. Distance to rivers across conservation clusters.
Accumulation curve of area within a conservation cluster as the distance increases away from rivers of varying flow orders.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s005 |
en_US |
dc.description |
4 Fig. Distribution of crop probability across conservation clusters.
Histogram of elephant telemetry points at various cropland probabilities for each metapopulation cluster outside of protected areas. The red dashed line indicates the threshold (25%) of preference for suitability.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s006 |
en_US |
dc.description |
S5 Fig. Distribution of human population density across conservation clusters.
Histogram of elephant telemetry points at various human population densities for each metapopulation cluster outside of protected areas. The red dashed line indicates the threshold (25 people per km2) of preference for suitability.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s007 |
en_US |
dc.description |
S6 Fig. Elephant interactions with cattle.
A) Histogram of elephant telemetry points at various cattle densities for each metapopulation cluster outside of protected areas. The red dashed line indicates the threshold (5 cattle per km2) of preference for suitability. B) A map of elephant telemetry points illustrating how spill over from protected areas leads to interactions with areas of high cattle density.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791.s008 |
en_US |
dc.description.abstract |
Southern Africa spans nearly 7 million km2 and contains approximately 80% of the world’s
savannah elephants (Loxodonta africana) mostly living in isolated protected areas. Here we
ask what are the prospects for improving the connections between these populations? We
combine 1.2 million telemetry observations from 254 elephants with spatial data on environmental factors and human land use across eight southern African countries. Telemetry data
show what natural features limit elephant movement and what human factors, including
fencing, further prevent or restrict dispersal. The resulting intersection of geospatial data
and elephant presences provides a map of suitable landscapes that are environmentally
appropriate for elephants and where humans allow elephants to occupy. We explore the
environmental and anthropogenic constraints in detail using five case studies. Lastly, we
review all the major potential connections that may remain to connect a fragmented elephant metapopulation and document connections that are no longer feasible. |
en_US |
dc.description.department |
Zoology and Entomology |
en_US |
dc.description.librarian |
dm2022 |
en_US |
dc.description.sponsorship |
Billiton, Conservation Foundation Zambia, Conservation International’s southern Africa’s Wildlife Programme, the Conservation Lower Zambezi, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Mozal Community Development Trust, the National Research Foundation, the National Postcode Lottery of the Netherlands, Peace Parks Foundation, the US Fish and Wildlife Services, the University of Pretoria, the World Wildlife Fund (SARPO; Mozambique; SA), the Walt Disney Grant Foundation, and the Wildlifewins Lottery. Elephants Without Borders was funded by the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation, Jody Allen, the Woodtiger Fund, the Thomas C Bishop Charitable Foundation, the James and Deborah Burrows Foundation, and the Zoological Society of San Diego. We acknowledge the in kind logistical support of South African National Parks. |
en_US |
dc.description.uri |
http://www.plosone.org |
en_US |
dc.identifier.citation |
Huang, R.M., Van Aarde, R.J., Pimm, S.L., Chase, M.J. & Leggett, K. (2022) Mapping potential connections between Southern Africa’s elephant
populations. PLoS One 17(10): e0275791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275791. |
en_US |
dc.identifier.issn |
1932-6203 (online) |
|
dc.identifier.other |
10.1371/journal.pone.0275791 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/88166 |
|
dc.language.iso |
en |
en_US |
dc.publisher |
Public Library of Science |
en_US |
dc.rights |
© 2022 Huang et al. This is an open
access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License. |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Elephants |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Conservation science |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Rivers |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Africa |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Mozambique |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Livestock |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Malawi |
en_US |
dc.subject |
Surface water |
en_US |
dc.subject |
African elephant (Loxodonta africana) |
en_US |
dc.title |
Mapping potential connections between Southern Africa’s elephant populations |
en_US |
dc.type |
Article |
en_US |