How Many Animal Habitats Are Destroyed Each Year

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

Habitat destruction (as well termed habitat loss and habitat reduction) is the procedure past 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 go one of the near important topics of research in environmental as they are major threats to the survival of endangered species.^[iv]

Activities such as harvesting natural resources, industrial production and urbanization are human being contributions to habitat destruction. Pressure level from agriculture is the principal human 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 tin contribute to habitat destruction more indirectly. Geological processes, climate alter,^[two] introduction of invasive species, ecosystem food depletion, water and noise pollution are some examples. Loss of habitat can be preceded past an initial habitat fragmentation.

Attempts to address habitat destruction are in international policy commitments embodied by Sustainable Evolution Goal 15 "Life on Land" and Sustainable Development Goal 14 "Life Below Water". However, the Un Environment Programme report on "Making Peace with Nature" released in 2021 constitute that near of these efforts had failed to run into their internationally agreed upon goals.^[6]

Impacts on organisms [edit]

When a habitat is destroyed, the conveying capacity for ethnic plants, animals, and other organisms is reduced then that populations pass up, sometimes up to the level of extinction.^[7]

Habitat loss is perchance the greatest threat to organisms and biodiversity.^[8] Temple (1986) found that 82% of endangered bird species were significantly threatened past habitat loss. Most amphibian species are besides threatened by native habitat loss,^[9] and some species are at present only breeding in modified habitat.^[ten] Endemic organisms with limited ranges are virtually afflicted by habitat destruction, mainly because these organisms are non found anywhere else inside the world, and thus have less take a chance of recovering. Many endemic organisms have very specific requirements for their survival that can only be found within a certain ecosystem, resulting in their extinction. Extinction may likewise have place very long afterward the destruction of habitat, a phenomenon known as extinction debt. Habitat destruction can also decrease the range of certain organism populations. This can result in the reduction of genetic diversity and possibly the product of infertile youths, as these organisms would accept a higher possibility of mating with related organisms inside their population, or unlike species. 1 of the virtually famous examples is the impact upon China's giant panda, once institute in many areas of Sichuan. At present it is only found 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 surface area occurs, the species diversity 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 main environmental causes of the decline of biodiversity on local, regional, and global scales. Many believe that habitat fragmentation is likewise a threat to biodiversity however some believe that it is secondary to habitat loss.^[14] The reduction of the corporeality of habitat bachelor 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 also every bit fragmentation effects. Pure habitat loss refers to changes occurring in the composition of the mural that causes a decrease in individuals. Fragmentation furnishings refers to an addition of furnishings occurring due to the habitat changes.^[four] Habitat loss can result in negative effects on the dynamic of species richness. The genus Hymenoptera are a various group of found pollinators who are highly susceptible to the negative effects of habitat loss, this could result in a domino effect between the constitute-pollinator interactions leading to major conservation implications within this genus.^[15]

Destruction of populations [edit]

Habitat fragmentation has a major impact on animal specie populations because it deprives species of what they are naturally accustomed to. This makes the species isolated, reduces the area where they tin can live, and creates new ecological boundaries. Some studies take shown that changes in the abiotic and biotic parameters have acquired a greater impact on the environmental than the reduction in habitat size itself. They concluded that crowding a species into 1 space 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 human relationship betwixt habitat patch and species number when information technology comes to habitat specialist plants species located in fragmented landscapes. This could potentially be due to drastic declines of plant species areas due to changes in the surrounding state.^[fourteen]

Predators affecting the population of the casualty [edit]

In recent times the destruction of habitat has been the cause of the loss of many species. Sometimes the expanse may be small of devastation but as time goes by slowly that will crusade an increase in extinction. Loss of habitat is not always the direct crusade 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 possibly consequence in overpopulation. A higher corporeality of whatsoever species that tin cause them to utilise too much of their resource. Since many species depend on limited natural resource, with the overuse they will eventually run out degrade their habitat.^[18]

Habitat destruction and fragmentation are the 2 well-nigh important 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 effects on the population. Fragmentation generally has either no effect or a negative effect on population survival. Since habitat loss of fragmentation typically occurs together it is still not clear which procedure has a larger effect on extinction. Increasing isolation and habitat loss with fragmentation are all connected in a manner that has negatively affected the environment.^[xix]

Geography [edit]

Biodiversity hotspots are importantly tropical regions that characteristic high concentrations of endemic species and, when all hotspots are combined, may comprise over half of the world'southward terrestrial species.^[21] These hotspots are suffering from habitat loss and destruction. Most of the natural habitat on islands and in areas of high man population density has already been destroyed (WRI, 2003). Islands suffering extreme habitat destruction include New Zealand, Republic of madagascar, the Philippines, and Japan.^[22] South and East asia—especially China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Nihon—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 besides 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 Body of water and its associated islands.^[22]

Regions of unsustainable agriculture or unstable governments, which may become hand-in-paw, typically experience high rates of habitat destruction. Fundamental America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Amazonian tropical rainforest areas of Southward America are the main regions with unsustainable agricultural practices and/or government mismanagement.^[22]

Areas of loftier agricultural production tend to have the highest extent of habitat destruction. In the U.South., less than 25% of native vegetation remains in many parts of the Due east and Midwest.^[23] But 15% of land area remains unmodified by human activities in all of Europe.^[22]

Currently, changes occurring in dissimilar environments effectually the world are changing the specific geographical habitats that are suitable for plants to grow. Therefore, the ability for plants to drift to suitable surround areas will take a strong bear upon on the distribution of institute diverseness. However, at the moment, the rates of institute migration that are influenced by habitat loss and fragmentation are not as well understood as they could exist.^[24]

Ecosystems [edit]

Jungle burned for agriculture in southern Mexico

Tropical rainforests take received virtually of the attention apropos the devastation of habitat. From the approximately sixteen one thousand thousand foursquare kilometers of tropical rainforest habitat that originally existed worldwide, less than 9 million square kilometers remain today.^[22] The current rate of deforestation is 160,000 square kilometers per year, which equates to a loss of approximately 1% of original forest habitat each year.^[25]

Other forest ecosystems take suffered as much or more destruction as tropical rainforests. Deforestation for farming and logging have severely disturbed at least 94% of temperate broadleaf forests; many erstwhile growth forest stands have lost more than than 98% of their previous area considering 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.ane% of dry forests in Central America's Pacific Coast and less than viii% in Madagascar remain from their original extents.^[25]

Plains and desert areas have been degraded to a lesser extent. Simply x-20% of the globe'south drylands, which include temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands, scrub, and deciduous forests, have been somewhat degraded.^[26] But included in that 10-20% of land is the approximately nine 1000000 square kilometers of seasonally dry-lands that humans have converted to deserts through the procedure of desertification.^[22] The tallgrass prairies of North America, on the other manus, 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 development is a major reason for the loss of green turtle nesting beaches.

Wetlands and marine areas have endured high levels of habitat destruction. More than 50% of wetlands in the U.S. take been destroyed in only the last 200 years.^[23] Betwixt 60% and seventy% of European wetlands take been completely destroyed.^[28] In the Great britain, in that location has been an increase in demand for coastal housing and tourism which has caused a decline in marine habitats over the last 60 years. The rising sea levels and temperatures have acquired soil erosion, coastal 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.^[xxx] One-fifth of coral reefs have also been destroyed, and another fifth has been severely degraded by overfishing, pollution, and invasive species; 90% of the Philippines' coral reefs solitary have been destroyed.^[31] Finally, over 35% of the mangrove ecosystems worldwide have been destroyed.^[31]

Natural causes [edit]

Habitat destruction through natural processes such as volcanism, fire, and climate change is well documented in the fossil record.^[ii] One study shows that habitat fragmentation of tropical rainforests in Euramerica 300 one thousand thousand years ago led to a peachy loss of amphibian diversity, just simultaneously the drier climate spurred on a burst of diversity amongst reptiles.^[2]

Homo causes [edit]

The rate of global tree encompass loss has approximately doubled since 2001, to an annual loss approaching an surface area the size of Italia.^[33]

Habitat destruction caused 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 do not necessarily involve over destruction of habitat, yet event in habitat collapse. Desertification, deforestation, and coral reef deposition are specific types of habitat devastation for those areas (deserts, forests, coral reefs).^{[ citation needed ]}

Geist and Lambin (2002) assessed 152 case studies of cyberspace losses of tropical woods embrace to determine whatsoever 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 meaning factor, provide a quantitative prioritization of which proximate and underlying causes were the most significant. The proximate causes were clustered into broad categories of agricultural expansion (96%), infrastructure expansion (72%), and wood extraction (67%). Therefore, according to this study, wood conversion to agriculture is the master state use change responsible for tropical deforestation. The specific categories reveal further insight into the specific causes of tropical deforestation: transport extension (64%), commercial wood extraction (52%), permanent tillage (48%), cattle ranching (46%), shifting (slash and fire) cultivation (41%), subsistence agriculture (40%), and fuel wood extraction for domestic use (28%). One issue is that shifting tillage is non the primary cause of deforestation in all world regions, while transport extension (including the construction of new roads) is the largest unmarried proximate cistron responsible for deforestation.^[34]

Global warming [edit]

Rise global temperatures, caused by the greenhouse effect, contribute to habitat devastation, 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 in a higher place-mentioned activities are the proximal or directly causes of habitat devastation in that they actually destroy habitat, this still does not identify why humans destroy habitat. The forces that crusade humans to destroy habitat are known as drivers of habitat destruction. Demographic, economic, sociopolitical, scientific and technological, and cultural drivers all contribute to habitat devastation.^[31]

Demographic drivers include the expanding human population; rate of population increase over fourth dimension; spatial distribution of people in a given surface area (urban versus rural), ecosystem type, and country; and the combined effects of poverty, historic period, family planning, gender, and education status of people in sure areas.^[31] Well-nigh of the exponential homo population growth worldwide is occurring in or close to biodiversity hotspots.^[21] This may explain why human population density accounts for 87.9% of the variation in numbers of threatened species across 114 countries, providing indisputable testify that people play the largest role in decreasing biodiversity.^[38] The nail in homo population and migration of people into such species-rich regions are making conservation efforts not only more urgent simply besides more likely to conflict with local homo interests.^[21] The loftier local population density in such areas is straight correlated to the poverty status of the local people, almost of whom lacking an education and family unit planning.^[34]

According to the Geist and Lambin (2002) study, the underlying driving forces were prioritized as follows (with the percentage of the 152 cases the factor played a significant role in): economic factors (81%), institutional or policy factors (78%), technological factors (70%), cultural or socio-political factors (66%), and demographic factors (61%). The main economical factors included commercialization and growth of timber markets (68%), which are driven past 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 cash crops (25%). Institutional and policy factors included formal pro-deforestation policies on land evolution (40%), economical growth including colonization and infrastructure improvement (34%), and subsidies for land-based activities (26%); belongings rights and land-tenure insecurity (44%); and policy failures such equally corruption, lawlessness, or mismanagement (42%). The main technological cistron was the poor application of technology in the woods industry (45%), which leads to wasteful logging practices. Within 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 bones values (36%), and unconcern by individuals (32%). Demographic factors were the in-migration of colonizing settlers into sparsely populated woods areas (38%) and growing population density—a event of the commencement factor—in those areas (25%).

At that place are also feedbacks and interactions amid the proximate and underlying causes of deforestation that can amplify the process. Route 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 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 by utilizing larger or more than modern machinery that frequently has a worse effect on the habitat than traditional farming and logging methods. Either way, 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 ]}

Affect on human population [edit]

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

Habitat devastation tin can vastly increase an area's vulnerability to natural disasters like flood and drought, crop failure, spread of disease, and water contamination.^{[31] [ page needed ]} On the other hand, a healthy ecosystem with practiced management practices can reduce the gamble of these events happening, or will at least mitigate adverse impacts.^[xl] Eliminating swamps—the habitat of pests such as 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 effect in eradicating that infectious agent.^[42]

Agronomical land can suffer from the destruction of the surrounding landscape. Over the by 50 years, the destruction of habitat surrounding agricultural land has degraded approximately 40% of agronomical state worldwide via erosion, salinization, compaction, nutrient depletion, pollution, and urbanization.^[31] Humans as well lose direct uses of natural habitat when habitat is destroyed. Aesthetic uses such as birdwatching, recreational uses like hunting and angling, and ecotourism usually^{[ quantify ]} rely upon relatively undisturbed habitat. Many^{[ quantify ]} people value the complexity of the natural earth and express business concern at the loss of natural habitats and of animate being or institute species worldwide.^[43]

Probably the near profound impact that habitat destruction has on people is the loss of many valuable ecosystem services. Habitat destruction has altered 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 climatic change.^{[31] [ need quotation to verify ]} One ecosystem service whose significance is becoming better understood is climate regulation. On a local scale, trees provide windbreaks and shade; on a regional calibration, plant transpiration recycles rainwater and maintains abiding annual rainfall; on a global scale, plants (especially trees in tropical rainforests) around the world 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 equally a event of habitat devastation include watershed management, nitrogen fixation, oxygen production, pollination (encounter pollinator decline),^[44] waste matter treatment (i.due east., the breaking down and immobilization of toxic pollutants), and nutrient recycling of sewage or agronomical runoff.^[22]

The loss of trees from tropical rainforests alone represents a substantial diminishing of World'southward ability to produce oxygen and to use up carbon dioxide. These services are becoming fifty-fifty more important as increasing carbon dioxide levels is one of the main contributors to global climate change.^[40] The loss of biodiversity may not directly affect humans, but the indirect effects of losing many species as well as the diversity of ecosystems in general are enormous. When biodiversity is lost, the surroundings loses many species that perform valuable and unique roles in the ecosystem. The environment and all its inhabitants rely on biodiversity to recover from extreme environmental conditions. When too much biodiversity is lost, a catastrophic event such equally an earthquake, alluvion, or volcanic eruption could crusade an ecosystem to crash, and humans would obviously suffer from that.^{[ citation needed ]} Loss of biodiversity also ways that humans are losing animals that could take served every bit biological-control agents and plants that could potentially provide college-yielding crop varieties, pharmaceutical drugs to cure existing or future 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 furnishings of habitat destruction usually impact rural populations more direct than urban populations.^[31] Across the world, 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 simply pay more to go on 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 price of destroying a given habitat. In other words, what do people lose out on with the removal of a given habitat? A land may increase its food supply by converting woods land to row-crop agronomics, but the value of the same land may exist much larger when it can supply natural resources or services such equally clean water, timber, ecotourism, or flood regulation and drought control.^{[31] [ need quotation to verify ]}

Outlook [edit]

The rapid expansion of the global human population is increasing the world's food requirement substantially. Simple logic dictates that more people volition crave more nutrient. In fact, as the globe's population increases dramatically, agricultural production will need to increase by at to the lowest degree 50%, over the next 30 years.^[45] In the past, continually moving to new state and soils provided a boost in food production to run into the global food demand. That like shooting fish in a barrel set up volition no longer be available, however, as more than than 98% of all land suitable for agriculture is already in employ or degraded across 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 food from the same amount of country, and so they will utilise more fertilizers and evidence less concern for the environment to meet the market place need. Others will seek out new land or volition convert other land-uses to agronomics. Agricultural intensification will get widespread at the cost of the surroundings and its inhabitants. Species will exist pushed out of their habitat either directly past habitat devastation or indirectly by fragmentation, degradation, or pollution. Whatsoever efforts to protect the globe'due south remaining natural habitat and biodiversity volition compete directly with humans' growing demand for natural resources, peculiarly new agricultural lands.^[45]

Solutions [edit]

Tropical deforestation: In most cases of tropical deforestation, three to 4 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 accost the unique combination of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation in each country.^[34] Before whatsoever 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 state.^[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 full general.

Shoreline erosion: Coastal erosion is a natural process as storms, waves, tides and other water level changes occur. Shoreline stabilization can be done by barriers between country and water such as 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 production, nutrient and sediment removal, and h2o quality improvement to order^[47]

Instance of human caused habitat destruction likely capable of reversing if further disturbance is halted. Republic of uganda.

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

To prevent an expanse from losing its specialist species to generalist invasive species depends on the extent of the habitat destruction 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 ecology may be needed.^[48]

Education of the general public is possibly the best way to prevent further human habitat destruction.^[49] Irresolute the deadening pitter-patter of environmental impacts from being viewed as adequate to beingness seen a reason for alter to more sustainable practices.^[49] Education about the necessity of family unit planning to irksome population growth is important every bit greater population leads to greater human being caused habitat destruction.^[l]

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

The biggest potential to solving the event of habitat destruction comes from solving the political, economical and social problems that go along with it such as, individual and commercial fabric consumption,^[49] sustainable extraction of resource,^[52] conservation areas,^[49] restoration of degraded land^[53] and addressing climate modify.^[thirteen]

Governmental leaders need to take activity by addressing the underlying driving forces, rather than merely 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 means to increment agricultural output without increasing the total land in production.
4. Reducing man population and expansion. Apart from improving access to contraception globally, furthering gender equality besides has a great benefit. When women take the same education (decision-making power), this generally leads to smaller families.

Information technology is argued that the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation can exist counteracted past including spatial processes in potential restoration management plans. Even so, even though spatial dynamics are incredibly important in the conservation and recovery of species, a limited 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). "Upshot of habitat deposition on contest, carrying capacity, and species aggregation stability". Environmental and Development. Wiley. 7 (15): 5784–5796. doi:x.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/G31182.1. Archived from the original on 2011-x-eleven. 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". Risk Assay. 24 (4): 869–878. doi:ten.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00485.10. 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 Surroundings Program (2021). Making Peace with Nature: A scientific blueprint 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 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". Fauna Cells and Systems. nineteen (three): 216. doi:10.1080/19768354.2015.1028442. S2CID 86565631.
11. ^ "The Panda'due south Forest: Biodiversity Loss". 24 August 2011. Archived from the original on 23 September 2011. Retrieved 6 September 2011.
12. ^ Evangelista, Paul H.; Kumar, Sunil; Stohlgren, Thomas J.; Jarnevich, Catherine S.; Crall, Alycia Westward.; Norman Three, John B.; Barnett, David T. (2008). "Modelling invasion for a habitat generalist and a specialist plant species". Diverseness and Distributions. 14 (5): 808–817. doi:x.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00486.x. ISSN 1366-9516. S2CID 14148713. Archived from the original on 2021-07-23. Retrieved 2021-03-xviii .
13. ^ ^{a b} Travis, J. M. J. (2003-03-07). "Climate change 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 plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation". Ecology Letters. nine (1): 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 plant–pollinator interaction networks". Ecology. 94 (12): 2688–2696. doi:ten.1890/13-0977.one. 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 15 April 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 furnishings of habitat destruction in model ecosystems". Science Direct. Archived from the original on 23 July 2021. Retrieved thirty 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 15 April 2021. Retrieved xxx March 2021.
20. ^ "Tierras Bajas Deforestation, Bolivia". Newsroom. Photo taken from the International Infinite Station on April 16, 2001. NASA Earth Observatory. 2001-04-16. 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 g 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:x.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 Issues, Policies and Make clean Technology". 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 g h i} Millennium Ecological Assessment, 2005.
32. ^ "File:Burnt forest GJ.jpg", Wikipedia, archived from the original on 2021-07-23, retrieved 2021-03-18
33. ^ Butler, Rhett A. (31 March 2021). "Global wood loss increases in 2020". Mongabay. Archived from the original on one April 2021. ● Mongabay graphing WRI information from "Forest Loss / How much tree cover is lost globally each year?". enquiry.WRI.org. Earth Resources Establish — Global Forest Review. January 2021. Archived from the original on 10 March 2021.
34. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Geist & Lambin, 2002.
35. ^ Durner, George Yard.; Douglas, David C.; Nielson, Ryan G.; Amstrup, Steven C.; McDonald, Trent L.; Stirling, Ian; Mauritzen, Mette; Built-in, Erik West.; Wiig, Øystein; Deweaver, Eric; Serreze, Mark C.; Belikov, Stanislav E.; Holland, Marika Chiliad.; 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 Fifty.; Johnston, David W. (2006-05-24). "Potential effects of sea level rise 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.; Folio, G. (2002-06-01). "Global Climatic 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]two.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 Demand to Adopt a Different Arroyo Under a Changing Climate". Resources Study. Un Environment Programme/Macaulay Land Apply Research Institute. Archived from the original on 15 April 2021. Retrieved fifteen April 2021.
41. ^ Bull, David (1982). A Growing Problem: Pesticides and the 3rd World Poor. OXFAM. p. 29. ISBN9780855980641. Archived from the original on 24 April 2021. Retrieved 24 April 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 Command 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 thirty September 2021. The eradication of smallpox virus [...] is likewise 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". World Wildlife Foundation. WWF. Archived from the original on 25 April 2021. Retrieved 15 April 2021.
44. ^ Benoît Geslin; Benoit Gauzens; Elisa Thébault; Isabelle Dajoz (2013). "Plant Pollinator Networks along a Gradient of Urbanisation". PLOS 1. 8 (v): e63421. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...863421G. doi:10.1371/periodical.pone.0063421. PMC3661593. PMID 23717421.
45. ^ ^{a b} Tilman et al., 2001.
46. ^ Sanderson et al., 2002.
47. ^ "Living Shorelines". NOAA Habitat Blueprint. Archived from the original on 2021-03-18. 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". Ecology. 98 (six): 1631–1639. doi:10.1002/ecy.1830. hdl:10067/1418100151162165141. ISSN 0012-9658. PMID 28369715. Archived from the original on 2021-07-23. Retrieved 2021-03-18 .
49. ^ ^{a b c d} Morrison, M.50. (1999), "Habitat and habitat destruction", Environmental 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. Grand. (2008-08-11). "Where does biodiversity go from here? A grim business organisation-as-usual forecast and a hopeful portfolio of partial solutions". Proceedings of the National University of Sciences. 105 (Supplement i): 11579–11586. doi:x.1073/pnas.0801911105. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC2556413. PMID 18695214.
51. ^ ^{a b} Townsend, Patricia A.; Levey, Douglas J. (2002). "An Experimental Examination of Whether Habitat Corridors Bear upon Pollen Transfer". Environmental. 86 (2): 466–475. doi:10.1890/03-0607. 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:10.9774/gleaf.978-1-907643-07-1_5, ISBN978-1-907643-07-1 , retrieved 2021-03-xviii
53. ^ Elmarsdottir, Asrun; Aradottir, Asa L.; Trlica, M. J. (2003-09-26). "Microsite availability and establishment of native species on degraded and reclaimed sites". Journal of Applied Ecology. 40 (five): 815–823. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.2003.00848.ten. ISSN 0021-8901.
54. ^ Huxel, Gary R.; Hastings, Alan (September 1999). "Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, and Restoration". Restoration Environmental. vii (3): 309–315. doi:x.1046/j.1526-100x.1999.72024.10. ISSN 1061-2971. S2CID 86235090.

References [edit]

• Barbault, R. and Southward. D. Sastrapradja. 1995. Generation, maintenance and loss of biodiversity. Global Biodiversity Cess, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge pp. 193–274. ISBN 9780521564816
• Burke, L.; Y. Kura; K. Kassem; C. Ravenga; M. Spalding; D. McAllister (2000). Airplane pilot Cess of Global Ecosystems: Coastal Ecosystems. World Resource Plant, Washington, D.C. ISBN9781569734582. Archived from the original on 2018-05-04. Retrieved 2020-02-19 .
• Cincotta, R.P., and R. Engelman. 2000. Nature'south place: man population density and the future of biological diversity. Population Action 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:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0143:PCAUDF]2.0.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 Printing, San Diego, CA.
• Laurance West. F. (1999). "Reflections on the tropical deforestation crisis". Biological Conservation. 91 (2–iii): 109–117. CiteSeerX10.i.1.501.3004. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00088-9.
• McKee J. Chiliad.; Sciulli P.W.; 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-five.
• Millennium Ecosystem Cess (Program). 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Beingness Archived 2016-06-10 at the Wayback Car. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Printing, Covelo, CA.
• Primack, R. B. 2006. Essentials of Conservation Biology. fourth 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:x.1038/35002708. PMID 10706267. S2CID 4310784.
• Ravenga, C., J. Brunner, North. Henninger, K. Kassem, and R. Payne. 2000. Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems: Wetland Ecosystems. Earth Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.
• Sahney Due south.; 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 East. West.; Jaiteh M.; Levy Thou. A.; Redford K. H.; Wannebo A. V.; Woolmer G. (2002). "The human footprint and the last of the wild". BioScience. 52 (10): 891–904. doi:x.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0891:thfatl]two.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 Machine CSIR, Pretoria, South Africa.
• Stein, B. A., L. S. Kutner, and J. S. Adams (eds.). 2000. Precious Heritage: The Status of Biodiversity in the The states. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Temple S. A. (1986). "The problem of avian extinctions". Current Ornithology. Ornithology. Vol. 3. pp. 453–485. doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-6784-4_11. ISBN978-1-4615-6786-8.
• Tibbetts John (2006). "Louisiana'due south Wetlands: A Lesson in Nature Appreciation". Environ Health Perspect. 114 (1): A40–A43. doi:10.1289/ehp.114-a40. PMC1332684. PMID 16393646.
• Tilman D.; Fargione J.; Wolff B.; D'Antonio C.; Dobson A.; Howarth R.; Schindler D.; Schlesinger West. H.; Simberloff D.; et al. (2001). "Forecasting agriculturally driven global ecology alter". Scientific discipline. 292 (5515): 281–284. Bibcode:2001Sci...292..281T. doi:10.1126/scientific discipline.1057544. PMID 11303102. S2CID 23847498.
• White, R. P., Due south. Murray, and M. Rohweder. 2000. Pilot Assessment of Global Ecosystems: Grassland Ecosystems. Earth Resource Institute, Washington, D. C.
• WRI. 2003. World Resources 2002-2004: Decisions for the Earth: Rest, voice, and power. 328 pp. Earth Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_destruction#:~:text=The%20current%20rate%20of%20deforestation,original%20forest%20habitat%20each%20year.

Posted by: blairroyes1951.blogspot.com

Share this post