Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Landscape connectivity is critical for maintaining populations of wildlife species and ecological integrity. However, connectivity can refer to a wide array of ecological processes across many spatio‐temporal scales, making it a nebulous concept for managers needing to develop concrete objectives. Furthermore, systematic and consistent connectivity information at multiple scales and for multiple species and ecosystems is lacking, leaving managers without baseline information from which to begin assessing connectivity needs. To fill this information gap, we conducted connectivity analyses across multiple spatial scales that represent connectivity for species guilds with different habitat associations and movement abilities. We used two different connectivity approaches, resistant kernels and Omniscape, and capitalized on the strengths of each method to classify the outputs into a typology that we call “kernel‐scape” for spatial management decision‐making. We describe the utility of these products for managers of the US National Forest System, who are required to consider connectivity in land management planning. We provide a set of seamless connectivity products that are applicable to multiple species and ecological processes across tiered planning extents, from the contiguous US, to geographic regions, to individual management units. These products provide baseline information for considering connectivity for a variety of natural resource needs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zeller et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: