It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Understanding historic patterns of land use and land cover change across large temporal and spatial scales is critical for developing effective biodiversity conservation management and policy. We quantify the extent and fragmentation of suitable habitat across the continental range of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) based on present-day occurrence data and land-use variables between 850 and 2015 A.D. We found that following centuries of relative stability, over 64% (3.36 million km2) of suitable elephant habitat across Asia was lost since the year 1700, coincident with colonial-era land-use practices in South Asia and subsequent agricultural intensification in Southeast Asia. Average patch size dropped 83% from approximately 99,000–16,000 km2 and the area occupied by the largest patch decreased 83% from ~ 4 million km2 (45% of area) to 54,000 km2 (~ 7.5% of area). Whereas 100% of the area within 100 km of the current elephant range could have been considered suitable habitat in the year 1700, over half was unsuitable by 2015, driving potential conflict with people. These losses reflect long-term decline of non-forested ecosystems, exceeding estimates of deforestation within this century. Societies must consider ecological histories in addition to proximate threats to develop more just and sustainable land-use and conservation strategies.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Trunks and Leaves Inc., Pittsfield, USA; Smithsonian’s National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute, Conservation Ecology Center, Front Royal, USA; University of California, San Diego, Department of Ecology, Behavior and Evolution, La Jolla, USA (GRID:grid.266100.3) (ISNI:0000 0001 2107 4242)
2 Colby College, Environmental Studies Program, Waterville, USA (GRID:grid.254333.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2296 8213)
3 Smithsonian’s National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute, Conservation Ecology Center, Front Royal, USA (GRID:grid.254333.0); United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, USA (GRID:grid.463419.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 0946 3608)
4 University of Nottingham Malaysia, School of Environmental and Geographical Science, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (GRID:grid.440435.2) (ISNI:0000 0004 1802 0472); Murdoch University, College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education, Perth, Australia (GRID:grid.1025.6) (ISNI:0000 0004 0436 6763)
5 Frankfurt Zoological Society, Jambi, Indonesia (GRID:grid.1025.6)
6 Vietnam National University of Forestry, Department of Wildlife Management, Hanoi, Vietnam (GRID:grid.499372.2)
7 Wild Earth Allies, Phnom Penh, Cambodia (GRID:grid.499372.2)
8 Zoological Society of London, London, UK (GRID:grid.20419.3e) (ISNI:0000 0001 2242 7273)
9 Smithsonian’s National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute, Conservation Ecology Center, Front Royal, USA (GRID:grid.20419.3e)