Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway
Numerous road and railway construction projects include costly mitigation measures to offset the barrier effect produced on local fauna, despite the scarcity of data on the effectiveness of such mitigation measures. In this study, we evaluate the utility of different types of crossing structures. Ve...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of environmental management 2008-08, Vol.88 (3), p.407-415 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 415 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 407 |
| container_title | Journal of environmental management |
| container_volume | 88 |
| creator | Mata, C. Hervás, I. Herranz, J. Suárez, F. Malo, J.E. |
| description | Numerous road and railway construction projects include costly mitigation measures to offset the barrier effect produced on local fauna, despite the scarcity of data on the effectiveness of such mitigation measures. In this study, we evaluate the utility of different types of crossing structures. Vertebrate use of 43 transverse crossing structures along the A-52 motorway (north-western Spain) was studied during spring 2001. Research centered on wildlife passages (9), wildlife-adapted box culverts (7), functional passages (6 overpasses, 7 underpasses) and culverts (14), with marble dust being used to record animal tracks. A total of 424 track-days were recorded, with most of the larger vertebrate groups present in the area being detected. All crossing structure types were used by animals, although the intensity of use varied significantly among them (Kruskal–Wallis test,
p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.014 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70776803</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0301479707000989</els_id><sourcerecordid>20848760</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-b2897ac55512bc21156b848ca4d6e61ef2b39870c3393894c9239ee89f98547e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkk1v1DAQhiMEokvhJ4AsJLgljL9i-1RVFVCkShz4uFqOM2kdZePFTrrqvyfLRq3EZU9zmOd9ZzTzFsVbChUFWn_qqx7H-60bKwagKuAVUPGs2FAwstQ1h-fFBjjQUiijzopXOfcAwBlVL4szqkStqJCbIl4mJNs4xbR3D2QfhnYIHZKdy9ndYib7mKY70sxLI4y3F-Q3pgmb5CYkc0YSO5Kia0ufYs4LQPKUZj_NaZHGkTjyY-fGkO8eR7wuXnRuyPhmrefFry-ff15dlzffv367urwpvaR8KhumjXJeSklZ4xmlsm600N6JtsaaYscabrQCz7nh2ghvGDeI2nRGS6GQnxcfj767FP_MmCe7DdnjMLgR45ytAqVqDfwkyGujqNTsJMhgWVDVcBKkAjgFeXB8_x_YxzmNy1ksNbKmWhu9QPII_Ttxws7uUti69GAp2EMSbG_XJNhDEixwuyRh0b1bzedmi-2Tan39AnxYAZe9G7rkRh_yI8eAa8HEwejiyOHyrvuAyWYfcPTYhoR-sm0MJ1b5C2oN08c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>195618898</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Mata, C. ; Hervás, I. ; Herranz, J. ; Suárez, F. ; Malo, J.E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Mata, C. ; Hervás, I. ; Herranz, J. ; Suárez, F. ; Malo, J.E.</creatorcontrib><description>Numerous road and railway construction projects include costly mitigation measures to offset the barrier effect produced on local fauna, despite the scarcity of data on the effectiveness of such mitigation measures. In this study, we evaluate the utility of different types of crossing structures. Vertebrate use of 43 transverse crossing structures along the A-52 motorway (north-western Spain) was studied during spring 2001. Research centered on wildlife passages (9), wildlife-adapted box culverts (7), functional passages (6 overpasses, 7 underpasses) and culverts (14), with marble dust being used to record animal tracks. A total of 424 track-days were recorded, with most of the larger vertebrate groups present in the area being detected. All crossing structure types were used by animals, although the intensity of use varied significantly among them (Kruskal–Wallis test,
p<0.05); culverts were used less frequently than other structures. Crossing structure type and width were identified as the most important factors in their selection for use. Wildlife passages and adapted culverts allowed crossing by certain species (wild boar, roe deer, Eurasian badger), which do not tend to cross elsewhere. These results highlight the importance of using both mixed-type structures and wildlife passages in reducing the barrier effect of roads.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-4797</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8630</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.014</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17467145</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEVMAW</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Accidents, Traffic - prevention & control ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Animals ; Applied ecology ; Automobile Driving ; Barrier effect ; Behavior, Animal ; Biological and medical sciences ; Conservation of Natural Resources ; Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife ; Ecology ; Ecosystems ; Environmental degradation: ecosystems survey and restoration ; Environmental management ; Facility Design and Construction ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Habitat fragmentation ; Highway construction ; Humans ; Lizards ; Mammals ; Motorways ; Railroad accidents & safety ; Road ecology ; Road transport ; Roads & highways ; Snakes ; Spain ; Studies ; Vertebrate ; Vertebrates ; Wildlife ; Wildlife conservation ; Wildlife crossing structures</subject><ispartof>Journal of environmental management, 2008-08, Vol.88 (3), p.407-415</ispartof><rights>2007 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Academic Press Ltd. Aug 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-b2897ac55512bc21156b848ca4d6e61ef2b39870c3393894c9239ee89f98547e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-b2897ac55512bc21156b848ca4d6e61ef2b39870c3393894c9239ee89f98547e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.014$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20384244$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17467145$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mata, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hervás, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herranz, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suárez, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malo, J.E.</creatorcontrib><title>Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway</title><title>Journal of environmental management</title><addtitle>J Environ Manage</addtitle><description>Numerous road and railway construction projects include costly mitigation measures to offset the barrier effect produced on local fauna, despite the scarcity of data on the effectiveness of such mitigation measures. In this study, we evaluate the utility of different types of crossing structures. Vertebrate use of 43 transverse crossing structures along the A-52 motorway (north-western Spain) was studied during spring 2001. Research centered on wildlife passages (9), wildlife-adapted box culverts (7), functional passages (6 overpasses, 7 underpasses) and culverts (14), with marble dust being used to record animal tracks. A total of 424 track-days were recorded, with most of the larger vertebrate groups present in the area being detected. All crossing structure types were used by animals, although the intensity of use varied significantly among them (Kruskal–Wallis test,
p<0.05); culverts were used less frequently than other structures. Crossing structure type and width were identified as the most important factors in their selection for use. Wildlife passages and adapted culverts allowed crossing by certain species (wild boar, roe deer, Eurasian badger), which do not tend to cross elsewhere. These results highlight the importance of using both mixed-type structures and wildlife passages in reducing the barrier effect of roads.</description><subject>Accidents, Traffic - prevention & control</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Automobile Driving</subject><subject>Barrier effect</subject><subject>Behavior, Animal</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Conservation of Natural Resources</subject><subject>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental degradation: ecosystems survey and restoration</subject><subject>Environmental management</subject><subject>Facility Design and Construction</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Habitat fragmentation</subject><subject>Highway construction</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lizards</subject><subject>Mammals</subject><subject>Motorways</subject><subject>Railroad accidents & safety</subject><subject>Road ecology</subject><subject>Road transport</subject><subject>Roads & highways</subject><subject>Snakes</subject><subject>Spain</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Vertebrate</subject><subject>Vertebrates</subject><subject>Wildlife</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><subject>Wildlife crossing structures</subject><issn>0301-4797</issn><issn>1095-8630</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkk1v1DAQhiMEokvhJ4AsJLgljL9i-1RVFVCkShz4uFqOM2kdZePFTrrqvyfLRq3EZU9zmOd9ZzTzFsVbChUFWn_qqx7H-60bKwagKuAVUPGs2FAwstQ1h-fFBjjQUiijzopXOfcAwBlVL4szqkStqJCbIl4mJNs4xbR3D2QfhnYIHZKdy9ndYib7mKY70sxLI4y3F-Q3pgmb5CYkc0YSO5Kia0ufYs4LQPKUZj_NaZHGkTjyY-fGkO8eR7wuXnRuyPhmrefFry-ff15dlzffv367urwpvaR8KhumjXJeSklZ4xmlsm600N6JtsaaYscabrQCz7nh2ghvGDeI2nRGS6GQnxcfj767FP_MmCe7DdnjMLgR45ytAqVqDfwkyGujqNTsJMhgWVDVcBKkAjgFeXB8_x_YxzmNy1ksNbKmWhu9QPII_Ttxws7uUti69GAp2EMSbG_XJNhDEixwuyRh0b1bzedmi-2Tan39AnxYAZe9G7rkRh_yI8eAa8HEwejiyOHyrvuAyWYfcPTYhoR-sm0MJ1b5C2oN08c</recordid><startdate>20080801</startdate><enddate>20080801</enddate><creator>Mata, C.</creator><creator>Hervás, I.</creator><creator>Herranz, J.</creator><creator>Suárez, F.</creator><creator>Malo, J.E.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Academic Press Ltd</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20080801</creationdate><title>Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway</title><author>Mata, C. ; Hervás, I. ; Herranz, J. ; Suárez, F. ; Malo, J.E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-b2897ac55512bc21156b848ca4d6e61ef2b39870c3393894c9239ee89f98547e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Accidents, Traffic - prevention & control</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Automobile Driving</topic><topic>Barrier effect</topic><topic>Behavior, Animal</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Conservation of Natural Resources</topic><topic>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental degradation: ecosystems survey and restoration</topic><topic>Environmental management</topic><topic>Facility Design and Construction</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Habitat fragmentation</topic><topic>Highway construction</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lizards</topic><topic>Mammals</topic><topic>Motorways</topic><topic>Railroad accidents & safety</topic><topic>Road ecology</topic><topic>Road transport</topic><topic>Roads & highways</topic><topic>Snakes</topic><topic>Spain</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Vertebrate</topic><topic>Vertebrates</topic><topic>Wildlife</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><topic>Wildlife crossing structures</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mata, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hervás, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herranz, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suárez, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malo, J.E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of environmental management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mata, C.</au><au>Hervás, I.</au><au>Herranz, J.</au><au>Suárez, F.</au><au>Malo, J.E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway</atitle><jtitle>Journal of environmental management</jtitle><addtitle>J Environ Manage</addtitle><date>2008-08-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>407</spage><epage>415</epage><pages>407-415</pages><issn>0301-4797</issn><eissn>1095-8630</eissn><coden>JEVMAW</coden><abstract>Numerous road and railway construction projects include costly mitigation measures to offset the barrier effect produced on local fauna, despite the scarcity of data on the effectiveness of such mitigation measures. In this study, we evaluate the utility of different types of crossing structures. Vertebrate use of 43 transverse crossing structures along the A-52 motorway (north-western Spain) was studied during spring 2001. Research centered on wildlife passages (9), wildlife-adapted box culverts (7), functional passages (6 overpasses, 7 underpasses) and culverts (14), with marble dust being used to record animal tracks. A total of 424 track-days were recorded, with most of the larger vertebrate groups present in the area being detected. All crossing structure types were used by animals, although the intensity of use varied significantly among them (Kruskal–Wallis test,
p<0.05); culverts were used less frequently than other structures. Crossing structure type and width were identified as the most important factors in their selection for use. Wildlife passages and adapted culverts allowed crossing by certain species (wild boar, roe deer, Eurasian badger), which do not tend to cross elsewhere. These results highlight the importance of using both mixed-type structures and wildlife passages in reducing the barrier effect of roads.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>17467145</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.014</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0301-4797 |
| ispartof | Journal of environmental management, 2008-08, Vol.88 (3), p.407-415 |
| issn | 0301-4797 1095-8630 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70776803 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
| subjects | Accidents, Traffic - prevention & control Animal, plant and microbial ecology Animals Applied ecology Automobile Driving Barrier effect Behavior, Animal Biological and medical sciences Conservation of Natural Resources Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife Ecology Ecosystems Environmental degradation: ecosystems survey and restoration Environmental management Facility Design and Construction Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology General aspects Habitat fragmentation Highway construction Humans Lizards Mammals Motorways Railroad accidents & safety Road ecology Road transport Roads & highways Snakes Spain Studies Vertebrate Vertebrates Wildlife Wildlife conservation Wildlife crossing structures |
| title | Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T00%3A47%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Are%20motorway%20wildlife%20passages%20worth%20building?%20Vertebrate%20use%20of%20road-crossing%20structures%20on%20a%20Spanish%20motorway&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20environmental%20management&rft.au=Mata,%20C.&rft.date=2008-08-01&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=407&rft.epage=415&rft.pages=407-415&rft.issn=0301-4797&rft.eissn=1095-8630&rft.coden=JEVMAW&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.014&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20848760%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=195618898&rft_id=info:pmid/17467145&rft_els_id=S0301479707000989&rfr_iscdi=true |