Next Article in Journal
Dendroclimatic Reconstruction of Mean Annual Temperatures over Treeline Regions of Northern Bhutan Himalayas
Previous Article in Journal
Macronutrient Content in European Beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) Seedlings Grown in Differently Compacted Peat Substrates in a Container Nursery
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 13
Issue 11
10.3390/f13111795
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluating the Suitability and Overlap of Resting and Path Habitats of Giant Pandas in the Wanglang Nature Reserve

by
Xiaoyu Chen
1,
Xiaorong Wang
2,
Dongwei Kang
1,* and
Junqing Li
1
1
School of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
2
Wanglang National Nature Reserve Administration Bureau, Mianyang 622553, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2022, 13(11), 1795; https://doi.org/10.3390/f13111795
Submission received: 16 August 2022 / Revised: 22 October 2022 / Accepted: 27 October 2022 / Published: 28 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Ecology and Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Habitat fragmentation threatens the survival of giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca); hence, it is vital to protect its habitat. However, a lack of detailed understanding of different functional habitats and their relationships restricts the protective effect. To reveal the relationship between different functional habitats, we distinguished and investigated giant pandas’ resting and path sites and evaluated the suitability patterns and overlap of resting and path habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve using MAXENT and overlay methods. A total of 28 resting sites and 30 path sites were used in this study. The results showed that the areas of suitable resting and path habitats were 42.03 km2 and 28.52 km2, respectively, and were fragmented due to the existence of roads. A total of 27.81 km2 of suitable habitat overlapped, indicating many areas have the dual attributes of suitable resting and path habitats for giant pandas. There were almost no suitable resting and path habitats within 200 m and 300 m from roads, respectively. Therefore, measures should be taken to restore the unsuitable habitats distributed in the roadside area and connect the fragmented habitat patches. The indicators and methods used in this study can be considered in studying different functional giant panda habitats and their relationships.

1. Introduction

The giant panda, Ailuropoda melanoleuca David, 1869 (Carnivora: Ursidae) is a well-known species in nature conservation, only distributed in China’s Sichuan, Shaanxi, and Gansu provinces. Viewed from the mountain range, they are distributed in the Minshan, Qinling, Qionglai, Daxiangling, Xiaoxiangling, and Liangshan Mountains [1]. After decades of conservation efforts, giant panda protection has achieved remarkable results. The population reached 1864 individuals with a habitat area of 2,576,595 ha [1]. Habitat degradation and fragmentation threaten the long-term survival of this species [2]. Protecting the existing habitats and restoring the degraded habitats are critical for effectively protecting giant pandas.
Giant panda habitat is defined as the specific place where they live [3]; it can be divided into different types according to habitat function, such as foraging habitat, resting habitat, and den habitat. Many studies have described the characteristics of different giant panda habitats. For example, habitats with large trees are suitable for resting [4,5], foraging sites usually have sufficient young bamboo [6,7], and tree holes and rock cavities are important den habitats [8,9]. However, few detailed studies have focused on distinguishing habitats with different functions and even less on characterizing their relationships. Thus, identifying different functional habitats and revealing their relationships is necessary to understand the giant panda habitat in-depth.
Many human activities, such as logging [10], grazing [11], roads [12], and mining [13], affect the giant panda habitat mainly through disturbance and destruction [1]. Due to their importance to infrastructure, the impact of roads on habitat has been extensively studied, providing essential information on their impact patterns and effects [14]. Roads are an important factor affecting habitat suitability [15,16,17,18], leading to habitat fragmentation [19], reducing habitat quality [20], and causing heavy metal and solid waste pollution [21,22]. However, little is known about the specific impact of roads on habitats with different functions, and the incomplete understanding reduces the effectiveness of control measures.
To describe the characteristics of different functional habitats, we studied the suitability of the giant panda habitat in the Wanglang Nature Reserve. The objectives were to distinguish resting and path habitats, determine their suitability patterns, and characterize the overlap of these two habitats. The aim was to reveal the relationship between resting and path habitats. By addressing the suitability of different functional habitats, we also described the distribution of resting and path habitats along the roadside to explore the impact of roads on these two habitats.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The Wanglang Nature Reserve (103°57′–104°11′ E, 32°49′–33°03′ N) in Pingwu County of Sichuan Province, China, was established in 1963 and is one of the earliest giant panda nature reserves. The reserve is approximately 323 km2 and is home to 28 giant pandas [23]. The annual average temperature of Wanglang is 2.9°, and the annual precipitation is 862.5 mm [24]. The Reserve’s terrain is high in the northwest and low in the southeast; the altitude ranges from 2300 m to 4890 m. There are no residents in the Reserve except staff.
Wanglang has three road sections, Baozigou-Zhenbaoqiao road, Zhenbaoqiao-Dawodang road, and Zhenbaoqiao-Baishagou road, completed in 2011 with a total length of 32 km and a width a range of 4.5 m to 5.5 m [25]. These roads are country roads, which can meet the requirements of fire prevention, monitoring, scientific research, and tourism activities [25]. The types of solid waste distributed near the roads in Wanglang mainly include livestock feces and plastic waste [22]. In 2009 and 2015, the annual number of tourists received by Wanglang was 4000 and 30,890, respectively [25]. Wanglang experienced a large area of forest cutting in the 1950s; after 1962, there was no forest cutting in the territory of the Reserve [25].

2.2. Data Collection

Feces are important evidence to identify the giant panda habitat [26]. The feces of giant pandas can usually remain for at least 15 days in the field [3]. According to the published literature, if more than ten feces with the same freshness in a group are found at a site, it suggests that the giant panda has stayed for at least two hours; if one or two feces are found at a site, it suggests that the giant panda has only passed through [4,27]. In this study, the former was defined as resting sites, and the latter as path sites of giant pandas.
To study the suitability characteristic of resting and path habitats, 30 sampling lines were established in the Wanglang Nature Reserve [28]. The sampling lines are in the main valleys (such as Dawodang, Zhugencha, Muyangchang, Shuizhagou, and Changbaigou) and branch valleys (such as Wuzhuagou, Huitouxian, Nangou, Changpo, Jixiegongpenggou). The area represented by each line was about 4 km2. Each line was at least 2 km in length. Once the resting and path sites were encountered in each line, feces’ number and location information were recorded. The field survey was conducted in April and May 2012 and March and April 2013. Because the resting site is challenging to find in the field, the resting sites randomly encountered in other field surveys (October and November 2012, and December 2015) were also recorded and used in this study to increase the sample size. Finally, a total of 37 resting sites and 41 path sites were recorded within the scope of the Wanglang Nature Reserve.

2.3. Data Information

Previous studies have found that giant pandas in Wanglang have obvious selectivity on variables of elevation, slope, and land-cover type [29,30]. These variables are closely related to the habitat suitability and distribution of giant pandas. Furthermore, variables of elevation, slope, and land-cover type were also frequently used in habitat evaluation of giant pandas [15,16,17,31,32,33]; they thus were selected to characterize the habitat suitability characteristics. Elevation and slope data were obtained from digital elevation model (DEM) data with a grid size of 30 m × 30 m. The land-cover type in Wanglang was classified into three categories (forest, shrub and grass, and others) by interpreting Landsat 8 OLI_TIRS imagery with 87.5% classification accuracy [33]. The DEM data and Landsat imagery were downloaded from the geospatial data cloud site of the Computer Network Information Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences (http://www.gscloud.cn, accessed on 11 June 2019 and 1 June 2020). Roads are a typical human disturbance in Wanglang [20]; therefore, the distance to the road was also considered in this study to improve the evaluation effect. The road data was obtained through actual measurement, and the nearest distance between each site and the road was calculated in ArcGIS 10.2.

2.4. Data Analysis

MAXENT 3.4.1 and ArcGIS 10.2 were used to determine the resting habitat’s suitability pattern. First, to avoid the effect of spatial autocorrelation, for all resting sites identified in the field, if the distances between any two sites were less than 100 m, only one of them was retained. A total of 28 resting sites were retained (Figure 1; Table S1). Next, we converted the four variables of elevation, slope, land-cover type, and road distance into ASCII format. Then, 75% of all retained resting sites were randomly selected for building the MAXENT model, and the remaining 25% were used to test the accuracy of the model. The above process was repeated, run ten times, and averaged. At last, we divided the suitability into three levels using Jenks natural break optimization: suitable, generally suitable, and unsuitable [33]. In addition, we also calculated the number and area of patches constituting the suitable resting habitat.
A MAXENT model based on the path sites was used to determine the suitability pattern of the path habitat. The analysis process and method were the same as those of the resting habitat. After excluding the sites with a distance of less than 100 m, 30 path sites were retained for analysis (Figure 1; Table S2).
We overlapped the suitability maps of resting and path habitats using the overlay analysis in ArcGIS and calculated the overlapping area and percentage to reveal the relationship between resting and path habitats. We mainly focused on the habitat at a suitable level to facilitate description.
To describe the distribution of resting and path habitats along the roadside, we tested and analyzed the changes of habitats with different suitability levels in different roadside areas. For the roadside range, we started 100 m away from roads and gradually increased to 400 m at 100 m intervals. In each roadside area tested, we calculated the area of habitats (including resting and path habitats) with different suitability levels and percentages in the roadside area.

3. Results

3.1. Suitability Characteristics of Resting Habitat

According to the MAXENT model of the resting sites, the area of suitable and generally suitable resting habitats was 42.03 km2 and 58.25 km2, accounting for 13.1% (42.03 of 321.99) and 18.1% (58.25 of 321.99) of Wanglang’s total area, respectively; the remaining area was unsuitable resting habitat (Figure 2). The suitable resting habitat was composed of 179 patches, five of them larger than 1 km2, and the area of the maximum patch was 14.73 km2.

3.2. Suitability Characteristics of Path Habitat

According to the MAXENT model of the path sites, the area of suitable and generally suitable path habitats was 28.52 km2 and 48.12 km2, accounting for 8.9% (28.52 of 321.99) and 14.9% (48.12 of 321.99) of Wanglang’s total area, respectively; the remaining area was unsuitable path habitat (Figure 3). The suitable path habitat was composed of 98 patches, four of them larger than 1 km2, and the area of the maximum patch was 11.97 km2.

3.3. Habitat Overlap of Suitable Resting and Path Habitats

After overlapping the suitable resting and path habitats, a total area of 27.81 km2 overlapped, accounting for 66.2% (27.81 of 42.03) and 97.5% (27.81 of 28.52) of total suitable resting and path habitats, respectively. For resting habitat, 33.8% (14.22 of 42.03) of them were the solely suitable resting habitat. For path habitat, only 2.5% (0.71 of 28.52) of them were the solely suitable path habitat (Figure 4).

3.4. Distribution of Resting and Path Habitats in the Roadside Areas

For the resting habitat, there were almost no suitable habitats within 200 m from roads, and the unsuitable habitat within 200 m from roads was 69.6%. When the range of roadside area expanded to 300 m, the unsuitable habitat decreased to 51.2% (Table 1).
For the path habitat, there were almost no suitable habitat within 300 m from roads, and the unsuitable habitat within 300 m from roads was 71.3%. When the range of roadside area expanded to 400 m, the unsuitable habitat decreased to 58.5% (Table 1).

4. Discussion

4.1. Relationship between Resting and Path Habitats

Habitat is vital to the survival of giant pandas [34], and habitat protection is the top priority in preserving giant pandas [35]. Identifying different functional habitats and adopting targeted protection strategies are important issues in habitat protection. This study defined the resting and path sites mainly based on the feces number. We evaluated the suitability patterns and overlap of resting and path habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve, providing an important basis for revealing the relationship between different functional habitats and the adequate protection and management of giant panda habitats.
The resting site usually means staying for a long time [4,27], which undoubtedly provides essential places for many behaviors and activities of giant pandas, such as sleeping, intermittent resting, and immobility. Thus, the resting habitats can be considered temporary residences for giant pandas. This study demonstrated that the resting habitat had a relatively broad distribution in Wanglang, suggesting that many areas can provide a resting place for local giant pandas. However, the resting habitat was fragmented. The suitable resting habitat was primarily composed of several small patches, and there was an apparent relationship between the existence of roads and habitat fragmentation. Therefore, based on protecting the existing resting habitats, attention should be paid to the connection of small patches and the impact of roads.
The path site usually means passing by [4,27], and the path habitat can be considered the channels connecting different areas. Due to the path habitats, giant pandas can move easier and communicate with each other in the Reserve. This study shows that the path habitat was relatively small and fragmented. Like those suitable resting habitats, roads contributed to the fragmentation of the suitable path habitat. Therefore, the protection of path habitats also needs to pay attention to the impact of roads.
After overlapping the suitable resting and path habitats, a total area of 27.81 km2 overlapped, indicating that many areas have the dual attributes of suitable resting and path habitats. Almost all suitable path habitats were also suitable resting habitats. This result might reflect the behavior habit of giant pandas of resting wherever they go [4]. However, unlike the suitable path habitats, one-third of suitable resting habitats did not overlap, indicating that a considerable proportion of resting habitats may differ from path habitats. This phenomenon may be related to the resting habitat characteristics at the microhabitat scale. Giant pandas always select places where they can lean for resting [4], such as the tree base, tree holes, stumps, and fallen trees. Previous studies have shown that the resting habitat usually had a large-sized tree [5]. Large trees are scarce resources in the environment, and Wanglang experienced large-scale forest cutting in the last century [25]. Therefore, an environment with large trees is not typical in Wanglang, partly explaining some characteristics of resting habitats. However, the reliability of this explanation needs further investigation.
Habitat suitability assessment is a hot issue in giant panda habitat ecology. Some studies involving different habitats have been performed at the microhabitat scale [5,6,7,8,26]. However, few comparative studies on the landscape scale have been conducted. We jointly considered the resting and path habitats, determined the suitability patterns, and quantified their overlap, which is a new attempt to evaluate the habitat suitability and relationship from the perspective of habitat function. To describe and distinguish the resting and path habitats in detail, it is necessary to compare the forest community characteristics of these two habitats from the perspective of trees, shrubs and bamboo.

4.2. Importance and Protection of Forest Habitat

The giant panda is a wild animal mainly living in the forest environment, and different types of forests serve as habitats for giant pandas [1]. In Wanglang, previous studies have shown that giant pandas prefer conifer forests [29], such as Abies fargesii var. faxoniana and Picea purpurea forests [36].
The land-cover type in Wanglang was divided into three categories. The forest area in Wanglang is nearly 42%. The site distribution in forest included 96% (27 of 28) of resting sites and 93% (28 of 30) of path sites. The high proportion in forest can reflect the importance of forest habitat to giant pandas to a certain extent. Therefore, it is important to protect the Reserve’s forests.
Giant pandas are selective to different habitats. For example, giant pandas use natural forests (including primary and secondary forests) but seldom use artificial forests [37]. A possible reason is that densely planted trees in the artificial forests do not support bamboo growth [38], making it challenging to provide sufficient food resources for giant pandas. However, vegetation information at the macro scale hardly reflects the growth status of plants in shrub layer and regeneration layer. To improve the protection effect, future research should consider the data on bamboo species and vegetation in the forest.

4.3. Impact of Roads on the Resting and Path Habitats

Roads are the human disturbance second only to the livestock grazing in the giant panda habitat [1]. However, different from the mobility of livestock, roads are typically fixed disturbances, and their impact is long term. There are many studies on the impact of roads on giant pandas’ habitat and habitat use [14]. From the research scale, roads affect the habitat quality at the microhabitat scale [20] and the habitat suitability pattern at the landscape scale [39]. As for the impact range of roads, previous studies have found that the impact range of roads differs by type [23,40]. For example, the impact range of the national road can reach 5 km, while the provincial road is about 1.5 km [41]. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the types of roads when discussing their impact ranges.
Based on this study, there are almost no suitable resting and path habitats within 200 m and 300 m from roads, respectively. This result is similar to a previous study at the microhabitat scale, which proposed that the impact range of roads on the giant panda habitat in Wanglang is 200 m, and giant pandas did not use the road-affected habitat [42]. Unlike the above study, this study involved two more detailed giant panda habitat types and examined their suitability distribution patterns in relation to roadside areas. Although there was a slight difference in value, this study supports that the road impact range is 200 m. To track the impacts of the roads, continuous patrol and monitoring should be performed for the resting and path habitats in the roadside area, especially for human disturbance and the activities of giant pandas. Furthermore, it should take necessary restoration measures for those unsuitable habitats to facilitate their transformation in the direction of suitable habitats, such as bamboo and forest restoration. In addition, to minimize the impacts of the roads, some measures are also worth considering, such as limiting the traffic flow on the road, controlling the running speed and time of vehicles, managing the whistle of cars, and setting warning signs on important road sections [43].
With the rapid development of China’s economy, the construction of roads and other infrastructure may become denser, posing a great challenge to protecting giant pandas. In nature reserves of Sichuan Province, the encountering rate of road disturbance in the giant panda habitat ranks third; in nature reserves of Shaanxi Province, the encountering rate of road disturbance in the giant panda habitat ranks first [1]. Therefore, it is urgent to study and determine the impact of roads on habitats in other nature reserves and forest areas. Currently, 67 giant panda nature reserves have been established [2], but research on the impacts of roads at the reserve level is not common. Considering that the environmental conditions differ by nature reserve, direct application of research results from one reserve to another should be cautiously approached.

4.4. Limitations of This Study and Future Research Needs

The habitat use and suitability characteristics of giant pandas differ by season [44]. Therefore, to describe the habitat characteristics of giant pandas in more detail, the seasonal changes of different functional habitats and their suitability should be considered. Besides road type and distance to roads, many other road-related factors may also affect the habitat suitability, such as traffic flow, lights and sound of vehicles, and pollutants; these factors should be included in the evaluation indicators according to the actual situation. This is a preliminary study in a typical nature reserve attempting to assess the suitability and relationship of different functional habitats. Future studies should focus on including more nature reserves to gain more insights into habitat use and suitability characteristics of giant pandas.

5. Conclusions

We revealed the relationship between resting and path habitats of the giant panda and found that many areas have dual attributes of suitable resting and path habitats for giant pandas. Both habitats were fragmented, and there were almost no suitable resting and path habitats within 200 m and 300 m from roads, respectively. Suitable measures such as bamboo and forest restoration should be considered to recover the presently-unsuitable habitat distributed in the roadside area and connect the fragmented habitat patches to maintain the long-term survival of giant pandas in this area, and to protect the existing resting and path habitats. Furthermore, limiting the traffic flow and controlling the running time of vehicles should be considered to minimize the impact of roads.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/f13111795/s1, Table S1: Location of resting site in this study; Table S2: Location of path site in this study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.K. and J.L.; methodology, D.K.; formal analysis, X.C.; investigation, D.K. and X.W.; writing—original draft preparation, D.K. and X.C.; supervision, J.L.; funding acquisition, J.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Beijing Forestry University Fundamental Research Achievement Project Fund, grant number 2019PYXM01.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in the Supplementary Materials.

Acknowledgments

We thank all of the people who participated in the field work, and the warm support from the Wanglang Nature Reserve Administration Bureau.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. National Forestry and Grassland Administration. The 4th National Survey Report on Giant Panda in China; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2021; pp. 21–23, 29, 32–34, 67–102. [Google Scholar]
  2. State Council Information Office of China. 2015. Available online: http://www.scio.gov.cn/xwfbh/gbwxwfbh/fbh/Document/1395514/1395514.htm (accessed on 1 April 2015).
  3. State Forestry Administration. The 3rd National Survey Report on Giant Panda in China; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2006; pp. 11–14. [Google Scholar]
  4. Hu, J. Research on the Giant Panda; Shanghai Scientific and Technological Education Publishing House: Shanghai, China, 2001; pp. 132–134. [Google Scholar]
  5. Kang, D.; Wang, X.; Li, J. Resting site use of giant pandas in Wanglang Nature Reserve. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 13809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Zhang, Z.; Zhan, X.; Yan, L.; Li, M.; Hu, J.; Wei, F. What determines selection and abandonment of a foraging patch by wild giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) in winter? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2009, 16, 79–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Kang, D.; Zhao, Z.; Li, S.; Chen, X.; Wang, X.; Li, J. Feeding habitat characteristics of giant pandas at different scales: A case study in the Wanglang Nature Reserve. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2019, 17, e00542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhang, Z.; Swaisgood, R.R.; Wu, H.; Li, M.; Yong, Y.; Hu, J.; Wei, F. Factors predicting den use by maternal giant pandas. J. Wildl. Manag. 2007, 71, 2694–2698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wei, W.; Swaisgood, R.R.; Owen, M.A.; Pilfold, N.W.; Han, H.; Hong, M.; Zhou, H.; Wei, F.; Nie, Y.; Zhang, Z. The role of den quality in giant panda conservation. Biol. Conserv. 2019, 231, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lin, Y.; Gu, H.; Long, T.; Yu, C.; Chen, Y. Impact of logging upon the habitat of giant panda in Pingwu County, Sichuan, China. Sci. Silvae Sin. 2005, 41, 109–115. [Google Scholar]
  11. Hull, V.; Zhang, J.; Zhou, S.; Huang, J.; Vina, A.; Liu, W.; Tuanmu, M.N.; Li, R.; Liu, D.; Xu, W.; et al. Impact of livestock on giant pandas and their habitat. J. Nat. Conserv. 2014, 22, 256–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gong, M.; Hou, M.; Lin, C.; Song, Y.; Ouyang, Z. The quantitative assessing of trail impacts on giant panda activity based on field track points and GIS. Biodivers. Sci. 2012, 20, 420–426. [Google Scholar]
  13. Wanghe, K.; Guo, X.; Hu, F.; Ahmad, S.; Luan, X. Spatial coincidence between mining activities and protected areas of giant panda habitat: The geographic overlaps and implications for conservation. Biol. Conserv. 2020, 247, 108600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kang, D. A review of the impacts of four identified major human disturbances on the habitat and habitat use of wild giant pandas from 2015 to 2020. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 763, 142975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Liu, J.; Ouyang, Z.; Taylor, W.W.; Groop, R.; Tan, Y.; Zhang, H. A framework for evaluating the effects of human factors on wildlife habitat: The case of giant pandas. Conserv. Biol. 1999, 13, 1360–1370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ouyang, Z.; Liu, J.; Xiao, H.; Tan, Y.; Zhang, H. An assessment of giant panda habitat in Wolong Nature Reserve. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2001, 21, 1869–1874. [Google Scholar]
  17. Shen, G.; Feng, C.; Xie, Z.; Ouyang, Z.; Li, J.; Pascal, M. Proposed conservation landscape for giant pandas in the Minshan mountains, China. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22, 1144–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Li, C.; Connor, T.; Bai, W.; Yang, H.; Zhang, J.; Qi, D.; Zhou, C. Dynamics of the giant panda habitat suitability in response to changing anthropogenic disturbance in the Liangshan Mountains. Biol. Conserv. 2019, 237, 445–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Xu, W.; Viña, A.; Kong, L.; Pimm, S.L.; Zhang, J.; Yang, W.; Xiao, Y.; Zhang, L.; Chen, X.; Liu, J.; et al. Reassessing the conservation status of the giant panda using remote sensing. Nature Ecol. Evol. 2017, 1, 1635–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kang, D.; Zhao, Z.; Chen, X.; Lin, Y.; Wang, X.; Li, J. Evaluating the effects of roads on giant panda habitat at two scales in a typical nature reserve. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 710, 136351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Zheng, Y.J.; Chen, Y.P.; Maltby, L.; Jin, X.L. Highway increases concentrations of toxic metals in giant panda habitat. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 21262–21272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kang, D.; Zhao, Z.; Chen, X.; Wang, X.; Li, J. Characteristics and impacts of solid waste on giant panda habitat in Wanglang Nature Reserve. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 724, 138210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sichuan Forestry Department. The Pandas of Sichuan: The 4th Survey Report on Giant Panda in Sichuan Province; Sichuan Science and Technology Press: Chengdu, China, 2015; pp. 10, 145–147. [Google Scholar]
  24. Wang, M.J.; Li, J.Q. Research on habitat restoration of giant panda after a grave disturbance of earthquake in Wanglang Nature Reserve, Sichuan Province. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2008, 28, 5848–5855. [Google Scholar]
  25. Li, S.; Jiang, S. Chronicles of Sichuan Wanglang National Nature Reserve (1965–2015); Sichuan Science and Technology Press: Chengdu, China, 2018; pp. 45, 153–162. [Google Scholar]
  26. Wei, F.; Feng, Z.; Wang, Z.; Hu, J. Habitat use and separation between the giant panda and the red panda. J. Mammal. 2000, 81, 448–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hu, J.; Schaller, G.B.; Pan, W.; Zhu, J. The Giant Pandas of Wolong; Sichuan Publishing House of Science and Technology: Chengdu, China, 1985; pp. 104–108. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kang, D. Research on the Habitat Selection of Giant Pandas. Ph.D. Thesis, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  29. Zeng, Z.Y.; Yue, B.S.; Ran, J.H.; Liu, S.Y.; Chen, Y.P.; Jiang, S.W. Panda’s exploitation of habitats at the Wanglang nature reserve. J. Sichuan Univ. (Nat. Sci.) 2002, 39, 1140–1144. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kang, D.W.; Zhao, Z.J.; Guo, W.X.; Tan, L.Y.; Kang, W.; Li, J.Q. Habitat selection attributes of giant panda. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 2011, 22, 519–525. [Google Scholar]
  31. Liu, X.; Skidmore, A.K.; Bronsveld, M.C. Assessment of giant panda habitat based on integration of expert system and neural network. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 2006, 17, 438–443. [Google Scholar]
  32. Xu, W.; Ouyang, Z.; Viña, A.; Zheng, H.; Liu, J.; Xiao, Y. Designing a conservation plan for protecting the habitat for giant pandas in the Qionglai mountain range, China. Divers. Distrib. 2006, 12, 610–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chen, X.; Wang, X.; Li, J.; Kang, D. Integrating livestock grazing and sympatric takin to evaluate the habitat suitability of giant panda in the Wanglang Nature Reserve. Animals 2021, 11, 2469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Li, J.; Shen, G. The Habitat of Giant Pandas; Higher Education Press: Beijing, China, 2012; pp. 1–2. [Google Scholar]
  35. Wei, F. Scientific Exploration of Wild Giant Panda; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2018; p. 117. [Google Scholar]
  36. Shen, G.; Li, J.; Ren, Y.; Ma, Y. Indicators for giant panda’s habitat degradation and restoration. J. Beijing For. Univ. 2002, 24, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kang, D. A review of the habitat restoration of giant pandas from 2012 to 2021: Research topics and advances. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 852, 158207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hull, V.; Roloff, G.; Zhang, J.; Liu, W.; Zhou, S.; Huang, J.; Xu, W.; Ouyang, Z.; Zhang, H.; Liu, J. A synthesis of giant panda habitat selection. Ursus 2014, 25, 148–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gong, M.H.; Ouyang, Z.Y.; Xu, W.H.; Song, Y.L.; Dai, B. The location of wildlife corridors under the impact of road disturbance: Case study of a giant panda conservation corridor. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2015, 35, 3447–3453. [Google Scholar]
  40. Liu, L.; Liu, X.; Jin, X.; Wang, Z.; Gong, M. Research on the change of giant pandas’ spatial utilization and road impacts in the Qinling Mountains. Acta Theriol. Sin. 2017, 37, 215–225. [Google Scholar]
  41. He, K.; Dai, Q.; Gu, X.; Zhang, Z.; Zhou, J.; Qi, D.; Gu, X.; Yang, X.; Zhang, W.; Yang, B.; et al. Effects of roads on giant panda distribution: A mountain range scale evaluation. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Kang, D.; Wang, X.; Yang, H.; Duan, L.; Li, J. Habitat use by giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) in relation to roads in the Wanglang Nature Reserve, People’s Republic of China. Can. J. Zool. 2014, 92, 715–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Forman, R.T.T.; Sperling, D.; Bissonette, J.A. (Eds.) Li, T.; An, L., Translators; Road Ecology: Science and Solutions; Higher Education Press: Beijing, China, 2008; pp. 100–123. [Google Scholar]
  44. Liu, X. 3S Technology and Wild Animal’s Habitat Assessment in China; China Forestry Press: Beijing, China, 2010; pp. 27–44. [Google Scholar]
Forests 13 01795 g001 550
Figure 1. Distribution of resting and path sites (resting site: more than ten feces at a site; path site: one or two feces at a site).
Figure 1. Distribution of resting and path sites (resting site: more than ten feces at a site; path site: one or two feces at a site).
Forests 13 01795 g001
Forests 13 01795 g002 550
Figure 2. Suitability map of resting habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve.
Figure 2. Suitability map of resting habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve.
Forests 13 01795 g002
Forests 13 01795 g003 550
Figure 3. Suitability map of path habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve.
Figure 3. Suitability map of path habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve.
Forests 13 01795 g003
Forests 13 01795 g004 550
Figure 4. Overlap of suitable resting and path habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve.
Figure 4. Overlap of suitable resting and path habitats in the Wanglang Nature Reserve.
Forests 13 01795 g004
Table
Table 1. Distribution of resting and path habitats with different suitability levels in different roadside areas.
Table 1. Distribution of resting and path habitats with different suitability levels in different roadside areas.
Habitat TypeSuitability LevelDistance to Roads (Area (km2)/Percentage (%))
0–100 m0–200 m0–300 m0–400 m
Resting HabitatSuitable0 (0%)0.00 (0.0%)0.34 (1.8%)3.35 (13.5%)
Generally suitable0.58 (9.2%)3.81 (30.3%)8.80 (47.0%)11.49 (46.2%)
Unsuitable5.76 (90.8%)8.76 (69.6%)9.60 (51.2%)10.03 (40.3%)
Path HabitatSuitable0 (0%)0 (0%)0.03 (0.1%)1.15 (4.6%)
Generally suitable0.13 (2.1%)1.58 (12.5%)5.35 (28.5%)9.16 (36.9%)
Unsuitable6.21 (97.9%)11.00 (87.5%)13.36 (71.3%)14.55 (58.5%)
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, X.; Wang, X.; Kang, D.; Li, J. Evaluating the Suitability and Overlap of Resting and Path Habitats of Giant Pandas in the Wanglang Nature Reserve. Forests 2022, 13, 1795. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13111795

AMA Style

Chen X, Wang X, Kang D, Li J. Evaluating the Suitability and Overlap of Resting and Path Habitats of Giant Pandas in the Wanglang Nature Reserve. Forests. 2022; 13(11):1795. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13111795

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Xiaoyu, Xiaorong Wang, Dongwei Kang, and Junqing Li. 2022. "Evaluating the Suitability and Overlap of Resting and Path Habitats of Giant Pandas in the Wanglang Nature Reserve" Forests 13, no. 11: 1795. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13111795

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop