Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
189,280 studies31 sourcesUpdated 37 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Ecology and Evolution

Multi‐Scale Habitat Drivers of Hainan Gibbon Distribution: Integrating Macro‐Environmental and Fine‐Scale Ecological Factors for Targeted Conservation of Threatened Species

  • Shuai Liu1,2,3,4
  • Dexu Zhang1,2,3
  • Chenglin Cai2,3,5
  • Yidong Zhou2,3,5
  • Kening Lu2,3,5
  • Yuan Chen1,2,3
  • Wenxing Long1,2,3
  • Eric I. Ameca1,2,3,6
6 affiliations
  1. 1School of Ecology ‐ Hainan University Haikou China
  2. 2The Research and Conservation Centre of Hainan Gibbon Hainan University Haikou China
  3. 3The National Research and Conservation Centre of Gibbon Bawangling China
  4. 4School of Ecology and Environment North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power Zhengzhou China
  5. 5School of Tropical Agriculture and Forestry ‐ Hainan University Haikou China
  6. 6IUCN SSC ‐ Primate Specialist Group Gland Switzerland
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

As habitat fragmentation intensifies due to Anthropocene impacts, ecological variation across spatial scales may cause conservation strategies to misalign with species' actual needs. Understanding how cross‐scale spatial heterogeneity in ecological variables shapes species distributions is therefore critical to optimize conservation prioritization. The Critically Endangered Hainan gibbon is restricted to highly degraded forests, yet the interplay of ecological drivers shaping its current distribution, from macro‐environmental constraints to fine‐scale habitat selection, remains poorly quantified. This study integrates two‐year monitoring data from all seven known Hainan gibbon groups (GA‐GG, representing the global population) using a multi‐scale sampling design. We employed 395 population‐level and 135 group‐level plots to evaluate 23 ecological variables spanning macro‐ (e.g., climate) to micro‐scales (e.g., food plant diversity), identifying drivers of gibbon distribution. We found that population‐scale distribution is driven by climatic and topographic factors (e.g., precipitation, elevation), whereas group‐scale distribution responded to fine‐scale habitat features (e.g., food plant diversity, terrain ruggedness, crown area). GC distribution reflects optimal foraging (preference for food plant diversity), whereas GE adopts an energy‐conserving strategy (selecting complex terrain with high food plant abundance). Habitat suitability followed a J‐shaped threshold response at the population scale, and divergent responses at the group level (rapid in GE, stable in GC). These findings underscore the need for scale‐ and habitat‐specific conservation: expanding climatically and vegetatively suitable areas at the population level, restoring food availability in GE habitats, and maintaining stability in GC habitats. Our multi‐scale mechanistic framework provides actionable conservation insights, with applications for other range‐restricted species in fragmented landscapes.

Related

  1. Areas of high conservation priority for threatened terrestrial vertebrates are governed by novel ecological conditions
    Matthew Roy Kerr, Anna M Behrend, Mia K Hoffmann +4
    EcoEvoRxivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textEcologyClimate scienceEcoEvoRxiv
  2. Environmental adaptation in wheat landraces: integrating physiological, molecular, and ecological mechanisms for climate-resilient agriculture
    Dali Vilma Francis, Malu Kishorkumar, Tarfa Abdulla +4
    Frontiers in plant sciencePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textPlant biologyEurope PMCCrossref
  3. TRIDENT (Taxonomic Resolution and IDentification using Environmental dNa Traces): An Optimized Algorithm for Vertebrate Taxonomic Assignments in eDNA Metabarcoding, Integrating Molecular, Taxonomic, and Ecological Criteria
    Rachel Haderlé, Gabriel Jung, Manon Riou +2
    HALPreprintCC BY2 citedEcologyHAL
  4. Host and Environmental Factors Outweigh Pathogen in Shaping Skin Microbiome of a Threatened Andean Amphibian Community
    Claudia Lansac, Ignacio De la Riva, Marta Miñarro +3
    Molecular ecologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGenetics & genomicsEurope PMC
  5. Threatened Conifers Need Targeted and Integrated Conservation: A Case Study of Pinus dabeshanensis
    Yan Xu, Chao Tan, David Kay Ferguson +1
    Ecology and EvolutionPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textPlant biologyCrossrefEurope PMCDOAJ

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{liu2026multiscale,
  title = {{Multi‐Scale Habitat Drivers of Hainan Gibbon Distribution: Integrating Macro‐Environmental and Fine‐Scale Ecological Factors for Targeted Conservation of Threatened Species}},
  author = {Shuai Liu and Dexu Zhang and Chenglin Cai and Yidong Zhou and Kening Lu and Yuan Chen and Wenxing Long and Eric I. Ameca},
  journal = {Ecology and Evolution},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1002/ece3.74519},
  url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.74519},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Multi‐Scale Habitat Drivers of Hainan Gibbon Distribution: Integrating Macro‐Environmental and Fine‐Scale Ecological Factors for Targeted Conservation of Threatened Species
AU  - Shuai Liu
AU  - Dexu Zhang
AU  - Chenglin Cai
AU  - Yidong Zhou
AU  - Kening Lu
AU  - Yuan Chen
AU  - Wenxing Long
AU  - Eric I. Ameca
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/26
JO  - Ecology and Evolution
DO  - 10.1002/ece3.74519
UR  - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.74519
AB  - As habitat fragmentation intensifies due to Anthropocene impacts, ecological variation across spatial scales may cause conservation strategies to misalign with species' actual needs. Understanding how cross‐scale spatial heterogeneity in ecological variables shapes species distributions is therefore critical to optimize conservation prioritization. The Critically Endangered Hainan gibbon is restricted to highly degraded forests, yet the interplay of ecological drivers shaping its current distribution, from macro‐environmental constraints to fine‐scale habitat selection, remains poorly quantified. This study integrates two‐year monitoring data from all seven known Hainan gibbon groups (GA‐GG, representing the global population) using a multi‐scale sampling design. We employed 395 population‐level and 135 group‐level plots to evaluate 23 ecological variables spanning macro‐ (e.g., climate) to micro‐scales (e.g., food plant diversity), identifying drivers of gibbon distribution. We found that population‐scale distribution is driven by climatic and topographic factors (e.g., precipitation, elevation), whereas group‐scale distribution responded to fine‐scale habitat features (e.g., food plant diversity, terrain ruggedness, crown area). GC distribution reflects optimal foraging (preference for food plant diversity), whereas GE adopts an energy‐conserving strategy (selecting complex terrain with high food plant abundance). Habitat suitability followed a J‐shaped threshold response at the population scale, and divergent responses at the group level (rapid in GE, stable in GC). These findings underscore the need for scale‐ and habitat‐specific conservation: expanding climatically and vegetatively suitable areas at the population level, restoring food availability in GE habitats, and maintaining stability in GC habitats. Our multi‐scale mechanistic framework provides actionable conservation insights, with applications for other range‐restricted species in fragmented landscapes.
SN  - 2045-7758
SN  - 2045-7758
ER  -