Does structural connectivity facilitate movement of native species in Australia’s fragmented landscapes?: a systematic review protocol

Table 1 Components of the primary systematic review question

Population	Intervention	Comparator	Primary Outcome	Secondary Outcome
Any terrestrial, arboreal, or semi-aquatic native Australian species	Patches of occupied habitat, surrounded by a dissimilar matrix, with some form of structural connectivity between the patches	Patches of occupied habitat, surrounded by a dissimilar unoccupied matrix, without (or with less) structural connectivity between the patches	Relative movement* rates of individuals or propagules (observed or inferred) between patches	Binary variable describing whether or not there is evidence of movement* of individuals or propagules (observed or inferred) between patches

See Appendix for definitions of ecological terms.
* Note that while we are ultimately most interested in dispersal, this is difficult to observe and quantify, and not all studies of movement are explicit about why the animals are moving. In some studies, the movement is even experimentally induced. Thus, we will include all studies with evidence of inter-patch movement, regardless of whether the purpose of the movement is known. Where the purpose of the movement is known but is related to migration or even daily foraging movements, we will still retain the study in the review because elements of structural connectivity that assist with these movements are likely to also be beneficial to dispersal. Depending on the data presented in a study, movement rates may be presented in terms of proportions of individuals moving, frequencies of movements, migrants per generation, etc.

ISSN: 2047-2382