Development of Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) for Habitat Restoration of Narrow-mouth Frog (Kaloula borealis)

Park, Sohyun1) Shim, Yun-Jin2) Cho, Dong-Gil2) Ko, Sang-Beom3)

1) Department of Landscape Architecture, Texas Tech University2) NEXUS Environmental Design Centre3) Jeju Amphibian Ecology Institute

November 14. 2015TXSER 2015 Annual Conference

San Antonio, TX

2

1. Background

Needs for Ecological Restoration

■ Human population increase

■ Vulnerability to climate change

■ Loss of urban habitats of threatened species

■ Introduction of non-native species

■ Humans desire to interact with nature

■ Endangered species 221 (2005) 246 (2012)

Introduction of exotic species

Climate change

Urbanization

3

1. Background

■ Useful indicator species for ecosystem health and balance

■ Linkage aquatic & terrestrial ecosystems as ecological mediator

■ Critical ecological niche

■ Important taxon being threatened globally

■ Decrease in the number of individuals due to habitat destruction

Amphibians

4

2. Methods

■ Designated Endangered Species: 9 Taxa, 246 species

Taxa Evaluation for Urban Habitability

Taxa # SpeciesSensitivity to

Environmental Change

Adaptability to urban Setting

Home Range

Habitat Requirement

Suitability to Urban Habitat Restoration

Terrestrial Plants 77 1 1 3 2 7 Medium

Birds 61 3 2 1 1 7 Medium

Invertebrate Animals 31 1 1 3 1 6 Low

Fishes 25 1 2 2 1 6 Low

Insects 22 1 1 3 2 7 Medium

Mammals 20 3 1 1 1 6 LowR

Amphibians & Herps 7 1 3 3 3 10 High

Algae 2 1 1 1 1 4 Low

3er Fungi 1 1 1 3 1 6 Low

Reptiles & Amphibians for Habitat Restoration

5

■ Four Criteria for Restoration Possibility

Taxa Species Names (Preservation Grades)

Possibility of Species

Restoration

UrbanAdaptability

Historic/Cultural Value

People Emotion Rating

Amphibians

Tree Frog (GradeⅠ) 1 2 1 2 Ⅳ(6)

Narro-mouth Frog (Gradue Ⅱ) 3 3 3 3 Ⅰ(12)

Korean Golden Frog (Grade Ⅱ) 2 2 3 2 Ⅱ(9)

Reptiles

Reeve’s Turtle (Grade Ⅱ) 3 3 3 3 Ⅰ(12)

Korean Lizard (Grade Ⅱ) 3 2 1 2 Ⅲ(8)

Big Snake(Grade Ⅱ) 3 1 3 1 Ⅲ(8)

Black headed snake (GradeⅠ) 1 1 1 1 Ⅴ(4)

Narrow-mouth Frog (Kaloula borealis) & Reeve's Turtle (Chinemys reevesii)

Selection of Target Species

2. Methods

6

1. Background

■ Common species in the past

■ Urban development & use of agricultural pesticides population and habitat size decrease

■ “Endangered Species Class II” by the “Endangered Species Protection and Management Act”

■ Research focused on ecology of the species since 2010 -- Few studies on habitat restoration -- species near extinction and destruction of remaining habitats

■ Climate-Sensitive Biological Indicator Species (CBIS) Fundamental information for urban climate change monitoring

Narrow-mouth Frog (Kaloula borealis)

7

Habitat Survey

2. Methods

■ Survey methods• Literature review (109 inland sites)• On-site investigation (19 inland, 92 Jeju Island)

■ Scope of Survey• Spawning ponds throughout the country • Natural habitats & alternative habitats • Population size, breeding, environmental condition

Habitat Evaluation • Cropland and peripheral residential areas• Insects & arthropods for prey • Destruction of breeding habitats

8

2. Methods

Habitat Suitability Index (HSI)

■ Quantitative indicator for habitat’s capability for a species

Habitat Condition of Study Site

Optimal Habitat ConditionHSI =

9

Components Ecological Characteristics

SpaceDistribution Throughout the county

Home Range Habitat as breeding site; Migration more than 500m from breeding place

PreyAdults Insects, arthropods, earthworms, etc.Larva Scraps of dead meat, bog moss, algae

ShelterAdults

Potholes, moist rocksUnder the building in groupUnder the earth & rock, 20cm deep in soft soils

Larva Ponds and grasses

Water (Breeding)

Breeding Season Hot and wet season (April –August)Climate factors Precipitation, humidity, pressure

Breeding SitePond or puddle;permanent wetlands > near streams > transient wetlands > agricultural / residential

Vegetation Aquatic plants > floating leaved plantsWater Depth < 50cm; >1m for freezing preventionSurroundings Field > Streams > Rice Paddy

Life CycleIncubating Period 1 ∼ 2 days from spawning to tadpole hatching

Egg-Adult Approx. 20 ~ 40 days

ThreatsDevelopment Landfill, urbanization, roadkill

Agriculture Pesticide, fertilizerPredator Pond Slider, carp, diving beetle, dragonfly larva

2. Methods

Ecological Characteristics

10

AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) Model

3. Results

Optimal Habitat Restoration Condition

Space Feed Cover Water Threats

Level I

Level II

Dis

tanc

e to

wet

land

, gr

assl

and,

fiel

d, s

tream

s,

and

crop

land

Altit

ude

of b

reed

ing

plac

e

Fore

st la

yer

Low

er g

rass

land

Roc

k/st

one

crev

ice

Soil

qual

ity

Perm

anen

t wet

land

si

ze

Tran

sien

t wet

land

siz

e

Dom

inan

ce o

f aqu

atic

ve

geta

tion

(ope

n w

ater

ra

tio)

Wat

er d

epth

Wat

er q

ualit

y (D

O)

pH Dis

tanc

e to

road

s

Dis

tanc

e to

pol

luta

nt

Level III

11

AHP-Based Weights

3. Results

Components Weights Variables Weights Final Weights(Rank)

Space 0.147Distance from wetland, grassland, farm,

stream, rice fields 0.704 0.104 (4)

Altitude of spawning pond 0.296 0.044 (7)

Feed 0.230Bed structure of forest 0.172 0.040 (10)

Low-rise grassland 0.828 0.190 (1)

Cover(Shelter)

0.283Stones and between the stones 0.371 0.105 (3)

Soil quality 0.629 0.178 (2)

Water(Breeding) 0.276

Area of permanent wetland 0.156 0.043 (8)

Area of temporary wetland 0.308 0.085 (5)

Coverage of emerged plants on wetland (Ratio of open water) 0.128 0.035 (12)

Water depth 0.181 0.050 (6)

Water quality (DO) 0.153 0.042 (9)

pH 0.074 0.020 (14)

Threatening Factors 0.064

Distance from street 0.559 0.036 (11)

Distance from pollutant 0.441 0.028 (13)

Level II Level III

12

Criteria & Credits for Optimal Habitat Restoration Condition3. Results

Assessment Areas

Assessment Items

Assessment Factors Criteria / Credits Weighs

Space

Distance from wet-land, grassland,

farm, stream, ricefields

Spatial relationship between

habitat & surroundings

Over 150m 100

0.104150m ~ 300m 70300m ~ 500m 40

Over 500m 10

Altitude of spawning pond

Altitude of spawning area

Under 250m 1000.044250m ~ 400m 70

Over 400m 40

Feed

Bed structure of forest

Layer structure type of vegetation (upper, middle

& lower layers)

Multi-layer structure 1000.040Mono-layer structure 70

None 40

Low-rise grassland Insect habitat space (food source)

Over 50㎡ 1000.190Under 50㎡ 70

None 40

Cover

Stones / interspaces Hiding place

Stones arranged 1000.105

None 50

Soil quality Burrow places/ underground spaces

> 20cm depth of soft soil 100

0.178< 20cm depth of soft soil 70

None 40

13

3. Results

Assessment Areas

Assessment Items

Assessment Factors

Scoring Criteria Weights

Water(breeding)

Permanentwetland size

Permanent wetlandwith open water

Over 500㎡ 100

0.043300㎡ ~ 500㎡ 70Under 300㎡ 40

None 10

Temporary wetland size

Transient wetland during wet season/rainy days (for about 1 month)

Over 50㎡ 1000.085Under 50㎡ 70

None 40

Coverage of Aquatic plants

(Open water ratio)

Food source for larva

65~75% 100

0.03575~90%, 50~65% 70

Under 50%, Over 90% 40

Water depth Water depth of spawning area

10 ~ 50㎝ 100

0.050Under 10㎝, 50㎝ ~ 70㎝ 70

Over 70㎝ 40None of water depth 10

Criteria & Credits for Optimal Habitat Restoration Condition

14

3. Results

Assessment Areas

Assessment Items

Assessment Factors

Scoring Criteria Weights

Water

Water quality(DO)

Water quality of spawning area

5.1 ~ 7.5 100

0.0422.0 ~ 5.0, Over 7.5 70

Under 2.0 40

pH pH of spawning area

5.8~7.5 100

0.0207.5~8.5 70

Under 5.8, Over 8.5 40

ThreateningFactors

Distance from streets Likelihood of road-kill

Over 500m 100

0.036150m ~ 500m 70

Under 150m 40

Distance from pollutant

Likelihood ofcontamination

of pawning area

Over 500m 100

0.028100m ~ 500m 70

Under 100m 40

Criteria & Credits for Optimal Habitat Restoration Condition

15

Adult organisms

[Floor Plan of proliferation facility]

Artificial Proliferation Technology & Breeding Facilities Development

① Setting up greenhouse (7×11 m)

② Man-made pond in greenhouse (5×3×0.3 m)

③Establish grassland and veggie field (pepper, tomato, egg plant) with exposed soils (burrowing habit during hibernation period

④Establish hiding place to protect from natural predators (10 logs) & pile of rocks

⑤Provide prays by inducing insects into greenhouse through attracting devices

⑥Establish lower banks (< 7 cm) between the compartments to ease the movement

[In-situ testing for breeding & proliferation]

3. Results

Pond Grassland

Field w/ logs

Fieldw/ rocks

Attracting lamp

Attracting lamp

16

Artificial Proliferation Technology & Breeding Facilities Development

3. Results

[Constructed Habitat Test Setting, Jeju island, 2014]

17

① 20×17m space with 2m high screen net

②Four artificial habitat sectors (10×13m, 10×10m, 10×7m, 10×4m)

③Cement block wall (40cm) with water-proof layer

④

Mixed water from survey site (1/10) and underground water (9/10), use after 10 days

⑤Arrange logs & rocks along the edge for resting, foraging, and hibernation. [Habitat Plan]

3. Results

Young organisms

Artificial Proliferation Technology & Breeding Facilities Development

Trees

Trees Trees

Pond

Pond Pond

Pond

TreesStones

Ston

es

StonesStones

18

Young organisms

[Raising box for young organisms]

■ Secure prey and avoid the risk of being eaten

[Indoor Testing Container] [Inside container]

3. ResultsArtificial Proliferation Technology & Breeding Facilities Development

19

Larva

[Larva Habitat Setting]

①Two cement block-high (40 cm) artificial ponds (180 × 390 cm) with water-proof layer on the bottom

②12 plastic tubs (75×56×31 cm) in the pond with constant water level (approx. 25 cm water depth)

③Shelter making with aquatic plants collected from survey sites

④Mix one third of natural pond water and two third of underground water and use it after ten days

⑤Install 0.5cm x 0.5cm wire mesh to prevent predators

3. ResultsArtificial Proliferation Technology & Breeding Facilities Development

20

Minimum habitat volume

Approximately 400 ㎤ (≒25 cubic inches) per individual (7.4*7.4*7.4 cm) with 1,200-1,600㎣ of mealworm per day

3. ResultsArtificial Proliferation Technology & Breeding Facilities Development

Growth analysis

A(130㎡) B(100㎡) C(70㎡) D(40㎡)

2011 25 25 25 25

2012 18 17 15 12

2013 15 13 12 7

• Male 25, female 25 for each experimental habitat• Higher survival rate in larger habitat

Num

ber o

f Ind

ivid

ual

2011 2012 2013

21

• Existing topography, natural characteristics, surrounding landscapes, and technologies to minimize possible environmental disturbance and pollutions

• Restoration construction timeline taking target species lifecycle into consideration

Establishment of Restoration-Optimized Habitat

3. Results

Layered structure

Aquatic plants cover ratio: >70%

Permanent wetland:>500m2

Rocks/Interspaces

Transient wetland:>50m2

Lower grassland: >50-1,500m2

Soft soil: > 20cm depth

Distance to wetland < 150m

WaterWoodsGrass

Soft soilAquatic plantSandbank

Legend HSI LegendBreeding elevation: <400m (1,312 ft)Water quality (DO): 5.1-7.5pH: 5.8-7.5Distance to road: > 150m (492 ft)Distance to pollutants: >100m (328 ft)

22

Sections of HSI-based Habit Model

3. Results

Layered structure

Transient wetland:>50m2

Distance to wetland, grass, natural land

uses < 150m Rocks/stone crevice

Lower grassland: >50-1,500m2

Permanent wetland:>500m2

Aquatic plants cover ratio (open water): >70% (30%)

Soft soil: > 20cm depth

23

Restoration-Optimized Habitat Model

3. Results

Forest Layer

Rocks w/ creviceTransient wetland:>50m2

Permanent wetland:>500m2

Aquatic plants cover ratio: >70%Lower grassland: >50-1,500m2

Soft soil: > 20cm depth

24

Code antenna sends tag numbers to data reader

Individual identification method using pit tag

Monitoring Technology for Habitat Adaptability

[Pit tag]

[Pit tag insertion]

3. Results

25

Test-bed Feasibility Survey

3. Restuls

32

Test-bed Application

3. Restuls

Ecosystem Conservation Cooperation Site for providing compensation for unavoidable impacts to ecological resources

Sanjung-Dong, Mokpo Pile of stones

Pile of tree twigs

Wetland

Monitoring sensor ranges

Legend

tuner

A

A`

Habitat Enhancement / Education

Core AreaBuffer AreaTransition

Habitat spaceObservation spaceRest area Silver grass/reed restoration

Observation space

Soft clay topsoilFoundation layer >30cm

Emergent plant communitySoft soil

Water-proof layer

Core Habitat Open Water

Breeding Resting

Resting

Hiding

Hiding

Birds Habitat

Breeding

Breeding Resting

Resting

Feeding

Birds Habitat

Natural Trail

GrasslandPagola

34

4. Implications

• Preservation of existing habitats & creation of new habitat opportunities

• Guidelines on specification development to remodel/restructure existing spaces into suitable habitats

• Fundamental information for potential restoration site selection

• Methods applicable to other species’ habitat restoration

35

Application in urban ecological restoration projects

4. Implications

36

Amendment in National-Level Restoration Project Guideline• Stipulation about “habitat plans for resting, feeding, hiding, and

breeding spaces”

4. Implications

Incorporation of endangered species habitat restoration in the approval process of Urban Ecosystem Projects• Ecological consideration in the evaluation criteria for national urban

ecological design project competition

Thank You!sohyun.park@ttu.edu