Back to the Ecology Plexus Page
Back to The Plexus Home Page
 

The Key Ecological Functions (KEFs) Page


Bruce G. Marcot
database and publication links updated: 19 August 2012

[This page is designed for wildlife biologists, ecologists, natural resource planners, and others in the fields of wildlife and natural resource management ... although teachers, students, and anyone else are welcome to explore.  Opinions and information are those of Bruce Marcot, and are not intended to reflect those of other people or organizations.]

Contents of This Page:
What Are KEFs?  |  Classification of KEFs  |
A Taxonomy of KEFs  |  Hypotheses on Ecological Functions  |  
KEFs Used in Regional and Species Assessments




What are KEFs?

One facet of modeling wildlife-habitat relations and species-environment relations may pertain to depicting the ecological roles played by organisms.  I have termed these "key ecological functions" or KEFs.

KEFs influence the productivity, diversity, and sustainability of ecosystems and resources.

KEFs can pertain to trophic levels, interactions with other organisms or physical substrates, and energy flow or nutrient cycling.  A few examples:



Classification of KEFs

I have produced two major classification systems of KEFs of organisms, which have been used to develop species-environment relations databases:

1/  The original KEF classification I developed for use with fungi, lichens, bryophytes, nonvascular and vascular plants, invertebrates, and terrestrial vertebrates, for the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Program (ICBEMP).  I call this database the "Species-Environment Relations" (SER) database.  
        Source:  Marcot, B. G., M. A. Castellano, J. A. Christy, L. K. Croft, J. F. Lehmkuhl, R. H. Naney, K. Nelson, C. G. Niwa, R. E. Rosentreter, R. E. Sandquist, B. C. Wales, and E. Zieroth. 1997. Terrestrial ecology assessment. Pp. 1497-1713 in:  T. M. Quigley and S. J. Arbelbide, ed. An assessment of ecosystem components in the interior Columbia Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins.  Volume III.  USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-405. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR.
        DatabaseDownload a zip file with the "Species-Environment Relations" (SER) database.  (Also available at: http://www.icbemp.gov/spatial/expnm/spc.shtml#BDBSER).
        DocumentationDownload a PDF file with explanation and metadocumentation of the SER database.  (Also available at: http://www.icbemp.gov/spatial/metadata/aux_pdf/ser_aux.pdf).  Also see further documentation at: http://www.icbemp.gov/spatial/metadata/species/792.htm.  

2/  A slight revision and refinement of the above KEF classification for use with marine and terrestrial vertebrates, for the Species-Habitat Project of Oregon and Washington.
          Source:  Marcot, B. G., and M. Vander Heyden. 2001. Key ecological functions of wildlife species. Pp. 168-186 in:  D. H. Johnson and T. A. O'Neil, Technical Coordinators. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis OR.  Read it here
          Please note: Replacement (errata) Figure 10 and Figure 11 for this publication.

These are the classification systems for categories of KEF.  The species data bases in which they were used are listed below for these two, and other, projects.
 


A Taxonomy of Patterns of Key Ecological Functions (KEFs) of Wildlife Species and Communities

What follows here is presented in Marcot and Vander Heyden (2001), cited and available above.
I have devised a "taxonomy" of various patterns of KEFs that could be analyzed in a community by using existing wildlife-habitat or species-environment databases that include KEF information (e.g., see references listed below under Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project and the Oregon-Washington Species-Habitat Project, which have such databases available).  This "taxonomy" was presented as Table 2 in Marcot and Vander Heyden (2001) (see literature list below), and this table is available here as an RTF format file.

The table includes descriptions of the type and name of the functional pattern, definitions, ecological implications, and how to evaluate them.

In brief, the KEF taxonomy is as follows:

Community Patterns of KEFs
  • Functional redundancy - The number of species performing the same ecological function in a community.
  • Functional richness - The total number of KEF categories in a community.
  • Total functional diversity - The total array of KEF categories weighted by their redundancy, i.e., the number of functions times the mean functional redundancy across all functions.
  • Functional web - The set of all KEFs within a community and their connections among species and thence to habitat elements.
  • Functional profile - The degree of functional redundancy compared across communities.
  • Functional homologies - The functional similarity of communities even if species composition differs.
  • Geographic Patterns of KEFs
  • Functional bottlenecks or cold spots - Geographic locations with very low functional redundancy of an otherwise widely-distributed functional category.
  • Functional linkages or hot spots - Geographic locations with very high functional redundancy.
  • Speciesí Functional Roles
  • Functional keystone species, critical functional link species, and critical functions - Functional keystone species are species whose removal would most alter the structure or function of the community.  One form of this may be critical functional links, which are species that are the only ones that perform a specific ecological function in a community.  A critical function therefore is the associated functional category represented by only 1 (or very few) species within a community.
  • Functional breadth and functional specialization of species - The number of ecological functions performed by a species.
  • Functional Responses of Communities
  • Functional resilience - The capacity of a community to return to a starting pattern of total functional diversity, richness, and redundancy, following a disturbance event.
  • Functional resistance - The ability of a community to resist changing its functional diversity, richness, and redundancy, following a disturbance event.
  • Functional attenuation - The degree to which the set of ecological functions within a community simplify following a disturbance event.
  • Functional shifting - The degree to which a community changes to a new, stable, functional constitution following a disturbance event.
  • Imperiled functions - A function that is represented by very few species (critical functional link species) or by species that are themselves scarce, declining, or moribund, where extirpation of the species would mean loss of the function.  Imperiled functions also can be identified geographically.
  • I have used this taxonomy to analyze the ecological functional patterns of:
    - plant and animal communities in the Columbia River Basin in western USA and Canada;
    - terrestrial wildlife communities in Washington and Oregon;
    - assemblages of selected wildlife species in forests of India;
    - assemblages of forest-dwelling mammals of western North America; and
    - other biotas.
    (See references further below.)
     


    Some Hypotheses on Ecological Functions

    The following is taken from Marcot and Vander Heyden (2001) (see link above):

     Ecological implications of functional patterns of species and communities can be taken as testable hypotheses about the roles of wildlife and how ecosystems work.  Some hypotheses include the following:

    1.  Functional switching (the inherent capability of a community to change its categories or redundancy of KEFs following some perturbation) imparts functional resistance:  a greater degree of functional switching by species imparts a greater functional resistance to the community.

    2.  Functional redundancy imparts resilience:  for a particular function, the higher the functional redundancy, the greater is the functional resilience (or resistance) for that function.

    3.  Functional diversity imparts low attenuation:  the greater the functional richness and diversity of a community, the lower is the degree of functional attenuation (loss of functions).

    4.  The more functionally diverse a community, the greater is its productivity and its biodiversity.

    5.  The greater the functional redundancy, the more sustainable is the set of resources that the function provides.

    6.  Functional breadth is not necessarily related to critical functional links.  That is, species that are the sole (or few) performer(s) of a given function in a community might also perform very few, or many other, functions.  Critical functional links cannot be predicted from functional breadth.

     Of course, such working hypotheses also can be stated as null hypotheses for the purpose of critical testing of their veracity.  For example, the first working hypothesis above can be restated as the following null hypothesis:  there is no influence on functional resistance of a community from degree of functional switching of its component species.  Then, to test this null hypothesis statistically in a field trial, an appropriate research study can be devised that compares the functional constitution of communities before and after a disturbance, for communities that may differ in their degree of functional switching of their component species.
     


    KEFs Used in Regional and Species Assessments

    I have worked on several major regional and species projects that incorporated KEFs into evaluations and planning actions.  Following are lists of publications and links to databases, from these projects, specifically pertaining to KEFs:
     

    Species-Habitat Project (Wildlife-Habitat Relationships) of Oregon and Washington
    USDA Forest Service, Washington Department of Wildlife, and Northwest Habitat Institute

    Cederholm, C. J., D. H. Johnson, R. E. Bilby, L. G. Dominguez, A. M. Garrett, W. H. Graeber, E. L. Greda, M. D. Kunze, B. G. Marcot, J. F. Palmisano, R. W. Plotnikoff, W. G. Pearcy, C. A. Simenstad, and P. C. Trotter. 2000. Pacific salmon and wildlife - ecological contexts, relationships, and implications for management.  Special Edition Technical Report, prepared for D.H. Johnson and T.A. O'Neil (Manag. Dirs.), Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 141 pp.  PDF
           (Listed by Washington State Office of Community Development, Olympia WA, as a citation of recommended source of "best available science" for designing critical areas (Nutley et al. 2002):  Nutley, B., S. Wells, L. Bauer, C. B. Parsons, R. R. Robison, C. Thomas, S. Bennett, and J. Unwin. 2002. Citations of recommended sources of best available science for designating and protecting critical areas. Washington State Office of Community Development, Olympia, Washington. 89 pp.)

    Cederholm, C. J., D. H. Johnson, R. E. Bilby, L. G. Dominguez, A. M. Garrett, W. H. Graeber, E. L. Greda, M. D. Kunze, B. G. Marcot, J. F. Palmisano, R. W. Plotnikoff, W. G. Pearcy, C. A. Simenstad, and P. C. Trotter. 2001. Pacific salmon and wildlife: ecological contexts, relationships, and implications for management. Pp. 628-685 in:  D. H. Johnson and T. A. O'Neil, Technical Coordinators. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis OR.

    Marcot, B. G., and M. Vander Heyden. 2001. Key ecological functions of wildlife species. Pp. 168-186 in:  D. H. Johnson and T. A. O'Neil, Technical Coordinators. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis OR.  Read it here   [Please note: Replacement (errata) Figure 10 and Figure 11 for this publication.]

    O'Neil, T. A., D. H. Johnson, C. Barrett, M. Trevithick, K. A. Bettinger, C. Kiilsgaard, M. Vander Heyden, E. L. Greda, D. Stinson, B. G. Marcot, P. J. Doran, S. Tank, and L. Wunder. 2001. Matrixes for wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington.  CD-ROM. in:  D. H. Johnson and T. A. O'Neil, Technical Coordinators. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis OR.
     

    Fish and Wildlife Multi-Species Framework and use in subbasin planning
    Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon

    Berwick, S., B. G. Marcot, P. Paquet, and P. Whitney. 2001. Ecosystem-selection of wildlife species for comparing future landscape alternatives in the Columbia River Basin. in:  R. Field, R. J. Warren, H. Okarma, and P. R. Sievert, ed. Wildlife, land, and people: priorities for the 21st century. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

    Marcot, B. G., W. E. McConnaha, P. H. Whitney, T. A. O'Neil, P. J. Paquet, L. E. Mobrand, G. R. Blair, L. C. Lestelle, K. M. Malone, and K. I. Jenkins. 2002. A multi-species framework approach for the Columbia River Basin:  integrating fish, wildlife, and ecological functions.  On CD-ROM. Northwest Power and Conservation Council (previously: Northwest Power Planning Council), Portland, Oregon.

    Marcot, B. G., T. A. O'Neil, J. B. Nyberg, A. MacKinnon, P. J. Paquet, and D. H. Johnson. 2006. Analyzing key ecological functions for transboundary subbasin assessments. Pp. 37-50 in: C. W. Slaughter and N. Berg, eds. Watersheds Across Boundaries: Science, Sustainability, Security. Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Watershed Management Council Conference, November 3-7, 2002, Stevenson, Washington. Center for Water Resources Report No.107. University of California, Riverside, California. 390 pp.  Read abstract hereOr read full paper here

    Scheeler, C. A., P. Ashley, W. Blosser, D. H. Johnson, J. Kagan, C. Macdonald, B. G. Marcot, T. A. O'Neil, P. J. Paquet, D. Parkin, E. Roderick, P. Roger, A. Sondenaa, and S. Soults. 2003. A technical guide for developing wildlife elements of a subbasin plan.  http://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/subbasinplanning/admin/guides/wildlife.pdf. Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority, and Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, OR. 21 February 2003. 20 pp.
     
     

    DecAID: The Decayed Wood Advisor for Managing Snags, Partially Dead Trees, and Down Wood for Biodiversity in Forests of Washington and Oregon
    USDA Forest Service

    The DecAID Advisor -- management advisory system
    The DecAID Repository -- background information for the DecAID Advisor

    Mellen, K., B. G. Marcot, J. L. Ohmann, K. L. Waddell, E. A. Willhite, B. B. Hostetler, S. A. Livingson, and C. Ogden. 2002. DecAID: a decaying wood advisory model for Oregon and Washington. (pp. 527-533) In: W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr, P. J. Shea, B. E. Valentine, C. P. Weatherspoon, and T. E. Lisle (Ed.). Proceedings of the Symposium on The Ecology and Management of Dead Wood in Western Forests, 2-4 November 1999, Reno, Nevada.  USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181.  Read it here

    Marcot, B. G., K. Mellen, S. A. Livingston, and C. Ogden. 2002. The DecAID advisory model:  wildlife component. (pp. 561-590) In: W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr, P. J. Shea, B. E. Valentine, C. P. Weatherspoon, and T. E. Lisle (Ed.). Proceedings of the Symposium on The Ecology and Management of Dead Wood in Western Forests, 2-4 November 1999, Reno, Nevada.  USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181. PDF

     

    Conservation of Biodiversity in Managed Forests of India
    Wildlife Institute of India, and USDA Forest Service

    Lehmkuhl, J. F., P. K. Mathur, V. B. Sawarkar, R. S. Holthausen, B. G. Marcot, and M. G. Raphael. 2006. Managing Indian forests for biological diversity and productivity. Pp. 92-114 in: J. A. McNeely, T. M. McCarthy, A. Smith, L. Olsvig-Whittaker, and E. D. Wikramnayake, eds. Conservation biology in Asia. Society for Conservation Biology Asia Section and Resources Himalaya Foundation, Kathmandu, Nepal. 461 pp.  PDF

    Lehmkuhl, J. F., S. K. Srivastava, B. G. Marcot, and V. B. Sawarkar. 2002. Chapter 5: Next steps. Pp. 57-70 in: P. K. Mathur, J. F. Lehmkuhl, and V. B. Sawarkar, editors. Management of forests in India for biological diversity and forest productivity, a new perspective - Volume I: Concepts, approaches, and project overview, Wildlife Institute of India-USDA Forest Service Collaborative Project Report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, India. 70 pp.

    Marcot, B. G., J. F. Lehmkuhl, and M. G. Raphael. 2002. Chapter 4: Summary and synthesis of lessons learned in four conservation areas. Pp. 47-56 in: P. K. Mathur, J. F. Lehmkuhl, and V. B. Sawarkar, editors. Management of forests in India for biological diversity and forest productivity, a new perspective - Volume I: Concepts, approaches, and project overview, Wildlife Institute of India-USDA Forest Service Collaborative Project Report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, India. 70 pp.

    Sawarkar, V. B., and B. G. Marcot. 2002. Chapter 2: Methods for wildlife-habitat relationships (WHR). Pp. 9-14 in: P. K. Mathur, J. F. Lehmkuhl, and V. B. Sawarkar, editors. Management of forests in India for biological diversity and forest productivity, a new perspective - Volume II: Wildlife-habitat relationships (WHR) in conservation areas, Wildlife Institute of India-USDA Forest Service Collaborative Project Report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, India. 224 pp.

    Delineating Protected Areas in Managed Forests of Amazonian Bolivia
    Bolfor Bolivian Forest Service, and Conservation International U.S.

    Marcot, B. G., D. I. Rumiz, and T. S. Fredericksen.  1998.  Defining forest protected area networks -- a handbook for delineating forest protected areas in managed forests of lowland Bolivia.  Report for Conservation International, Washington, D.C. and Conservation International, Washington, D.C.  (Unpublished report.)

    Marcot, B. G., D. I. Rumiz, and T. S. Fredericksen. 2000. Definicion de redes de areas protegidas forestales: un manual para la delimitacion de areas protegidas forestales en los bosques manajados de las tierras bajas de Bolivia.  [Defining forest protected area networks -- a handbook for delineating forest protected areas in managed forests of lowland Bolivia.  In Spanish]  Documento Téchnico 87/2000, Contrato USAID: 511-0621-C-00-3027. BOLFOR (de USAID y Chemonics International), Santa Cruz, Bolivia. 27 pp. PDF
     

    Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project
    USDA Forest Service

    Marcot, B. G. 1997. The species-environment relations (SER) database:  an overview and some cautions in its use.  Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project, USDA Forest Service. Database documentation available on-line at URL: http://www.icbemp.gov/spatial/metadata/databases/792aux2.html

    Marcot, B. G. 1997. The species-environment relations (SER) modeling approach of the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. Analysis Notes (USDA Forest Service, Washington Office/Ecosystem Management Analysis Center, Fort Collins, CO) 7(2):11-15.   Read it here.

    Marcot, B. G. 1998. Modeling species-environment relations (SER): key ecological functions and key environmental correlates of terrestrial species of the interior Columbia River basin.  Poster and abstract, presented at:  Landscape management of Pacific Northwest forests: exploring practical tools for managers.  19-20 February 1998. Olympia WA. Web: http://www.spiritone.com/~brucem/absmod.htm

    Marcot, B. G. 1996. An ecosystem context for bat management: a case study of the interior Columbia River Basin, U.S.A. Pp. 19-36 in: R. M. R. Barclay and R. M. Brigham, eds. Bats and forests symposium: October 19-21, 1995, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. B.C. Ministry of Forests, Victoria, B.C., Canada.  PDF
     

    Old Forest Remnants Study
    ongoing research in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest, Cascade Mountains, Washington

    Marcot, B. G., and A. Moldenke. 1999. Testing biodiversity implications of old-forest stand remnants surrounded by clearcuts.  Poster presentation at:  83rd Annual Meeting of the Pacific Branch Entomological Society of America, 20-23 June 1999. Eugene OR.

    Marcot, B. G., and A. R. Moldenke. 2003. Testing the role of old-forest stand remnants for maintaining forest invertebrates.  Presented at:  Conference on Innovations in Species Conservation: Integrative Approaches to Address Rarity and Risk, April 28-30, 2003. USDA Forest Service and others.  Portland, OR.

    other publications in prep.
     

    Other Analyses of Key Ecological Functions of Organisms

    Aubry, K. B., J. P. Hayes, B. L. Biswell, and B. G. Marcot. 2003. The ecological role of tree-dwelling mammals in western coniferous forests. Pp. 405-443 in: C. J. Zabel and R. G. Anthony, eds. Mammal community dynamics: management and conservation in the coniferous forests of western North America. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. 709 pp.  PDF

    Marcot, B. G. 1996. An ecosystem context for bat management: a case study of the interior Columbia River Basin, U.S.A.  Pp. 19-36 in:  R. M. R. Barclay and R. M. Brigham, ed. Bats and forests symposium: October 19-21, 1995, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. B.C. Ministry of Forests, Victoria, B.C., Canada.  PDF

    Marcot, B. G. 2002. An ecological functional basis for managing decaying wood for wildlife.  Pp. 895-910 in: W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr, P. J. Shea, B. E. Valentine, C. P. Weatherspoon, and T. E. Lisle, editors.  Proceedings of the Symposium on The Ecology and Management of Dead Wood in Western Forests, 2-4 November 1999, Reno, Nevada.  USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station General Technical Report PSW-GTR-181. PDF

    Marcot, B. G., and K. B. Aubry. 2003. The functional diversity of mammals in coniferous forests of western North America. Pp. 631-664 in: C. J. Zabel and R. G. Anthony, eds. Mammal community dynamics: management and conservation in the coniferous forests of western North America. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. 709 pp.  PDF

    Marcot, B. G., R. E. Gullison, and J. R. Barborak. 2001. Protecting habitat elements and natural areas in the managed forest matrix.  Pp. 523-558 in:  R. A. Fimbel, A. Grajal, and J. G. Robinson, editors.  The cutting edge:  conserving wildlife in logged tropical forests. Columbia University Press, N.Y.  PDF
     

    Presentations (Talks and Posters) on Key Ecological Functions of Organisms

    Marcot, B. G. 1997. Addressing ecological function from a wildlife perspective. In: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Research Review, 9 June 1997. Corvallis OR.

    Marcot, B. G. 1997. Recent advances in terrestrial conservation: modeling and managing for species viability, ecological functions, and evolutionary potential. In: Maintaining ecological integrity in Washington State: biodiversity information and conservation priorities.  10 May 1997.  Co-sponsored by Sierra Biodiversity Institute and Seattle University. Seattle WA.

    Marcot, B. G. 1997. Species functions and evolutionary trends. In: Ecosystem management in the interior Columbia Basin: science and management in partnership.  3-5 March 1997. Spokane WA.

    Marcot, B. G. 1997. Terrestrial biodiversity and ecological functions, overall findings:  terrestrial ecology assessment.  Poster presented at:  Ecosystem management in the interior Columbia Basin: science and management in partnership.  3-5 March 1997. Spokane WA.

    Marcot, B. G. 1998. Analyzing key ecological functions of wildlife species.  Abstract and presentation at:  Landscape management of Pacific Northwest forests: exploring practical tools for managers.  19-20 February 1998. Olympia WA.

    Marcot, B. G. 1998. Modeling species-environment relations (SER): key ecological functions and key environmental correlates of terrestrial species of the interior Columbia River Basin.  Poster presentation at:  Landscape management of Pacific Northwest forests: exploring practical tools for managers.  19-20 February 1998. Olympia WA.

    Marcot, B. G. 1998. Terrestrial biodiversity and ecological functions.  Poster presentation at:  Landscape management of Pacific Northwest forests: exploring practical tools for managers.  19-20 February 1998. Olympia WA.

    Marcot, B. G. 1999. Analyzing key ecological functions of species for wildlife community patterns.  Presented 29 October 1999 to the Ecological Work Group, Northwest Power Planning Council. (invited presentation). Portland Or.

    Marcot, B. G. 1999. An ecological functional basis for managing decaying wood for wildlife.  Presented 4 November 1999 at: Symposium on the Ecology and Management of Dead Wood in Western Forests, 2-4 November 1999. (invited presentation). The Western Section, The Wildlife Society, Reno NV.

    Marcot, B. G. 1999. Species-environment relations, key ecological functions of wildlife, and salmon-wildlife relations.  Presented 6 October 1999 to USDA Forest Service, Chugach National Forest Planning Team, Anchorage AK. (invited presentation).

    Marcot, B. G. 2000. Complements to managing biodiversity in the interior Columbia Basin:  maintaining key ecological functions and evolutionary potential of species. In: Annual Conference, 12-16 September 2000. The Wildlife Society, Kentucky.

    Marcot, B. G. 2000. Key elements of biodiversity in the Columbia River Basin:  patterns of diversity, key ecological functions, and evolutionary context.  Presented 14 September 2000 to The Wildlife Society 7th Annual Conference.  Invited. Nashville, TN.

    Marcot, B. G. 2001. Discussion on decayed wood ecology and key ecological functions of wildlife.  For:  Graduate reading and discussion seminar, 6 June 2001, hosted by Dr. Dede Olsen, Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR. In:

    Marcot, B. G. 2001. Functional assessments and Bayesian belief network modeling.  Presented 9 May 2001 to the INLAS modeling team, USDA Forest Service and others, The Dalles, Oregon.  Invited presentation.

    Marcot, B. G., T. A. O'Neil, D. H. Johnson, P. Paquet, and E. Greda. 2001. The functional connection: a framework for integrating fish-wildlife assessments. In: Joint Annual Meeting, Oregon Chapters American Fisheries Society and The Wildlife Society, 14-16 February 2001. Portland, OR.

    Marcot, B. G., T. A. O'Neil, J. B. Nyberg, and J. A. MacKinnon. 2002. A broad-scale assessment of key ecological functions of wildlife in the Columbia River Basin of USA and Canada.  Presented 30 April 2002 at Western Division Conference of the American Fisheries Society, Spokane, Washington.

    O'Neil, T. A., B. G. Marcot, D. H. Johnson, P. Paquet, and E. Greda. 2001. A functional approach to integrating fish and wildlife in ecological assessments. In: Joint Annual Meeting, Oregon Chapters American Fisheries Society and The Wildlife Society, 14-16 February 2001. Portland, OR.

    O'Neil, T. A., B. G. Marcot, P. Paquet, and D. H. Johnson. 2002. Determining riparian functions from a fish and wildlife perspective. In: Annual Meeting, Oregon Chapter The Wildlife Society, 13-15 February 2002. Salishan, Wa.

    Whitney, P., B. G. Marcot, P. Paquet, C. McConnaha, and L. Mobrand. 2002. Multi-species framework: coordinating theory, models and lexicon across spatial scales and between fish and wildlife in the Columbia Basin. In: Joint Meeting, Society for Ecological Restoration and Ecological Society of America, 4-9 August 2002. Tucson AZ.

    Marcot, B. G. 2002. Use of key ecological functions for assessing Columbia Basin and subbasin conditions. Presented 1 August 2002 to Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority and Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon.

    Marcot, B. G., T. A. O'Neil, J. B. Nyberg, and J. A. MacKinnon. 2002. A broad-scale assessment of key ecological functions of wildlife in the Columbia River Basin of USA and Canada. Presented 30 April 2002. in: L. R. F. Western Division of the American Fisheries Society (WDAFS), the Sustainable Fisheries Foundation (SFF), and the North Pacific International Chapter AFS (NPIC), ed. Toward Ecosystem-Based Management: Breaking Down the Barriers in the Columbia River Basin and Beyond, 27 April - 1 May 2002. Spokane, Washington.

    Marcot, B. G., T. A. O'Neil, J. B. Nyberg, J. A. MacKinnon, P. Paquet, and D. H. Johnson. 2002. Analyzing key ecological functions as one facet of transboundary subbasin assessment. Presented at: Conference on Watersheds Across Boundaries: Science, Sustainability, Security, 3-6 November 2002. Skamania Lodge, Stevenson, WA.

    O'Neil, T. A., J. A. MacKinnon, D. H. Johnson, P. C. Paquet, J. B. Nyberg, and B. G. Marcot. 2002. Wildlife habitat relationships in the Columbia River Basin: cross-border information and applications. Poster presentation at: Watershed Management Council Ninth Biennial Conference -- Watersheds Across Boundaries: Science, Sustainability, Security, 3-6 November 2002. Watershed Management Council, Stevenson, WA.

    Marcot, B. G. 2003. The conceptual basis of IBIS: wildlife-habitat relationships and key ecological functions. Presented 24 June 2003 to Joint Meeting of the Interagency Science Review Panel and the Interagency Science Advisory Board, Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon.

    Marcot, B. G. 2003. Expanding the wildlife-habitat relationships paradigm: how key ecological functions of organisms change the world. Presented at Seminar Series, Department of Biology, Portland State University, Oregon, 27 May 2004 (invited).

    Marcot, B. G. 2005. How key ecological functions of organisms change the world.  Presented at: Management of Forests in India for Biological Diversity and Forest Productivity - A New Perspective. Site Level Workshop - Terai Conservation Area, 5-8 December 2005. Dudwa Tiger Reserve, Uttar Pradesh, India.

    Marcot, B. G. 2005. How key ecological functions of organisms change the world. Presented 1 December 2005 at: Wildlife Institute of India. Dehra Dun, Uttaranchal, India.

    Marcot, B. G., and T. O'Neil. 2005. Analyses of habitats, species, ecological functions, and ecosystem services for mitigation banking in Oregon. Presented at: Defenders of Wildlife. West Linn, Oregon.

    Olson, D. H., R. Molina, B. G. Marcot, G. H. Stankey, A. B. Carey, R. Kiester, E. A. Beever, J. Kagan, B. Taylor, and A. Delach. 2005. Biodiversity issues in US Pacific Northwest managed forests. Poster presentation at conference on Biodiversity Conservation in Plantation Forests, 25-29 April 2005, Bordeaux, France.

    O'Neil, T., B. Marcot, and P. Paquet. 2005. Species-habitats-functions: a planning framework for ecoprovinces and subbasins. Presented at: Joint Annual Meeting, Society for Northwestern Vertebrate Biology and Oregon Chapter of The Wildlife Society. Presented 24 February 2005. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

    Marcot, B. G. 2006. Wildlife-habitat relationships of key ecological and cultural functions.  Presented at:  Habitat and Habitat Supply Modeling Practitioner's Workshop, 5-7 December 2006. Ministry of Forests, Research Branch, British Columbia, Canada, Chase, B.C. Canada.

    Todd, M., F. L. Waterhouse, S. Saunders, J. M. Meggs, B. S. Lindgren, and B. Marcot. 2008. Monitoring ground arthropod functional communities to evaluate the effectiveness of structural retention for biodiversity conservation in coastal forests of British Columbia. Poster presented at International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO) Conference on Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems and Landscapes, 5-8 August 2008, Kamloops, Canada.

    Marcot, B. G. 2011. Invertebrates in old forest remnants in the Cascade Mountains of southern Washington. Presented at: 2011 US-IALE (U.S. Regional Association of the International Association for Landscape Ecology) Annual Symposium. Portland, Oregon.
     


    Back to the Ecology Plexus Page
    Back to The Plexus Home Page