Citizen participation and ecological integrity assessment in biological corridors using a composite index

Authors

  • Juan Carlos Villegas-Arguedas Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica, Doctorado en Ciencias Naturales para el Desarrollo, Heredia, Costa Rica. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9080-8382

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22458/urj.v18i1.6694

Keywords:

Fragmentation, citizen science, landscape connectivity, Hill numbers, species diversity, forest cover, biodiversity monitoring

Abstract

Introduction: Ecological integrity reflects the ability of ecosystems to maintain their natural composition, structure, and functions in the face of disturbances. However, few studies have assessed ecological integrity using citizen science data. Objective: To assess the ecological condition of biological corridors in Costa Rica using citizen science and indicators of tetrapod diversity and forest fragmentation. Methods: I calculated a composite index, the Ecological Integrity Index, combining the Forest Fragmentation Index (based on forest cover maps from 2021 and 2023) and the alpha diversity of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, estimated using Hill numbers (q = 1) from citizen science records. Results: In 2021, the highest composite index value was recorded for the San Juan La Selva biological corridor (1.00), while the lowest was recorded for the Interurbano María Aguilar corridor (0.00). In 2023, the highest and lowest values were recorded for Amistosa (0.99) and El Achiote (0.00). Conclusion: The increase in species evenness and changes in ecological composition suggest local restructuring or short-term functional recovery, but no significant changes were observed between the two years.

References

Cairns, J., Jr. (1977). Quantification of biological integrity. In R. K. Ballentine & L. J. Guarraia (Eds.), The integrity of water: A symposium (pp. 171–185). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Calvera-Isabal, M., Santos, P., Ulrich, H., & Schulten, C. (2023). Cómo automatizar la extracción y análisis de información sobre ciencia ciudadana con propósitos educativos. Rev. Comunicar 74 (31): ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3293. http://doi.org/10.3916/C74-2023-02

Chao, A., Gotelli, N. J., Hsieh, T. C., Sander, E. L., Ma, K. H., Colwell, R. K., & Ellison, A. M. (2014). Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: A framework for sampling and estimation in biodiversity studies. Ecological Monographs, 84(1), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.1890/13-0133.1

Elkie, P. C., Rempel, R. S., & Carr, A. P. (1999). Patch Analyst user's manual: A tool for quantifying landscape structure (Technical Manual TM-002). Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northwest Science & Technology.

Gensollen, M., & Jiménez-Rolland, M. (2022). Ciencia ciudadana: pluralidad científica y pensamiento crítico. CIENCIA ergo-sum, 29(2), Artículo e164. https://doi.org/10.30878/ces.v29n2a6

Global Biodiversity Information Facility. (2026). Free and open access to biodiversity data. https://www.gbif.org/

Gurrutxaga-San Vicente, M. (2003). Índices de fragmentación y conectividad para el indicador de biodiversidad y paisaje de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco. IKT, Gobierno Vasco. https://www.euskadi.eus/web01-a2ingdib/es/contenidos/documentacion/indicadores_biodiversidad/es_doc/adjuntos/fragmentacion_2003.pdf

Herrera, B., & Corrales, L. (2004). Midiendo el éxito de las acciones en las áreas protegidas de Centroamérica: Evaluación y monitoreo de la integridad ecológica. PROARCA/APM.

Jost, L. (2006). Entropy and diversity. Oikos, 113(2), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14714.x

Karr, J. R., & Dudley, D. R. (1981). Ecological perspective on water quality goals. Environmental Management, 5(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01866609

Naturalista Costa Rica. (2024). Portal de biodiversidad y ciencia ciudadana. iNaturalist. https://costarica.inaturalist.org

Morera-Beita, C., & Sandoval-Murillo, L. F. (2018). Fragmentación y conectividad de la cobertura natural a nivel cantonal en Costa Rica durante los años 2000 y 2015. Revista Geográfica de América Central, 4(61E), 37–61. https://doi.org/10.15359/rgac.61-4.2

R Core Team. (2023). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.3.3) [Software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/

Ramírez-Herrejón, J. P., Mercado-Silva, N., Medina-Nava, M., & Domínguez-Domínguez, O. (2012). Validación de dos índices biológicos de integridad (IBI) en la subcuenca del río Angulo en el centro de México. Revista de Biología Tropical, 60(4), 1669–1685. http://www.scielo.sa.cr/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-77442012000400024

Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación. (2021). Mapa de tipos de bosques de Costa Rica (Versión 2021) [Conjunto de datos cartográficos]. Departamento de Información y Regularización del Territorio. https://www.snitcr.go.cr/ico_servicios_ogc_info?k=bm9kbzo6NDA=&nombre=SINAC

Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación. (2023). Mapa de tipos de bosques de Costa Rica (Versión 2023) [Conjunto de datos cartográficos]. Departamento de Información y Regularización del Territorio. https://www.snitcr.go.cr/ico_servicios_ogc_info?k=bm9kbzo6NDA=&nombre=SINAC

Wurtzebach, Z., & Schultz, C. (2016). Measuring ecological integrity: History, practical applications, and research opportunities. BioScience, 66(6), 446–457. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw037

Additional Files

Published

2026-11-09

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Citizen participation and ecological integrity assessment in biological corridors using a composite index. (2026). UNED Research Journal, 18(1), e6694. https://doi.org/10.22458/urj.v18i1.6694

Similar Articles

31-40 of 607

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.