Conclusions
Railways can cause barrier effects in several ways. Some, like mortality, have been
widely studied for some charismatic species, but their effects for others are poorly
known. Studies on barrier effects due to behavioral responses to disturbances or the
effects of habitat loss and fragmentation due to railway implementation are scarce.
The monitoring of the effectiveness of mitigation measures should incorporate more
recent approaches, such as genetic tools. It would allow, for instance, to broaden the
current scope based on the qualitative use of wildlife passes to a more interesting
functional connectivity-based framework. The use of computer simulations has
advantages not fully applied at present, but useful both before railway construction
and during its operation.
Acknowledgements We thank Graça Garcia and Clara Grilo for carefully reading an early version
of this chapter. This research was supported by FEDER funds through the Operational Programme
for Competitiveness Factors—COMPETE, by National Funds through FCT—the Foundation for
Science and Technology under UID/BIA/50027/2013, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006821, and by the
Infraestruturas de Portugal Biodiversity Chair. Rafael Barrientos acknowledges financial support by
the Infraestruturas de Portugal Biodiversity Chair—CIBIO—Research Center in Biodiversity and
Genetic Resources.
References
Ando, C. (2003). The relationship between deer-train collisions and daily activity of the sika deer,
Cervus nippon. Mammal Study, 28, 135–143.
Andreassen, H. P., Gundersen, H., & Storaasthe, T. (2005). The effect of scent-marking, forest
clearing and supplemental feeding on moose-train collisions. Journal of Wildlife Management,
69, 1125–1132.
Babińska-Werka, J., Krauze-Gryz, D., Wasilewski, M., & Jasińska, K. (2015). Effectiveness of an
acoustic wildlife warning device using natural calls to reduce the risk of train collisions with
animals. Transportation Research Part D, 38, 6–14.
Balkenhol, N., & Waits, L. P. (2009). Molecular road ecology: Exploring the potential of genetics
for investigating transportation impacts on wildlife. Molecular Ecology, 18, 4151–4164.
Baofa, Y., Huyin, H., Yili, Z., Le, Z., & Wanhong, W. (2006). Influence of the Qinghai-Tibetan
railway and highway on the activities of wild animals. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 26, 3917–3923.
Bartoszek, J., & Greenwald, K. R. (2009). A population divided: Railroad tracks as barriers to
gene flow in an isolated population of marbled salamanders (Ambystoma opacum).
Herpetological Conservation and Biology, 4, 191–197.
Belant, J. L. (1995). Moose collisions with vehicles and trains in Northeastern Minnesota. Alces,
31, 45–52.
Benítez-López, A., Alkemade, R., & Verweij, P. A. (2010). The impacts of roads and other
infrastructure on mammal and bird populations: A meta-analysis. Biological Conservation,
143, 1307–1316.
Bhattacharya, M., Primack, R. B., & Gerwein, J. (2003). Are roads and railroads barriers to
bumblebee movement in a temperate suburban conservation area? Biological Conservation,
109, 37–45.
4 Railways as Barriers for Wildlife: Current Knowledge
59
Railways can cause barrier effects in several ways. Some, like mortality, have been
widely studied for some charismatic species, but their effects for others are poorly
known. Studies on barrier effects due to behavioral responses to disturbances or the
effects of habitat loss and fragmentation due to railway implementation are scarce.
The monitoring of the effectiveness of mitigation measures should incorporate more
recent approaches, such as genetic tools. It would allow, for instance, to broaden the
current scope based on the qualitative use of wildlife passes to a more interesting
functional connectivity-based framework. The use of computer simulations has
advantages not fully applied at present, but useful both before railway construction
and during its operation.
Acknowledgements We thank Graça Garcia and Clara Grilo for carefully reading an early version
of this chapter. This research was supported by FEDER funds through the Operational Programme
for Competitiveness Factors—COMPETE, by National Funds through FCT—the Foundation for
Science and Technology under UID/BIA/50027/2013, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006821, and by the
Infraestruturas de Portugal Biodiversity Chair. Rafael Barrientos acknowledges financial support by
the Infraestruturas de Portugal Biodiversity Chair—CIBIO—Research Center in Biodiversity and
Genetic Resources.
References
Ando, C. (2003). The relationship between deer-train collisions and daily activity of the sika deer,
Cervus nippon. Mammal Study, 28, 135–143.
Andreassen, H. P., Gundersen, H., & Storaasthe, T. (2005). The effect of scent-marking, forest
clearing and supplemental feeding on moose-train collisions. Journal of Wildlife Management,
69, 1125–1132.
Babińska-Werka, J., Krauze-Gryz, D., Wasilewski, M., & Jasińska, K. (2015). Effectiveness of an
acoustic wildlife warning device using natural calls to reduce the risk of train collisions with
animals. Transportation Research Part D, 38, 6–14.
Balkenhol, N., & Waits, L. P. (2009). Molecular road ecology: Exploring the potential of genetics
for investigating transportation impacts on wildlife. Molecular Ecology, 18, 4151–4164.
Baofa, Y., Huyin, H., Yili, Z., Le, Z., & Wanhong, W. (2006). Influence of the Qinghai-Tibetan
railway and highway on the activities of wild animals. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 26, 3917–3923.
Bartoszek, J., & Greenwald, K. R. (2009). A population divided: Railroad tracks as barriers to
gene flow in an isolated population of marbled salamanders (Ambystoma opacum).
Herpetological Conservation and Biology, 4, 191–197.
Belant, J. L. (1995). Moose collisions with vehicles and trains in Northeastern Minnesota. Alces,
31, 45–52.
Benítez-López, A., Alkemade, R., & Verweij, P. A. (2010). The impacts of roads and other
infrastructure on mammal and bird populations: A meta-analysis. Biological Conservation,
143, 1307–1316.
Bhattacharya, M., Primack, R. B., & Gerwein, J. (2003). Are roads and railroads barriers to
bumblebee movement in a temperate suburban conservation area? Biological Conservation,
109, 37–45.
4 Railways as Barriers for Wildlife: Current Knowledge
59