Our library features many hundreds of entries.

To search among them, click "Search" below to pull down options, including filtering by document type, author, year, and keyword.
Find these options under "Show only items where." Or you can also sort by author, title, type, and year clicking the headings below.

Export 8 results:
Filters: Author is Stephanie Panlasigui  [Clear All Filters]
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 
W
Panlasigui, S.; Pearce, S.; Hegstad, R.; Quinn, M.; Whipple, A. 2020. Wildlife Habitat and Water Quality Enhancement Opportunities at Castlewood Country Club. SFEI Contribution No. 1003. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.

Meeting human and ecological needs within San Francisco Bay’s watersheds is increasingly challenged by flooding, water quality degradation, and habitat loss, exacerbated by intensified urbanization and climate change. Addressing these challenges requires implementing multi-benefit strategies through new partnerships and increased coordination across the region’s diverse landscapes. Actions to improve water quality and enhance habitat for biodiversity in our highly developed and managed landscapes can help the region as a whole to build resilience to withstand current pressures and future change. The EPA-funded project, “Preparing for the Storm,” aims to address these challenges at the site- and landscape-scale through studies and implementation projects in the Livermore-Amador Valley. As part of this larger project, this technical report presents a synthesis of water quality and habitat improvement opportunities for a golf course of Castlewood Country Club.

 (52.69 MB) (2.68 MB)
P
Iknayan, K.; Heath, S.; Terrill, S. B.; Wenny, D. G.; Panlasigui, S.; Wang, Y.; Beller, E. E.; Spotswood, E. 2024. Patterns in bird and pollinator occupancy and richness in a mosaic of urban office parks across scales and seasons. Ecology and Evolution 14 (3).

Urbanization is a leading cause of global biodiversity loss, yet cities can provide resources required by many species throughout the year. In recognition of this, cities around the world are adopting strategies to increase biodiversity. These efforts would benefit from a robust understanding of how natural and enhanced features in urbanized areas influence various taxa. We explored seasonal and spatial patterns in occupancy and taxonomic richness of birds and pollinators among office parks in Santa Clara County, California, USA, where natural features and commercial landscaping have generated variation in conditions across scales. We surveyed birds and insect pollinators, estimated multi-species occupancy and species richness, and found that spatial scale (local, neighborhood, and landscape scale), season, and urban sensitivity were all important for understanding how communities occupied sites. Features at the landscape (distance to streams or baylands) and local scale (tree canopy, shrub, or impervious cover) were the strongest predictors of avian occupancy in all seasons. Pollinator richness was influenced by local tree canopy and impervious cover in spring, and distance to baylands in early and late summer. We then predicted the relative contributions of different spatial scales to annual bird species richness by simulating “good” and “poor” quality sites based on influential covariates returned by the previous models. Shifting from poor to good quality conditions locally increased annual avian richness by up to 6.8 species with no predicted effect on the quality of the neighborhood. Conversely, sites of poor local and neighborhood scale quality in good-quality landscapes were predicted to harbor 11.5 more species than sites of good local- and neighborhood-scale quality in poor-quality landscapes. Finally, more urban-sensitive bird species were gained at good quality sites relative to urban tolerant species, suggesting that urban natural features at the local and landscape scales disproportionately benefited them.

L
Vaughn, L. Smith; Panlasigui, S.; Spotswood, E. 2020. Livestock grazing and its effects on ecosystem structure, processes, and conservation. SFEI Contribution No. 1011. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (1.75 MB)
E
 (9.33 MB)
Panlasigui, S.; Baumgarten, S.; Spotswood, E. 2021. E-Bikes and Open Space: The Current State of Research and Management Recommendations. SFEI Contribution No. 1064. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (2.99 MB)
B
Panlasigui, S.; Spotswood, E.; Beller, E.; Grossinger, R. 2021. Biophilia beyond the Building: Applying the Tools of Urban Biodiversity Planning to Create Biophilic Cities. Sustainability 13 (5).

In response to the widely recognized negative impacts of urbanization on biodiversity, many cities are reimagining urban design to provide better biodiversity support. Some cities have developed urban biodiversity plans, primarily focused on improving biodiversity support and ecosystem function within the built environment through habitat restoration and other types of urban greening projects. The biophilic cities movement seeks to reframe nature as essential infrastructure for cities, seamlessly integrating city and nature to provide abundant, accessible nature for all residents and corresponding health and well-being outcomes. Urban biodiversity planning and biophilic cities have significant synergies in their goals and the means necessary to achieve them. In this paper, we identify three key ways by which the urban biodiversity planning process can support biophilic cities objectives: engaging the local community; identifying science-based, quantitative goals; and setting priorities for action. Urban biodiversity planning provides evidence-based guidance, tools, and techniques needed to design locally appropriate, pragmatic habitat enhancements that support biodiversity, ecological health, and human health and well-being. Developing these multi-functional, multi-benefit strategies that increase the abundance of biodiverse nature in cities has the potential at the same time to deepen and enrich our biophilic experience in daily life.

 (7.42 MB)