1
|
Gumbs R, Chaudhary A, Daru BH, Faith DP, Forest F, Gray CL, Kowalska A, Lee WS, Pellens R, Pipins S, Pollock LJ, Rosindell J, Scherson RA, Owen NR. Indicators to monitor the status of the tree of life. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2023; 37:e14138. [PMID: 37377164 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.14138] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2022] [Revised: 02/21/2023] [Accepted: 06/08/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023]
Abstract
Following the failure to fully achieve any of the 20 Aichi biodiversity targets, the future of biodiversity rests in the balance. The Convention on Biological Diversity's Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) presents the opportunity to preserve nature's contributions to people (NCPs) for current and future generations by conserving biodiversity and averting extinctions. There is a need to safeguard the tree of life-the unique and shared evolutionary history of life on Earth-to maintain the benefits it bestows into the future. Two indicators have been adopted within the GBF to monitor progress toward safeguarding the tree of life: the phylogenetic diversity (PD) indicator and the evolutionarily distinct and globally endangered (EDGE) index. We applied both to the world's mammals, birds, and cycads to show their utility at the global and national scale. The PD indicator can be used to monitor the overall conservation status of large parts of the evolutionary tree of life, a measure of biodiversity's capacity to maintain NCPs for future generations. The EDGE index is used to monitor the performance of efforts to conserve the most distinctive species. The risk to PD of birds, cycads, and mammals increased, and mammals exhibited the greatest relative increase in threatened PD over time. These trends appeared robust to the choice of extinction risk weighting. EDGE species had predominantly worsening extinction risk. A greater proportion of EDGE mammals (12%) had increased extinction risk compared with threatened mammals in general (7%). By strengthening commitments to safeguarding the tree of life, biodiversity loss can be reduced and thus nature's capacity to provide benefits to humanity now and in the future can be preserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rikki Gumbs
- EDGE of Existence Programme, Zoological Society of London, London, UK
- Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus, Ascot, UK
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, UK
| | - Abhishek Chaudhary
- Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kanpur, Kanpur, India
| | - Barnabas H Daru
- Department of Life Sciences, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, Texas, USA
- Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Daniel P Faith
- The Australian Museum Research Institute, The Australian Museum, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Félix Forest
- Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, UK
| | - Claudia L Gray
- EDGE of Existence Programme, Zoological Society of London, London, UK
| | | | - Who-Seung Lee
- Environmental Assessment Group, Korea Environment Institute, Sejong, Republic of Korea
| | - Roseli Pellens
- Institut de Systématique, Evolution, et Biodiversité (Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Centre National pour la Recherche Scientifique, Sorbonne Université, Ecole Pratique de Hautes Etudes, Université des Antilles), Paris, France
| | - Sebastian Pipins
- Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus, Ascot, UK
- Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, UK
| | - Laura J Pollock
- Department of Biology, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - James Rosindell
- Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus, Ascot, UK
| | - Rosa A Scherson
- Departamento de Silvicultura y Conservación de la Naturaleza, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Nisha R Owen
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, UK
- On the EDGE Conservation, Chelsea, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gumbs R, Gray CL, Böhm M, Burfield IJ, Couchman OR, Faith DP, Forest F, Hoffmann M, Isaac NJB, Jetz W, Mace GM, Mooers AO, Safi K, Scott O, Steel M, Tucker CM, Pearse WD, Owen NR, Rosindell J. The EDGE2 protocol: Advancing the prioritisation of Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered species for practical conservation action. PLoS Biol 2023; 21:e3001991. [PMID: 36854036 PMCID: PMC9974121 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001991] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/02/2023] Open
Abstract
The conservation of evolutionary history has been linked to increased benefits for humanity and can be captured by phylogenetic diversity (PD). The Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered (EDGE) metric has, since 2007, been used to prioritise threatened species for practical conservation that embody large amounts of evolutionary history. While there have been important research advances since 2007, they have not been adopted in practice because of a lack of consensus in the conservation community. Here, building from an interdisciplinary workshop to update the existing EDGE approach, we present an "EDGE2" protocol that draws on a decade of research and innovation to develop an improved, consistent methodology for prioritising species conservation efforts. Key advances include methods for dealing with uncertainty and accounting for the extinction risk of closely related species. We describe EDGE2 in terms of distinct components to facilitate future revisions to its constituent parts without needing to reconsider the whole. We illustrate EDGE2 by applying it to the world's mammals. As we approach a crossroads for global biodiversity policy, this Consensus View shows how collaboration between academic and applied conservation biologists can guide effective and practical priority-setting to conserve biodiversity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rikki Gumbs
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Life Sciences, Silwood Park Campus, Imperial College London, Ascot, Berkshire, United Kingdom
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, United Kingdom
- Science and Solutions for a Changing Planet DTP, Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London, United Kingdom
| | - Claudia L. Gray
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, United Kingdom
| | - Monika Böhm
- Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, United Kingdom
- Global Center for Species Survival, Indianapolis Zoological Society, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America
| | - Ian J. Burfield
- BirdLife International, David Attenborough Building, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Olivia R. Couchman
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel P. Faith
- School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Félix Forest
- Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, United Kingdom
| | - Michael Hoffmann
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nick J. B. Isaac
- UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford, United Kingdom
| | - Walter Jetz
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America
- Center for Biodiversity and Global Change, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America
| | - Georgina M. Mace
- Department of Genetics, Evolution & Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Arne O. Mooers
- Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Kamran Safi
- Max-Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Department of Migration, Radolfzell, Germany
- University of Konstanz, Department of Biology, Konstanz, Germany
| | - Oenone Scott
- School of Life Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom
| | - Mike Steel
- Biomathematics Research Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Caroline M. Tucker
- Environment, Ecology and Energy Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - William D. Pearse
- Department of Life Sciences, Silwood Park Campus, Imperial College London, Ascot, Berkshire, United Kingdom
- Department of Biology and Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America
| | - Nisha R. Owen
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, United Kingdom
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, United Kingdom
- On the EDGE Conservation, London, United Kingdom
| | - James Rosindell
- Department of Life Sciences, Silwood Park Campus, Imperial College London, Ascot, Berkshire, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Towards a more healthy conservation paradigm: integrating disease and molecular ecology to aid biological conservation †. J Genet 2021. [PMID: 33622992 PMCID: PMC7371965 DOI: 10.1007/s12041-020-01225-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Parasites, and the diseases they cause, are important from an ecological and evolutionary perspective because they can negatively affect host fitness and can regulate host populations. Consequently, conservation biology has long recognized the vital role that parasites can play in the process of species endangerment and recovery. However, we are only beginning to understand how deeply parasites are embedded in ecological systems, and there is a growing recognition of the important ways in which parasites affect ecosystem structure and function. Thus, there is an urgent need to revisit how parasites are viewed from a conservation perspective and broaden the role that disease ecology plays in conservation-related research and outcomes. This review broadly focusses on the role that disease ecology can play in biological conservation. Our review specifically emphasizes on how the integration of tools and analytical approaches associated with both disease and molecular ecology can be leveraged to aid conservation biology. Our review first concentrates on disease-mediated extinctions and wildlife epidemics. We then focus on elucidating how host–parasite interactions has improved our understanding of the eco-evolutionary dynamics affecting hosts at the individual, population, community and ecosystem scales. We believe that the role of parasites as drivers and indicators of ecosystem health is especially an exciting area of research that has the potential to fundamentally alter our view of parasites and their role in biological conservation. The review concludes with a broad overview of the current and potential applications of modern genomic tools in disease ecology to aid biological conservation.
Collapse
|
4
|
Nic Lughadha E, Bachman SP, Leão TCC, Forest F, Halley JM, Moat J, Acedo C, Bacon KL, Brewer RFA, Gâteblé G, Gonçalves SC, Govaerts R, Hollingsworth PM, Krisai‐Greilhuber I, Lirio EJ, Moore PGP, Negrão R, Onana JM, Rajaovelona LR, Razanajatovo H, Reich PB, Richards SL, Rivers MC, Cooper A, Iganci J, Lewis GP, Smidt EC, Antonelli A, Mueller GM, Walker BE. Extinction risk and threats to plants and fungi. PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET 2020; 2:389-408. [PMID: 0 DOI: 10.1002/ppp3.10146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 94] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2020] [Accepted: 06/09/2020] [Indexed: 05/29/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Steven P. Bachman
- Conservation Science Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| | | | - Félix Forest
- Analytical Methods Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| | - John M. Halley
- Laboratory of Ecology Department of Biological Applications & Technology University of Ioannina Ioannina Greece
| | - Justin Moat
- Bioinformatics and Spatial Analysis Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| | - Carmen Acedo
- Department of Biodiversity and Environment Management Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences Campus of Vegazana University of León León Spain
| | - Karen L. Bacon
- Botany & Plant Sciences School of Natural Sciences National University of Ireland Galway Ireland
| | - Ryan F. A. Brewer
- Conservation Science Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| | - Gildas Gâteblé
- Equipe ARBOREAL Institut Agronomique néo‐Calédonien Mont‐Dore New Caledonia
| | - Susana C. Gonçalves
- Centre for Functional Ecology Department of Life Sciences University of Coimbra Coimbra Portugal
| | - Rafaël Govaerts
- Bioinformatics and Spatial Analysis Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| | | | - Irmgard Krisai‐Greilhuber
- Mycology Research Group Division of Systematic and Evolutionary Biology Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research University of Vienna Vienna Austria
| | - Elton J. Lirio
- Departamento de Botânica Instituto de Biociências Universidade de São Paulo São Paulo Brazil
| | | | - Raquel Negrão
- Conservation Science Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| | - Jean Michel Onana
- Systematics, Biodiversity and Conservation of Plants Faculty of Science University of Yaoundé I & National Herbarium of Cameroon Yaoundé Cameroon
| | - Landy R. Rajaovelona
- Conservation Science Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
- Kew Madagascar Conservation Centre Antananarivo Madagascar
| | - Henintsoa Razanajatovo
- Conservation Science Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
- Kew Madagascar Conservation Centre Antananarivo Madagascar
| | - Peter B. Reich
- Department of Forest Resources University of Minnesota St. Paul MN USA
- Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment Western Sydney University Penrith NSW Australia
| | | | | | - Amanda Cooper
- Bioinformatics and Spatial Analysis Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
- Department of Biological Sciences Royal HollowayUniversity of London Egham UK
| | - João Iganci
- Instituto de Biologia Departamento de Botânica Universidade Federal de Pelotas Pelotas Brazil
- Instituto de Biociências Programa de Pós‐Graduação em Botânica Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto Alegre Brazil
| | - Gwilym P. Lewis
- Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| | - Eric C. Smidt
- Departamento de Botânica Universidade Federal do Paraná Curitiba Brazil
| | - Alexandre Antonelli
- Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
- Gothenburg Global Biodiversity Centre Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences University of Gothenburg Gothenburg Sweden
| | - Gregory M. Mueller
- Negaunee Institute for Plant Conservation Science and Action Chicago Botanic Garden Chicago IL USA
| | - Barnaby E. Walker
- Conservation Science Department Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gupta P, Robin VV, Dharmarajan G. Towards a more healthy conservation paradigm: integrating disease and molecular ecology to aid biological conservation †. J Genet 2020; 99:65. [PMID: 33622992 PMCID: PMC7371965] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2019] [Revised: 04/23/2020] [Accepted: 05/25/2020] [Indexed: 08/23/2024]
Abstract
Parasites, and the diseases they cause, are important from an ecological and evolutionary perspective because they can negatively affect host fitness and can regulate host populations. Consequently, conservation biology has long recognized the vital role that parasites can play in the process of species endangerment and recovery. However, we are only beginning to understand how deeply parasites are embedded in ecological systems, and there is a growing recognition of the important ways in which parasites affect ecosystem structure and function. Thus, there is an urgent need to revisit how parasites are viewed from a conservation perspective and broaden the role that disease ecology plays in conservation-related research and outcomes. This review broadly focusses on the role that disease ecology can play in biological conservation. Our review specifically emphasizes on how the integration of tools and analytical approaches associated with both disease and molecular ecology can be leveraged to aid conservation biology. Our review first concentrates on disease mediated extinctions and wildlife epidemics. We then focus on elucidating how host-parasite interactions has improved our understanding of the eco-evolutionary dynamics affecting hosts at the individual, population, community and ecosystem scales. We believe that the role of parasites as drivers and indicators of ecosystem health is especially an exciting area of research that has the potential to fundamentally alter our view of parasites and their role in biological conservation. The review concludes with a broad overview of the current and potential applications of modern genomic tools in disease ecology to aid biological conservation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pooja Gupta
- Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, PO Drawer E, Aiken, SC 29801, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Véron S, Saito V, Padilla-García N, Forest F, Bertheau Y. The Use of Phylogenetic Diversity in Conservation Biology and Community Ecology: A Common Base but Different Approaches. QUARTERLY REVIEW OF BIOLOGY 2019. [DOI: 10.1086/703580] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
|
7
|
Abstract
Driven by limited resources and a sense of urgency, the prioritization of species for conservation has been a persistent concern in conservation science. Gymnosperms (comprising ginkgo, conifers, cycads, and gnetophytes) are one of the most threatened groups of living organisms, with 40% of the species at high risk of extinction, about twice as many as the most recent estimates for all plants (i.e. 21.4%). This high proportion of species facing extinction highlights the urgent action required to secure their future through an objective prioritization approach. The Evolutionary Distinct and Globally Endangered (EDGE) method rapidly ranks species based on their evolutionary distinctiveness and the extinction risks they face. EDGE is applied to gymnosperms using a phylogenetic tree comprising DNA sequence data for 85% of gymnosperm species (923 out of 1090 species), to which the 167 missing species were added, and IUCN Red List assessments available for 92% of species. The effect of different extinction probability transformations and the handling of IUCN data deficient species on the resulting rankings is investigated. Although top entries in our ranking comprise species that were expected to score well (e.g. Wollemia nobilis, Ginkgo biloba), many were unexpected (e.g. Araucaria araucana). These results highlight the necessity of using approaches that integrate evolutionary information in conservation science.
Collapse
|
8
|
Tetrapods on the EDGE: Overcoming data limitations to identify phylogenetic conservation priorities. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0194680. [PMID: 29641585 PMCID: PMC5894989 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194680] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2017] [Accepted: 03/07/2018] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
The scale of the ongoing biodiversity crisis requires both effective conservation prioritisation and urgent action. As extinction is non-random across the tree of life, it is important to prioritise threatened species which represent large amounts of evolutionary history. The EDGE metric prioritises species based on their Evolutionary Distinctiveness (ED), which measures the relative contribution of a species to the total evolutionary history of their taxonomic group, and Global Endangerment (GE), or extinction risk. EDGE prioritisations rely on adequate phylogenetic and extinction risk data to generate meaningful priorities for conservation. However, comprehensive phylogenetic trees of large taxonomic groups are extremely rare and, even when available, become quickly out-of-date due to the rapid rate of species descriptions and taxonomic revisions. Thus, it is important that conservationists can use the available data to incorporate evolutionary history into conservation prioritisation. We compared published and new methods to estimate missing ED scores for species absent from a phylogenetic tree whilst simultaneously correcting the ED scores of their close taxonomic relatives. We found that following artificial removal of species from a phylogenetic tree, the new method provided the closest estimates of their “true” ED score, differing from the true ED score by an average of less than 1%, compared to the 31% and 38% difference of the previous methods. The previous methods also substantially under- and over-estimated scores as more species were artificially removed from a phylogenetic tree. We therefore used the new method to estimate ED scores for all tetrapods. From these scores we updated EDGE prioritisation rankings for all tetrapod species with IUCN Red List assessments, including the first EDGE prioritisation for reptiles. Further, we identified criteria to identify robust priority species in an effort to further inform conservation action whilst limiting uncertainty and anticipating future phylogenetic advances.
Collapse
|
9
|
Reintroductions of birds and mammals involve evolutionarily distinct species at the regional scale. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2018. [PMID: 29531037 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1714599115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Reintroductions offer a powerful tool for reversing the effects of species extirpation and have been increasingly used over recent decades. However, this species-centered conservation approach has been criticized for its strong biases toward charismatic birds and mammals. Here, we investigated whether reintroduced species can be representative of the phylogenetic diversity within these two groups at a continental scale (i.e., Europe, North and Central America). Using null models, we found that reintroduced birds and mammals of the two subcontinents tend to be more evolutionarily distinct than expected by chance, despite strong taxonomic biases leading to low values of phylogenetic diversity. While evolutionary considerations are unlikely to have explicitly driven the allocation of reintroduction efforts, our results illustrate an interest of reintroduction practitioners toward species with fewer close relatives. We discuss how this phylogenetic framework allows us to investigate the contribution of reintroductions to the conservation of biodiversity at multiple geographic scales. We argue that because reintroductions rely on a parochial approach of conservation, it is important to first understand how the motivations and constraints at stake at a local context can induce phylogenetic biases before trying to assess the relevance of the allocation of reintroduction efforts at larger scales.
Collapse
|
10
|
Monti F, Duriez O, Arnal V, Dominici JM, Sforzi A, Fusani L, Grémillet D, Montgelard C. Being cosmopolitan: evolutionary history and phylogeography of a specialized raptor, the Osprey Pandion haliaetus. BMC Evol Biol 2015; 15:255. [PMID: 26577665 PMCID: PMC4650845 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-015-0535-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2015] [Accepted: 11/09/2015] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) is one of only six bird species with an almost world-wide distribution. We aimed at clarifying its phylogeographic structure and elucidating its taxonomic status (as it is currently separated into four subspecies). We tested six biogeographical scenarios to explain how the species' distribution and differentiation took place in the past and how such a specialized raptor was able to colonize most of the globe. RESULTS Using two mitochondrial genes (cyt b and ND2), the Osprey appeared structured into four genetic groups representing quasi non-overlapping geographical regions. The group Indo-Australasia corresponds to the cristatus ssp, as well as the group Europe-Africa to the haliaetus ssp. In the Americas, we found a single lineage for both carolinensis and ridgwayi ssp, whereas in north-east Asia (Siberia and Japan), we discovered a fourth new lineage. The four lineages are well differentiated, contrasting with the low genetic variability observed within each clade. Historical demographic reconstructions suggested that three of the four lineages experienced stable trends or slight demographic increases. Molecular dating estimates the initial split between lineages at about 1.16 Ma ago, in the Early Pleistocene. CONCLUSIONS Our biogeographical inference suggests a pattern of colonization from the American continent towards the Old World. Populations of the Palearctic would represent the last outcomes of this colonization. At a global scale the Osprey complex may be composed of four different Evolutionary Significant Units, which should be treated as specific management units. Our study brought essential genetic clarifications, which have implications for conservation strategies in identifying distinct lineages across which birds should not be artificially moved through exchange/reintroduction schemes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Flavio Monti
- CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS - Université de Montpellier - Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier - EPHE, 1919 Route de Mende, 34293, Montpellier cedex 5, France. .,Department of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, via Borsari 46, I-44121, Ferrara, Italy.
| | - Olivier Duriez
- CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS - Université de Montpellier - Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier - EPHE, 1919 Route de Mende, 34293, Montpellier cedex 5, France.
| | - Véronique Arnal
- CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS - Université de Montpellier - Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier - EPHE, 1919 Route de Mende, 34293, Montpellier cedex 5, France.
| | - Jean-Marie Dominici
- Réserve Naturelle Scandola, Parc Naturel Règional de Corse, 20245, Galeria, France.
| | - Andrea Sforzi
- Maremma Natural History Museum, Strada Corsini 5, 58100, Grosseto, Italy.
| | - Leonida Fusani
- Department of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, via Borsari 46, I-44121, Ferrara, Italy. .,Department of Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, & Konrad Lorenz Institute for Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria.
| | - David Grémillet
- CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS - Université de Montpellier - Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier - EPHE, 1919 Route de Mende, 34293, Montpellier cedex 5, France. .,Percy FitzPatrick Institute, DST-NRF Centre of Excellence, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, 7701, South Africa.
| | - Claudine Montgelard
- CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS - Université de Montpellier - Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier - EPHE, 1919 Route de Mende, 34293, Montpellier cedex 5, France. .,Department of Zoology, University of Johannesburg, P.O. Box 524, Auckland Park, 2006, South Africa.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Brooks TM, Cuttelod A, Faith DP, Garcia-Moreno J, Langhammer P, Pérez-Espona S. Why and how might genetic and phylogenetic diversity be reflected in the identification of key biodiversity areas? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2015; 370:20140019. [PMID: 25561678 PMCID: PMC4290431 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
‘Key biodiversity areas' are defined as sites contributing significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity. The identification of these sites builds from existing approaches based on measures of species and ecosystem diversity and process. Here, we therefore build from the work of Sgró et al. (2011 Evol. Appl.4, 326–337. (doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2010.00157.x)) to extend a framework for how components of genetic diversity might be considered in the identification of key biodiversity areas. We make three recommendations to inform the ongoing process of consolidating a key biodiversity areas standard: (i) thresholds for the threatened species criterion currently consider a site's share of a threatened species' population; expand these to include the proportion of the species' genetic diversity unique to a site; (ii) expand criterion for ‘threatened species' to consider ‘threatened taxa’ and (iii) expand the centre of endemism criterion to identify as key biodiversity areas those sites holding a threshold proportion of the compositional or phylogenetic diversity of species (within a taxonomic group) whose restricted ranges collectively define a centre of endemism. We also recommend consideration of occurrence of EDGE species (i.e. threatened phylogenetic diversity) in key biodiversity areas to prioritize species-specific conservation actions among sites.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M Brooks
- IUCN, 28 rue Mauverney, Gland 1196, Switzerland
| | - A Cuttelod
- IUCN, 219c Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, UK
| | - D P Faith
- Australian Museum, 6 College St., Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia
| | | | - P Langhammer
- School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, PO Box 874601, Tempe, AZ 85287-4601, USA
| | - S Pérez-Espona
- Department of Life Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, East Road, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Forest F, Crandall KA, Chase MW, Faith DP. Phylogeny, extinction and conservation: embracing uncertainties in a time of urgency. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2015; 370:20140002. [PMID: 25561663 PMCID: PMC4290416 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Evolutionary studies have played a fundamental role in our understanding of life, but until recently, they had only a relatively modest involvement in addressing conservation issues. The main goal of the present discussion meeting issue is to offer a platform to present the available methods allowing the integration of phylogenetic and extinction risk data in conservation planning. Here, we identify the main knowledge gaps in biodiversity science, which include incomplete sampling, reconstruction biases in phylogenetic analyses, partly known species distribution ranges, and the difficulty in producing conservation assessments for all known species, not to mention that much of the effective biological diversity remains to be discovered. Given the impact that human activities have on biodiversity and the urgency with which we need to address these issues, imperfect assumptions need to be sanctioned and surrogates used in the race to salvage as much as possible of our natural and evolutionary heritage. We discuss some aspects of the uncertainties found in biodiversity science, such as the ideal surrogates for biodiversity, the gaps in our knowledge and the numerous available phylogenetic diversity-based methods. We also introduce a series of cases studies that demonstrate how evolutionary biology can effectively contribute to biodiversity conservation science.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Félix Forest
- Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond TW9 3DS, UK
| | - Keith A Crandall
- Computational Biology Institute, George Washington University, Ashburn, VA 20147, USA Department of Invertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20013, USA
| | - Mark W Chase
- Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond TW9 3DS, UK School of Plant Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia
| | - Daniel P Faith
- The Australian Museum, College Street, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia
| |
Collapse
|