Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning.
In the face of accelerating species extinctions, map-based prioritization systems are increasingly useful to decide where to pursue conservation action most effectively. However, a number of seemingly inconsistent schemes have emerged, mostly focussing on endemism. Here we use global vertebrate dist...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2010-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2811746?pdf=render |
| _version_ | 1819131063403806720 |
|---|---|
| author | Stephan M Funk John E Fa |
| author_facet | Stephan M Funk John E Fa |
| author_sort | Stephan M Funk |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In the face of accelerating species extinctions, map-based prioritization systems are increasingly useful to decide where to pursue conservation action most effectively. However, a number of seemingly inconsistent schemes have emerged, mostly focussing on endemism. Here we use global vertebrate distributions in terrestrial ecoregions to evaluate how continuous and categorical ranking schemes target and accumulate endangered taxa within the IUCN Red List, Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE), and EDGE of Existence programme. We employed total, endemic and threatened species richness and an estimator for richness-adjusted endemism as metrics in continuous prioritization, and WWF's Global200 and Conservation International's (CI) Hotspots in categorical prioritization. Our results demonstrate that all metrics target endangerment more efficiently than by chance, but each selects unique sets of top-ranking ecoregions, which overlap only partially, and include different sets of threatened species. Using the top 100 ecoregions as defined by continuous prioritization metrics, we develop an inclusive map for global vertebrate conservation that incorporates important areas for endemism, richness, and threat. Finally, we assess human footprint and protection levels within these areas to reveal that endemism sites are more impacted but have more protection, in contrast to high richness and threat ones. Given such contrasts, major efforts to protect global biodiversity must involve complementary conservation approaches in areas of unique species as well as those with highest diversity and threat. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-22T09:09:33Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-274152ffeeae4e6d959ebaef7ee6359f |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-22T09:09:33Z |
| publishDate | 2010-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-274152ffeeae4e6d959ebaef7ee6359f2022-12-21T18:31:28ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032010-01-0151e892310.1371/journal.pone.0008923Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning.Stephan M FunkJohn E FaIn the face of accelerating species extinctions, map-based prioritization systems are increasingly useful to decide where to pursue conservation action most effectively. However, a number of seemingly inconsistent schemes have emerged, mostly focussing on endemism. Here we use global vertebrate distributions in terrestrial ecoregions to evaluate how continuous and categorical ranking schemes target and accumulate endangered taxa within the IUCN Red List, Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE), and EDGE of Existence programme. We employed total, endemic and threatened species richness and an estimator for richness-adjusted endemism as metrics in continuous prioritization, and WWF's Global200 and Conservation International's (CI) Hotspots in categorical prioritization. Our results demonstrate that all metrics target endangerment more efficiently than by chance, but each selects unique sets of top-ranking ecoregions, which overlap only partially, and include different sets of threatened species. Using the top 100 ecoregions as defined by continuous prioritization metrics, we develop an inclusive map for global vertebrate conservation that incorporates important areas for endemism, richness, and threat. Finally, we assess human footprint and protection levels within these areas to reveal that endemism sites are more impacted but have more protection, in contrast to high richness and threat ones. Given such contrasts, major efforts to protect global biodiversity must involve complementary conservation approaches in areas of unique species as well as those with highest diversity and threat.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2811746?pdf=render |
| spellingShingle | Stephan M Funk John E Fa Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning. PLoS ONE |
| title | Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning. |
| title_full | Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning. |
| title_fullStr | Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning. |
| title_short | Ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning. |
| title_sort | ecoregion prioritization suggests an armoury not a silver bullet for conservation planning |
| url | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2811746?pdf=render |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT stephanmfunk ecoregionprioritizationsuggestsanarmourynotasilverbulletforconservationplanning AT johnefa ecoregionprioritizationsuggestsanarmourynotasilverbulletforconservationplanning |