Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation.
In recent decades, many marine populations have experienced major declines in abundance, but we still know little about where management interventions may help protect the highest levels of marine biodiversity. We used modeled spatial distribution data for nearly 12,500 species to quantify global pa...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2014-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3885410?pdf=render |
| _version_ | 1818912392680046592 |
|---|---|
| author | Elizabeth R Selig Will R Turner Sebastian Troëng Bryan P Wallace Benjamin S Halpern Kristin Kaschner Ben G Lascelles Kent E Carpenter Russell A Mittermeier |
| author_facet | Elizabeth R Selig Will R Turner Sebastian Troëng Bryan P Wallace Benjamin S Halpern Kristin Kaschner Ben G Lascelles Kent E Carpenter Russell A Mittermeier |
| author_sort | Elizabeth R Selig |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In recent decades, many marine populations have experienced major declines in abundance, but we still know little about where management interventions may help protect the highest levels of marine biodiversity. We used modeled spatial distribution data for nearly 12,500 species to quantify global patterns of species richness and two measures of endemism. By combining these data with spatial information on cumulative human impacts, we identified priority areas where marine biodiversity is most and least impacted by human activities, both within Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ). Our analyses highlighted places that are both accepted priorities for marine conservation like the Coral Triangle, as well as less well-known locations in the southwest Indian Ocean, western Pacific Ocean, Arctic and Antarctic Oceans, and within semi-enclosed seas like the Mediterranean and Baltic Seas. Within highly impacted priority areas, climate and fishing were the biggest stressors. Although new priorities may arise as we continue to improve marine species range datasets, results from this work are an essential first step in guiding limited resources to regions where investment could best sustain marine biodiversity. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-19T23:13:52Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-845ceb7a600d47c6935c0cdbd9219f40 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-19T23:13:52Z |
| publishDate | 2014-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-845ceb7a600d47c6935c0cdbd9219f402022-12-21T20:02:09ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0191e8289810.1371/journal.pone.0082898Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation.Elizabeth R SeligWill R TurnerSebastian TroëngBryan P WallaceBenjamin S HalpernKristin KaschnerBen G LascellesKent E CarpenterRussell A MittermeierIn recent decades, many marine populations have experienced major declines in abundance, but we still know little about where management interventions may help protect the highest levels of marine biodiversity. We used modeled spatial distribution data for nearly 12,500 species to quantify global patterns of species richness and two measures of endemism. By combining these data with spatial information on cumulative human impacts, we identified priority areas where marine biodiversity is most and least impacted by human activities, both within Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ). Our analyses highlighted places that are both accepted priorities for marine conservation like the Coral Triangle, as well as less well-known locations in the southwest Indian Ocean, western Pacific Ocean, Arctic and Antarctic Oceans, and within semi-enclosed seas like the Mediterranean and Baltic Seas. Within highly impacted priority areas, climate and fishing were the biggest stressors. Although new priorities may arise as we continue to improve marine species range datasets, results from this work are an essential first step in guiding limited resources to regions where investment could best sustain marine biodiversity.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3885410?pdf=render |
| spellingShingle | Elizabeth R Selig Will R Turner Sebastian Troëng Bryan P Wallace Benjamin S Halpern Kristin Kaschner Ben G Lascelles Kent E Carpenter Russell A Mittermeier Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation. PLoS ONE |
| title | Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation. |
| title_full | Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation. |
| title_fullStr | Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation. |
| title_short | Global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation. |
| title_sort | global priorities for marine biodiversity conservation |
| url | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3885410?pdf=render |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT elizabethrselig globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT willrturner globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT sebastiantroeng globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT bryanpwallace globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT benjaminshalpern globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT kristinkaschner globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT benglascelles globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT kentecarpenter globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation AT russellamittermeier globalprioritiesformarinebiodiversityconservation |