Search

Abstract: Despite their high diversity and importance for humankind, invertebrates are often neglected in biodiversity conservation policies. We identify seven impediments to their effective protection: (1) invertebrates and their ecological services are mostly unknown to the general public (the public dilemma); (2) policymakers and stakeholders are mostly unaware of invertebrate conservation problems (the political dilemma); (3) basic science on invertebrates is scarce and underfunded (the scientific dilemma); (4) most species are undescribed (the Linnean shortfall); (5) the distribution of described species is mostly unknown (the Wallacean shortfall); (6) the abundance of species and their changes in space and time are unknown (the Prestonian shortfall); (7) species ways of life and sensitivities to habitat change are largely unknown (the Hutchinsonian shortfall). Numerous recent developments in taxonomy, inventorying, monitoring, data compilation, statistical analysis and science communication facilitate overcoming these impediments in both policy and practice. We suggest as possible solutions for the public dilemma: better public information and marketing. For the political dilemma: red-listing, legal priority listing and inclusion in environmental impact assessment studies. For the scientific dilemma: parataxonomy, citizen science programs and biodiversity informatics. For the Linnean shortfall: biodiversity surrogacy, increased support for taxonomy and advances in taxonomic publications. For the Wallacean shortfall: funding of inventories, compilation of data in public repositories and species distribution modeling. For the Prestonian shortfall: standardized protocols for inventorying and monitoring, widespread use of analogous protocols and increased support for natural history collections. For the Hutchinsonian shortfall: identifying good indicator taxa and studying extinction rates by indirect evidence. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A number of alternative approaches have been suggested during recent years to predict species richness of a given taxa, while retaining information on the identities of the observed individuals. Such information can be extremely useful for choosing conservation priority areas, either by using simple richness values or, preferentially, by considering the complementarity of potential sites. Among the most popular approaches is the use of higher taxa surrogates. Both family and genus richness are here tested in their ability to predict the number of spider (Araneae) species independently of sampling effort, geographical location and type of habitat. We use data from three Portuguese protected areas as a test case. Genus richness is considered a good surrogate of species richness, despite some caution being needed regarding the comparison of sites with considerably different sampling effort, the same not happening with families. Only genera are also found to be reliable either for ranking sites according to taxa richness or for determining near-minimum sets of sites for conservation. We therefore recommend surrogacy at this taxonomic level as a promising approach for the prediction of spider species richness or evaluation and ranking of areas according to their conservation importance. The reached conclusions should uphold for Portugal and the entire Mediterranean region. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]