Search

We used a simple engineering principle, which suggests that the width of a road needed for a smooth traffic flow is proportional to the peak traffic volume ('engineering hypothesis'), to analyze the adaptive significance of trail width at branching points in the leaf-cutting ant Atta cephalotes. Since the flow of outgoing ants splits at trail bifurcations and merges when ants return to the nest through the same paths, the sum of branch widths should equal the width of the trail section upstream of the bifurcation. We measured the width of branches and their preceding trail section and also performed field measurements and manipulations to analyze ant flow, number of collisions, and ant speed in different trail sectors. Contrary to the prediction of the 'engineering hypothesis', the sum of branch widths was larger than the width of the trail immediately before the bifurcation. Our data contradict the 'trail addition hypothesis' and support the 'border effect hypothesis' to explain this pattern. First, the width of the widest branch was smaller than the width of the trail upstream of the bifurcation, an unexpected result if one branch is merely the continuation of the basal trail. Second, ants collided with obstacles more often in the margin than in the central portion of the trail, relocated ants from central to margin trail sectors reduced their speed, and ant flow was higher in the central sections of the trail. Since the delaying effect of trail margins increases as the trail width decreases, ants may build branches wider than expected to reduce the border effect. The delaying effect of trail margins should be included in the analysis of costs and benefits to fully understand the adaptive value of the design of ant trail networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To meet the ambitious objectives of biodiversity and climate conventions, the international community requires clarity on how these objectives can be operationalized spatially and how multiple targets can be pursued concurrently. To support goal setting and the implementation of international strategies and action plans, spatial guidance is needed to identify which land areas have the potential to generate the greatest synergies between conserving biodiversity and nature's contributions to people. Here we present results from a joint optimization that minimizes the number of threatened species, maximizes carbon retention and water quality regulation, and ranks terrestrial conservation priorities globally. We found that selecting the top-ranked 30% and 50% of terrestrial land area would conserve respectively 60.7% and 85.3% of the estimated total carbon stock and 66% and 89.8% of all clean water, in addition to meeting conservation targets for 57.9% and 79% of all species considered. Our data and prioritization further suggest that adequately conserving all species considered (vertebrates and plants) would require giving conservation attention to ~70% of the terrestrial land surface. If priority was given to biodiversity only, managing 30% of optimally located land area for conservation may be sufficient to meet conservation targets for 81.3% of the terrestrial plant and vertebrate species considered. Our results provide a global assessment of where land could be optimally managed for conservation. We discuss how such a spatial prioritization framework can support the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)