Search

The Red List Index (RLI) measures change in the aggregate extinction risk of species. It is a key indicator for tracking progress toward nine of the Aichi and many proposed post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework Targets. Here, we consider two formulations of the RLI used for reporting biodiversity trends at national scales. Disaggregated global RLIs measure changing national contributions to global extinction risk and are currently based on five taxonomic groups, while national RLIs measure changing national extinction risk and are based on taxonomic groups assessed multiple times in country. For 74% of nations, the disaggregated global RLI is currently based on three or fewer taxonomic groups. Meanwhile, national RLIs from selected pilot countries Finland, South Africa, and Brazil are computed from twelve, eight, and nine taxonomic groups, respectively. The national RLI and the disaggregated global RLI measure different aspects of biodiversity, in that the former detects national trends in populations of species for which each country is responsible while the latter provides standardized comparisons of nations' contributions to the global extinction risk of the same species groups. As governments commit to the post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we encourage them to monitor a standard set of taxonomic groups representing different biomes using both RLI formulations to ensure effective target tracking and accurate feedback on their conservation investments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Globally, large terrestrial carnivores (Carnivora) have suffered precipitous declines in population and range. Today, they must persist in increasingly isolated natural habitat patches within a human‐dominated matrix. Effective conservation aimed at supporting carnivores in such landscapes requires species‐specific understanding of habitat requirements.We present results from a review of the published literature to assess the current state of knowledge regarding habitat preferences of the African lion Pantheraleo, with the aim of identifying common drivers of habitat use across contexts.Using the Web of Science, we identified 154 usable articles and extracted information relating to study topic, location, habitats described, land‐use type, and any documented habitat preferences.Only 31 studies documented evidence of habitat use, and collectively, they suggested that preferences for specific habitat types were varied and context‐specific. The importance of prey abundance and proximity to water was highlighted in multiple studies. Anthropogenic factors interfered with expected patterns of habitat use. There was evident bias in study locations: 83% of the habitat‐use studies were based in only three countries, and 70% were focussed on protected or managed areas.Our synthesis suggests that lions demonstrate behavioural plasticity in habitat use in response to anthropogenic pressures. To understand the limits of this plasticity and to manage Africa's changing landscapes effectively for roaming lions, future research should be focussed on analysis of habitat use outside protected areas, taking into account gradients of distance to water, prey abundance, and anthropogenic risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aichi Target 12 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) contains the aim to 'prevent extinctions of known threatened species'. To measure the degree to which this was achieved, we used expert elicitation to estimate the number of bird and mammal species whose extinctions were prevented by conservation action in 1993–2020 (the lifetime of the CBD) and 2010–2020 (the timing of Aichi Target 12). We found that conservation action prevented 21–32 bird and 7–16 mammal extinctions since 1993, and 9–18 bird and two to seven mammal extinctions since 2010. Many remain highly threatened and may still become extinct. Considering that 10 bird and five mammal species did go extinct (or are strongly suspected to) since 1993, extinction rates would have been 2.9–4.2 times greater without conservation action. While policy commitments have fostered significant conservation achievements, future biodiversity action needs to be scaled up to avert additional extinctions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Convention on Biological Diversity's target of halting extinctions by 2020 is less than a handful of years away. Captive, or ex situ, management has long been cited as having a potential role to play in the recovery of species, although this remains the subject of debate. IUCN's Species Survival Commission (IUCN SSC) produced guidelines to assist in identifying when ex situ management may contribute to species recovery in 2002. Since then, there have been considerable developments in a range of areas that may influence the design of such programs (e.g., understanding of constraints on breeding programs, development of new techniques and approaches, and strategic planning approaches to species conservation). IUCN SSC has therefore revised its guidance and proposes a five-step process: (1) compile a status review; (2) define the role(s) that ex situ management might play; (3) determine the precise nature of the ex situ population in order to meet identified role(s); (4) define resources and expertise, and appraise the feasibility and risks; and (5) make a decision that is informed based on the above analysis and transparent. These guidelines offer an objective process for considering the role of ex situ management in species conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines to save exploited species from continual declines and extinction while ensuring food security and the livelihoods of people. History of overexploitation; Poverty and sustainable use; Integrated conservation and development projects that attempts to save biodiversity through social and economic development.

Ensuring the conservation of wild relatives of domesticated animals that are important food sources for humans forms part of targets for both the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). There is, however, no indicator allowing progress toward these aims to be measured. We identified 30 domesticated mammal and bird taxa that are sources of food for humans and consider 55 mammal and 449 bird species to be their wild relatives. We developed a Red List Index for these wild relatives, which declined by 2.02% between 1988 and 2016. Currently, 15 species are Critically Endangered, indicating that the Red List Index could deteriorate sharply unless action is taken to ensure the survival of highly threatened species and the reversal of their declines. This Index can meet a range of global policy needs, including reporting on progress toward Aichi Target 13 of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and SDG Target 2.5. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Protected areas (PAs) are fundamental to conservation efforts but they are only part of a successful conservation strategy. We examine biodiversity outside PAs in Sundaland, one of the world's most biologically degraded regions. Using the avian order Galliformes as a case study, we identify species that have not been sighted outside PAs within the last 20 years on each individual landmass (i.e., Malay Peninsula, Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and Bali). We estimate these species' extirpation dates outside PAs using optimal linear estimation and species' sighting records. We conclude there have been up to 13 extirpations of Galliformes from outside PAs in Sundaland. Three Sundaic endemics now occur only inside PAs. Sumatra has suffered the highest proportion of extirpations (50% of its galliform species). Effective management of Sundaland's PAs is thus critical to species' persistence and the conservation strategy for species outside PAs must be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]