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]

The Finnish Red Lists from 2000 and 2010 were used to calculate for the first time the national Red List Index for the order Lepidoptera and different Lepidoptera families with data from 2245 species., We grouped species according to their primary habitats and analysed each habitat's RLI as well., The overall RLI was significantly negative, reflecting the worsening of the group as a whole in the country., A significant negative trend was found for families Tortricidae, Gelechiidae and Hesperiidae and for coastal habitats., We also report that 76 Lepidoptera species newly established a population in Finland between 2000 and 2010, probably expanding northwards driven by climate warming. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The taxonomic knowledge gap and lack of knowledge on species-level diversity has been a global concern within conservation biology through the recent two decades. As a national response, Finland has funded a Research Program of Poorly Known and Threatened Forest Species from the year 2003. The program is an essential part of the knowledge base applied in Finnish forest policy. The present paper evaluates the outcomes of the program, covering scientific publication, training, taxonomic coverage, increased knowledge on boreal forest biodiversity and awareness rising. The ongoing program has been funded by 6.5 million Euros to date including 59 projects. The program has produced 19 master's theses and six doctoral theses. Due to their expertise the graduated biologists have been employed in environmental administration or become researchers. The program has produced 163 refereed scientific articles, 104 of which are recognized by the Web of Science; with an average impact factor of 1.81. The results of the program include 15 genera and 348 species new to science, and 60 genera and 1,664 species to Finland's list of known species. Due to new knowledge gathered in the program 3,000-4,000 species could be included in the most recent National Red List assessment. The publishing of identification books on local language has proved as the most effective way of advancing general species knowledge among the public and end-users. The high number of new species to science from a biodiversity-poor boreal country describes the scale of the huge work still be done in describing the global species-level diversity. The program has achieved its goals in many ways, but the program leaves out a large part of the species that do not occur in forest biotopes. Moreover, the funding has decreased through the years despite the international goal of halting the world's biodiversity loss has not been met. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To associate specimens identified by molecular characters to other biological knowledge, we need reference sequences annotated by Linnaean taxonomy. In this study, we (1) report the creation of a comprehensive reference library of DNA barcodes for the arthropods of an entire country (Finland), (2) publish this library, and (3) deliver a new identification tool for insects and spiders, as based on this resource. The reference library contains mtDNA COI barcodes for 11,275 (43%) of 26,437 arthropod species known from Finland, including 10,811 (45%) of 23,956 insect species. To quantify the improvement in identification accuracy enabled by the current reference library, we ran 1000 Finnish insect and spider species through the Barcode of Life Data system (BOLD) identification engine. Of these, 91% were correctly assigned to a unique species when compared to the new reference library alone, 85% were correctly identified when compared to BOLD with the new material included, and 75% with the new material excluded. To capitalize on this resource, we used the new reference material to train a probabilistic taxonomic assignment tool, FinPROTAX, scoring high success. For the full-length barcode region, the accuracy of taxonomic assignments at the level of classes, orders, families, subfamilies, tribes, genera, and species reached 99.9%, 99.9%, 99.8%, 99.7%, 99.4%, 96.8%, and 88.5%, respectively. The FinBOL arthropod reference library and FinPROTAX are available through the Finnish Biodiversity Information Facility (www.laji.fi) at https://laji.fi/en/theme/protax. Overall, the FinBOL investment represents a massive capacity-transfer from the taxonomic community of Finland to all sectors of society., (© 2021 The Authors. Molecular Ecology Resources published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Biodiversity informatics has advanced rapidly with the maturation of major biodiversity data infrastructures (BDDIs), such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility sharing unprecedented data volumes. Nevertheless, taxonomic, temporal and spatial data coverage remains unsatisfactory. With an increasing data need, the global BDDIs require continuous inflow from local data mobilisation, and national BDDIs are being developed around the world. The global BDDIs are specialised in certain data types or data life cycle stages which, despite possible merits, renders the BDDI landscape fragmented and complex. That this often is repeated at the national level creates counterproductive redundancy, complicates user services, and frustrates funders. Here, we present the Finnish Biodiversity Information Facility (FinBIF) as a model of an all-inclusive BDDI. It integrates relevant data types and phases of the data life cycle, manages them under one IT architecture, and distributes the data through one service portal under one brand. FinBIF has experienced diverse funder engagement and rapid user uptake. Therefore, we suggest the integrated and inclusive approach be adopted in national BDDI development.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List Index (RLI) is recognized as one of the key indicators of trends in the status of species. The red-list assessment done by Finnish authorities of species in Finland is taxonomically one of the most extensive national assessments. We used the Finnish Red Lists from 2000 and 2010 to calculate for the first time the national RLIs for 11 taxonomic groups at different trophic levels and with different life cycles. The red-list index is calculated on the basis of changes in red-list categories and indicates trends in the status of biological diversity of sets of species. The RLI value ranges from 0 to 1. The lower the value the faster the set of species is heading toward extinction. If the value is 1, all species in the set are least concern and if the value is 0, all species are (regionally) extinct. The overall RLI of Finnish species decreased. This means that, in Finland, these taxonomic groups were heading toward extinction faster in 2010 than in 2000. Of the analyzed groups of organisms, RLIs of 5 decreased and RLIs of 6 increased. At the national level, the RLIs and status trends varied markedly between species groups. Thus, we concluded that generalizations on the basis of RLIs of a few taxa only may yield a biased view of ongoing trends in the status of biological diversity at the species level. In addition, one overall RLI that includes many different species groups may also be misleading if variation in RLI among species groups is not considered and if RLI values are not presented separately for each group., (© 2013 Society for Conservation Biology.)