Search

The global biodiversity crisis threatens the natural world and its capacity to provide benefits to humans into the future. The conservation of evolutionary history, captured by the measure phylogenetic diversity (PD), is linked to the maintenance of these benefits and future options. The Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered (EDGE) metric has, since 2007, been used to identify species for conservation action that embody large amounts of threatened evolutionary history. In 2017, we convened a workshop to update the EDGE metric to incorporate advances in the field of phylogenetically-informed conservation. Building on that workshop, we devised the metric ‘EDGE2’, which we present here. EDGE2 uses a modular, tiered approach to provide priority rankings—and associated measures of uncertainty in both phylogenetic and extinction risk data—for all species in a clade. EDGE2 takes into account the extinction risk of closely-related species to better reflect the contribution a species is expected to make to overall PD in the future. We applied EDGE2 to the world’s mammals to identify an updated list of priority EDGE species and compare the results with the original EDGE approach. Despite similarity in the priority lists produced between EDGE and EDGE2, EDGE2 places greater priority on species with fewer close relatives on the Tree of Life. As we approach a crossroads for global biodiversity policy, EDGE2 exemplifies how academic and applied conservation biologists can collaborate to guide effective priority-setting to conserve the most irreplaceable components of biodiversity upon which humanity depends.

In the face of the biodiversity crisis, it is argued that we should prioritize species in order to capture high functional diversity (FD). Because species traits often reflect shared evolutionary history, many researchers have assumed that maximizing phylogenetic diversity (PD) should indirectly capture FD, a hypothesis that we name the “phylogenetic gambit”. Here, we empirically test this gambit using data on ecologically relevant traits from >15,000 vertebrate species. Specifically, we estimate a measure of surrogacy of PD for FD. We find that maximizing PD results in an average gain of 18% of FD relative to random choice. However, this average gain obscures the fact that in over one-third of the comparisons, maximum PD sets contain less FD than randomly chosen sets of species. These results suggest that, while maximizing PD protection can help to protect FD, it represents a risky conservation strategy., An ongoing conservation question is if we can maintain functional diversity by optimizing for preservation of phylogenetic diversity. Here, Mazel et al. show that functional diversity increases with phylogenetic diversity in some clades but not others, and thus could be a risky conservation strategy.

The extinction of species at the present leads to the loss of ‘phylogenetic diversity’ (PD) from the evolutionary tree in which these species lie. Prior to extinction, the total PD present can be divided up among the species in various ways using measures of evolutionary isolation (such as ‘fair proportion’ and ‘equal splits’). However, the loss of PD when certain combinations of species become extinct can be either larger or smaller than the cumulative loss of the isolation values associated with the extinct species. In this paper, we show that for trees generated under neutral evolutionary models, the loss of PD under a null model of random extinction at the present can be predicted from the loss of the cumulative isolation values, by applying a non-linear transformation that is independent of the tree. Moreover, the error in the prediction provably converges to zero as the size of the tree grows, with simulations showing good agreement even for moderate sized trees (n = 64).

For decades, academic biologists have advocated for making conservation decisions in light of evolutionary history. Specifically, they suggest that policymakers should prioritize conserving phylogenetically diverse assemblages. The most prominent argument is that conserving phylogenetic diversity (PD) will also conserve diversity in traits and features (functional diversity; FD), which may be valuable for a number of reasons. The claim that PD-maximized (‘maxPD’) sets of taxa will also have high FD is often taken at face value and in cases where researchers have actually tested it, they have done so by measuring the phylogenetic signal in ecologically important functional traits. The rationale is that if traits closely mirror phylogeny, then saving the maxPD set of taxa will tend to maximize FD and if traits do not have phylogenetic structure, then saving the maxPD set of taxa will be no better at capturing FD than criteria that ignore PD. Here, we suggest that measuring the phylogenetic signal in traits is uninformative for evaluating the effectiveness of using PD in conservation. We evolve traits under several different models and, for the first time, directly compare the FD of a set of taxa that maximize PD to the FD of a random set of the same size. Under many common models of trait evolution and tree shapes, conserving the maxPD set of taxa will conserve more FD than conserving a random set of the same size. However, this result cannot be generalized to other classes of models. We find that under biologically plausible scenarios, using PD to select species can actually lead to less FD compared to a random set. Critically, this can occur even when there is phylogenetic signal in the traits. Predicting exactly when we expect using PD to be a good strategy for conserving FD is challenging, as it depends on complex interactions between tree shape and the assumptions of the evolutionary model. Nonetheless, if our goal is to maintain trait diversity, the fact that conserving taxa based on PD will not reliably conserve at least as much FD as choosing randomly raises serious concerns about the general utility of PD in conservation.

In an era of accelerated biodiversity loss and limited conservation resources, systematic prioritization of species and places is essential. In terrestrial vertebrates, evolutionary distinctness has been used to identify species and locations that embody the greatest share of evolutionary history. We estimate evolutionary distinctness for a large marine vertebrate radiation on a dated taxon-complete tree for all 1,192 chondrichthyan fishes (sharks, rays and chimaeras) by augmenting a new 610-species molecular phylogeny using taxonomic constraints. Chondrichthyans are by far the most evolutionarily distinct of all major radiations of jawed vertebrates—the average species embodies 26 million years of unique evolutionary history. With this metric, we identify 21 countries with the highest richness, endemism and evolutionary distinctness of threatened species as targets for conservation prioritization. On average, threatened chondrichthyans are more evolutionarily distinct—further motivating improved conservation, fisheries management and trade regulation to avoid significant pruning of the chondrichthyan tree of life. Evolutionary distinctness is used as a metric to determine conservation priorities across all Chondrichthyes, identifying 21 countries with the highest richness, endemism and evolutionary distinctness of threatened species as targets.

The 'edge of existence' (EDGE) prioritisation scheme is a new approach to rank species for conservation attention that aims to identify species that are both isolated on the tree of life and at imminent risk of extinction as defined by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). The self-stated benefit of the EDGE system is that it effectively captures unusual 'unique' species, and doing so will preserve the total evolutionary history of a group into the future. Given the EDGE metric was not designed to capture total evolutionary history, we tested this claim. Our analyses show that the total evolutionary history of mammals preserved is indeed much higher if EDGE species are protected than if at-risk species are chosen randomly. More of the total tree is also protected by EDGE species than if solely threat status or solely evolutionary distinctiveness were used for prioritisation. When considering how much trait diversity is captured by IUCN and EDGE prioritisation rankings, interestingly, preserving the highest-ranked EDGE species, or indeed just the most threatened species, captures more total trait diversity compared to sets of randomly-selected at-risk species. These results suggest that, as advertised, EDGE mammal species contribute evolutionary history to the evolutionary tree of mammals non-randomly, and EDGE-style rankings among endangered species can also capture important trait diversity. If this pattern holds for other groups, the EDGE prioritisation scheme has greater potential to be an efficient method to allocate scarce conservation effort.

The value of a continuous character evolving on a phylogenetic tree is commonly modelled as the location of a particle moving under one-dimensional Brownian motion with constant rate. The Brownian motion model is best suited to characters evolving under neutral drift or tracking an optimum that drifts neutrally. We present a generalization of the Brownian motion model which relaxes assumptions of neutrality and gradualism by considering increments to evolving characters to be drawn from a heavy-tailed stable distribution (of which the normal distribution is a specialized form). We describe Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for fitting the model to biological data paying special attention to ancestral state reconstruction, and study the performance of the model in comparison with a selection of existing comparative methods, using both simulated data and a database of body mass in 1,679 mammalian species. We discuss hypothesis testing and model selection. The new model is well suited to a stochastic process with a volatile rate of change in which biological characters undergo a mixture of neutral drift and occasional evolutionary events of large magnitude., 39 pages, 5 figures, 4 tables

We present optimal linear time algorithms for computing the Shapley values and 'heightened evolutionary distinctiveness' (HED) scores for the set of taxa in a phylogenetic tree. We demonstrate the efficiency of these new algorithms by applying them to a set of 10,000 reasonable 5139-species mammal trees. This is the first time these indices have been computed on such a large taxon and we contrast our finding with an ad-hoc index for mammals, fair proportion (FP), used by the Zoological Society of London's EDGE programme. Our empirical results follow expectations. In particular, the Shapley values are very strongly correlated with the FP scores, but provide a higher weight to the few monotremes that comprise the sister to all other mammals. We also find that the HED score, which measures a species' unique contribution to future subsets as function of the probability that close relatives will go extinct, is very sensitive to the estimated probabilities. When they are low, HED scores are less than FP scores, and approach the simple measure of a species' age. Deviations (like the Solendon genus of the West Indies) occur when sister species are both at high risk of extinction and their clade roots deep in the tree. Conversely, when endangered species have higher probabilities of being lost, HED scores can be greater than FP scores and species like the African elephant Loxondonta africana, the two solendons and the thumbless bat Furipterus horrens can move up the rankings. We suggest that conservation attention be applied to such species that carry genetic responsibility for imperiled close relatives. We also briefly discuss extensions of Shapley values and HED scores that are possible with the algorithms presented here.

In the face of inevitable future losses to biodiversity, ranking species by conservation priority seems more than prudent. Setting conservation priorities within species (i.e., at the population level) may be critical as species ranges become fragmented and connectivity declines. However, existing approaches to prioritization (e.g., scoring organisms by their expected genetic contribution) are based on phylogenetic trees, which may be poor representations of differentiation below the species level. In this paper we extend evolutionary isolation indices used in conservation planning from phylogenetic trees to phylogenetic networks. Such networks better represent population differentiation, and our extension allows populations to be ranked in order of their expected contribution to the set. We illustrate the approach using data from two imperiled species: the spotted owl Strix occidentalis in North America and the mountain pygmy-possum Burramys parvus in Australia. Using previously published mitochondrial and microsatellite data, we construct phylogenetic networks and score each population by its relative genetic distinctiveness. In both cases, our phylogenetic networks capture the geographic structure of each species: geographically peripheral populations harbor less-redundant genetic information, increasing their conservation rankings. We note that our approach can be used with all conservation-relevant distances (e.g., those based on whole-genome, ecological, or adaptive variation) and suggest it be added to the assortment of tools available to wildlife managers for allocating effort among threatened populations.