Search

Funder: Stichting Ave Fenix Europa, Funder: Arcadia Fund; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012088, Funder: MAVA Foundation; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100013324, Funder: David and Claudia Harding Foundation, Funder: Research England, Species reliant on both the terrestrial and marine realms present a challenge for conventional species distribution models (SDMs). For such species, standard single���realm SDMs may omit key information that could result in decreased model accuracy and performance. Existing approaches to habitat suitability modeling typically do not effectively combine information from multiple realms; this methodological gap can ultimately hamper management efforts for groups such as seabirds, seals, and turtles. This study, for the first time, jointly incorporates both terrestrial information and marine information into a single species distribution model framework. We do this by sampling nearby marine conditions for a given terrestrial point and vice versa using parameters set by each species��� mean maximum foraging distance and then use standard SDM methods to generate habitat suitability predictions; therefore, our method does not rely on post hoc combination of several different models. Using three seabird species with very different ecologies, we investigate whether this new multi���realm approach can improve our ability to identify suitable habitats for these species. Results show that incorporating terrestrial information into marine SDMs, or vice versa, generally improves model performance, sometimes drastically. However, there is considerable variability between species in the level of improvement as well as in the particular method that produces the most improvement. Our approach provides a repeatable and transparent method to combine information from multiple ecological realms in a single SDM framework. Important advantages over existing solutions include the opportunity to, firstly, easily combine terrestrial and marine information for species that forage large distances inland or out to sea and, secondly, consider interactions between terrestrial and marine variables.

The widely held assumption that any important scientific information would be available in English underlies the underuse of non-English-language science across disciplines. However, non-English-language science is expected to bring unique and valuable scientific information, especially in disciplines where the evidence is patchy, and for emergent issues where synthesising available evidence is an urgent challenge. Yet such contribution of non-English-language science to scientific communities and the application of science is rarely quantified. Here, we show that non-English-language studies provide crucial evidence for informing global biodiversity conservation. By screening 419,679 peer-reviewed papers in 16 languages, we identified 1,234 non-English-language studies providing evidence on the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation interventions, compared to 4,412 English-language studies identified with the same criteria. Relevant non-English-language studies are being published at an increasing rate in 6 out of the 12 languages where there were a sufficient number of relevant studies. Incorporating non-English-language studies can expand the geographical coverage (i.e., the number of 2° × 2° grid cells with relevant studies) of English-language evidence by 12% to 25%, especially in biodiverse regions, and taxonomic coverage (i.e., the number of species covered by the relevant studies) by 5% to 32%, although they do tend to be based on less robust study designs. Our results show that synthesising non-English-language studies is key to overcoming the widespread lack of local, context-dependent evidence and facilitating evidence-based conservation globally. We urge wider disciplines to rigorously reassess the untapped potential of non-English-language science in informing decisions to address other global challenges. Please see the Supporting information files for Alternative Language Abstracts., A survey of 419,680 peer-reviewed papers in 16 languages reveals that non-English-language studies can expand geographical (by 12-25%) and taxonomic (by 5-32%) coverage of English-language evidence on the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation interventions, especially in biodiverse regions.

Funder: MAVA Foundation; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100013324, The crisis generated by the emergence and pandemic spread of COVID‐19 has thrown into the global spotlight the dangers associated with novel diseases, as well as the key role of animals, especially wild animals, as potential sources of pathogens to humans. There is a widespread demand for a new relationship with wild and domestic animals, including suggested bans on hunting, wildlife trade, wet markets or consumption of wild animals. However, such policies risk ignoring essential elements of the problem as well as alienating and increasing hardship for local communities across the world, and might be unachievable at scale. There is thus a need for a more complex package of policy and practical responses. We undertook a solution scan to identify and collate 161 possible options for reducing the risks of further epidemic disease transmission from animals to humans, including potential further SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission (original or variants). We include all categories of animals in our responses (i.e. wildlife, captive, unmanaged/feral and domestic livestock and pets) and focus on pathogens (especially viruses) that, once transmitted from animals to humans, could acquire epidemic potential through high rates of human‐to‐human transmission. This excludes measures to prevent well‐known zoonotic diseases, such as rabies, that cannot readily transmit between humans. We focused solutions on societal measures, excluding the development of vaccines and other preventive therapeutic medicine and veterinary medicine options that are discussed elsewhere. We derived our solutions through reading the scientific literature, NGO position papers, and industry guidelines, collating our own experiences, and consulting experts in different fields. Herein, we review the major zoonotic transmission pathways and present an extensive list of options. The potential solutions are organised according to the key stages of the trade chain and encompass solutions that can be applied at the local, regional and international scales. This is a set of options targeted at practitioners and policy makers to encourage careful examination of possible courses of action, validating their impact and documenting outcomes.

Funder: Nottingham Trent University; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010016, Funder: People's Trust for Endangered Species; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100018690, In light of rapidly expanding road networks worldwide, there is increasing global awareness of the growing amount of mammalian roadkill. However, the ways in which road mortality affects the population dynamics of different species remains largely unclear. We aimed to categorise the demographic parameters in mammalian populations around the world that are directly or indirectly affected by road mortality, as well as identify the most effective study designs for quantifying population-level consequences of road mortality. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review to synthesise literature published between 2000 and 2021 and out of 11,238 unique studies returned, 83 studies were retained comprising 69 mammalian species and 150 populations. A bias towards research-intensive countries and larger mammals was apparent. Although searches were conducted in five languages, all studies meeting the inclusion criteria were in English. Relatively few studies (13.3%) provided relevant demographic context to roadkill figures, hampering understanding of the impacts on population persistence. We categorised five direct demographic parameters affected by road mortality: sex- and age-biased mortality, the percentage of a population killed on roads per year (values up to 50% were reported), the contribution of roadkill to total mortality rates (up to 80%), and roadkill during inter-patch or long-distance movements. Female-biased mortality may be more prevalent than previously recognised and is likely to be critical to population dynamics. Roadkill was the greatest source of mortality for 28% of studied populations and both additive and compensatory mechanisms to roadkill were found to occur, bringing varied challenges to conservation around roads. In addition, intra-specific population differences in demographic effects of road mortality were common. This highlights that the relative importance of road mortality is likely to be context specific as the road configuration and habitat quality surrounding a population can vary. Road ecology studies that collect data on key life parameters, such as age/stage/sex-specific survival and dispersal success, and that use a combination of methods are critical in understanding long-term impacts. Quantifying the demographic impacts of road mortality is an important yet complex consideration for proactive road management.

Terrestrial anurans, with their typically short limbs, heavy-set bodies and absent claws or toe pads are incongruous tree climbers, but even occasional arboreal locomotion could offer substantial advantages for evading predators or accessing new shelter or food resources. Despite recent interest, arboreal behaviour remains rarely and unsystematically described for terrestrial amphibians in Europe, likely due to fundamental differences in survey methods and therefore a lack of field data. However, other taxa surveys specifically target trees and tree cavities. We undertook collaborations and large-scale data searches with two major citizen science projects surveying for arboreal mammals in Britain to investigate potential tree climbing by amphibians at a national scale. Remarkably, we found widespread arboreal usage by amphibians in England and Wales, with occupancy of hazel dormouse (Muscardinus avellenarius) nest boxes, tree cavities investigated as potential bat roosts and even a bird nest, by common toads (Bufo bufo), but few additional records of frogs or newts. Of the 277–400 sites surveyed annually for dormice since 2009 at least 18 sites had amphibians recorded in nest boxes while of the 1388 trees surveyed for bats a total 1.4% (19 trees) had toads present. Common toads were found using cavities in seven tree species and especially goat willow (Salix caprea). Toads are potentially attracted to tree cavities and arboreal nests because they provide safe and damp microenvironments which can support an abundance of invertebrate prey but the importance of such tree microhabitats for toad conservation remains unknown and our results should be interpreted cautiously. We encourage expanding and linking of unrelated biodiversity monitoring surveys and citizen science initiatives as valuable tools for investigating ecological traits and interactions.

Evidence-based decision-making is most effective with comprehensive access to scientific studies. If studies face significant publication delays or barriers, the useful information they contain may not reach decision-makers in a timely manner. This represents a potential problem for mission-oriented disciplines where access to the latest data is required to ensure effective actions are undertaken. We sought to analyse the severity of publication delay in conservation science—a field that requires urgent action to prevent the loss of biodiversity. We used the Conservation Evidence database to assess the length of publication delay (time from finishing data collection to publication) in the literature that tests the effectiveness of conservation interventions. From 7,447 peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed studies of conservation interventions published over eleven decades, we find that the raw mean publication delay was 3.2 years (±2SD = 0.1) and varied by conservation subject. A significantly shorter delay was observed for studies focused on Bee Conservation, Sustainable Aquaculture, Management of Captive Animals, Amphibian Conservation, and Control of Freshwater Invasive Species (Estimated Marginal Mean range from 1.4–1.9 years). Publication delay was significantly shorter for the non-peer-reviewed literature (Estimated Marginal Mean delay of 1.9 years ± 0.2) compared to the peer-reviewed literature (i.e., scientific journals; Estimated Marginal Mean delay of 3.0 years ± 0.1). We found publication delay has significantly increased over time (an increase of ~1.2 years from 1912 (1.4 years ± 0.2) to 2020 (2.6 years ± 0.1)), but this change was much weaker and non-significant post-2000s; we found no evidence for any decline. There was also no evidence that studies on more threatened species were subject to a shorter delay—indeed, the contrary was true for mammals, and to a lesser extent for birds. We suggest a range of possible ways in which scientists, funders, publishers, and practitioners can work together to reduce delays at each stage of the publication process.

This book provides an assessment of the effectiveness of 2526 conservation interventions based on summarized scientific evidence. The 2021 edition contains substantial new material on bat conservation, terrestrial mammal conservation and marine and freshwater mammals, thus completing the evidence for all mammal species categories. Other chapters cover practical global conservation of primates, amphibians, bats, birds, forests, peatlands, subtidal benthic invertebrates, shrublands and heathlands, as well as the conservation of European farmland biodiversity and some aspects of enhancing natural pest control, enhancing soil fertility, management of captive animals and control of freshwater invasive species. It contains key results from the summarized evidence for each conservation intervention and an assessment of the effectiveness of each by international expert panels. The accompanying website www.conservationevidence.com describes each of the studies individually, and provides full references. This is the sixth author-approved edition of What Works in Conservation, which is revised on an annual basis.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine this year has further highlighted the vulnerability of global food security to geopolitical disruption of supply chains. As members of the Biosecurity Research Initiative at St Catharine’s (BioRISC) at the University of Cambridge, UK, we argue that necessary transport route changes must be accompanied by effective biosecurity measures against invasive species and pathogens.

Efforts to tackle the current biodiversity crisis need to be as efficient and effective as possible given chronic underfunding. To inform decision‐makers of the most effective conservation actions, it is important to identify biases and gaps in the conservation literature to prioritize future evidence generation. We used the Conservation Evidence database to assess the state of the global literature that tests conservation actions for amphibians and birds. For the studies in the database, we investigated their spatial and taxonomic extent and distribution across biomes, effectiveness metrics, and study designs. Studies were heavily concentrated in Western Europe and North America for birds and particularly for amphibians, and temperate forest and grassland biomes were highly represented relative to their percentage of land coverage. Studies that used the most reliable study designs ‐ before‐after control‐impact and randomized controlled trials ‐ were the most geographically restricted and scarce in the evidence base. There were negative spatial relationships between the numbers of studies and the numbers of threatened and data‐deficient species worldwide. Taxonomic biases and gaps were apparent for amphibians and birds–some entire orders were absent from the evidence base–whereas others were poorly represented relative to the proportion of threatened species they contained. Metrics used to evaluate effectiveness of conservation actions were often inconsistent between studies, potentially making them less directly comparable and evidence synthesis more difficult. Testing conservation actions on threatened species outside Western Europe, North America and Australasia should be prioritized. Standardizing metrics and improving the rigor of study designs used to test conservation actions would also improve the quality of the evidence base for synthesis and decision‐making.

Road-based citizen science surveys are increasingly used for long-term monitoring of wildlife, including amphibians, over large spatial scales. However, how representative such data are when compared to the actual species distribution remains unclear. Spatial biases in site selection or road network coverage by volunteers could skew results towards more urbanised areas and consequently produce incorrect or partial trend estimations at regional or national scales. Our objective was to compare and verify potential spatial biases of road-based data using distribution datasets of different origins. We used as a case study the common toad (Bufo bufo), a fast-declining species and the main amphibian targeted by conservation action on roads in Europe. We used Maxent models to compare road survey data obtained from the 35 year-long “Toads on Roads” project in Great Britain with models using national-scale toad distribution records as well as with models using randomly generated points on roads. Distribution models that used data collected by volunteers on roads produced similar results to those obtained from overall species distribution, indicating the lack of selection bias and high spatial coverage of volunteer-collected data on roads. Toads were generally absent from mountainous areas and, despite the high availability of potential recorders, showed nearly complete absence of road-based records in large urban areas. This is probably the first study that comparatively evaluates species distribution models created using datasets of different origin in order to verify the influence of potential spatial bias of data collected by volunteers on roads. Large-scale declines of widespread amphibians have been demonstrated using data collected on roads and our results indicate that such data are representative and certainly comparable to other existing datasets. We show that for countries with high road network coverage, such as Great Britain, road-based data collected by volunteers represent a robust dataset and a critical citizen science contribution to conservation.