Search

Protected areas currently cover about 15% of the global land area, and constitute one of the main tools in biodiversity conservation. Quantifying their effectiveness at protecting species from local decline or extinction involves comparing protected with counterfactual unprotected sites representing “what would have happened to protected sites had they not been protected”. Most studies are based on pairwise comparisons, using neighbour sites to protected areas as counterfactuals, but this choice is often subjective and may be prone to biases. An alternative is to use large-scale biodiversity monitoring datasets, whereby the effect of protected areas is analysed statistically by controlling for landscape differences between protected and unprotected sites, allowing a more targeted and clearly defined measure of the protected areas effect. Here we use the North American Breeding Bird Survey dataset as a case study to investigate the effectiveness of protected areas at conserving bird assemblages. We analysed the effect of protected areas on species richness, on assemblage-level abundance, and on the abundance of individual species by modelling how these metrics relate to the proportion of each site that is protected, while controlling for local habitat, altitude, productivity and for spatial autocorrelation. At the assemblage level, we found almost no relationship between protection and species richness or overall abundance. At the species level, we found that forest species are present in significantly higher abundances within protected forest sites, compared with unprotected forests, with the opposite effect for species that favour open habitats. Hence, even though protected forest assemblages are not richer than those of unprotected forests, they are more typical of this habitat. We also found some evidence that species that avoid human activities tend to be favoured by protection, but found no such effect for regionally declining species. Our results highlight the complexity of assessing protected areas effectiveness, and the necessity of clearly defining the metrics of effectiveness and the controls used in such assessments.

How did ancient communities around the Mediterranean exploit the presence of whales in their seas? Given that the whales currently present in the region are seldom found near the coast, it seems probable that ancient whale exploitation would have been restricted to stranded animals. The authors explore, however, the possibility that additional species migrated seasonally through the Strait of Gibraltar to visit coastal calving grounds, which could have supported an organised whaling industry. Classical literature provides a number of descriptions suggestive of coastal encounters with whales. New methods of whale bone identification will shed light on which species were previously present in the Mediterranean and thus on the probability of ancient whaling. This article is one of two on ancient whaling in the current issue, and should be read in conjunction with that by Dario Bernal-Casasola and colleagues. Keywords: Mediterranean, classical literature, whales, whaling, Introduction Human effects on nature are easily forgotten as perceptions adjust to progressively impoverished ecosystems (Turvey et al. 2010). This 'shifting baseline syndrome' (Pauly 1995: 430) affects not only scientific [...]

Taxonomy, the description and classification of life's diversity, is a discipline that underpins all biological sciences. Current gaps in taxonomic knowledge and expertise restrict our ability to effectively conserve and [...]

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01196.x Byline: ANDREW BALMFORD (*[double dagger][double dagger]), PETE CAREY ([dagger]), VALERIE KAPOS (*[double dagger]), ANDREA MANICA (*), ANA S.L. RODRIGUES (*s.), JORN P.W. SCHARLEMANN ([double dagger]), RHYS E. GREEN (*[dagger][dagger]) Author Affiliation: (*)Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, United Kingdom ([dagger])Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, PE28 2LS, United Kingdom ([double dagger])UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, United Kingdom (s.)Environment and Energy Section, Mechanical Engineering Department, Instituto Superior Tecnico, Lisbon, Portugal ([dagger][dagger])Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, The Lodge, Sandy SG19 2DL, United Kingdom Article History: Paper submitted July 30, 2008; revised manuscript accepted November 10, 2008 Article note: ([double dagger][double dagger]) email a.balmford@zoo.cam.ac.uk

Slowing rates of global biodiversity loss requires preventing species extinctions. Here we pinpoint centers of imminent extinction, where highly threatened species are confined to single sites. Within five globally assessed taxa (i.e., mammals, birds, selected reptiles, amphibians, and conifers), we find 794 such species, three times the number recorded as having gone extinct since 1500. These species occur in 595 sites, concentrated in tropical forests, on islands, and in mountainous areas. Their taxonomic and geographical distribution differs significantly from that of historical extinctions, indicating an expansion of the current extinction episode beyond sensitive species and places toward the planet's most biodiverse mainland regions. Only one-third of the sites are legally protected, and most are surrounded by intense human development. These sites represent clear opportunities for urgent conservation action to prevent species loss. biodiversity | conservation | protected area | threatened species

Methods are needed to identify priority areas for biodiversity conservation that minimize conflict with agricultural productivity. Analysis of georeferenced datasets for breeding birds. mammals, and amphibians in Mexico indicates that only 94 of 3,040 areas are needed to include all unprotected species within a reserve system. An examination of socioeconomic data reveals that in most of these 94 areas, opportunities exist to develop reserve networks that conserve biodiversity without adversely affecting existing human settlement, land use, or agricultural productivity. Planning that simultaneously considers infrastructure development, agricultural suitability, and protected areas can conserve biodiversity, increase agricultural production, and support rural livelihoods. Key words--Latin America, Mexico, biodiversity conservation, agricultural productivity, protected areas, locational modeling

Scientists first became concerned about widespread amphibian population declines when they met in 1989 at the First World Congress of Herpetology. Historical data indicate that declines began as early as [...], The first global assessment of amphibians provides new context for the well-publicized phenomenon of amphibian declines. Amphibians are more threatened and are declining more rapidly than either birds or mammals. Although many declines are due to habitat loss and overutilization, other, unidentified processes threaten 48% of rapidly declining species and are driving species most quickly to extinction. Declines are nonrandom in terms of species' ecological preferences, geographic ranges, and taxonomic associations and are most prevalent among Neotropical montane, stream-associated species. The lack of conservation remedies for these poorly understood declines means that hundreds of amphibian species now face extinction.

Protected-area targets of 10% of a biome, of a country, or of the planet have often been used in conservation planning. The new World Database on Protected Areas shows that [...]

Protected areas are the single most important conservation tool. The global protected-area network has grown substantially in recent decades, now occupying 11.5% of Earth's land surface, but such growth has [...]

To purchase or authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015003550.x Byline: Steven L. Chown (*), Ana S.L. Rodrigues ([dagger]), Niek J.M. Gremmen ([double dagger]), Kevin J. Gaston ([dagger]) Author Affiliation: (*)Department of Zoology & Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa ([dagger])Biodiversity and Macroecology Group, Department of Animal & Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, United Kingdom ([double dagger])Arctic Centre, University of Groningen, The Netherlands. Current address: Data Analyse Ecologie, Dwarsdrift 24,7981 AP Diever, The Netherlands

The Brazilian Amazon is globally important for biodiversity, climate, and geochemical cycles, but is also among the least developed regions in Brazil Economic development is often pursued through forest conversion for cattle ranching and agriculture, mediated by logging. However, on the basis of an assessment of 286 municipalities in different stages of deforestation, we found a boom-and-bust pattern in levels of human development across the deforestation frontier. Relative standards of living, literacy, and rife expectancy increase as deforestation begins but then decline as the frontier evolves, so that pre- and postfrontier levels of human development are similarly low. New financial incentives and policies are creating opportunities for a more sustained development trajectory that is not based on the depletion of nature and ecosystem services.

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]

The article discusses the method and the advantages of using surrogates for an effective conservation planning of an unknown biodiversity. With respect to the cross-taxon tests, the surrogacy rates are found to be higher for the animals that belong to the same realm.

Arising from: R. Grenyer et al. Nature 444, 93-96 (2006). Using data on the global distribution of mammal (1), bird (2) and amphibian (3) species, Grenyer et al. (4) conclude [...]

THE FIRST REACTION OF A PALAEOHERPETOLogist to the growing concern about the future of amphibians ('Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide,' Reports, S. N. Stuart et al., [...]

Using information on Brazilian species, Pimenta et al. assert that we overestimated the number of threatened amphibians. However, this claim, based on a misunderstanding of the IUCN Red List criteria [...]

The article presents information on the threat to amphibians due to climatic changes. Although amphibians have survived past climatic and ecological changes, many species appear to be unable to withstand current threats. Previously, amphibians have not been confronted simultaneously by rapid climate change and human-induced habitat loss, overexploitation, and disease . If threats can be contained through effective conservation actions, then amphibian populations can be expected to rebound and be viable over long periods of time. However, because such a resilient group of species is in such rapid decline, the underlying causal changes taking place in the biosphere will probably have substantial adverse impacts extending well beyond amphibians.