Literature DB >> 16969940

Maximizing phylogenetic diversity in biodiversity conservation: Greedy solutions to the Noah's Ark problem.

Klaas Hartmann1, Mike Steel.   

Abstract

The Noah's Ark Problem (NAP) is a comprehensive cost-effectiveness methodology for biodiversity conservation that was introduced by Weitzman (1998) and utilizes the phylogenetic tree containing the taxa of interest to assess biodiversity. Given a set of taxa, each of which has a particular survival probability that can be increased at some cost, the NAP seeks to allocate limited funds to conserving these taxa so that the future expected biodiversity is maximized. Finding optimal solutions using this framework is a computationally difficult problem to which a simple and efficient "greedy" algorithm has been proposed in the literature and applied to conservation problems. We show that, although algorithms of this type cannot produce optimal solutions for the general NAP, there are two restricted scenarios of the NAP for which a greedy algorithm is guaranteed to produce optimal solutions. The first scenario requires the taxa to have equal conservation cost; the second scenario requires an ultrametric tree. The NAP assumes a linear relationship between the funding allocated to conservation of a taxon and the increased survival probability of that taxon. This relationship is briefly investigated and one variation is suggested that can also be solved using a greedy algorithm.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16969940     DOI: 10.1080/10635150600873876

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Syst Biol        ISSN: 1063-5157            Impact factor:   15.683


  8 in total

1.  The Shapley value of phylogenetic trees.

Authors:  Claus-Jochen Haake; Akemi Kashiwada; Francis Edward Su
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2007-09-06       Impact factor: 2.259

2.  The equivalence of two phylogenetic biodiversity measures: the Shapley value and Fair Proportion index.

Authors:  Klaas Hartmann
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 2.259

3.  Phylogenetically clustered extinction risks do not substantially prune the Tree of Life.

Authors:  Rakesh K Parhar; Arne Ø Mooers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  The price of conserving avian phylogenetic diversity: a global prioritization approach.

Authors:  Laura A Nunes; Samuel T Turvey; James Rosindell
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Gymnosperms on the EDGE.

Authors:  Félix Forest; Justin Moat; Elisabeth Baloch; Neil A Brummitt; Steve P Bachman; Steffi Ickert-Bond; Peter M Hollingsworth; Aaron Liston; Damon P Little; Sarah Mathews; Hardeep Rai; Catarina Rydin; Dennis W Stevenson; Philip Thomas; Sven Buerki
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Measuring inferential importance of taxa using taxon influence indices.

Authors:  John S S Denton; Eric W Goolsby
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2018-04-03       Impact factor: 2.912

7.  Converting endangered species categories to probabilities of extinction for phylogenetic conservation prioritization.

Authors:  Arne Ø Mooers; Daniel P Faith; Wayne P Maddison
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Phylogenetics and the human microbiome.

Authors:  Frederick A Matsen
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 15.683

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.