Literature DB >> 20152842

How to resolve the SLOSS debate: lessons from species-diversity models.

Even Tjørve1.   

Abstract

The SLOSS debate--whether a single large reserve will conserve more species than several small--of the 1970s and 1980s never came to a resolution. The first rule of reserve design states that one large reserve will conserve the most species, a rule which has been heavily contested. Empirical data seem to undermine the reliance on general rules, indicating that the best strategy varies from case to case. Modeling has also been deployed in this debate. We may divide the modeling approaches to the SLOSS enigma into dynamic and static approaches. Dynamic approaches, covered by the fields of island equilibrium theory of island biogeography and metapopulation theory, look at immigration, emigration, and extinction. Static approaches, such as the one in this paper, illustrate how several factors affect the number of reserves that will save the most species. This article approaches the effect of different factors by the application of species-diversity models. These models combine species-area curves for two or more reserves, correcting for the species overlap between them. Such models generate several predictions on how different factors affect the optimal number of reserves. The main predictions are: Fewer and larger reserves are favored by increased species overlap between reserves, by faster growth in number of species with reserve area increase, by higher minimum-area requirements, by spatial aggregation and by uneven species abundances. The effect of increased distance between smaller reserves depends on the two counteracting factors: decreased species density caused by isolation (which enhances minimum-area effect) and decreased overlap between isolates. The first decreases the optimal number of reserves; the second increases the optimal number. The effect of total reserve-system area depends both on the shape of the species-area curve and on whether overlap between reserves changes with scale. The approach to modeling presented here has several implications for conservational strategies. It illustrates well how the SLOSS enigma can be reduced to a question of the shape of the species-area curve that is expected or generated from reserves of different sizes and a question of overlap between isolates (or reserves). Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20152842     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.02.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Theor Biol        ISSN: 0022-5193            Impact factor:   2.691


  11 in total

1.  Biodiversity conservation across taxa and landscapes requires many small as well as single large habitat fragments.

Authors:  Verena Rösch; Teja Tscharntke; Christoph Scherber; Péter Batáry
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-04-25       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Decoupling habitat fragmentation from habitat loss: butterfly species mobility obscures fragmentation effects in a naturally fragmented landscape of lake islands.

Authors:  Zachary G MacDonald; Iraleigh D Anderson; John H Acorn; Scott E Nielsen
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Contrasting Patterns of Species Richness and Functional Diversity in Bird Communities of East African Cloud Forest Fragments.

Authors:  Werner Ulrich; Luc Lens; Joseph A Tobias; Jan C Habel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Microhabitats and canopy cover moderate high summer temperatures in a fragmented Mediterranean landscape.

Authors:  Gunnar Keppel; Sharolyn Anderson; Craig Williams; Sonia Kleindorfer; Christopher O'Connell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Assessing connectivity and the contribution of private lands to protected area networks in the United States.

Authors:  Lindsey Bargelt; Marie-Josée Fortin; Dennis L Murray
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Effects of habitat area and spatial configuration on biodiversity in an experimental intertidal community.

Authors:  Lynette H L Loke; Ryan A Chisholm; Peter A Todd
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 5.499

7.  Resolving the SLOSS dilemma for biodiversity conservation: a research agenda.

Authors:  Lenore Fahrig; James I Watling; Carlos Alberto Arnillas; Víctor Arroyo-Rodríguez; Theresa Jörger-Hickfang; Jörg Müller; Henrique M Pereira; Federico Riva; Verena Rösch; Sebastian Seibold; Teja Tscharntke; Felix May
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2021-08-28

8.  Managing genetic diversity in breeding programs of small populations: the case of French local chicken breeds.

Authors:  Gwendal Restoux; Xavier Rognon; Agathe Vieaud; Daniel Guemene; Florence Petitjean; Romuald Rouger; Sophie Brard-Fudulea; Sophie Lubac-Paye; Geoffrey Chiron; Michèle Tixier-Boichard
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 5.100

9.  Species accumulation in small-large vs large-small order: more species but not all species?

Authors:  David C Deane
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2022-09-17       Impact factor: 3.298

Review 10.  Old concepts, new challenges: adapting landscape-scale conservation to the twenty-first century.

Authors:  Lynda Donaldson; Robert J Wilson; Ilya M D Maclean
Journal:  Biodivers Conserv       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 3.549

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.