Literature DB >> 21371231

Designing nature reserves in the face of uncertainty.

Michael A McCarthy1, Colin J Thompson, Alana L Moore, Hugh P Possingham.   

Abstract

Conservation reserves are a fundamental tool for managing biodiversity. The so-called SLOSS debate--should we have a Single Large Or Several Small reserves - is central to conservation theory. Population dynamic models suggest that the design that minimizes the risk of extinction of a species is case-specific, with the optimal number of reserves ranging between one and very many. Uncertainty is pervasive in ecology, but, the previous analyses of the SLOSS debate have not considered how uncertainty in the model of extinction risk might influence the optimal design. Herein, we show that when uncertainty is considered, the SLOSS problem is simplified and driven more by the aspirations of the manager than the population dynamics of the species. In this case, the optimal solution is to have in the order of twenty or fewer reserves for any species. This result shows counter-intuitively that considering uncertainty actually simplifies rather than complicates decisions about designing nature reserves.
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21371231     DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01608.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecol Lett        ISSN: 1461-023X            Impact factor:   9.492


  8 in total

Review 1.  Core concepts of spatial prioritisation in systematic conservation planning.

Authors:  Aija S Kukkala; Atte Moilanen
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2012-12-22

2.  Accommodating species climate-forced dispersal and uncertainties in spatial conservation planning.

Authors:  Priscila Lemes; Rafael Dias Loyola
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  Contending with uncertainty in conservation management decisions.

Authors:  Michael A McCarthy
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 5.691

4.  The optimal number of surveys when detectability varies.

Authors:  Alana L Moore; Michael A McCarthy; Kirsten M Parris; Joslin L Moore
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  An improved neutral landscape model for recreating real landscapes and generating landscape series for spatial ecological simulations.

Authors:  Maarten J van Strien; Cornelis T J Slager; Bauke de Vries; Adrienne Grêt-Regamey
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 2.912

6.  Spatially-Correlated Risk in Nature Reserve Site Selection.

Authors:  Heidi J Albers; Gwenlyn M Busby; Bertrand Hamaide; Amy W Ando; Stephen Polasky
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Landscape configuration affects probability of apex predator presence and community structure in experimental metacommunities.

Authors:  Ellie Wolfe; Edd Hammill; Jane Memmott; Christopher F Clements
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.298

8.  Synergistic impacts of habitat loss and fragmentation on model ecosystems.

Authors:  Lewis J Bartlett; Tim Newbold; Drew W Purves; Derek P Tittensor; Michael B J Harfoot
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 5.349

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.