| Literature DB >> 27943401 |
Alexandre Robert1, Colin Fontaine1, Simon Veron1, Anne-Christine Monnet1, Marine Legrand1, Joanne Clavel1, Stéphane Chantepie1, Denis Couvet1, Frédéric Ducarme1, Benoît Fontaine1, Frédéric Jiguet1, Isabelle le Viol1, Jonathan Rolland1, François Sarrazin1, Céline Teplitsky1,2, Maud Mouchet1.
Abstract
The field of biodiversity conservation has recently been criticized as relying on a fixist view of the living world in which existing species constitute at the same time targets of conservation efforts and static states of reference, which is in apparent disagreement with evolutionary dynamics. We reviewed the prominent role of species as conservation units and the common benchmark approach to conservation that aims to use past biodiversity as a reference to conserve current biodiversity. We found that the species approach is justified by the discrepancy between the time scales of macroevolution and human influence and that biodiversity benchmarks are based on reference processes rather than fixed reference states. Overall, we argue that the ethical and theoretical frameworks underlying conservation research are based on macroevolutionary processes, such as extinction dynamics. Current species, phylogenetic, community, and functional conservation approaches constitute short-term responses to short-term human effects on these reference processes, and these approaches are consistent with evolutionary principles.Entities:
Keywords: Anthropocene; Antropoceno; biodiversidad; biodiversity; especies; ethics; evolutionary potential; potencial evolutivo; species; ética
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 27943401 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12876
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Conserv Biol ISSN: 0888-8892 Impact factor: 6.560