Literature DB >> 28447398

A suite of essential biodiversity variables for detecting critical biodiversity change.

Dirk S Schmeller1,2, Lauren V Weatherdon3, Adeline Loyau2,4, Alberte Bondeau5, Lluis Brotons6,7,8, Neil Brummitt9, Ilse R Geijzendorffer5,10, Peter Haase11,12, Mathias Kuemmerlen11,13, Corinne S Martin3, Jean-Baptiste Mihoub1,14, Duccio Rocchini15, Hannu Saarenmaa16, Stefan Stoll11,17, Eugenie C Regan3,18.   

Abstract

Key global indicators of biodiversity decline, such as the IUCN Red List Index and the Living Planet Index, have relatively long assessment intervals. This means they, due to their inherent structure, function as late-warning indicators that are retrospective, rather than prospective. These indicators are unquestionably important in providing information for biodiversity conservation, but the detection of early-warning signs of critical biodiversity change is also needed so that proactive management responses can be enacted promptly where required. Generally, biodiversity conservation has dealt poorly with the scattered distribution of necessary detailed information, and needs to find a solution to assemble, harmonize and standardize the data. The prospect of monitoring essential biodiversity variables (EBVs) has been suggested in response to this challenge. The concept has generated much attention, but the EBVs themselves are still in development due to the complexity of the task, the limited resources available, and a lack of long-term commitment to maintain EBV data sets. As a first step, the scientific community and the policy sphere should agree on a set of priority candidate EBVs to be developed within the coming years to advance both large-scale ecological research as well as global and regional biodiversity conservation. Critical ecological transitions are of high importance from both a scientific as well as from a conservation policy point of view, as they can lead to long-lasting biodiversity change with a high potential for deleterious effects on whole ecosystems and therefore also on human well-being. We evaluated candidate EBVs using six criteria: relevance, sensitivity to change, generalizability, scalability, feasibility, and data availability and provide a literature-based review for eight EBVs with high sensitivity to change. The proposed suite of EBVs comprises abundance, allelic diversity, body mass index, ecosystem heterogeneity, phenology, range dynamics, size at first reproduction, and survival rates. The eight candidate EBVs provide for the early detection of critical and potentially long-lasting biodiversity change and should be operationalized as a priority. Only with such an approach can science predict the future status of global biodiversity with high certainty and set up the appropriate conservation measures early and efficiently. Importantly, the selected EBVs would address a large range of conservation issues and contribute to a total of 15 of the 20 Aichi targets and are, hence, of high biological relevance.
© 2017 Cambridge Philosophical Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biodiversity conservation; biodiversity loss; early change detection; essential biodiversity variables

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28447398     DOI: 10.1111/brv.12332

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc        ISSN: 0006-3231


  6 in total

1.  Recommendations for connecting molecular sequence and biodiversity research infrastructures through ELIXIR.

Authors:  Robert M Waterhouse; Anne-Françoise Adam-Blondon; Donat Agosti; Petr Baldrian; Bachir Balech; Erwan Corre; Robert P Davey; Henrik Lantz; Graziano Pesole; Christian Quast; Frank Oliver Glöckner; Niels Raes; Anna Sandionigi; Monica Santamaria; Wouter Addink; Jiri Vohradsky; Amandine Nunes-Jorge; Nils Peder Willassen; Jerry Lanfear
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2021-12-03

2.  Land use, REDD+ and the status of wildlife populations in Yaeda Valley, northern Tanzania.

Authors:  Christian Kiffner; Zoe Arndt; Trent Foky; Megan Gaeth; Alex Gannett; Madeline Jackson; Georgie Lellman; Sophia Love; Ana Maroldi; Shane McLaughlin; Bobbi Skenandore; Sarah von Euler; Zachary Zambrano; Bernard Kissui
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  BioModelos: A collaborative online system to map species distributions.

Authors:  Jorge Velásquez-Tibatá; María H Olaya-Rodríguez; Daniel López-Lozano; César Gutiérrez; Iván González; María C Londoño-Murcia
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-27       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  Supporting in situ conservation of the genetic diversity of crop wild relatives using genomic technologies.

Authors:  Peterson W Wambugu; Robert Henry
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 6.622

Review 5.  Global genetic diversity status and trends: towards a suite of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) for genetic composition.

Authors:  Sean Hoban; Frederick I Archer; Laura D Bertola; Jason G Bragg; Martin F Breed; Michael W Bruford; Melinda A Coleman; Robert Ekblom; W Chris Funk; Catherine E Grueber; Brian K Hand; Rodolfo Jaffé; Evelyn Jensen; Jeremy S Johnson; Francine Kershaw; Libby Liggins; Anna J MacDonald; Joachim Mergeay; Joshua M Miller; Frank Muller-Karger; David O'Brien; Ivan Paz-Vinas; Kevin M Potter; Orly Razgour; Cristiano Vernesi; Margaret E Hunter
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2022-04-12

6.  Ecosystem antifragility: beyond integrity and resilience.

Authors:  Miguel Equihua; Mariana Espinosa Aldama; Carlos Gershenson; Oliver López-Corona; Mariana Munguía; Octavio Pérez-Maqueo; Elvia Ramírez-Carrillo
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-02-11       Impact factor: 2.984

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.