| Literature DB >> 30135158 |
Li Yang1,2,3, Minhao Chen1, Daniel W S Challender2, Carly Waterman2, Chao Zhang1, Zhaomin Huo1, Hongwei Liu4, Xiaofeng Luan5.
Abstract
The Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) has long suffered from intense exploitation driven by consumer demand for medicinal use and food. Effective conservation management is hampered by insufficient data on pangolin status and distribution. We integrated ecological niche modelling with long-term ecological records at the local scale (e.g. from local historical documents, grey and published literature and interviews) to estimate the magnitude of potential distribution change of the Chinese pangolin in eastern China (Fujian, Jiangxi and Zhejiang provinces) over time. Our results suggest that the range of the species decreased by 52.20% between the 1970s and early 2000s and that the population is now mainly confined to the Wuyi Mountains. This reduction in potential distribution range is attributable to anthropogenic pressures. According to our conservation prioritization analysis, the priority conservation area for the Chinese pangolin in eastern China is 51 268.4 km2, 5.62% of which is covered by nature reserves. There are 18 nature reserves and 46 prefectures which are priority areas for conservation in China. The priority-level nature reserves and prefectures in eastern China are mainly located in the centre of the Wuyi Mountains, and areas declared important tend to be around the Wuyi Mountains. We propose several actions to improve the conservation status of this species: establish or enlarge nature reserves, ensure local governments at the prefecture level prioritize conservation management and encourage local communities to participate in pangolin conservation.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese pangolin; Manis pentadactyla; conservation; eastern China; historical range
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30135158 PMCID: PMC6125891 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2018.1084
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8452 Impact factor: 5.349
Figure 1.Study area—Eastern China (include Zhejiang Province, Fujian Province and Jiangxi Province). (Online version in colour.)
Figure 2.(a) Species niches projected in the environmental space defined by PCA calibrated on all environmental variables for all periods (see text for more details). PC1 and PC2 represent the first two principal components, explaining 70.54% of the total variability. The correlation circle shows the variance contribution of axes 1 (PC1) and 2 (PC2). (b) Dots represent species distribution in the environmental space; and different colours represent different time periods. (c) Comparison between partial niche and total niches for each time period. Box plots represent Schoener's D values measured considering 100 random subsamples of the total niche with a sample size equivalent to the occurrence data available for each period. The bold lines indicate the mean values, X's indicate extreme values, and light grey boxes indicate non-significant relationships. (Online version in colour.)
Estimates of range size and accuracy of species distribution models in eastern China in different time periods. Occurrence point data were collected from six sources and verified (see Methods—Data). Model accuracy was measured by the TSS (see details in appendix SII). For the relative importance of variables to the Chinese pangolin, only the most important variable is shown (see details in electronic supplementary material, appendix SII). The ranges were determined as the total number of related pixels.
| period | occurrences | TSS | relative importance | range (km2) | elevation (m) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970s | 714 | 0.593 | elevation | 155 929 | 631 |
| 1980s | 561 | 0.657 | elevation | 104 093 | 699 |
| 1990s | 322 | 0.712 | elevation | 92 271 | 716 |
| 2000s | 117 | 0.764 | elevation | 74 537 | 716 |
Figure 3.Potential distribution of the Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) in different time periods. Notes: Maps (a–d) represent potential distributions of the Chinese pangolin. 1970s = 1970–1979; 1980s = 1980–1989; 1990s = 1990–1999 and 2000s = 2000–2016.
Figure 4.(1) Results from the zonation conservation ranking of the landscape with the cost layer. (2) The priority nature reserves and prefectures according to zonation conservation ranking. Red dots indicate priority level, yellow dots important level and green dots indicate normal level. Bottom left: the dashed-line y-axis represents the average percentage of priority conservation areas. Bottom right: the dashed-line y-axis indicates the average rank for the 33 nature reserves or 151 prefectures. (Online version in colour.)