Literature DB >> 33208939

Clustered versus catastrophic global vertebrate declines.

Brian Leung1,2, Anna L Hargreaves3, Dan A Greenberg4, Brian McGill5,6, Maria Dornelas7, Robin Freeman8.   

Abstract

Recent analyses have reported catastrophic global declines in vertebrate populations1,2. However, the distillation of many trends into a global mean index obscures the variation that can inform conservation measures and can be sensitive to analytical decisions. For example, previous analyses have estimated a mean vertebrate decline of more than 50% since 1970 (Living Planet Index2). Here we show, however, that this estimate is driven by less than 3% of vertebrate populations; if these extremely declining populations are excluded, the global trend switches to an increase. The sensitivity of global mean trends to outliers suggests that more informative indices are needed. We propose an alternative approach, which identifies clusters of extreme decline (or increase) that differ statistically from the majority of population trends. We show that, of taxonomic-geographic systems in the Living Planet Index, 16 systems contain clusters of extreme decline (comprising around 1% of populations; these extreme declines occur disproportionately in larger animals) and 7 contain extreme increases (around 0.4% of populations). The remaining 98.6% of populations across all systems showed no mean global trend. However, when analysed separately, three systems were declining strongly with high certainty (all in the Indo-Pacific region) and seven were declining strongly but with less certainty (mostly reptile and amphibian groups). Accounting for extreme clusters fundamentally alters the interpretation of global vertebrate trends and should be used to help to prioritize conservation efforts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33208939     DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2920-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  7 in total

1.  Insect decline in the Anthropocene: Death by a thousand cuts.

Authors:  David L Wagner; Eliza M Grames; Matthew L Forister; May R Berenbaum; David Stopak
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  The world's species are playing musical chairs: how will it end?

Authors:  Gayathri Vaidyanathan
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-08       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Bending the curve: Simple but massive conservation action leads to landscape-scale recovery of amphibians.

Authors:  Helen Moor; Ariel Bergamini; Christoph Vorburger; Rolf Holderegger; Christoph Bühler; Simon Egger; Benedikt R Schmidt
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-10-10       Impact factor: 12.779

4.  Annual changes in the Biodiversity Intactness Index in tropical and subtropical forest biomes, 2001-2012.

Authors:  Adriana De Palma; Andrew Hoskins; Ricardo E Gonzalez; Luca Börger; Tim Newbold; Katia Sanchez-Ortiz; Simon Ferrier; Andy Purvis
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-12       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Abundance decline in the avifauna of the European Union reveals cross-continental similarities in biodiversity change.

Authors:  Fiona Burns; Mark A Eaton; Ian J Burfield; Alena Klvaňová; Eva Šilarová; Anna Staneva; Richard D Gregory
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 2.912

6.  No pervasive relationship between species size and local abundance trends.

Authors:  J Christopher D Terry; Jacob D O'Sullivan; Axel G Rossberg
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-12-30       Impact factor: 19.100

7.  Life history predicts global population responses to the weather in terrestrial mammals.

Authors:  John Jackson; Christie Le Coeur; Owen Jones
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 8.713

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.