Predicting species distributions for conservation decisions

Ecology Letters - Tập 16 Số 12 - Trang 1424-1435 - 2013
Antoine Guisan1,2,3,4, Reid Tingley5, John B. Baumgartner5, Ilona Naujokaitis‐Lewis6, Patricia Sutcliffe1, Ayesha Tulloch1, Tracey J. Regan5, Lluís Brotóns7,8, Eve McDonald‐Madden1,2, Chrystal Mantyka‐Pringle9,2, Tara G. Martin1,2, Jonathan R. Rhodes9, Ramona Maggini1, Samantha A. Setterfield10, Jane Elith11, Mark W. Schwartz12, Brendan A. Wintle5, Olivier Broennimann3, M. P. Austin13, Simon Ferrier13, Michael Kearney14, Hugh P. Possingham1,15, Yvonne M. Buckley1,16
1ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions (CEED), School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, Qld, 4072 Australia
2CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, Ecosciences Precinct, Dutton Park, Brisbane, QLD 4102, Australia
3Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
4Institute of Earth Surface Dynamics. University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
5ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions (CEED), School of Botany, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic, 3010 Australia
6Ecology & Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto Toronto Canada
7Centre Tecnològic Forestal de Catalunya (CTFC ‐ CEMFOR) Solsona Spain
8Centre de Recerca Ecològica i Aplicacions Forestals (CREAF) Bellaterra Spain
9ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions (CEED), School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, Qld, 4072 Australia
10Research Institute for Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, 0909, Australia
11School of Botany, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3010, Australia
12John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, 95616 USA
13CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
14Department of Zoology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3010, Australia
15Imperial College London, Department of Life Sciences, Silwood Park, Ascot SL5 7PY, Berkshire, England, UK
16Zoology Department, School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

Tóm tắt

AbstractSpecies distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly proposed to support conservation decision making. However, evidence of SDMs supporting solutions for on‐ground conservation problems is still scarce in the scientific literature. Here, we show that successful examples exist but are still largely hidden in the grey literature, and thus less accessible for analysis and learning. Furthermore, the decision framework within which SDMs are used is rarely made explicit. Using case studies from biological invasions, identification of critical habitats, reserve selection and translocation of endangered species, we propose that SDMs may be tailored to suit a range of decision‐making contexts when used within a structured and transparent decision‐making process. To construct appropriate SDMs to more effectively guide conservation actions, modellers need to better understand the decision process, and decision makers need to provide feedback to modellers regarding the actual use of SDMs to support conservation decisions. This could be facilitated by individuals or institutions playing the role of ‘translators’ between modellers and decision makers. We encourage species distribution modellers to get involved in real decision‐making processes that will benefit from their technical input; this strategy has the potential to better bridge theory and practice, and contribute to improve both scientific knowledge and conservation outcomes.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1111/ddi.12054

10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01610.x

10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.07.005

10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01136.x

10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01893.x

Brotons L., 2004, Modelling the effects of irrigation schemes on the distribution of steppe birds in Mediterranean farmland, Biodivers. Conserv., 13, 1039, 10.1023/B:BIOC.0000014468.71368.35

Brown D., 2000, Establishment of a biological information database for regional conservation planning in north‐east New South Wales

10.1016/j.biocon.2011.04.024

10.1073/pnas.1231332100

10.1177/194008290900200304

10.1111/j.1469-1795.2012.00589.x

10.1126/science.1206432

CTFC, 2008, Informe científico sobre la identificación de zonas de hábitat adecuado para la carraca, la terrera común, la calándria común y el sisón en el ámbito de las IBAs 142 (secans de Lleida y 144(Cogul‐Alfés)

DEPI, 2013, Biodiversity information tools for use in native vegetation decisions

DMAH, 2010, RESOLUCIÓ MAH/3644/2010 de 22 d'octubre per la qual es fa públic l'Acord de declaració d'impacte ambiental del Projecte de regadiu i concentració parcel lària del Segarra‐Garrigues. Transformació en regadiu, obres de distribució i concentració parcel lària a diversos termes municipals. Departament de Medi Ambient i Habitatge (DMAH), Diari Oicial de la Generalitat de Catalunya, 5759, 84690

10.1086/661782

10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159

Environment Canada, 2011, Recovery Strategy for the Ord's Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys ordii) in Canada [Proposed]

10.1023/A:1021302930424

10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00625.x

10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02614.x

10.1017/CBO9780511810602

10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02016.x

10.3390/fi2040624

10.1525/bio.2012.62.7.11

10.1002/9781444398557

10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00792.x

Haines A., 2004, Bridging the implementation gap between knowledge and action for health, Bull. World Health Organ., 82, 724

10.1890/1540-9295(2007)5[131:PANIAC]2.0.CO;2

10.1016/j.biocon.2010.06.009

10.1126/science.1157897

10.1016/j.tree.2011.09.007

Johnson H., 2007, Modelling Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep habitat: applying resource selection functions to species recovery

10.1890/1051-0761(2003)013[0853:ASAOFA]2.0.CO;2

10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01277.x

10.1098/rsbl.2008.0049

10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00914.x

10.1126/science.1155193

10.1016/j.biocon.2012.05.012

10.1111/j.1755-263X.2008.00012.x

Lepitzki D.A.W., 2010, Recovery strategy and action plan for the banff springs snail (Physella johnsoni) in Canada

10.1038/35012251

10.1038/nclimate1348

10.1007/s10980-010-9514-x

10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01226.x

10.1890/11-0329.1

10.1098/rspb.2005.3164

10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00560.x

Moilanen A., 2009, Spatial conservation prioritization: Quantitative methods and computational tools, 10.1093/oso/9780199547760.001.0001

10.1007/s10707-009-0090-7

NTA, 2007, Northern Territory weed risk management user guide

NTA, 2009, NT weed risk assessment report: Andropogon gayanus (gamba grass)

10.23943/princeton/9780691136868.001.0001

10.1006/jema.1999.0297

Possingham H.P., 2001, Conservation Biology: Research Priorities for the Next Decade, 225

10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00287.x

10.1890/03-5419

10.1073/pnas.0902327106

10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00356.x

10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00970.x

10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[835:GSOMAF]2.0.CO;2

10.1016/j.biocon.2010.12.020

10.1016/j.tree.2010.05.001

10.1016/j.biocon.2012.06.011

10.1016/j.biocon.2012.06.014

10.1016/j.biocon.2011.06.015

Seki N.P.S, 2011, Sierra Nevada Bighorn sheep environmental assessment: research and recovery actions

10.1080/00139150409604394

10.2307/3496376

10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.11.016

10.1098/rstb.2011.0181

10.1002/9780470999356

10.1016/j.tree.2011.02.006

10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.001018.x

US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2007, Recovery Plan for the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep

10.1007/s10530-011-9952-7

10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.06.005

10.1038/nclimate1227

10.1890/08-0442.1

van Zonneveld M., 2011, Collecting plant genetic diversity: Technical guidelines ‐ 2011 Update

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Ecology Letters

Tập 16 Số 12

1424-1435

Thông tin tác giả