Limits...
Performance and consistency of indicator groups in two biodiversity hotspots.

Trindade-Filho J, Loyola RD - PLoS ONE (2011)

Bottom Line: To test for group effectiveness we first found the best sets of sites able to maximize the representation of each indicator group in the BH and then calculated the average representation of different target species by the indicator groups in the BH.Restricted-range species were the most effective indicators for the representation of all mammal diversity as well as target species.We show that several indicator groups could be applied as shortcuts for representing mammal species in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest to develop conservation plans, however, only restricted-range species consistently held as the most effective indicator group for such a task.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

Background: In a world limited by data availability and limited funds for conservation, scientists and practitioners must use indicator groups to define spatial conservation priorities. Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of indicator groups, but still little is known about the consistency in performance of these groups in different regions, which would allow their a priori selection.

Methodology/principal findings: We systematically examined the effectiveness and the consistency of nine indicator groups in representing mammal species in two top-ranked Biodiversity Hotspots (BH): the Brazilian Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest. To test for group effectiveness we first found the best sets of sites able to maximize the representation of each indicator group in the BH and then calculated the average representation of different target species by the indicator groups in the BH. We considered consistent indicator groups whose representation of target species was not statistically different between BH. We called effective those groups that outperformed the target-species representation achieved by random sets of species. Effective indicator groups required the selection of less than 2% of the BH area for representing target species. Restricted-range species were the most effective indicators for the representation of all mammal diversity as well as target species. It was also the only group with high consistency.

Conclusions/significance: We show that several indicator groups could be applied as shortcuts for representing mammal species in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest to develop conservation plans, however, only restricted-range species consistently held as the most effective indicator group for such a task. This group is of particular importance in conservation planning as it captures high diversity of endemic and endangered species.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Effectiveness and consistency of each indicator group to represent mammal taxonomic groups in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest Biodiversity Hotspots.Graphs indicate how much diversity each indicator group (A–K) captured from each mammal taxonomic group in both Biodiversity Hotspots. Effectiveness and consistency were measured as the percentage of all species included in eight (Cerrado) and nine (Atlantic Forest) sites selected to protected all species of each indicator groups. Bars heights represent means of 20 reserve-selection analyses, error bars represent standard deviations. The ideal model and the  model stand for the result of sites selected based on all species pooled together and random species sets, respectively.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3102650&req=5

pone-0019746-g002: Effectiveness and consistency of each indicator group to represent mammal taxonomic groups in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest Biodiversity Hotspots.Graphs indicate how much diversity each indicator group (A–K) captured from each mammal taxonomic group in both Biodiversity Hotspots. Effectiveness and consistency were measured as the percentage of all species included in eight (Cerrado) and nine (Atlantic Forest) sites selected to protected all species of each indicator groups. Bars heights represent means of 20 reserve-selection analyses, error bars represent standard deviations. The ideal model and the model stand for the result of sites selected based on all species pooled together and random species sets, respectively.

Mentions: Some indicator groups also performed better than others in representing target species. Again, restricted-range species was the best indicator group being more effective in representing all target species than groups randomly assorted. The performance of restricted-range species, varying from 66% (±4.3% SD) to 99% (±1.0% SD) in the Cerrado, and from 64% (±3.2% SD) to 99% (±1.0% SD) in the Atlantic Forest was statistically equal to the ideal model: 69% ±8.4% SD in the Cerrado, and 65% ±2.3% SD in the Atlantic Forest (q value  = 1.89, p>0.01, Fig. 2). Random species sets captured 8–90% of target species in the Cerrado, and 35–100% in the Atlantic Forest. Contrastingly, selecting sites based on endemic species provided less species representation than selecting sites based on random species sets.


Performance and consistency of indicator groups in two biodiversity hotspots.

Trindade-Filho J, Loyola RD - PLoS ONE (2011)

Effectiveness and consistency of each indicator group to represent mammal taxonomic groups in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest Biodiversity Hotspots.Graphs indicate how much diversity each indicator group (A–K) captured from each mammal taxonomic group in both Biodiversity Hotspots. Effectiveness and consistency were measured as the percentage of all species included in eight (Cerrado) and nine (Atlantic Forest) sites selected to protected all species of each indicator groups. Bars heights represent means of 20 reserve-selection analyses, error bars represent standard deviations. The ideal model and the  model stand for the result of sites selected based on all species pooled together and random species sets, respectively.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3102650&req=5

pone-0019746-g002: Effectiveness and consistency of each indicator group to represent mammal taxonomic groups in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest Biodiversity Hotspots.Graphs indicate how much diversity each indicator group (A–K) captured from each mammal taxonomic group in both Biodiversity Hotspots. Effectiveness and consistency were measured as the percentage of all species included in eight (Cerrado) and nine (Atlantic Forest) sites selected to protected all species of each indicator groups. Bars heights represent means of 20 reserve-selection analyses, error bars represent standard deviations. The ideal model and the model stand for the result of sites selected based on all species pooled together and random species sets, respectively.
Mentions: Some indicator groups also performed better than others in representing target species. Again, restricted-range species was the best indicator group being more effective in representing all target species than groups randomly assorted. The performance of restricted-range species, varying from 66% (±4.3% SD) to 99% (±1.0% SD) in the Cerrado, and from 64% (±3.2% SD) to 99% (±1.0% SD) in the Atlantic Forest was statistically equal to the ideal model: 69% ±8.4% SD in the Cerrado, and 65% ±2.3% SD in the Atlantic Forest (q value  = 1.89, p>0.01, Fig. 2). Random species sets captured 8–90% of target species in the Cerrado, and 35–100% in the Atlantic Forest. Contrastingly, selecting sites based on endemic species provided less species representation than selecting sites based on random species sets.

Bottom Line: To test for group effectiveness we first found the best sets of sites able to maximize the representation of each indicator group in the BH and then calculated the average representation of different target species by the indicator groups in the BH.Restricted-range species were the most effective indicators for the representation of all mammal diversity as well as target species.We show that several indicator groups could be applied as shortcuts for representing mammal species in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest to develop conservation plans, however, only restricted-range species consistently held as the most effective indicator group for such a task.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

Background: In a world limited by data availability and limited funds for conservation, scientists and practitioners must use indicator groups to define spatial conservation priorities. Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of indicator groups, but still little is known about the consistency in performance of these groups in different regions, which would allow their a priori selection.

Methodology/principal findings: We systematically examined the effectiveness and the consistency of nine indicator groups in representing mammal species in two top-ranked Biodiversity Hotspots (BH): the Brazilian Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest. To test for group effectiveness we first found the best sets of sites able to maximize the representation of each indicator group in the BH and then calculated the average representation of different target species by the indicator groups in the BH. We considered consistent indicator groups whose representation of target species was not statistically different between BH. We called effective those groups that outperformed the target-species representation achieved by random sets of species. Effective indicator groups required the selection of less than 2% of the BH area for representing target species. Restricted-range species were the most effective indicators for the representation of all mammal diversity as well as target species. It was also the only group with high consistency.

Conclusions/significance: We show that several indicator groups could be applied as shortcuts for representing mammal species in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest to develop conservation plans, however, only restricted-range species consistently held as the most effective indicator group for such a task. This group is of particular importance in conservation planning as it captures high diversity of endemic and endangered species.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus