Limits...
On the decline of biodiversity due to area loss.

Keil P, Storch D, Jetz W - Nat Commun (2015)

Bottom Line: We show that extinction estimates based on endemics-area and backward species-area relationships are complementary, and the crucial difference comprises the geometry of area loss.In inward destruction, species loss is almost proportional to area loss, although the decline in phylogenetic and functional diversity is less severe.These trends are explained by the geometry of species ranges and the shape of phylogenetic and functional trees, which may allow baseline predictions of biodiversity decline for underexplored taxa.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Yale University, 165 Prospect Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8106, USA.

ABSTRACT
Predictions of how different facets of biodiversity decline with habitat loss are broadly needed, yet challenging. Here we provide theory and a global empirical evaluation to address this challenge. We show that extinction estimates based on endemics-area and backward species-area relationships are complementary, and the crucial difference comprises the geometry of area loss. Across three taxa on four continents, the relative loss of species, and of phylogenetic and functional diversity, is highest when habitable area disappears inward from the edge of a region, lower when it disappears from the centre outwards, and lowest when area is lost at random. In inward destruction, species loss is almost proportional to area loss, although the decline in phylogenetic and functional diversity is less severe. These trends are explained by the geometry of species ranges and the shape of phylogenetic and functional trees, which may allow baseline predictions of biodiversity decline for underexplored taxa.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Loss of species richness (E) resulting from simulated area loss using empirical species distributions in nine regions and three taxa.Inward area loss (blue) always leads to higher proportional species loss than outward loss (red), and randomly scattered area loss (grey lines) consistently causes the lowest proportional loss. The curves are averages of multiple realizations of the habitat destruction in each of the nine regions and in each of the three vertebrate taxa (birds, mammals, amphibians). The maps at the top row show positions of the nine sampling regions. The shading in the maps indicates altitude.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4660053&req=5

f4: Loss of species richness (E) resulting from simulated area loss using empirical species distributions in nine regions and three taxa.Inward area loss (blue) always leads to higher proportional species loss than outward loss (red), and randomly scattered area loss (grey lines) consistently causes the lowest proportional loss. The curves are averages of multiple realizations of the habitat destruction in each of the nine regions and in each of the three vertebrate taxa (birds, mammals, amphibians). The maps at the top row show positions of the nine sampling regions. The shading in the maps indicates altitude.

Mentions: We find that for amphibians, birds and mammals in nine regions on four continents, simulated inward area loss leads to greater loss of species richness than outward area loss, and that the randomly scattered habitat loss leads to lowest loss of richness (Fig. 4). The proportion of species predicted to go extinct in a given area is generally highest for amphibians, which corresponds with this group's generally steeper SARs and EARs26. This is due to the relatively smaller ranges and higher endemicity of amphibians, which results in a predicted species loss that is almost proportional to the inward area loss. As expected, the initial loss of the PD and FD metrics PDX and FDX is always lower than the corresponding loss of species richness E (Fig. 5) for all taxa. This difference is particularly pronounced in mammals (Supplementary Fig. 3). In contrast, PD loss is relatively high in amphibians and also in birds in selected African and Asian regions (Supplementary Fig. 3).


On the decline of biodiversity due to area loss.

Keil P, Storch D, Jetz W - Nat Commun (2015)

Loss of species richness (E) resulting from simulated area loss using empirical species distributions in nine regions and three taxa.Inward area loss (blue) always leads to higher proportional species loss than outward loss (red), and randomly scattered area loss (grey lines) consistently causes the lowest proportional loss. The curves are averages of multiple realizations of the habitat destruction in each of the nine regions and in each of the three vertebrate taxa (birds, mammals, amphibians). The maps at the top row show positions of the nine sampling regions. The shading in the maps indicates altitude.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4660053&req=5

f4: Loss of species richness (E) resulting from simulated area loss using empirical species distributions in nine regions and three taxa.Inward area loss (blue) always leads to higher proportional species loss than outward loss (red), and randomly scattered area loss (grey lines) consistently causes the lowest proportional loss. The curves are averages of multiple realizations of the habitat destruction in each of the nine regions and in each of the three vertebrate taxa (birds, mammals, amphibians). The maps at the top row show positions of the nine sampling regions. The shading in the maps indicates altitude.
Mentions: We find that for amphibians, birds and mammals in nine regions on four continents, simulated inward area loss leads to greater loss of species richness than outward area loss, and that the randomly scattered habitat loss leads to lowest loss of richness (Fig. 4). The proportion of species predicted to go extinct in a given area is generally highest for amphibians, which corresponds with this group's generally steeper SARs and EARs26. This is due to the relatively smaller ranges and higher endemicity of amphibians, which results in a predicted species loss that is almost proportional to the inward area loss. As expected, the initial loss of the PD and FD metrics PDX and FDX is always lower than the corresponding loss of species richness E (Fig. 5) for all taxa. This difference is particularly pronounced in mammals (Supplementary Fig. 3). In contrast, PD loss is relatively high in amphibians and also in birds in selected African and Asian regions (Supplementary Fig. 3).

Bottom Line: We show that extinction estimates based on endemics-area and backward species-area relationships are complementary, and the crucial difference comprises the geometry of area loss.In inward destruction, species loss is almost proportional to area loss, although the decline in phylogenetic and functional diversity is less severe.These trends are explained by the geometry of species ranges and the shape of phylogenetic and functional trees, which may allow baseline predictions of biodiversity decline for underexplored taxa.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Yale University, 165 Prospect Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8106, USA.

ABSTRACT
Predictions of how different facets of biodiversity decline with habitat loss are broadly needed, yet challenging. Here we provide theory and a global empirical evaluation to address this challenge. We show that extinction estimates based on endemics-area and backward species-area relationships are complementary, and the crucial difference comprises the geometry of area loss. Across three taxa on four continents, the relative loss of species, and of phylogenetic and functional diversity, is highest when habitable area disappears inward from the edge of a region, lower when it disappears from the centre outwards, and lowest when area is lost at random. In inward destruction, species loss is almost proportional to area loss, although the decline in phylogenetic and functional diversity is less severe. These trends are explained by the geometry of species ranges and the shape of phylogenetic and functional trees, which may allow baseline predictions of biodiversity decline for underexplored taxa.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus