EcoHealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY, USA.
Glob Chang Biol. 2014 Feb;20(2):483-94. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12366. Epub 2013 Dec 25.
Comparative extinction risk analysis is a common approach for assessing the relative plight of biodiversity and making conservation recommendations. However, the usefulness of such analyses for conservation practice has been questioned. One reason for underperformance may be that threats arising from global environmental changes (e.g., habitat loss, invasive species, climate change) are often overlooked, despite being widely regarded as proximal drivers of species' endangerment. We explore this problem by (i) reviewing the use of threats in this field and (ii) quantitatively investigating the effects of threat exclusion on the interpretation and potential application of extinction risk model results. We show that threat variables are routinely (59%) identified as significant predictors of extinction risk, yet while most studies (78%) include extrinsic factors of some kind (e.g., geographic or bioclimatic information), the majority (63%) do not include threats. Despite low overall usage, studies are increasingly employing threats to explain patterns of extinction risk. However, most continue to employ methods developed for the analysis of heritable traits (e.g., body size, fecundity), which may be poorly suited to the treatment of nonheritable predictors including threats. In our global mammal and continental amphibian extinction risk case studies, omitting threats reduced model predictive performance, but more importantly (i) reduced mechanistic information relevant to management; (ii) resulted in considerable disagreement in species classifications (12% and 5% for amphibians and mammals, respectively, translating to dozens and hundreds of species); and (iii) caused even greater disagreement (20-60%) in a downstream conservation application (species ranking). We conclude that the use of threats in comparative extinction risk analysis is important and increasing but currently in the early stages of development. Priorities for future studies include improving uptake, availability, quality and quantification of threat data, and developing analytical methods that yield more robust, relevant and tangible products for conservation applications.
比较灭绝风险分析是评估生物多样性相对困境并提出保护建议的常用方法。然而,这种分析在保护实践中的有用性受到了质疑。表现不佳的一个原因可能是,尽管人们普遍认为全球环境变化(如栖息地丧失、入侵物种、气候变化)是物种濒危的近因,但这些变化所带来的威胁往往被忽视。我们通过以下两种方法来探讨这个问题:(i)审查该领域中威胁的使用情况;(ii)定量调查排除威胁对灭绝风险模型结果的解释和潜在应用的影响。结果表明,威胁变量通常(59%)被确定为灭绝风险的显著预测因子,但大多数研究(78%)都包含某种外部因素(例如,地理或生物气候信息),而大多数研究(63%)并未包含威胁。尽管总体使用率较低,但越来越多的研究开始利用威胁来解释灭绝风险的模式。然而,大多数研究仍然采用为遗传特征分析而开发的方法(例如,体型、繁殖力),这些方法可能不太适合处理非遗传预测因子,包括威胁。在我们的全球哺乳动物和大陆两栖动物灭绝风险案例研究中,排除威胁会降低模型的预测性能,但更重要的是:(i)减少了与管理相关的机制信息;(ii)导致物种分类存在较大分歧(分别为 12%和 5%,相当于数十种和数百种物种);(iii)甚至在下游保护应用(物种排名)中造成更大分歧(20%-60%)。我们的结论是,在比较灭绝风险分析中使用威胁是重要的,而且使用的频率正在增加,但目前还处于早期发展阶段。未来研究的重点包括提高威胁数据的采用率、可用性、质量和量化程度,以及开发能够为保护应用提供更稳健、相关和切实可行的产品的分析方法。