Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, U.S.A..
Conserv Biol. 2013 Dec;27(6):1265-78. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12130. Epub 2013 Aug 23.
Use of population viability analyses (PVAs) in endangered species recovery planning has been met with both support and criticism. Previous reviews promote use of PVA for setting scientifically based, measurable, and objective recovery criteria and recommend improvements to increase the framework's utility. However, others have questioned the value of PVA models for setting recovery criteria and assert that PVAs are more appropriate for understanding relative trade-offs between alternative management actions. We reviewed 258 final recovery plans for 642 plants listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act to determine the number of plans that used or recommended PVA in recovery planning. We also reviewed 223 publications that describe plant PVAs to assess how these models were designed and whether those designs reflected previous recommendations for improvement of PVAs. Twenty-four percent of listed species had recovery plans that used or recommended PVA. In publications, the typical model was a matrix population model parameterized with ≤5 years of demographic data that did not consider stochasticity, genetics, density dependence, seed banks, vegetative reproduction, dormancy, threats, or management strategies. Population growth rates for different populations of the same species or for the same population at different points in time were often statistically different or varied by >10%. Therefore, PVAs parameterized with underlying vital rates that vary to this degree may not accurately predict recovery objectives across a species' entire distribution or over longer time scales. We assert that PVA, although an important tool as part of an adaptive-management program, can help to determine quantitative recovery criteria only if more long-term data sets that capture spatiotemporal variability in vital rates become available. Lacking this, there is a strong need for viable and comprehensive methods for determining quantitative, science-based recovery criteria for endangered species with minimal data availability. Uso Actual y Potencial del Análisis de Viabilidad Poblacional para la Recuperación de Especies de Plantas Enlistadas en el Acta de Especies En Peligro de E.U.A.
使用种群生存力分析（PVA）来制定濒危物种恢复计划，既得到了支持，也受到了批评。之前的综述报告提倡将 PVA 用于制定基于科学、可衡量和客观的恢复标准，并建议改进该框架以提高其实用性。然而，也有人质疑 PVA 模型在制定恢复标准方面的价值，并认为 PVA 更适用于理解替代管理措施之间的相对权衡。我们回顾了美国濒危物种法案列出的 642 种植物中的 258 个最终恢复计划，以确定在恢复计划中使用或推荐 PVA 的计划数量。我们还回顾了 223 篇描述植物 PVA 的出版物，以评估这些模型是如何设计的，以及这些设计是否反映了改进 PVA 的先前建议。列出的物种中有 24%的物种的恢复计划使用或推荐了 PVA。在出版物中，典型的模型是一个矩阵种群模型，参数化使用的是≤5 年的人口统计数据，没有考虑随机性、遗传学、密度依赖性、种子库、营养繁殖、休眠、威胁或管理策略。同一物种的不同种群或同一种群在不同时间的种群增长率往往存在统计学差异或差异超过 10%。因此，用变化程度如此之大的基本生命率参数化的 PVA 可能无法准确预测物种整个分布或更长时间范围内的恢复目标。我们断言，PVA 虽然是适应性管理计划的一个重要工具，但只有在获得更多能够捕捉到重要率时空变异性的长期数据集的情况下，才能帮助确定定量的恢复标准。在缺乏这种数据集的情况下，对于那些数据可用性最小的濒危物种，需要有可行和全面的方法来确定基于科学的定量恢复标准。
