Driscoll Don A, Banks Sam C, Barton Philip S, Ikin Karen, Lentini Pia, Lindenmayer David B, Smith Annabel L, Berry Laurence E, Burns Emma L, Edworthy Amanda, Evans Maldwyn J, Gibson Rebecca, Heinsohn Rob, Howland Brett, Kay Geoff, Munro Nicola, Scheele Ben C, Stirnemann Ingrid, Stojanovic Dejan, Sweaney Nici, Villaseñor Nélida R, Westgate Martin J
ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia; School of Botany, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 17;9(4):e95053. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095053. eCollection 2014.
Dispersal knowledge is essential for conservation management, and demand is growing. But are we accumulating dispersal knowledge at a pace that can meet the demand? To answer this question we tested for changes in dispersal data collection and use over time. Our systematic review of 655 conservation-related publications compared five topics: climate change, habitat restoration, population viability analysis, land planning (systematic conservation planning) and invasive species. We analysed temporal changes in the: (i) questions asked by dispersal-related research; (ii) methods used to study dispersal; (iii) the quality of dispersal data; (iv) extent that dispersal knowledge is lacking, and; (v) likely consequences of limited dispersal knowledge. Research questions have changed little over time; the same problems examined in the 1990s are still being addressed. The most common methods used to study dispersal were occupancy data, expert opinion and modelling, which often provided indirect, low quality information about dispersal. Although use of genetics for estimating dispersal has increased, new ecological and genetic methods for measuring dispersal are not yet widely adopted. Almost half of the papers identified knowledge gaps related to dispersal. Limited dispersal knowledge often made it impossible to discover ecological processes or compromised conservation outcomes. The quality of dispersal data used in climate change research has increased since the 1990s. In comparison, restoration ecology inadequately addresses large-scale process, whilst the gap between knowledge accumulation and growth in applications may be increasing in land planning. To overcome apparent stagnation in collection and use of dispersal knowledge, researchers need to: (i) improve the quality of available data using new approaches; (ii) understand the complementarities of different methods and; (iii) define the value of different kinds of dispersal information for supporting management decisions. Ambitious, multi-disciplinary research programs studying many species are critical for advancing dispersal research.
扩散知识对于保护管理至关重要，且需求不断增长。但我们积累扩散知识的速度能否满足需求呢？为回答这个问题，我们测试了扩散数据收集和使用随时间的变化情况。我们对655篇与保护相关的出版物进行了系统综述，比较了五个主题：气候变化、栖息地恢复、种群生存力分析、土地规划（系统保护规划）和入侵物种。我们分析了以下方面的时间变化：（i）与扩散相关研究提出的问题；（ii）用于研究扩散的方法；（iii）扩散数据的质量；（iv）扩散知识的欠缺程度；以及（v）扩散知识有限可能产生的后果。随着时间推移，研究问题变化不大；20世纪90年代研究的相同问题仍在探讨。用于研究扩散的最常见方法是占有率数据、专家意见和建模，这些方法通常提供关于扩散的间接、低质量信息。尽管利用遗传学估计扩散的情况有所增加，但用于测量扩散的新生态和遗传方法尚未得到广泛采用。几乎一半的论文指出了与扩散相关的知识空白。有限的扩散知识常常使得无法发现生态过程或损害保护成果。自20世纪90年代以来，气候变化研究中使用的扩散数据质量有所提高。相比之下，恢复生态学对大规模过程的处理不足，而在土地规划中，知识积累与应用增长之间的差距可能正在扩大。为克服扩散知识收集和使用方面明显的停滞状况，研究人员需要：（i）采用新方法提高现有数据的质量；（ii）了解不同方法的互补性；以及（iii）确定不同类型扩散信息对支持管理决策的价值。开展研究众多物种的雄心勃勃的多学科研究项目对于推进扩散研究至关重要。
