Comparative Zoology, Institute for Evolution and Ecology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Institute of Medical Genetics and Applied Genomics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
PLoS One. 2022 Feb 11;17(2):e0251950. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251950. eCollection 2022.
Because it is impossible to comprehensively characterize biodiversity at all levels of organization, conservation prioritization efforts need to rely on surrogates. As species distribution maps of relished groups as well as high-resolution remotely sensed data increasingly become available, both types of surrogates are commonly used. A good surrogate should represent as much of biodiversity as possible, but it often remains unclear to what extent this is the case. Here, we aimed to address this question by assessing how well bird species and habitat diversity represent one another. We conducted our study in Romania, a species-rich country with high landscape heterogeneity where bird species distribution data have only recently started to become available. First, we prioritized areas for conservation based on either 137 breeding bird species or 36 habitat classes, and then evaluated their reciprocal surrogacy performance. Second, we examined how well these features are represented in already existing protected areas. Finally, we identified target regions of high conservation value for the potential expansion of the current network of reserves (as planned under the new EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030). We found a limited reciprocal surrogacy performance, with bird species performing slightly better as a conservation surrogate for habitat diversity than vice versa. We could also show that areas with a high conservation value based on habitat diversity were represented better in already existing protected areas than areas based on bird species, which varied considerably between species. Our results highlight that taxonomic and environmental (i.e., habitat types) data may perform rather poorly as reciprocal surrogates, and multiple sources of data are required for a full evaluation of protected areas expansion.
由于不可能全面描述各级组织的生物多样性,保护优先级的确定工作需要依赖替代指标。随着珍稀物种分布地图和高分辨率遥感数据的日益普及,这两种替代指标都得到了广泛应用。一个好的替代指标应该尽可能多地代表生物多样性,但在多大程度上能做到这一点,目前仍不清楚。在这里,我们旨在通过评估鸟类物种和生境多样性之间的相互关系来解决这个问题。我们在罗马尼亚开展了这项研究,罗马尼亚是一个物种丰富、景观异质性高的国家,鸟类物种分布数据最近才开始可用。首先,我们根据 137 种繁殖鸟类或 36 种生境类型,为保护工作确定了优先区域,然后评估了它们相互替代的效果。其次,我们研究了这些特征在已有的保护区中是如何体现的。最后,我们确定了具有高保护价值的目标区域,以扩大现有保护区网络(根据新的欧盟 2030 年生物多样性战略规划)。我们发现,替代效果有限,鸟类物种作为生境多样性的保护替代指标的效果略好于生境多样性作为鸟类物种的替代指标。我们还表明,基于生境多样性的高保护价值区域在现有的保护区中得到了更好的体现,而基于鸟类物种的区域则不然,不同物种之间存在很大差异。我们的研究结果强调,分类学和环境(即生境类型)数据作为相互替代指标的效果可能较差,需要多种数据源才能全面评估保护区的扩张。