1 Chapter 1.6. Evolution While You Are Watching Chapter 1.6
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
SDG Indicator Metadata (Harmonized Metadata Template - Format Version 1.0)
Last updated: 4 January 2021 SDG indicator metadata (Harmonized metadata template - format version 1.0) 0. Indicator information 0.a. Goal Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss 0.b. Target Target 15.5: Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species 0.c. Indicator Indicator 15.5.1: Red List Index 0.d. Series 0.e. Metadata update 4 January 2021 0.f. Related indicators Disaggregations of the Red List Index are also of particular relevance as indicators towards the following SDG targets (Brooks et al. 2015): SDG 2.4 Red List Index (species used for food and medicine); SDG 2.5 Red List Index (wild relatives and local breeds); SDG 12.2 Red List Index (impacts of utilisation) (Butchart 2008); SDG 12.4 Red List Index (impacts of pollution); SDG 13.1 Red List Index (impacts of climate change); SDG 14.1 Red List Index (impacts of pollution on marine species); SDG 14.2 Red List Index (marine species); SDG 14.3 Red List Index (reef-building coral species) (Carpenter et al. 2008); SDG 14.4 Red List Index (impacts of utilisation on marine species); SDG 15.1 Red List Index (terrestrial & freshwater species); SDG 15.2 Red List Index (forest-specialist species); SDG 15.4 Red List Index (mountain species); SDG 15.7 Red List Index (impacts of utilisation) (Butchart 2008); and SDG 15.8 Red List Index (impacts of invasive alien species) (Butchart 2008, McGeoch et al. -
Improvements to the Red List Index Stuart H
Improvements to the Red List Index Stuart H. M. Butchart1*, H. Resit Akc¸akaya2, Janice Chanson3, Jonathan E. M. Baillie4, Ben Collen4, Suhel Quader5,8, Will R. Turner6, Rajan Amin4, Simon N. Stuart3, Craig Hilton-Taylor7 1 BirdLife International, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2 Applied Biomathematics, Setauket, New York, United States of America, 3 Conservation International/Center for Applied Biodiversity Science-World Conservation Union (IUCN)/Species Survival Commission Biodiversity Assessment Unit, IUCN Species Programme, Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, Washington, D. C., United States of America, 4 Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, United Kingdom, 5 Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 6 Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, Washington, D. C., United States of America, 7 World Conservation Union (IUCN) Species Programme, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 8 Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Sandy, United Kingdom The Red List Index uses information from the IUCN Red List to track trends in the projected overall extinction risk of sets of species. It has been widely recognised as an important component of the suite of indicators needed to measure progress towards the international target of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. However, further application of the RLI (to non-avian taxa in particular) has revealed some shortcomings in the original formula and approach: It performs inappropriately when a value of zero is reached; RLI values are affected by the frequency of assessments; and newly evaluated species may introduce bias. Here we propose a revision to the formula, and recommend how it should be applied in order to overcome these shortcomings. -
A Robust Goal Is Needed for Species in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 16 April 2020 Title: A robust goal is needed for species in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework Running title: A post-2020 goal for species conservation Authors: Brooke A. Williams*1,2, James E.M. Watson1,2,3, Stuart H.M. Butchart4,5, Michelle Ward1,2, Nathalie Butt2, Friederike C. Bolam6, Simon N. Stuart7, Thomas M. Brooks8,9,10, Louise Mair6, Philip J. K. McGowan6, Craig Hilton-Taylor11, David Mallon12, Ian Harrison8,13, Jeremy S. Simmonds1,2. Affiliations: 1School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia 2Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Queensland, Australia. 3Wildlife Conservation Society, Global Conservation Program, Bronx, NY 20460, USA. 4BirdLife International, The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QZ, UK 5Department of Zoology, Cambridge University, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK 6School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK 7Synchronicity Earth, 27-29 Cursitor Street, London, EC4A 1LT, UK 8IUCN, 28 rue Mauverney, CH-1196, Gland, Switzerland 9World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), University of the Philippines Los Baños, Laguna, 4031, Philippines 10Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia 11IUCN, The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QZ, UK 12Division of Biology and Conservation Ecology, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester St, Manchester, M1 5GD, U.K 13Conservation International, Arlington, VA 22202, USA Emails: Brooke A. Williams: [email protected]; James E.M. Watson: [email protected]; Stuart H.M. -
Edwards, Anthony
Anthony Edwards Personal Details Name Anthony Edwards Dates Born 1935 Place of Birth UK (London) Main work places Pavia, Cambridge Principal field of work Mathematical genetics Short biography See below Interview Recorded interview made Yes Interviewer Peter Harper Date of Interview 10/12/2004 Edited transcript available See below Personal Scientific Records Significant Record set exists Yes Records catalogued No Permanent place of archive Summary of archive Biography Anthony William Fairbank Edwards (born 1935) is a British statistician, geneticist, and evolutionary biologist. He is a Life Fellow of Gonville and Caius College and retired Professor of Biometry at the University of Cambridge, and holds both the ScD and LittD degrees. A pupil of R.A. Fisher, he has written several books and numerous scientific papers. He is best known for his pioneering work, with L.L. Cavalli-Sforza, on quantitative methods of phylogenetic analysis, and for strongly advocating Fisher's concept of likelihood as the proper basis for statistical and scientific inference. He has also written extensively on the history of genetics and statistics, including an analysis of whether Mendel's results were "too good", and also on purely mathematical subjects, such as Venn diagrams. His elder brother John H. Edwards (1928–2007) was a geneticist. He is also known for his involvement in gliding, particularly within the Cambridge University Gliding Club and for his writing on the subject in Sailplane and Gliding magazine as "the armchair pilot". INTERVIEW WITH PROFESSOR ANTHONY EDWARDS, 10th DECEMBER, 2004 AE. It’s Friday 10 December 2004 and I’m speaking to Professor Anthony Edwards at his home in Barton near Cambridge. -
Global Conservation Translocation Perspectives: 2021. Case Studies from Around the Globe
Global conservation Global conservation translocation perspectives: 2021 translocation perspectives: 2021 IUCN SSC Conservation Translocation Specialist Group Global conservation translocation perspectives: 2021 Case studies from around the globe Edited by Pritpal S. Soorae IUCN SSC Conservation Translocation Specialist Group (CTSG) i The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN or any of the funding organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN. IUCN is pleased to acknowledge the support of its Framework Partners who provide core funding: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark; Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland; Government of France and the French Development Agency (AFD); the Ministry of Environment, Republic of Korea; the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad); the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida); the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and the United States Department of State. Published by: IUCN SSC Conservation Translocation Specialist Group, Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi & Calgary Zoo, Canada. Copyright: © 2021 IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non- commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Citation: Soorae, P. S. -
A Process for Assessing and Prioritzing Species Conservaton Needs: Going Beyond the Red List
A process for assessing and prioritzing species conservaton needs: going beyond the red list KEVIN JOHNSON, ANNE BAKER, KEVIN BULEY, LUIS CARRILLO, RICHARD GIBSON, GRAEME GILLESPIE, ROBERT C. LACY and KEVIN ZIPPEL SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL 1 Assessment Questions and Answer Scores. Assessment questions are designed to serve two purposes: to identify the needed conservation actions for each species and for quantitative prioritization of species for each action. Numeric scores from questions are used to develop the overall prioritization score, with the scores for the selected responses added to give a total. A higher total score represents a species of higher priority. Questions without scores are used as triggers for conservation actions, or to provide additional information to support subsequent action-planning, but are not used in the prioritization (scoring) process. Assessors select the most appropriate response to each question for the species being assessed. Section One – Review of external data 1. Extinction risk: What is the current IUCN Red List category for the taxon? The Red List category can be modified accordingly (for the purposes of this assessment only) if new/additional information is available, or if country-level Red List assessments exist. If the assessors consider that the Red List category of threat would change if the species was re- assessed using more current data than that which was used previously, or if a more recent national Red List assessment exists, a revised estimate of the new category can be chosen, and this will be used to calculate priorities and conservation actions. If a national Red List assessment exists, the national category of threat is used rather than the global category. -
Mexico's Ten Most Iconic Endangered Species
Alejandro Olivera Center for Biological Diversity, April 2018 Executive summary exico is one of the world’s most biologically rich nations, with diverse landscapes that are home to a treasure trove of wildlife, including plant and animal species found nowhere else. Sadly, in Mexico and Maround the world, species are becoming extinct because of human activities at rates never seen before. In this report we highlight the threats facing Mexico’s 10 most iconic endangered species to help illustrate the broader risks confronting the country’s imperiled plants and animals. These 10 species — which in most cases are protected only on paper — were chosen to reflect Mexico’s diversity of wildlife and ecosystems and the wide range of threats to the country’s biodiversity. New awareness of these unique animals and plants is critical to inspiring a nationwide demand to protect these critical components of Mexico’s natural heritage. Although the Mexican government began officially listing and protecting species as extinct, threatened, endangered, and “under special protection” in 1994 — more than 20 years ago — few species have actually recovered, and many critical threats continue unabated. In many cases, officials are failing to enforce crucial laws and regulations that would protect these species. Additionally, the Mexican government has not updated its official list of imperiled species, referred to as NOM059, since 2010, despite new and growing risks from climate change, habitat destruction, the wildlife trade and in some cases direct killing. This failure obscures the true plight of the nation’s endangered wildlife. The following 10 iconic endangered species are not adequately protected by the Mexican government: 1. -
WILDLIFE in a CHANGING WORLD an Analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™
WILDLIFE IN A CHANGING WORLD An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ Edited by Jean-Christophe Vié, Craig Hilton-Taylor and Simon N. Stuart coberta.indd 1 07/07/2009 9:02:47 WILDLIFE IN A CHANGING WORLD An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ first_pages.indd I 13/07/2009 11:27:01 first_pages.indd II 13/07/2009 11:27:07 WILDLIFE IN A CHANGING WORLD An analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ Edited by Jean-Christophe Vié, Craig Hilton-Taylor and Simon N. Stuart first_pages.indd III 13/07/2009 11:27:07 The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily refl ect those of IUCN. This publication has been made possible in part by funding from the French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs. Published by: IUCN, Gland, Switzerland Red List logo: © 2008 Copyright: © 2009 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Citation: Vié, J.-C., Hilton-Taylor, C. -
Determining Species Expansion and Extinction Possibilities Using Probabilistic and Graphical Models
Ekológia (Bratislava) Vol. 34, No. 2, p. 111–120, 2015 DOI:10.1515/eko-2015-0012 DetermininG species EXpansion AND EXtinction possibilities UsinG probabilistic AND Graphical models RAJESH CHATURVEDI, P. RAMA CHANDRA PRASAD Lab for Spatial Informatics, International Institute of Information Technology, Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500032, India; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Chaturvedi R., Prasad R.Ch.: Determining species expansion and extinction possibilities using probabilistic and graphical models. Ekológia (Bratislava), Vol. 34, No. 2, p. 111–120, 2015. Survival of plant species is governed by a number of functions. The participation of each function in species survival and the impact of the contrary behaviour of the species vary from function to function. The probability of extinction of species varies in all such scenarios and has to be calculated separately. Secondly, species follow different patterns of dispersal and localisation at different stages of occupancy state of the site, therefore, the scenarios of competition for resources with climatic shifts leading to deterioration and loss of biodiversity resulting in extinction needs to be studied. Furthermore, most po- ssible deviations of species from climax community states needs to be calculated before species become extinct due to sudden environmental disruption. Globally, various types of anthropogenic disturbances threaten the diversity of biological systems. The impact of these anthropogenic activities needs to be analysed to identify extinction patterns with respect to these activities. All the analyses mentioned abo- ve have been tried to be achieved through probabilistic or graphical models in this study. Key words: biodiversity, disturbances, climate change, endangered, risks, ecological models. -
Evolution 2 Speciation
Evolution 2 Evolution Speciation • The evolution of life is directly connected to the evolution of earth. • Evidence: – Fossils –Geology – Biogeography • Similarities in rock types • Glaciation • Fossil distributions Plate tectonics Plate tectonics Alfred Wegener (1880-1930) His theory was based on several 1915 – he suggested that 300 observations: mya all of the continents 1. The fit of the continents. formed a supercontinent that 2. Similarity of rock types across he called “Pangea”. Atlantic. 3. Glacial “tracks”. 4. Fossil distributions. Plate Tectonics Plate Tectonics Continental Margins 1 Plate Tectonics Plate Continental Margins Tectonics Near perfect fit when continents are joined by continental margins. South America Africa Plate Tectonics Plate Tectonics Glacial striations reveal ancient continental connections. Matching rock assemblages across the Atlantic Ocean. Plate Tectonics Plate Tectonics Glacial striations reveal ancient continental connections. Glacial Striations 2 Plate Tectonics Plate Tectonics Glacial Striations Glacial Striations Plate Tectonics Plate tectonics New evidence supporting Overlapping Fossil Wegener: assemblages 1. Sea floor spreading 2. Magnetic sea floor patterns 3. Sea floor age patterns Plate Tectonics Plate Tectonics Evidence of sea floor spreading The planet experience periodic reversals in the poles. Rock reflect direction of magnetism when they are created. Sea floor reveals a mirror image of rock magnetism. 3 Plate Tectonics Plate Tectonics Evidence of sea floor spreading Sea floor spreading The planet experience Age of seafloor N . A periodic reversals in the increases at m Europe a e n ri poles. equal rates i ca h India relative to C Rock reflect direction of oceanic rifts. Africa magnetism when they The oldest sea are created. -
Fraser, George
George Fraser Personal Details Name George Fraser Dates 1932 Place of Birth Uzhhorod (Ukraine) Main work places London, Leiden, Adelaide, Seattle, Oxford Principal field of work Human genetics Short biography To follow Interview Recorded interview made Yes Interviewer Peter Harper Date of Interview 03/02/2005 Edited transcript available See below Personal Scientific Records Significant Record set exists Yes Records catalogued In progress Permanent place of archive Summary of archive This document is based on a conversation between George Fraser and Peter Harper on 3 February 2005 at the Galton Laboratory, London . PSH. George, can I start at the beginning and ask where were you born and brought up? GF. I was born in Užhorod— I must tell you a little story about Užhorod. An elderly gentleman died and went to heaven where he was received by Saint Peter. ‘Where were you born?’ asked Saint Peter. ‘The Austro-Hungarian Empire’ was the reply. ‘Where did you go to school?’ ‘Czechoslovakia.’ ‘Where did you get married?’ ‘Carpatho-Ruthenia. I was married on 15 March 1939 when Carpatho- Ruthenia was an independent republic for one day.’ ‘Where did you have children? ‘Hungary.’ ‘Where did your children grow up?’ ‘The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.’ ‘Where did you die?’ ‘Ukraine.’ Saint Peter reflected on this unusual set of answers. ‘Perhaps you have been sent to the wrong place because we do not have facilities for tourism up here. Why did you move around so much down there?’ ‘Move around? I was born in Užhorod and I died in Užhorod and I never once left Užhorod during my entire life’ PSH. -
Detection of Simple Polygenic Segregations in a Natural Population (Genetic Variation/Drosophila Melanogaster/Dominance Modifiers) JAMES N
Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 82, pp. 8552-8556, December 1985 Evolution Detection of simple polygenic segregations in a natural population (genetic variation/Drosophila melanogaster/dominance modifiers) JAMES N. TH6MPSON, JR.,* AND C. G. N. MASCIE-TAYLORt *Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019; and tDepartment of Physical Anthropology, Cambridge University, Cambridge CB2 3DZ England Communicated by Hampton L. Carson, August 7, 1985 ABSTRACT Penetrance frequencies were used to quantify MATERIALS AND METHODS segregating polygenic effects in a natural population of Drosophila melanogaster. When males from a series of 100 Polygenic modifiers offormation ofthe fifth-longitudinal (L5) isofemale strains were crossed to females from a veinlet line vein were scored in 100 isofemale strains collected around a (ve) single watermelon on a single day in 1973 in Oklahoma City, that had been selected for shortened veins, gaps commonly Oklahoma. The bait was exposed for less than 6 hr before appeared In the fifth longitudinal (L5) vein in the ve/+ collections were made. A localized natural D. melanogaster heterozygotes. We were able to assign each strain to one of six population is extremely difficult to identify with certainty. In significantly different clusters, based upon the pattern of sampling 100 separate genomes collected at the same time polygenic modifiers of ve dominance segregating in each strain. from the same location, however, we have done our best to We conclude that the extensive range of phenotypic variation obtain flies from the same population. in vein-forming ability is actually based upon a relatively Each female had been inseminated before collection, simple underlying polygenic structure that is consistent with though the number ofinseminations could not be determined.