DOCSLIB.ORG

Wkdivextinct Report 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wkdivextinct Report 2018 ICES WKDIVEXTINCT REPORT 2018 ICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ICES CM 2018/ACOM:48 REF. ACOM Report of the Workshop on extinction risk of MSFD biodiversity approach (WKDIVExtinct) 12–15 June 2018 ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer H. C. Andersens Boulevard 44–46 DK-1553 Copenhagen V Denmark Telephone (+45) 33 38 67 00 Telefax (+45) 33 93 42 15 www.ices.dk [email protected] Recommended format for purposes of citation: ICES. 2018. Report of the Workshop on extinction risk of MSFD biodiversity ap- proach (WKDIVExtinct), 12–15 June 2018, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2018/ACOM:48. 43 pp. The material in this report may be reused using the recommended citation. ICES may only grant usage rights of information, data, images, graphs, etc. of which it has own- ership. For other third-party material cited in this report, you must contact the original copyright holder for permission. For citation of datasets or use of data to be included in other databases, please refer to the latest ICES data policy on the ICES website. All extracts must be acknowledged. For other reproduction requests please contact the General Secretary. The document is a report of an Expert Group under the auspices of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the views of the Council. © 2018 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ICES WKDIVExtinct REPORT 2018 | i Contents Executive summary 1 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Findings from the workshop WKDIVAgg ........................................................ 3 1.3 Critical evaluation of proposals by WKDIVAGG ............................................ 8 2 Definitions of extinction risk .................................................................................... 10 2.1 IUCN red list ....................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Local v. global ..................................................................................................... 13 2.2.1 Global – regional – national scale ........................................................ 13 2.2.2 How to deal with shifting baselines? .................................................. 14 2.2.3 Species vs. populations/stocks ............................................................. 15 2.2.4 Natural and anthropogenic processes ................................................ 15 2.2.5 Consideration of variable life-history strategies ................................ 17 2.2.6 Caveats .................................................................................................... 18 2.3 Threatened species management, an example from Norway ...................... 19 3 Methods to identify risks ........................................................................................... 19 3.1 Le Mans modelling ............................................................................................. 19 3.2 Geometric mean abundance and living planet index .................................... 22 4 Inadequacy of monitoring data, especially in the Black Sea ............................... 25 5 Integrating red list species in aggregated GES indicators ................................... 26 6 Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................ 27 6.1 WKDIVAGG outcomes on aggregation, implications on extinction risk ........................................................................................................................ 27 6.2 Detailing extinction risk ..................................................................................... 27 6.3 Including extinction risk in GES and aggregation ......................................... 28 6.4 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 28 7 References ..................................................................................................................... 29 Annex 3: WKDIVExtinct ToRs ........................................................................................... 31 Annex 2: List of participants ............................................................................................... 33 Annex 3: Agenda ................................................................................................................... 34 Annex 4 IUCN summary of criteria sheet ........................................................................ 35 Annex5 WKDIVExtinct Report Reviews ......................................................................... 36 ICES WKDIVExtinct REPORT 2018 | 1 Executive summary The Workshop on extinction risk of MSFD biodiversity approach (WKDIVEXTINCT) was set up to: a ) consider if the methods recommended by WKDIVAGG on integration of the status of each species, followed by integration of species to provide status of species group, could lead to the failure to alert of a potential extinction risk to a species. b ) if required, suggest adaptions or additional rules to alert the risk of extinc- tion of a species within a species group. The workshop brought together 11 experts from 8 countries, chaired by Dave Reid, Ireland, and held at ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark, 12–15 June 2018. The workshop examined both the preceding workshop WKDIVAGG and a number of issues surrounding the definition and determination of extinction, as well as the dif- ferences between “extinction” and “extirpation”, and global v. local extinction. The broad conclusion was that none of the proposed approaches to aggregation of yes/no GES assessments were fully satisfactory, as they would all tend to produce a large number of false alarms in terms of GES. In addition, it was concluded that the risk of extinctions could be considered as largely independent of the method of aggre- gation. The recommended solution to this was to develop a “red list” approach, broadly based on that of the IUCN red list. The IUCN red list provides criteria for es- tablishing an increasing level of threat to any species, and can also be applied in a local context as well as global. Advice on both is provided by the IUCN. Local “red lists” have also been compiled at European, RFMO, and EU MS levels. It was recognized that many of these species would not normally be included in routine monitoring and re- porting due to lack of data. The workshop proposed that species under the highest level of threat “critically en- dangered”, should always be included in any aggregation to the species group level or higher. A species shown to have moved from a lesser category of threat to a higher one should also be included in the periodical GES assessment. Two approaches for includ- ing these species were proposed. Any species identified as above should be considered as being below GES. It could then be included in any chosen aggregation process based on WKDIVAGG etc., as for any other species. However, it would be “flagged” that this was the case, and that remedial action, or other management decisions could lead to a changed status. Alternatively, the aggregated GES for a species group could be deter- mined, and “red flags” attached to highlight the status of one or more threatened spe- cies. In either case management action would be required. Essentially this approach represents a “safety net” to avoid extinction risks under any aggregation approach. The workshop also noted that the data needs for much of this approach were quite demanding, and that in many cases there would be insufficient data to make a full determination. In particular cases e.g. the Black Sea, data availability is quite minimal and this would be an issue for determining both extinction risk, and for GES by species in general. 2 | ICES WKDIVExtinct REPORT 2018 1 Introduction 1.1 Background The main background to the meeting was the findings from WKDIVAGG 1–4 May 2018. The outcome of this workshop is summarised in chapter 1.2. and represents the conclusions of that group, and not any evaluation of that report by WKDIVEXTINCT. Based on WKDIVAGG, WKDEVEXTINCT was asked to identify if there would be a “failure to alert of a potential extinction risk to a species” from applying the aggrega- tion approaches proposed. WKDIVEXTINCT was also asked to “suggest adaptions or additional rules” if required. The Terms of Reference of the workshop, list of participants and agenda can be found in annexes 1,2 and 3. ICES WKDIVExtinct REPORT 2018 | 3 1.2 Findings from the workshop WKDIVAgg In May 2018, the workshop WKDIVAGG met to consider the aggregation and integra- tion approaches for the assessment of GES for species biodiversity under the MSFD. This can be summarised as in Figure 1.2.1. Figure 1.2.1. Integration approach of species biodiversity indicators under the revised MSFD com- mission decision 2017. The WKDIVAGG workshop provided guidance on an appropriate method(s): a) to integrate across criteria for each species of bird, fish and cephalopod (ex- cepting commercial species and species on Habitats Directive annexes); b) to aggregate species within species groups for an overall assessment of status per species group for MSFD Descriptor 1; c) to aggregate from species group
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Megafauna Extinction, Tree Species Range Reduction, and Carbon Storage in Amazonian Forests
    Ecography 39: 194–203, 2016 doi: 10.1111/ecog.01587 © 2015 The Authors. Ecography © 2015 Nordic Society Oikos Subject Editor: Yadvinder Mahli. Editor-in-Chief: Nathan J. Sanders. Accepted 27 September 2015 Megafauna extinction, tree species range reduction, and carbon storage in Amazonian forests Christopher E. Doughty, Adam Wolf, Naia Morueta-Holme, Peter M. Jørgensen, Brody Sandel, Cyrille Violle, Brad Boyle, Nathan J. B. Kraft, Robert K. Peet, Brian J. Enquist, Jens-Christian Svenning, Stephen Blake and Mauro Galetti C. E. Doughty ([email protected]), Environmental Change Inst., School of Geography and the Environment, Univ. of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QY, UK. – A. Wolf, Dept of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton Univ., Princeton, NJ 08544, USA. – N. Morueta-Holme, Dept of Integrative Biology, Univ. of California – Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. – B. Sandel, J.-C. Svenning and NM-H, Section for Ecoinformatics and Biodiversity, Dept of Bioscience, Aarhus Univ., Ny Munkegade 114, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. – P. M. Jørgensen, Missouri Botanical Garden, PO Box 299, St Louis, MO 63166-0299, USA. – C. Violle, CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS – Univ. de Montpellier – Univ. Paul-Valéry Montpellier – EPHE – 1919 route de Mende, FR-34293 Montpellier Cedex 5, France. – B. Boyle and B. J. Enquist, Dept of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA. – N. J. B. Kraft, Dept of Biology, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA. BJE also at: The Santa Fe inst., 1399 Hyde Park Road, Santa Fe, NM 87501, USA. – R. K. Peet, Dept of Biology, Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3280, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Consequences of Bird Declines
    Ecosystem consequences of bird declines C¸ag˘ an H. S¸ekerciog˘ lu*, Gretchen C. Daily, and Paul R. Ehrlich Center for Conservation Biology, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, 371 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305-5020 Contributed by Paul R. Ehrlich, October 28, 2004 We present a general framework for characterizing the ecological historically extinct (129) bird species of the world from 248 and societal consequences of biodiversity loss and applying it to sources into a database with Ͼ600,000 entries. Our scenarios the global avifauna. To investigate the potential ecological conse- (Fig. 3, which is published as supporting information on the quences of avian declines, we developed comprehensive databases PNAS web site) are based on the extinction probabilities for of the status and functional roles of birds and a stochastic model threatened species used by International Union for Conserva- for forecasting change. Overall, 21% of bird species are currently tion of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). These probabil- extinction-prone and 6.5% are functionally extinct, contributing ities are as follows: 50% chance of extinction in the next 10 years negligibly to ecosystem processes. We show that a quarter or more for critically endangered species, 20% chance of extinction in the of frugivorous and omnivorous species and one-third or more of next 20 years for endangered species, and 10% chance of herbivorous, piscivorous, and scavenger species are extinction- extinction in the next 100 years for vulnerable species. We report prone. Furthermore, our projections indicate that by 2100, 6–14% the averages of 10,000 simulations run for each decade from 2010 of all bird species will be extinct, and 7–25% (28–56% on oceanic to 2100.
    [Show full text]
  • The Extinction and De-Extinction of Species
    Linfield University DigitalCommons@Linfield Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship & Creative Works 2017 The Extinction and De-Extinction of Species Helena Siipi University of Turku Leonard Finkelman Linfield College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.linfield.edu/philfac_pubs Part of the Biology Commons, and the Philosophy of Science Commons DigitalCommons@Linfield Citation Siipi, Helena and Finkelman, Leonard, "The Extinction and De-Extinction of Species" (2017). Faculty Publications. Accepted Version. Submission 3. https://digitalcommons.linfield.edu/philfac_pubs/3 This Accepted Version is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It is brought to you for free via open access, courtesy of DigitalCommons@Linfield, with permission from the rights-holder(s). Your use of this Accepted Version must comply with the Terms of Use for material posted in DigitalCommons@Linfield, or with other stated terms (such as a Creative Commons license) indicated in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, or if you have questions about permitted uses, please contact [email protected]. The extinction and de-extinction of species I. Introduction WhendeathcameforCelia,ittooktheformoftree.Heedlessofthedangerposed bybranchesoverladenwithsnow,CeliawanderedthroughthelandscapeofSpain’s OrdesanationalparkinJanuary2000.branchfellonherskullandcrushedit.So deathcameandtookher,leavingbodytobefoundbyparkrangersandlegacyto bemournedbyconservationistsaroundtheworld. Theconservationistsmournednotonlythedeathoftheorganism,butalsoan
    [Show full text]
  • Memoria 2013
    Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 1 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 Portada: Experimentación con picudo rojo (Rhinchophorus ferrugineus), especie invasora, actualmente en expasión en España, que ha supuesto una plaga, principalmente para la palmera canaria. 2 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 ESTACIÓN BIOLÓGICA DE DOÑANA CONSEJO SUPERIOR DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTÍFICAS MEMORIA 2013 COORDINACIÓN Guyonne Janss Rocío Astasio Rosa Rodríguez RECOPILACIÓN INFORMACIÓN Begoña Arrizabalaga José Carlos Soler Olga Guerrero Carmen Mª Velasco Tomás Perera Antonio Páez María Antonia Orduña Ana Ruíz Sonia Velasco Angelines Soto María Cabot Sofía Conradi FOTOGRAFÍAS Héctor Garrido DISEÑO Y MAQUETACIÓN Héctor Garrido Sevilla, Noviembre de 2014 Estación Biológica de Doñana/CSIC C/ Américo Vespucio, s/n 41092 SEVILLA www.ebd.csic.es 3 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 4 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 5 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 6 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 Contenidos Presentación 9 Introducción 10 Misión 10 Sedes 10 Organización y Estructura 12 Departamentos y grupos de investigación 12 Organigrama de la Estación Biológica de Doñana 13 Líneas de Investigación 14 Servicios científicos 18 Actividades 2013 31 Actividad Investigadora de la EBD 32 Recursos económicos y humanos 38 Otras actividades a destacar 42 Proyectos de Investigación 45 Publicaciones 103 Congresos 120 Tesis doctorales y maestrias 121 Cursos 124 Premios y distinciones 125 Recursos humanos 127 7 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 8 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 Presentación 9 Estación Biológica de Doñana - Memoria 2013 Sedes La Estación Biológica de Doñana consta de un centro de investigación con sede en Sevilla, dos estaciones de campo (El Palacio y Huer- ta Tejada) junto a las Reservas Biológicas de Doñana en Almonte (Huelva) y del Guadiamar en Aznalcazar (Sevilla) y de una Estación de Campo en Roblehondo, en el Parque Natural de las Sierras de Cazorla, Segura y Las Villas (Jaén).
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Ecological Function in the Context of Species Recovery H
    Assessing ecological function in the context of species recovery H. Resit Akçakaya, Ana S.L. Rodrigues, David Keith, E.J. Milner-gulland, Eric Sanderson, Simon Hedges, David Mallon, Molly Grace, Barney Long, Erik Meijaard, et al. To cite this version: H. Resit Akçakaya, Ana S.L. Rodrigues, David Keith, E.J. Milner-gulland, Eric Sanderson, et al.. Assessing ecological function in the context of species recovery. Conservation Biology, Wiley, 2020, 10.1111/cobi.13425. hal-02383294 HAL Id: hal-02383294 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02383294 Submitted on 18 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Article type: Essay Assessing Ecological Function in the Context of Species Recovery H. Resit Akçakaya1,2, Ana S.L. Rodrigues3, David A. Keith2,4,5, E.J. Milner-Gulland6, Eric W. Sanderson7, Simon Hedges8,9, David P. Mallon10,11, Molly K. Grace12, Barney Long13, Erik Meijaard14,15, P.J. Stephenson16,17 1 Dept. of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA. email: [email protected] 2 IUCN Species Survival Commission 3 Centre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS – Univ.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Look at the Ethical Debate of De- Extinction Stanford-Brown Igem 2013 Alissa Greenberg
    1 A Brief Look at the Ethical Debate of De- Extinction Stanford-Brown iGEM 2013 Alissa Greenberg “If extinction is not forever, a lot changes.” -Dr. Stanley Temple, TEDx March 2013 Introduction This year, the 2013 Stanford-Brown iGEM team stepped into uncharted territory. When we brainstormed projects back in April, a combined interest in ancient organisms generated questions on the origins of life and the nature of evolution itself. One screening of Steven Spielberg’s Jurassic Park (1993) later and we developed iGEM’s very first de-extinction project. Hollywood has taken advantage of exploiting scientific disasters. The following paper is meant to strip away the entertaining fiction and facilitate a discussion about the real consequences of de-extinction in the context of our project, both positive and negative. We were still reviewing the task’s objectives when we attended the San Mateo Maker’s Faire in May. All four of our projects were met with enthusiasm. Amidst the excitement, however, were inquiries we had already begun to consider but had not completely explored. Many of the attendees expressed concern over the ethical issues of our de-extinction ideas. Some thought de-extinction had a lot of potential but most appeared weary of our desire to revive what is already “dead and buried.”1 Who are we to manipulate life so vigorously? With the benefit of education and discussion, we feel that the popular fear of de-extinction we encountered is more out of misinformation. The last thing we want to be guilty of is conducting a project without considering multiple perspectives, including the long-term consequences.
    [Show full text]
  • Relation of Minimum Viable Population Size to Biology, Time Frame, and Objective
    Comment Relation of Minimum Viable Population Size to Biology, Time Frame, and Objective J. MICHAEL REED∗ § AND EARL D. MCCOY† ∗Department of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, MA, 02155, U.S.A. †Department of Integrative Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, 33620, U.S.A. Shoemaker et al.’s (2013) estimate of the minimum vi- probability of extinction escalates dramatically over 40 able population size (MVPS) of the bog turtle (Glyptemys generations (Fig. 1). Given the long generation length, muhlenbergii) is 3 orders of magnitude below popu- 20–30 years, of the bog turtle, Shoemaker et al.’s result lation sizes typically viewed as minimally viable (Reed is, therefore, not surprising; but, it is inconsistent with et al. 2003; Trail et al. 2007). Even Flather et al. (2011), typical conception of MVPS, which assumes a population who question the utility of MVPS for conservation plan- will be self-sustaining. Similarly, Brook et al. (1999) con- ning, concede that long-term persistent populations will cluded a high probability of persistence for 50 years for require thousands of individuals. Rather than conclude a population of 18 Whooping Cranes (Grus americana). their result is incorrect, Shoemaker at al. suggest that Because Whooping Cranes can live for 35 years, it is MVPS has been overestimated for long-lived species. Al- unlikely that any pair of birds that can reproduce would though we agree in principle that small populations, es- fail to produce a lineage that persisted 50 years; but, 18 pecially of long-lived species, have conservation value, individuals do not necessarily constitute a viable popu- we do not agree that Shoemaker et al.’s result provides lation.
    [Show full text]
  • Rescuing Ecosystems from Extinction Cascades Through Compensatory Perturbations
    ARTICLE Received 8 Nov 2010 | Accepted 15 Dec 2010 | Published 25 Jan 2011 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1163 Rescuing ecosystems from extinction cascades through compensatory perturbations Sagar Sahasrabudhe1 & Adilson E. Motter1,2 Food-web perturbations stemming from climate change, overexploitation, invasive species and habitat degradation often cause an initial loss of species that results in a cascade of secondary extinctions, posing considerable challenges to ecosystem conservation efforts. Here, we devise a systematic network-based approach to reduce the number of secondary extinctions using a predictive modelling framework. We show that the extinction of one species can often be compensated by the concurrent removal or population suppression of other specific species, a counterintuitive effect not previously tested in complex food webs. These compensatory perturbations frequently involve long-range interactions that are not evident from local predator–prey relationships. In numerous cases, even the early removal of a species that would eventually go extinct is found to significantly reduce the number of cascading extinctions. These compensatory perturbations only exploit resources available in the system, and illustrate the potential of human intervention combined with predictive modelling for ecosystem management. 1 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Northwestern University, 2145 Sheridan Road, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA. 2 Northwestern Institute on Complex Systems, Northwestern University, 600 Foster Street, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.E.M. (email: [email protected]). NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 2:170 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1163 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved. ARTICLE NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1163 alting the loss of biodiversity caused by human and natural Results forces1–4 has become one of the grand challenges of this Rescue mechanism.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Consequences of Human Niche Construction: Examining Long-Term Anthropogenic Shaping of Global Species Distributions Nicole L
    SPECIAL FEATURE: SPECIAL FEATURE: PERSPECTIVE PERSPECTIVE Ecological consequences of human niche construction: Examining long-term anthropogenic shaping of global species distributions Nicole L. Boivina,b,1, Melinda A. Zederc,d, Dorian Q. Fuller (傅稻镰)e, Alison Crowtherf, Greger Larsong, Jon M. Erlandsonh, Tim Denhami, and Michael D. Petragliaa Edited by Richard G. Klein, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved March 18, 2016 (received for review December 22, 2015) The exhibition of increasingly intensive and complex niche construction behaviors through time is a key feature of human evolution, culminating in the advanced capacity for ecosystem engineering exhibited by Homo sapiens. A crucial outcome of such behaviors has been the dramatic reshaping of the global bio- sphere, a transformation whose early origins are increasingly apparent from cumulative archaeological and paleoecological datasets. Such data suggest that, by the Late Pleistocene, humans had begun to engage in activities that have led to alterations in the distributions of a vast array of species across most, if not all, taxonomic groups. Changes to biodiversity have included extinctions, extirpations, and shifts in species composition, diversity, and community structure. We outline key examples of these changes, highlighting findings from the study of new datasets, like ancient DNA (aDNA), stable isotopes, and microfossils, as well as the application of new statistical and computational methods to datasets that have accumulated significantly in recent decades. We focus on four major phases that witnessed broad anthropogenic alterations to biodiversity—the Late Pleistocene global human expansion, the Neolithic spread of agricul- ture, the era of island colonization, and the emergence of early urbanized societies and commercial net- works.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant-Pollinator Coextinctions and the Loss of Plant Functional and Phylogenetic Diversity
    Plant-Pollinator Coextinctions and the Loss of Plant Functional and Phylogenetic Diversity Marcos Costa Vieira1*, Marcus Vinicius Cianciaruso2, Mário Almeida-Neto2 1 Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Evolução, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil, 2 Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil Abstract Plant-pollinator coextinctions are likely to become more frequent as habitat alteration and climate change continue to threaten pollinators. The consequences of the resulting collapse of plant communities will depend partly on how quickly plant functional and phylogenetic diversity decline following pollinator extinctions. We investigated the functional and phylogenetic consequences of pollinator extinctions by simulating coextinctions in seven plant- pollinator networks coupled with independent data on plant phylogeny and functional traits. Declines in plant functional diversity were slower than expected under a scenario of random extinctions, while phylogenetic diversity often decreased faster than expected by chance. Our results show that plant functional diversity was relatively robust to plant-pollinator coextinctions, despite the underlying rapid loss of evolutionary history. Thus, our study suggests the possibility of uncoupled responses of functional and phylogenetic diversity to species coextinctions, highlighting the importance of considering both dimensions of biodiversity explicitly in ecological studies and when planning for the conservation of species and interactions. Citation: Vieira MC, Cianciaruso MV, Almeida-Neto M (2013) Plant-Pollinator Coextinctions and the Loss of Plant Functional and Phylogenetic Diversity. PLoS ONE 8(11): e81242. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081242 Editor: Nina Farwig, University of Marburg, Germany Received July 2, 2013; Accepted October 10, 2013; Published November 29, 2013 Copyright: © 2013 Vieira et al.
    [Show full text]
  • A General Framework for Setting Quantitative Population Objectives for Wildlife Conservation Kristen E
    MARCH 2017 RESEARCH A General Framework for Setting Quantitative Population Objectives for Wildlife Conservation Kristen E. Dybala*,1, Neil Clipperton2, Thomas Gardali1, Gregory H. Golet3, Rodd Kelsey4, Stefan Lorenzato5, Ron Melcer, Jr.5,6, Nathaniel E. Seavy1, Joseph G. Silveira7, and Gregory S. Yarris8 feasible objectives. Conservation practitioners require Volume 15, Issue 1 | Article 8 https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2017v15iss1art8 an alternative, science-based method for setting long- term quantitative population objectives. We reviewed * Corresponding author: [email protected] conservation biology literature to develop a general 1 Point Blue Conservation Science conceptual framework that represents conservation Petaluma, CA 94954 USA biology principles and identifies key milestones a 2 California Department of Fish and Wildlife Sacramento, CA 95811 USA population would be expected to pass in the process 3 The Nature Conservancy of becoming a recovered or robust population. Chico, CA 95926 USA We then synthesized recent research to propose 4 The Nature Conservancy general hypotheses for the orders of magnitude at Sacramento, CA 95814 USA which most populations would be expected to reach 5 California Department of Water Resources each milestone. The framework is structured as a Sacramento, CA 95814 USA hierarchy of four population sizes, ranging from very 6 Geography Graduate Group, University of California small populations at increased risk of inbreeding Davis, CA 95616 USA depression and extirpation (< 1,000 adults) to large 7 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge Complex populations with minimized risk of extirpation Willows, CA 95988 USA (> 50,000 adults), along with additional modifiers 8 Central Valley Joint Venture, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Inferring Functional Extinction Based on Sighting Records Ivan Jarić1,2*, Jörn Gessner1 and Andrew R. Solow3 1 Leibniz-Institu
    Inferring functional extinction based on sighting records Ivan Jarić1,2*, Jörn Gessner1 and Andrew R. Solow3 1 Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Müggelseedamm 310, 12587 Berlin, Germany 2 Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, University of Belgrade, Kneza Viseslava 1, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia 3 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed: Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Müggelseedamm 310, 12587 Berlin, Germany; E-mail: jaric@igb- berlin.de; phone: +49 (0)30 64181 766, fax.: +49 (0)30 64181 626 1 ABSTRACT The term functional extinction is used to describe a permanent failure of reproduction or recruitment in a population. Functional extinction results in a truncation of the age distribution, but this can be very difficult to detect in poorly studied populations. Here, we describe a novel statistical method for detecting functional extinction based on a sighting record of individuals of known or estimated ages. The method is based on a simple population dynamics model and simulation results show that it works well even with limited data. The method is illustrated using a sighting record of the ship sturgeon (Acipenser nudiventris) in the Danube River. The results indicate that this population is functionally extinct, most likely by 2002. Management implications of this finding are discussed. Keywords: Acipenser nudiventris, extinction risk, recruitment failure, reproductive failure, sighting record 2 1. INTRODUCTION For many species, negative population trends pass largely undetected across the critical point beyond which management and conservation measures become ineffective, while the likelihood of extinction approaches certainty. As a result, timely and reliable detection of critical population status is of paramount importance to allow effective countermeasures to be taken in due time.
    [Show full text]