Peggy A. Bevan, Guilherme Braga Ferreira, Daniel J. Ingram, Marcus Rowcliffe, Lucy Young, Robin Freeman, Kate E. Jones
{"title":"Regional Biomes outperform broader spatial units in capturing biodiversity responses to land-use change","authors":"Peggy A. Bevan, Guilherme Braga Ferreira, Daniel J. Ingram, Marcus Rowcliffe, Lucy Young, Robin Freeman, Kate E. Jones","doi":"10.1111/ecog.07318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Biogeographic context, such as biome type, has a critical influence on ecological resilience, as climatic and environmental conditions impact how communities respond to anthropogenic threats. For example, land-use change causes a greater loss of biodiversity in tropical biomes compared to temperate biomes. Furthermore, the nature of threats impacting ecosystems varies geographically. Therefore, monitoring the state of biodiversity at a high spatial resolution is crucial to capture variation in threat–responses caused by biogeographical context. However such fine-scale ecological data collection could be prohibitively resource intensive. In this study, we aim to find the spatial scale that could best capture variation in community-level threat responses whilst keeping data collection requirements feasible. Using a database of biodiversity records with extensive global coverage, we modelled species richness and total abundance (the responses) across land-use types (reflecting threats), considering three different spatial scales: biomes, biogeographical realms, and regional biomes (the interaction between realm and biome). We then modelled data from three highly sampled biomes to ask how responses to threat differ between regional biomes and taxonomic group. We found strong support for regional biomes in explaining variation in species richness and total abundance compared to biomes or realms alone. Our biome case studies demonstrate that there is variation in magnitude and direction of threat responses across both regional biomes and taxonomic group, although the interpretation is limited by sampling bias in the literature. All groups in tropical forest showed a consistently negative response, whilst many taxon-regional biome groups showed no clear response to threat in temperate forest and tropical grassland. Our results provide the first empirical evidence that the taxon-regional biome unit has potential as a reasonable spatial unit for monitoring how ecological communities respond to threats and designing effective conservation interventions to bend the curve on biodiversity loss.","PeriodicalId":51026,"journal":{"name":"Ecography","volume":"214 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecography","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.07318","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Biogeographic context, such as biome type, has a critical influence on ecological resilience, as climatic and environmental conditions impact how communities respond to anthropogenic threats. For example, land-use change causes a greater loss of biodiversity in tropical biomes compared to temperate biomes. Furthermore, the nature of threats impacting ecosystems varies geographically. Therefore, monitoring the state of biodiversity at a high spatial resolution is crucial to capture variation in threat–responses caused by biogeographical context. However such fine-scale ecological data collection could be prohibitively resource intensive. In this study, we aim to find the spatial scale that could best capture variation in community-level threat responses whilst keeping data collection requirements feasible. Using a database of biodiversity records with extensive global coverage, we modelled species richness and total abundance (the responses) across land-use types (reflecting threats), considering three different spatial scales: biomes, biogeographical realms, and regional biomes (the interaction between realm and biome). We then modelled data from three highly sampled biomes to ask how responses to threat differ between regional biomes and taxonomic group. We found strong support for regional biomes in explaining variation in species richness and total abundance compared to biomes or realms alone. Our biome case studies demonstrate that there is variation in magnitude and direction of threat responses across both regional biomes and taxonomic group, although the interpretation is limited by sampling bias in the literature. All groups in tropical forest showed a consistently negative response, whilst many taxon-regional biome groups showed no clear response to threat in temperate forest and tropical grassland. Our results provide the first empirical evidence that the taxon-regional biome unit has potential as a reasonable spatial unit for monitoring how ecological communities respond to threats and designing effective conservation interventions to bend the curve on biodiversity loss.
期刊介绍:
ECOGRAPHY publishes exciting, novel, and important articles that significantly advance understanding of ecological or biodiversity patterns in space or time. Papers focusing on conservation or restoration are welcomed, provided they are anchored in ecological theory and convey a general message that goes beyond a single case study. We encourage papers that seek advancing the field through the development and testing of theory or methodology, or by proposing new tools for analysis or interpretation of ecological phenomena. Manuscripts are expected to address general principles in ecology, though they may do so using a specific model system if they adequately frame the problem relative to a generalized ecological question or problem.
Purely descriptive papers are considered only if breaking new ground and/or describing patterns seldom explored. Studies focused on a single species or single location are generally discouraged unless they make a significant contribution to advancing general theory or understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes. Manuscripts merely confirming or marginally extending results of previous work are unlikely to be considered in Ecography.
Papers are judged by virtue of their originality, appeal to general interest, and their contribution to new developments in studies of spatial and temporal ecological patterns. There are no biases with regard to taxon, biome, or biogeographical area.