Regional Biomes outperform broader spatial units in capturing biodiversity responses to land-use change

IF 5.4 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Ecography Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1111/ecog.07318
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.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecography
Ecography 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
3.40%
发文量
122
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信