Robert M. Goodsell, Ayco J. M. Tack, Fredrik Ronquist, Laura J. A. van Dijk, Elzbieta Iwaszkiewicz-Eggebrecht, Andreia Miraldo, Tomas Roslin, Jarno Vanhatalo
{"title":"Moving towards better risk assessment for invertebrate conservation","authors":"Robert M. Goodsell, Ayco J. M. Tack, Fredrik Ronquist, Laura J. A. van Dijk, Elzbieta Iwaszkiewicz-Eggebrecht, Andreia Miraldo, Tomas Roslin, Jarno Vanhatalo","doi":"10.1002/ecog.07819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Global change threatens a vast number of species with severe population declines or even extinction. The threat status of an organism is often designated based on geographic range, population size, or declines in either. However, invertebrates, which comprise the bulk of animal diversity, are conspicuously absent from global frameworks that assess extinction risk. Many invertebrates are hard to study, and it has been questioned whether current risk assessments are appropriate for the majority of these organisms. As the majority of invertebrates are rare, we contend that the lack of data for these organisms makes current criteria hard to apply. Using empirical evidence from one of the largest terrestrial arthropod surveys to date, consisting of over 33 000 species collected from over a million hours of survey effort, we demonstrate that estimates of trends based on low sample sizes are associated with major uncertainty and a risk of misclassification under criteria defined by the IUCN. We argue that even the most ambitious monitoring efforts are unlikely to produce enough observations to reliably estimate population sizes and ranges for more than a fraction of species, and there is likely to be substantial uncertainty in assessing risk for the majority of global biodiversity using species-level trends. In response, we discuss the need to focus on metrics we can currently measure when conducting risk assessments for these organisms. We highlight modern statistical methods that allow quantification of metrics that could incorporate observations of rare invertebrates into global conservation frameworks, and suggest how current criteria might be adapted to meet the needs of the majority of global biodiversity.","PeriodicalId":51026,"journal":{"name":"Ecography","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecography","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ecog.07819","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
Global change threatens a vast number of species with severe population declines or even extinction. The threat status of an organism is often designated based on geographic range, population size, or declines in either. However, invertebrates, which comprise the bulk of animal diversity, are conspicuously absent from global frameworks that assess extinction risk. Many invertebrates are hard to study, and it has been questioned whether current risk assessments are appropriate for the majority of these organisms. As the majority of invertebrates are rare, we contend that the lack of data for these organisms makes current criteria hard to apply. Using empirical evidence from one of the largest terrestrial arthropod surveys to date, consisting of over 33 000 species collected from over a million hours of survey effort, we demonstrate that estimates of trends based on low sample sizes are associated with major uncertainty and a risk of misclassification under criteria defined by the IUCN. We argue that even the most ambitious monitoring efforts are unlikely to produce enough observations to reliably estimate population sizes and ranges for more than a fraction of species, and there is likely to be substantial uncertainty in assessing risk for the majority of global biodiversity using species-level trends. In response, we discuss the need to focus on metrics we can currently measure when conducting risk assessments for these organisms. We highlight modern statistical methods that allow quantification of metrics that could incorporate observations of rare invertebrates into global conservation frameworks, and suggest how current criteria might be adapted to meet the needs of the majority of global biodiversity.
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.