Conservation Biology最新文献

{"title":"Integrating expert range maps and opportunistic occurrence records of marine fish species in range estimates.","authors":"Zhixin Zhang, Ákos Bede-Fazekas, Jorge García Molinos, Stefano Mammola, Jamie M Kass, Junmei Qu, Julian Oeser, Songxi Yuan, Chongliang Zhang, Jiqi Gu, Liuyong Ding, Qiang Lin","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70154","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70154","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Species distribution models (SDMs) are commonly used to estimate species' geographic distributions to inform biodiversity assessments and conservation planning. However, despite their growing popularity, range predictions of SDMs are affected by biases in opportunistic occurrence records and the lack of information on range limits. Integration of expert range maps in SDMs could help, but this strategy is still rarely used, especially for marine species. We built SDMs for 196 marine fish species with global distributions of Epinephelidae and Syngnathidae, 4 modeling algorithms, and opportunistic occurrence data. We then developed 2 types of SDM ensembles (i.e., combined predictions of multiple individual SDMs): with and without integration of expert range maps. We quantified the level of dissimilarity in range estimates between the 2 ensembles and explored the effects of taxonomic identity, geographic attributes, and conservation status on dissimilarity in model predictions. Although both types of ensembles had good predictive performance, ensembles informed by expert range maps avoided overpredictions of ranges past geographical barriers. Moreover, the dissimilarity between predictions of the 2 ensembles depended on multiple factors, including the number and extent of opportunistic occurrences, distance of occurrences to the expert range polygons, and fish family. Based on our findings, we recommend that researchers combine complementary information provided by expert range maps and opportunistic occurrences when predicting marine species distributions with SDMs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70154"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145198557","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Role of forest edges and other seminatural linear landscape features in structuring wild bee habitat connectivity in intensively managed landscapes.","authors":"Markus A K Sydenham, Anders Nielsen, Yoko L Dupont, Claus Rasmussen, Henning B Madsen, Marianne S Torvanger, Bastiaan Star","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70152","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70152","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pollinator conservation schemes typically focus on conserving existing, restoring degraded, or creating new wild bee habitats. Their effectiveness depends on dispersal corridors enabling habitat colonization by bees. However, the role of seminatural linear landscape structures (LLS) in connecting pollinator communities across intensively managed landscapes remains poorly understood. We analyzed 953 occurrences of wild bees comprising 79 nonparasitic species sampled at 68 study sites across a Norwegian and a Danish landscape. We first tested whether bee species richness was positively associated with the lengths of seminatural LLS in bee foraging ranges of study sites while controlling for local plant species richness. We then combined maps identifying seminatural LLS with least-cost path (LCP) analysis to determine whether bee species compositional similarity, a proxy for connectivity, decreased as LCP length increased. The length of seminatural LLS, such as forest edges, was positively correlated with bee species richness and habitat connectivity. Specifically, wild bee species richness sampled along roadsides increased as the length of seminatural LLS increased in 1.5 km circles around the study sites, and increased as local plant species richness increased. The most likely dispersal routes between our bee communities tracked forest edges. The length of LCPs provided better models of bee species compositional similarity than geographic distance, suggesting that seminatural LLS, particularly forest edges, act as dispersal corridors in intensively managed landscapes. However, bee species compositional similarity among communities depended on site-specific plant species richness and similarity in plant community composition, which highlights the importance of improving the habitat quality of seminatural LLS if they are to function as dispersal corridors. Our findings suggest that maps of LCPs can be used to identify important dispersal corridors between bee habitats and to direct wild bee habitat management actions along seminatural LLS to facilitate the dispersal of bees in intensively managed landscapes.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70152"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145198489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Changes in Key Biodiversity Area networks following national comprehensive assessments.","authors":"Andrew J Plumptre, Zoltan Waliczky, Daniele Baisero, Olivia Crowe, Jeannot Kivono, Cecilia Tobar, Maria Gabriela Toscano, Natalia Boulad, Hugo Costa, Camila Davila, Sophie Dirou, Eleuterio Duarte, Karolina Fierro, Carolina Castellanos-Castro, Hanna Haddad, Stephen Holness, Fiona Maisels, Daniel Marnewick, Menard Mbende, Maitha Abdulla Al Mheiri, Dissondet Moundzoho, Simon Nampindo, Grace Nangendo, Steeve Ngama, Catherine Numa, Diego Peñaranda, Samridhi Rijal, Manuel Sánchez-Nivicela, Andrew Skowno, Thomas Starnes, Nicolas Texier, Lize von Staden, Anne Bowser, Thomas M Brooks, Gill Bunting, Stuart H M Butchart, Neil Cox, Wendy Elliot, Jo Gilbert, Penny Langhammer, Olivier Langrand, Rachel Neugarten, Madhu Rao, Jon Paul Rodriguez, Gina Della Togna, Amy Upgren, Stephen Woodley","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70151","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70151","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are sites of significance for the global persistence of biodiversity. Based on the Global Standard for the Identification of Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA Standard), published in 2016, sites are currently being assessed for KBA designation in a growing number of countries across the world. For these assessments, the KBA criteria are applied to all species and ecosystems with available data. We reviewed the first comprehensive assessments of 11 countries and compared the KBA network before and after assessments. The mean (SD) number of KBAs per country increased by 69.6% (102.1), and the mean total extent of KBAs per country increased by 164.2% (150.7). More than half of the KBAs in 2024 had >50% of their area outside the 2019 KBAs, indicating a substantial increase in KBA extent (54.0% [18.8] of KBAs). The mean proportion of each KBA covered by protected or conserved areas decreased from 56.2% (20.2) to 44.5% (15.5), owing to the incorporation of unprotected sites in the KBA network. On average, 41.1% (14.0) of sites in each country (mean 44.5 [46.4] sites per country) and 47.2% (20.5) of new KBA area after the assessment were completely unprotected, indicating that many of the new sites were not recognized in national protected area networks as significant for biodiversity before the assessment. Making a comprehensive assessment of KBAs increased the combined coverage of protected and conserved area networks from 25.4% (10.6) to 32.0% (13.1) in each country and thus contributed to reducing biodiversity loss. Therefore, comprehensive assessments of KBAs led to a substantially increased number and extent of recognized sites of importance for biodiversity published in the World Database of KBAs. Where such assessments have not been made, many important areas for biodiversity may be overlooked. We therefore encourage other nations to update their KBA networks to inform efforts to meet the goals and targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70151"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145198522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Accounting for human-nature linkages in area-based conservation monitoring through social-ecological indicator bundles.","authors":"Natalie C Ban, Mark H Carr, Emily M Rubidge, Anne Salomon, Joachim Claudet, Arielle Levine, Lindsay Aylesworth, Luisa Ramirez, Jenn M Burt, Mark Andrachuk, Natascia Tamburello, Rebecca Martone, Anna Schuhbauer, Mairi Meehan, Dana Baker, Georgina G Gurney, Nathan J Bennett, David Gill, Gerald Singh, Stefan Gelcich, Avery Maloney, Fiona Beaty","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70156","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70156","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As the coverage of area-based conservation increases across the globe, it is critical to improve understanding of the social and ecological outcomes of such measures and the pathways to their outcomes. A social-ecological systems approach to monitoring and evaluation is increasingly advocated; yet, applications remain scarce. We sought to facilitate operationalization of this approach through prioritization of indicators when resources are scarce and to improve capture of social-ecological interactions. We convened a working group of practitioners and academics to explore linked social and ecological interactions through a case study of marine protected areas (MPAs). We used causal models (implemented through causal loop diagrams) in participatory and future-oriented approaches to identify interactions among key nodes of the system that can be a focus of monitoring. These nodes and their interactions provided insight into linked indicators of key system components, for example, biomass, compliance, perceived legitimacy, catches, and perceived fairness. We called these indicator bundles. Indicator bundles can be applied to analyze causal modeling diagrams, identify essential elements to monitor, and inform analytical and reporting protocols. The bundles can also help identify key leverage points for adaptive management to improve outcomes of existing interventions. This approach can inform monitoring and evaluation and, ultimately, the design and adaptive management of conservation areas that maximize social and ecological benefits and minimize negative trade-offs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70156"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145191335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Lessons learned from screening potential other effective area-based conservation measures.","authors":"Carly N Cook, Madhu Rao, Peter J Clyne, Vanessa Rathbone, Christian Barrientos, Antonio Boveda, Alex Diment, Jorge Parra, Valeria Falabella, Matthew Linke, Deo Kujirakwinja, Stephane Ostrowski, Kirk Olson, Vardhan Patankar, Lovy Rasolofomanan, Hedley S Grantham","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70148","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70148","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) are sites that deliver effective biodiversity outcomes irrespective of their management objectives. These areas are widely expected to play an important role in efforts to protect 30% of Earth by 2030. Despite general guidance to support screening sites against the formal criteria to be OECMs, progress recognizing sites has been limited. To advance the ability to identify OECMs, we developed a questionnaire that translates the components of the broad formal guidance into statements that experts can use to screen potential OECMs. Twenty-eight local experts used the questionnaire to evaluate a large global sample of 81 sites. Most sites evaluated were largely in good condition and had the potential to achieve conservation outcomes, but none met the criteria to be considered OECMs. The most common challenges are related to threat management, adequate resourcing, and the ability to demonstrate that governance and management are achieving effective and sustained conservation outcomes. Based on the formal International Union for Conservation of Nature guidance, sites that only partially meet the relevant criteria remain candidate OECMs. Our questionnaire provides a nuanced way to assess OECMs that can help identify what support sites need to meet the necessary criteria. With effective long-term conservation outcomes unable to be demonstrated for so many important conservation areas, our findings raise important questions about how to ensure area-based conservation promotes positive and sustained outcomes for biodiversity.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70148"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145084986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Clarifying the so-called gull problem in the Gulf of Maine: Response to Taylor et al. (2024)","authors":"Antony W. Diamond,&nbsp;Linda Welch,&nbsp;Donald E. Lyons,&nbsp;Lauren C. Scopel,&nbsp;Brian Benedict,&nbsp;Heather L. Major,&nbsp;Stephen W. Kress,&nbsp;Stephanie Koch,&nbsp;Ian C. T. Nisbet","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70119","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cobi.70119","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":"39 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145058448","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Incomplete progress toward reasoning about the gull problem: Reply to Diamond et al. (2025)","authors":"Liam U. Taylor,&nbsp;Wriley Hodge,&nbsp;Katherine R. Shlepr,&nbsp;John Anderson","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70120","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cobi.70120","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":"39 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145058545","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Navigating diverse human-nature worldviews for more inclusive conservation.","authors":"Ranjini Murali, Christopher B Anderson, Barbara Muraca, Paola Arias-Arévalo, Rachelle K Gould, Dominic Lenzi, Eglee Zent, Simone Athayde, Jasper Kenter, Christopher M Raymond, Arild Vatn","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70144","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70144","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Different worldviews shape how humans perceive, understand, inhabit, and value the world. Major efforts to achieve more inclusive conservation, such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, seek to more fully reflect diverse worldviews in science, policy, and practice. Building on the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Values Assessment's comprehensive review of academic publications, Indigenous and local knowledge sources, and policy documents, we characterize 4 human-nature worldviews: anthropocentrism, biocentrism, ecocentrism, and pluricentrism. This heuristic typology can help conservation scholars and practitioners navigate participatory decision-making by providing conceptual clarity to distinguish particular worldviews and the fuzzy boundaries between them, and by addressing practical issues, particularly discursive and structural power dynamics, that affect worldview expression. Two case studies, protected area prioritization in India and payments for ecosystem services in Colombia, show that inclusive conservation depends on strategies and abilities to recognize and understand diverse worldviews and to articulate them in institutions. These examples highlight that engaging diverse human-nature worldviews applies not only to developing new policies but also to adapting mainstream instruments.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70144"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145039319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Diagnosing scaling bottlenecks in 10 community conservation initiatives in southern and eastern Africa.","authors":"Thomas Pienkowski, Matt Clark, Arundhati Jagadish, Aklei Albert, Mohanjeet Brar, Tarn Breedveld, Linda Chinangwa, Deepali Gohil, Deziderius Irumba, Ramzy Kanaan, Rose Peter Kicheleri, Phillip Kihumuro, Wilhelm Andrew Kiwango, Mathew Bukhi Mabele, Paul Matiku, Gimbage Mbeyale, Musingo Tito E Mbuvi, Arthur Mugisha, Stanley Mwango, Iddi Mwanyoka, Robson Nyirenda, Geoffrey Oula, Jón Geir Pétursson, Taddeo Rusoke, Nelson Turyahabwe, Moses Kazungu, Lessah Mandoloma, Charles Meshack, Kaala B Moombe, Francis Moyo, Victor K Muposhi, Amos Ochieng, Edwin Sabuhoro, Anna Spenceley, Emmanuel Sulle, David Mwesigye Tumusiime, Paulo Wilfred, Peadar Brehony, Elias Damtew Assef, Morena Mills","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70149","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Scaling area-based conservation, including initiatives led or comanaged by Indigenous Peoples and local communities, is a flagship goal of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Conservationists often aspire to scale initiatives, but this is rarely achieved in practice. Identifying and addressing factors that limit initiative adoption (i.e., bottlenecks) could improve scaling strategies. We used insightsfrom 84 expert surveys to identify potential risk factors and bottlenecks to scaling 10 community, area-based initiatives in southern and eastern Africa. The number of reported potential risk factors and bottlenecks varied among initiatives. However, unfair benefit sharing, unequal decision-making, inflexible rules, and top-down leadership were frequently identified as bottlenecks. Although adopting initiatives had costs (e.g., increased local conflicts, reduced local access to natural resources and cropland), most experts believed these costs were offset by other benefits and thus did not constitute bottlenecks. Our results did not capture local perspectives, but they suggest scaling strategies that strengthen environmental governance may support more socially just and durable approaches to meeting area-based conservation goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70149"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145039223","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evolution of research on global amphibian declines.","authors":"Jordann Crawford-Ash, Maldwyn John Evans, Tamilie Carvalho, Jodi J L Rowley, Trenton W J Garner, Erin Muths, Ben C Scheele","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70146","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the late 1980s, the scientific community became aware of severe, enigmatic amphibian population declines. These declines triggered a wave of research focused on quantifying their extent and identifying key drivers. We used text-analysis techniques, including topic modeling and geoparsing, to examine the evolution of research focused on amphibian declines. We sought to provide an example of scientific inquiry in action, from the initial recognition and quantification of the phenomenon to identifying drivers and understanding mechanisms of amphibian decline. We delineated research topics, tracked spatiotemporal trends from 1985 to 2024, and extracted the number of publications per topic. Early research focused on evaluating the veracity of declines and was followed by investigations of potential drivers (in particular, UVB radiation, pollution, and habitat fragmentation and loss). After the amphibian chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) was identified in the late 1990s, research emphasis shifted toward disease. Subsequently, disease-focused research became increasingly specialized, the primary topics of which were susceptibility, resistance and tolerance, and mitigation. Most recently, extinction risk and climate change became increasingly prominent topics, reflecting emerging threats to amphibians. Regions with high amphibian biodiversity and observed declines (e.g., Central and South America) were underrepresented in the literature, and research was strongly biased toward North America, Australia, and Europe. We uncovered a clear disconnect between the amphibian decline literature and the development of effective management and conservation actions. To address this gap, we suggest an increased emphasis on the application of existing knowledge to drive meaningful conservation outcomes and prioritization of new research on ongoing and emerging threats.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70146"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145039292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}