通过对美国佐治亚州沿海的案例研究,量化未来海岸线改造对生物多样性的影响。

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Daniel J Coleman, Rachel K Gittman, Craig E Landry, James E Byers, Clark R Alexander, G Paul Coughlin, C Brock Woodson
{"title":"通过对美国佐治亚州沿海的案例研究,量化未来海岸线改造对生物多样性的影响。","authors":"Daniel J Coleman, Rachel K Gittman, Craig E Landry, James E Byers, Clark R Alexander, G Paul Coughlin, C Brock Woodson","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People often modify the shoreline to mitigate erosion and protect property from storm impacts. The 2 main approaches to modification are gray infrastructure (e.g., bulkheads and seawalls) and natural or green infrastructure (NI) (e.g., living shorelines). Gray infrastructure is still more often used for coastal protection than NI, despite having more detrimental effects on ecosystem parameters, such as biodiversity. We assessed the impact of gray infrastructure on biodiversity and whether the adoption of NI can mitigate its loss. We examined the literature to quantify the relationship of gray infrastructure and NI to biodiversity and developed a model with temporal geospatial data on ecosystem distribution and shoreline modification to project future shoreline modification for our study location, coastal Georgia (United States). We applied the literature-derived empirical relationships of infrastructure effects on biodiversity to the shoreline modification projections to predict change in biodiversity under different NI versus gray infrastructure scenarios. For our study area, which is dominated by marshes and use of gray infrastructure, when just under half of all new coastal infrastructure was to be NI, previous losses of biodiversity from gray infrastructure could be mitigated by 2100 (net change of biodiversity of +0.14%, 95% confidence interval -0.10% to +0.39%). As biodiversity continues to decline from human impacts, it is increasingly imperative to minimize negative impacts when possible. We therefore suggest policy and the permitting process be changed to promote the adoption of NI.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quantifying the impacts of future shoreline modification on biodiversity in a case study of coastal Georgia, United States.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel J Coleman, Rachel K Gittman, Craig E Landry, James E Byers, Clark R Alexander, G Paul Coughlin, C Brock Woodson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cobi.14301\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>People often modify the shoreline to mitigate erosion and protect property from storm impacts. The 2 main approaches to modification are gray infrastructure (e.g., bulkheads and seawalls) and natural or green infrastructure (NI) (e.g., living shorelines). Gray infrastructure is still more often used for coastal protection than NI, despite having more detrimental effects on ecosystem parameters, such as biodiversity. We assessed the impact of gray infrastructure on biodiversity and whether the adoption of NI can mitigate its loss. We examined the literature to quantify the relationship of gray infrastructure and NI to biodiversity and developed a model with temporal geospatial data on ecosystem distribution and shoreline modification to project future shoreline modification for our study location, coastal Georgia (United States). We applied the literature-derived empirical relationships of infrastructure effects on biodiversity to the shoreline modification projections to predict change in biodiversity under different NI versus gray infrastructure scenarios. For our study area, which is dominated by marshes and use of gray infrastructure, when just under half of all new coastal infrastructure was to be NI, previous losses of biodiversity from gray infrastructure could be mitigated by 2100 (net change of biodiversity of +0.14%, 95% confidence interval -0.10% to +0.39%). As biodiversity continues to decline from human impacts, it is increasingly imperative to minimize negative impacts when possible. We therefore suggest policy and the permitting process be changed to promote the adoption of NI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14301\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14301","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

摘要

人们通常会对海岸线进行改造,以减轻侵蚀并保护财产免受风暴影响。改造海岸线的两种主要方法是灰色基础设施(如防波堤和海堤)和自然或绿色基础设施 (NI)(如生机海岸线)。尽管灰色基础设施对生态系统参数(如生物多样性)的不利影响更大,但在海岸保护 方面,灰色基础设施的使用仍多于绿色基础设施。我们评估了灰色基础设施对生物多样性的影响,以及采用 NI 能否减轻生物多样性的损失。我们研究了相关文献,以量化灰色基础设施和氮氧化物与生物多样性的关系,并利用生态系统分布和海岸线改造的时间地理空间数据开发了一个模型,以预测我们的研究地点--美国佐治亚州沿海地区未来的海岸线改造情况。我们将从文献中得出的基础设施对生物多样性影响的经验关系应用到海岸线改造预测中,以预测在不同的 NI 与灰色基础设施情景下生物多样性的变化。我们的研究区域以沼泽和使用灰色基础设施为主,当所有新建沿海基础设施中仅有不到一半为 NI 型时,到 2100 年,灰色基础设施以前造成的生物多样性损失将得到缓解(生物多样性净变化为 +0.14%,95% 置信区间为 -0.10% 到 +0.39%)。随着生物多样性因人类影响而不断减少,在可能的情况下将负面影响降至最低变得越来越重要。因此,我们建议改变政策和许可程序,促进采用 NI。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Quantifying the impacts of future shoreline modification on biodiversity in a case study of coastal Georgia, United States.

People often modify the shoreline to mitigate erosion and protect property from storm impacts. The 2 main approaches to modification are gray infrastructure (e.g., bulkheads and seawalls) and natural or green infrastructure (NI) (e.g., living shorelines). Gray infrastructure is still more often used for coastal protection than NI, despite having more detrimental effects on ecosystem parameters, such as biodiversity. We assessed the impact of gray infrastructure on biodiversity and whether the adoption of NI can mitigate its loss. We examined the literature to quantify the relationship of gray infrastructure and NI to biodiversity and developed a model with temporal geospatial data on ecosystem distribution and shoreline modification to project future shoreline modification for our study location, coastal Georgia (United States). We applied the literature-derived empirical relationships of infrastructure effects on biodiversity to the shoreline modification projections to predict change in biodiversity under different NI versus gray infrastructure scenarios. For our study area, which is dominated by marshes and use of gray infrastructure, when just under half of all new coastal infrastructure was to be NI, previous losses of biodiversity from gray infrastructure could be mitigated by 2100 (net change of biodiversity of +0.14%, 95% confidence interval -0.10% to +0.39%). As biodiversity continues to decline from human impacts, it is increasingly imperative to minimize negative impacts when possible. We therefore suggest policy and the permitting process be changed to promote the adoption of NI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
×
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