Joseph R Bennett, Brandon PM Edwards, Jordanna N Bergman, Allison D Binley, Rachel T Buxton, Dalal EL Hanna, Jeffrey O Hanson, Emma J Hudgins, Sahebeh Karimi, Calla V Raymond, Courtney D Robichaud, Trina Rytwinski
{"title":"忽视探测概率如何损害生物多样性保护","authors":"Joseph R Bennett, Brandon PM Edwards, Jordanna N Bergman, Allison D Binley, Rachel T Buxton, Dalal EL Hanna, Jeffrey O Hanson, Emma J Hudgins, Sahebeh Karimi, Calla V Raymond, Courtney D Robichaud, Trina Rytwinski","doi":"10.1002/fee.2782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Conservation priorities and legal protections are often based on confirmed species occurrences. However, imperfect detection is likely the norm in biological surveys, resulting in negative consequences for conservation. Focusing on threatened species in the US and Canada, we show that detectability information appears to be lacking for most species that are conservation priorities. Although more research on species detection is needed, detectability estimates are important for many immediate decisions. Thus, we recommend: (1) estimating and accounting for detectability and designing rigorous surveys when confirming presence or absence is crucial. Otherwise, absence in surveys should be considered suggestive only and critical habitat should be managed even if species presences are unconfirmed. (2) When directly estimating detectability is prohibitively difficult, indirect estimates should be explored, for example through expert elicitation or trait-based predictors. (3) Detectability should be explicitly incorporated into decisions to ensure that surveys and management actions are directed where they have the greatest potential benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":171,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment","volume":"22 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/fee.2782","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How ignoring detection probability hurts biodiversity conservation\",\"authors\":\"Joseph R Bennett, Brandon PM Edwards, Jordanna N Bergman, Allison D Binley, Rachel T Buxton, Dalal EL Hanna, Jeffrey O Hanson, Emma J Hudgins, Sahebeh Karimi, Calla V Raymond, Courtney D Robichaud, Trina Rytwinski\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/fee.2782\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Conservation priorities and legal protections are often based on confirmed species occurrences. However, imperfect detection is likely the norm in biological surveys, resulting in negative consequences for conservation. Focusing on threatened species in the US and Canada, we show that detectability information appears to be lacking for most species that are conservation priorities. Although more research on species detection is needed, detectability estimates are important for many immediate decisions. Thus, we recommend: (1) estimating and accounting for detectability and designing rigorous surveys when confirming presence or absence is crucial. Otherwise, absence in surveys should be considered suggestive only and critical habitat should be managed even if species presences are unconfirmed. (2) When directly estimating detectability is prohibitively difficult, indirect estimates should be explored, for example through expert elicitation or trait-based predictors. (3) Detectability should be explicitly incorporated into decisions to ensure that surveys and management actions are directed where they have the greatest potential benefit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":171,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment\",\"volume\":\"22 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/fee.2782\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fee.2782\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fee.2782","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
How ignoring detection probability hurts biodiversity conservation
Conservation priorities and legal protections are often based on confirmed species occurrences. However, imperfect detection is likely the norm in biological surveys, resulting in negative consequences for conservation. Focusing on threatened species in the US and Canada, we show that detectability information appears to be lacking for most species that are conservation priorities. Although more research on species detection is needed, detectability estimates are important for many immediate decisions. Thus, we recommend: (1) estimating and accounting for detectability and designing rigorous surveys when confirming presence or absence is crucial. Otherwise, absence in surveys should be considered suggestive only and critical habitat should be managed even if species presences are unconfirmed. (2) When directly estimating detectability is prohibitively difficult, indirect estimates should be explored, for example through expert elicitation or trait-based predictors. (3) Detectability should be explicitly incorporated into decisions to ensure that surveys and management actions are directed where they have the greatest potential benefit.
期刊介绍:
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment is a publication by the Ecological Society of America that focuses on the significance of ecology and environmental science in various aspects of research and problem-solving. The journal covers topics such as biodiversity conservation, ecosystem preservation, natural resource management, public policy, and other related areas.
The publication features a range of content, including peer-reviewed articles, editorials, commentaries, letters, and occasional special issues and topical series. It releases ten issues per year, excluding January and July. ESA members receive both print and electronic copies of the journal, while institutional subscriptions are also available.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment is highly regarded in the field, as indicated by its ranking in the 2021 Journal Citation Reports by Clarivate Analytics. The journal is ranked 4th out of 174 in ecology journals and 11th out of 279 in environmental sciences journals. Its impact factor for 2021 is reported as 13.789, which further demonstrates its influence and importance in the scientific community.