基于指标的跨领域沿海生物多样性评估方法

IF 1.4 4区 生物学 Q3 MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY
LR Harris, AL Skowno, K. Sink, L. van Niekerk, S. Holness, M. Monyeki, P. Majiedt
{"title":"基于指标的跨领域沿海生物多样性评估方法","authors":"LR Harris, AL Skowno, K. Sink, L. van Niekerk, S. Holness, M. Monyeki, P. Majiedt","doi":"10.2989/1814232X.2022.2104373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ecosystem status assessments are generally separated into realm-specific analyses (terrestrial, freshwater, estuarine or marine), but without integrating these into a coherent assessment of coastal biodiversity across the land–sea interface. Trends in assessment indicators in coastal versus non-coastal areas have also rarely been considered. In this study we aimed to compile the first cross-realm national biodiversity assessment for the South African coast using three key indicators. The ecological condition, ecosystem threat status, and ecosystem protection level of coastal ecosystem types (n = 186) were determined and compared with those of non-coastal ecosystem types (n = 444). Nearly half (46.9%) of the South African coastal habitat has been degraded compared with 20% of non-coastal areas. Proportionately, there are three-times (60%) as many threatened coastal ecosystem types (or 55% by area) as there are threatened non-coastal ecosystem types (19%, 6% by area). Despite the impacted state of coastal biodiversity, protection levels are generally higher in the coastal zone (87% of ecosystem types have some protection) compared with non-coastal areas (75%), although fewer coastal ecosystem types have met their biodiversity targets (24%, vs 28% for non-coastal ecosystem types). These results illustrate the importance of using a cross-realm approach for status assessments, management and conservation of coastal biodiversity. The assessment methods described are flexible and widely applicable to other regions.","PeriodicalId":7719,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Marine Science","volume":"44 1","pages":"239 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An indicator-based approach for cross-realm coastal biodiversity assessments\",\"authors\":\"LR Harris, AL Skowno, K. Sink, L. van Niekerk, S. Holness, M. Monyeki, P. Majiedt\",\"doi\":\"10.2989/1814232X.2022.2104373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ecosystem status assessments are generally separated into realm-specific analyses (terrestrial, freshwater, estuarine or marine), but without integrating these into a coherent assessment of coastal biodiversity across the land–sea interface. Trends in assessment indicators in coastal versus non-coastal areas have also rarely been considered. In this study we aimed to compile the first cross-realm national biodiversity assessment for the South African coast using three key indicators. The ecological condition, ecosystem threat status, and ecosystem protection level of coastal ecosystem types (n = 186) were determined and compared with those of non-coastal ecosystem types (n = 444). Nearly half (46.9%) of the South African coastal habitat has been degraded compared with 20% of non-coastal areas. Proportionately, there are three-times (60%) as many threatened coastal ecosystem types (or 55% by area) as there are threatened non-coastal ecosystem types (19%, 6% by area). Despite the impacted state of coastal biodiversity, protection levels are generally higher in the coastal zone (87% of ecosystem types have some protection) compared with non-coastal areas (75%), although fewer coastal ecosystem types have met their biodiversity targets (24%, vs 28% for non-coastal ecosystem types). These results illustrate the importance of using a cross-realm approach for status assessments, management and conservation of coastal biodiversity. The assessment methods described are flexible and widely applicable to other regions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of Marine Science\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"239 - 253\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of Marine Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2989/1814232X.2022.2104373\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Marine Science","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2989/1814232X.2022.2104373","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MARINE & FRESHWATER BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

生态系统状况评估通常分为特定领域的分析(陆地、淡水、河口或海洋),但没有将这些分析纳入陆地-海洋界面沿海生物多样性的连贯评估中。沿海地区与非沿海地区的评估指标趋势也很少得到考虑。在这项研究中,我们旨在使用三个关键指标编制南非海岸第一个跨领域国家生物多样性评估。测定了沿海生态系统类型(n=186)的生态条件、生态系统威胁状况和生态系统保护水平,并与非沿海生态系统(n=444)进行了比较。南非近一半(46.9%)的沿海栖息地已经退化,而非沿海地区的这一比例为20%。相应地,受威胁的沿海生态系统类型(或按面积计55%)是受威胁的非沿海生态系统类别(按面积计19%,6%)的三倍(60%)。尽管沿海生物多样性受到影响,但与非沿海地区(75%)相比,沿海地区的保护水平通常更高(87%的生态系统类型得到了一定的保护),尽管达到生物多样性目标的沿海生态系统类型更少(24%,非沿海生态系统类别为28%)。这些结果说明了使用跨领域方法进行沿海生物多样性状况评估、管理和保护的重要性。所述评估方法灵活,广泛适用于其他地区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An indicator-based approach for cross-realm coastal biodiversity assessments
Ecosystem status assessments are generally separated into realm-specific analyses (terrestrial, freshwater, estuarine or marine), but without integrating these into a coherent assessment of coastal biodiversity across the land–sea interface. Trends in assessment indicators in coastal versus non-coastal areas have also rarely been considered. In this study we aimed to compile the first cross-realm national biodiversity assessment for the South African coast using three key indicators. The ecological condition, ecosystem threat status, and ecosystem protection level of coastal ecosystem types (n = 186) were determined and compared with those of non-coastal ecosystem types (n = 444). Nearly half (46.9%) of the South African coastal habitat has been degraded compared with 20% of non-coastal areas. Proportionately, there are three-times (60%) as many threatened coastal ecosystem types (or 55% by area) as there are threatened non-coastal ecosystem types (19%, 6% by area). Despite the impacted state of coastal biodiversity, protection levels are generally higher in the coastal zone (87% of ecosystem types have some protection) compared with non-coastal areas (75%), although fewer coastal ecosystem types have met their biodiversity targets (24%, vs 28% for non-coastal ecosystem types). These results illustrate the importance of using a cross-realm approach for status assessments, management and conservation of coastal biodiversity. The assessment methods described are flexible and widely applicable to other regions.
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
African Journal of Marine Science
African Journal of Marine Science 生物-海洋与淡水生物学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
17
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The African (formerly South African) Journal of Marine Science provides an international forum for the publication of original scientific contributions or critical reviews, involving oceanic, shelf or estuarine waters, inclusive of oceanography, studies of organisms and their habitats, and aquaculture. Papers on the conservation and management of living resources, relevant social science and governance, or new techniques, are all welcomed, as are those that integrate different disciplines. Priority will be given to rigorous, question-driven research, rather than descriptive research. Contributions from African waters, including the Southern Ocean, are particularly encouraged, although not to the exclusion of those from elsewhere that have relevance to the African context. Submissions may take the form of a paper or a short communication. The journal aims to achieve a balanced representation of subject areas but also publishes proceedings of symposia in dedicated issues, as well as guest-edited suites on thematic topics in regular issues.
×
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