Remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss important human threats 遥感评估人类活动对生物多样性的危险可能会被低估

Christos Mammides, Francesco Martini, Constantinos Kounnamas
{"title":"Remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss important human threats 遥感评估人类活动对生物多样性的危险可能会被低估","authors":"Christos Mammides,&nbsp;Francesco Martini,&nbsp;Constantinos Kounnamas","doi":"10.1002/inc3.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Monitoring human pressure on biodiversity within protected areas (PAs) remains a challenging task due to the vast number of PAs worldwide (&gt;250,000) and the fact that we lack basic information for most of them. Consequently, researchers are increasingly relying on remote sensing techniques to overcome this challenge. However, remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss crucial threats, such as hunting and invasive species, which are often best documented through in situ field surveys. Here, we use a unique European Union dataset documenting human threats within 8210 PAs through field surveys to assess the relationship between those threats and three commonly used indices of human pressure that are largely derived using remote-sensing methods—the Human Footprint and Human Modification indices and the LandScan Global Population Database. We find that the indices are not always related to the threats recorded within PAs through field surveys. The indices seem to best capture threats associated with urbanization, agriculture, and pollution but not necessarily others. Although remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity are crucial for conservation, researchers and practitioners must be aware of their limitations and must complement such assessments with information collected in the field whenever possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":100680,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Conservation","volume":"1 1","pages":"52-59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/inc3.11","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss important human threats\\n 遥感评估人类活动对生物多样性的危险可能会被低估\",\"authors\":\"Christos Mammides,&nbsp;Francesco Martini,&nbsp;Constantinos Kounnamas\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/inc3.11\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Monitoring human pressure on biodiversity within protected areas (PAs) remains a challenging task due to the vast number of PAs worldwide (&gt;250,000) and the fact that we lack basic information for most of them. Consequently, researchers are increasingly relying on remote sensing techniques to overcome this challenge. However, remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss crucial threats, such as hunting and invasive species, which are often best documented through in situ field surveys. Here, we use a unique European Union dataset documenting human threats within 8210 PAs through field surveys to assess the relationship between those threats and three commonly used indices of human pressure that are largely derived using remote-sensing methods—the Human Footprint and Human Modification indices and the LandScan Global Population Database. We find that the indices are not always related to the threats recorded within PAs through field surveys. The indices seem to best capture threats associated with urbanization, agriculture, and pollution but not necessarily others. Although remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity are crucial for conservation, researchers and practitioners must be aware of their limitations and must complement such assessments with information collected in the field whenever possible.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrative Conservation\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"52-59\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/inc3.11\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrative Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/inc3.11\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/inc3.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

监测人类对保护区生物多样性的压力仍然是一项具有挑战性的任务,因为全球保护区数量庞大(25万),而且我们缺乏大多数保护区的基本信息。因此,研究人员越来越依赖遥感技术来克服这一挑战。然而,对人类对生物多样性的压力的远程评估可能会错过关键的威胁,例如狩猎和入侵物种,这些威胁通常最好通过实地调查来记录。在这里,我们使用了一个独特的欧盟数据集,通过实地调查记录了8210个保护区内的人类威胁,以评估这些威胁与人类压力的三个常用指数之间的关系,这些指数主要是通过遥感方法得出的——人类足迹和人类改变指数以及LandScan全球人口数据库。通过实地调查,我们发现这些指数并不总是与保护区内记录的威胁相关。这些指数似乎最好地反映了与城市化、农业和污染有关的威胁,但不一定反映其他威胁。尽管人类对生物多样性的压力的远程评估对保护至关重要,但是研究人员和实践者必须意识到它们的局限性,并且必须尽可能地用实地收集的信息来补充这种评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss important human threats
      遥感评估人类活动对生物多样性的危险可能会被低估

Remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss important human threats 遥感评估人类活动对生物多样性的危险可能会被低估

Monitoring human pressure on biodiversity within protected areas (PAs) remains a challenging task due to the vast number of PAs worldwide (>250,000) and the fact that we lack basic information for most of them. Consequently, researchers are increasingly relying on remote sensing techniques to overcome this challenge. However, remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity may miss crucial threats, such as hunting and invasive species, which are often best documented through in situ field surveys. Here, we use a unique European Union dataset documenting human threats within 8210 PAs through field surveys to assess the relationship between those threats and three commonly used indices of human pressure that are largely derived using remote-sensing methods—the Human Footprint and Human Modification indices and the LandScan Global Population Database. We find that the indices are not always related to the threats recorded within PAs through field surveys. The indices seem to best capture threats associated with urbanization, agriculture, and pollution but not necessarily others. Although remote assessments of human pressure on biodiversity are crucial for conservation, researchers and practitioners must be aware of their limitations and must complement such assessments with information collected in the field whenever possible.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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