4.7 Article

Complementarity-based conservation prioritization using a community classification, and its application to riverine ecosystems

Journal

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
Volume 143, Issue 4, Pages 984-991

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.01.012

Keywords

Community dissimilarity; Complementarity; Conservation planning; Environmental classification; Riverine ecosystems; Zonation software

Funding

  1. New Zealand's Foundation for Research, Science and Technology [C01X0305]
  2. New Zealand's Department of Conservation
  3. Academy of Finland [1206 883, 129 636]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We demonstrate a novel method for spatial conservation prioritization at a community-level that takes account of: (i) an environmentally-based classification of the landscape into community classes; (ii) similarities between community classes to allow for community complementarity-based selection; (iii) variation in species richness. (iv) variation in human impacts on ecological integrity; and (v) requirements for maintenance of upstream-downstream connectivity in riverine systems While this technique has generic application, we demonstrate its application using a biologically-trained environmental classification of New Zealand's river network. Our analysis produces a priority ranking of planning units (here 4th order catchments or sub-catchments) and performance estimates in terms of expected biodiversity returns given varying degrees of geographic protection Accounting for community similarity ensures high protection for distinct habitat classes with low similarity to other classes; our results indicate a 28% loss in conservation efficiency of the highest-ranked 10% of the landscape if it is ignored. Accounting for human pressures and connectivity also had clear influences on spatial priority rankings, indicating the need to consider these factors in the conservation planning process (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available