4.2 Article

Significant variables for the conservation of mountain invertebrates

期刊

JOURNAL OF INSECT CONSERVATION
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 247-256

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10841-009-9253-y

关键词

Mountains; Biodiversity conservation; Invertebrates; Elevation; Vegetation; Aspect; Table Mountain; Cape Floristic Region

资金

  1. Table Mountain Fund
  2. National Research Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Conserving biodiversity on mountains holds particular challenges, with topographic species beta diversity being high. In turn, conserving mountain biodiversity in the heart of a biodiversity hotspot, with intense urbanization on its lower slopes, poses further challenges. We investigate here an iconic mountain at the southern tip of Africa, which is under multiple human pressures, while receiving much conservation attention. We sought here some general principles to guide conservation management of this and other similar mountains. Our focal organisms were surface-active invertebrates, as they are abundant, diverse, and environmentally sensitive at point localities. We show that vegetation structure and elevation were the most important environmental variables determining this diversity. Type of fynbos vegetation, proximity of forest to a river, aspect, and abundance of the alien Argentine ant Linepithema humile, had no significant influence. Suburban woodland species richness and abundance had a non-significant difference to that of natural forest. Fynbos had high species beta diversity of invertebrates, suggesting that large areas of this dominant vegetation type should be conserved. However, many specialist and highly local endemic species were in forest, highlighting the irreplaceability of forest habitats. Such a mountain, with its complex topography, requires total protection, as there is no room for loss of any part of the mountain. We emphasize that, while the upper slope and summit are well protected, the lower slopes are in need of urgent attention, a situation which mirrors that in Europe.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据