A review of selection-based tests of abiotic surrogates for species representation

© 2015 Society for Conservation Biology.

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology. - 1999. - 29(2015), 3 vom: 21. Juni, Seite 668-79
1. Verfasser: Beier, Paul (VerfasserIn)
Weitere Verfasser: Sutcliffe, Patricia, Hjort, Jan, Faith, Daniel P, Pressey, Robert L, Albuquerque, Fabio
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 2015
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
Schlagworte:Journal Article Review conservar el estado de la naturaleza conservation planning conserving nature's stage geodiversidad geodiversity incidental representation planeación de la conservación pruebas de sustitución mehr... representación secundaria surrogacy tests
LEADER 01000naa a22002652 4500
001 NLM248524747
003 DE-627
005 20231224151607.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231224s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/cobi.12509  |2 doi 
028 5 2 |a pubmed24n0828.xml 
035 |a (DE-627)NLM248524747 
035 |a (NLM)25923191 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Beier, Paul  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
245 1 2 |a A review of selection-based tests of abiotic surrogates for species representation 
264 1 |c 2015 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a ƒaComputermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a ƒa Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
500 |a Date Completed 08.02.2016 
500 |a Date Revised 17.03.2022 
500 |a published: Print-Electronic 
500 |a Citation Status MEDLINE 
520 |a © 2015 Society for Conservation Biology. 
520 |a Because conservation planners typically lack data on where species occur, environmental surrogates--including geophysical settings and climate types--have been used to prioritize sites within a planning area. We reviewed 622 evaluations of the effectiveness of abiotic surrogates in representing species in 19 study areas. Sites selected using abiotic surrogates represented more species than an equal number of randomly selected sites in 43% of tests (55% for plants) and on average improved on random selection of sites by about 8% (21% for plants). Environmental diversity (ED) (42% median improvement on random selection) and biotically informed clusters showed promising results and merit additional testing. We suggest 4 ways to improve performance of abiotic surrogates. First, analysts should consider a broad spectrum of candidate variables to define surrogates, including rarely used variables related to geographic separation, distance from coast, hydrology, and within-site abiotic diversity. Second, abiotic surrogates should be defined at fine thematic resolution. Third, sites (the landscape units prioritized within a planning area) should be small enough to ensure that surrogates reflect species' environments and to produce prioritizations that match the spatial resolution of conservation decisions. Fourth, if species inventories are available for some planning units, planners should define surrogates based on the abiotic variables that most influence species turnover in the planning area. Although species inventories increase the cost of using abiotic surrogates, a modest number of inventories could provide the data needed to select variables and evaluate surrogates. Additional tests of nonclimate abiotic surrogates are needed to evaluate the utility of conserving nature's stage as a strategy for conservation planning in the face of climate change 
650 4 |a Journal Article 
650 4 |a Review 
650 4 |a conservar el estado de la naturaleza 
650 4 |a conservation planning 
650 4 |a conserving nature's stage 
650 4 |a geodiversidad 
650 4 |a geodiversity 
650 4 |a incidental representation 
650 4 |a planeación de la conservación 
650 4 |a pruebas de sustitución 
650 4 |a representación secundaria 
650 4 |a surrogacy tests 
700 1 |a Sutcliffe, Patricia  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Hjort, Jan  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Faith, Daniel P  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Pressey, Robert L  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Albuquerque, Fabio  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology  |d 1999  |g 29(2015), 3 vom: 21. Juni, Seite 668-79  |w (DE-627)NLM098176803  |x 1523-1739  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:29  |g year:2015  |g number:3  |g day:21  |g month:06  |g pages:668-79 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12509  |3 Volltext 
912 |a GBV_USEFLAG_A 
912 |a SYSFLAG_A 
912 |a GBV_NLM 
912 |a GBV_ILN_350 
951 |a AR 
952 |d 29  |j 2015  |e 3  |b 21  |c 06  |h 668-79