Institutes
Refine
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
Institute
- Biowissenschaften (4) (remove)
Climatic niches describe the climatic conditions in which species can persist. Shifts in climatic niches have been observed to coincide with major climatic change, suggesting that species adapt to new conditions. We test the relationship between rates of climatic niche evolution and paleoclimatic conditions through time for 65 Old-World flycatcher species (Aves: Muscicapidae). We combine niche quantification for all species with dated phylogenies to infer past changes in the rates of niche evolution for temperature and precipitation niches. Paleoclimatic conditions were inferred independently using two datasets: a paleoelevation reconstruction and the mammal fossil record. We find changes in climatic niches through time, but no or weak support for a relationship between niche evolution rates and rates of paleoclimatic change for both temperature and precipitation niche and for both reconstruction methods. In contrast, the inferred relationship between climatic conditions and niche evolution rates depends on paleoclimatic reconstruction method: rates of temperature niche evolution are significantly negatively related to absolute temperatures inferred using the paleoelevation model but not those reconstructed from the fossil record. We suggest that paleoclimatic change might be a weak driver of climatic niche evolution in birds and highlight the need for greater integration of different paleoclimate reconstructions.
The establishment and maintenance of protected areas(PAs) is viewed as a key action in delivering post-2020 biodiversity targets. PAs often need to meet a multitude of objectives, ranging from biodiversity protection to ecosystem service provision and climate change mitigation. As available land and conservation funding are limited, optimizing resources by selecting the most beneficial PAs is vital. Here we present a decision support tool that enables a flexible approach to PA selection on a global scale, allowing different conservation objectives to be weighted and prioritized according to user-specified preferences. We apply the tool across 1347 terrestrial PAs and highlight frequent trade-offs among different objectives, e.g., between biodiversity protection and ecosystem integrity. These results indicate that decision makers must usually decide among conflicting objectives. To assist this our decision support tool provides an explicitly value-based approach that can help resolve such conflicts by considering divergent societal and political demands and values.
Establishing and maintaining protected areas (PAs) is a key action in delivering post-2020 biodiversity targets. PAs often need to meet multiple objectives, ranging from biodiversity protection to ecosystem service provision and climate change mitigation, but available land and conservation funding is limited. Therefore, optimizing resources by selecting the most beneficial PAs is vital. Here, we advocate for a flexible and transparent approach to selecting PAs based on multiple objectives, and illustrate this with a decision support tool on a global scale. The tool allows weighting and prioritization of different conservation objectives according to user-specified preferences as well as real-time comparison of the outcome. Applying the tool across 1,346 terrestrial PAs, we demonstrate that decision makers frequently face trade-offs among conflicting objectives, e.g., between species protection and ecosystem integrity. Nevertheless, we show that transparent decision support tools can reveal synergies and trade-offs associated with PA selection, thereby helping to illuminate and resolve land-use conflicts embedded in divergent societal and political demands and values.
The establishment and maintenance of protected areas (PAs) is viewed as a key action in delivering post-2020 biodiversity targets. PAs often need to meet multiple objectives, ranging from biodiversity protection to ecosystem service provision and climate change mitigation, but available land and conservation funding is limited. Therefore, optimizing resources by selecting the most beneficial PAs is vital. Here, we advocate for a flexible and transparent approach to selecting protected areas based on multiple objectives, and illustrate this with a decision support tool on a global scale. The tool allows weighting and prioritization of different conservation objectives according to user-specified preferences, as well as real-time comparison of the selected areas that result from such different priorities. We apply the tool across 1347 terrestrial PAs and highlight frequent trade-offs among different objectives, e.g., between species protection and ecosystem integrity. Outputs indicate that decision makers frequently face trade-offs among conflicting objectives. Nevertheless, we show that transparent decision-support tools can reveal synergies and trade-offs associated with PA selection, thereby helping to illuminate and resolve land-use conflicts embedded in divergent societal and political demands and values.