Building indicator groups based on species characteristics can improve conservation planning

How well can indicator groups, as sets of species with well-known distributions, represent the distribution of overall biodiversity to select networks of areas for conservation? In the literature, reliable indicator groups of complementarity have proven difficult to find, with some taxon-based indicator groups resulting in no more species represented than when areas are chosen at random. We rigorously test which quantifiable characteristics of species make them better components of indicator groups of complementarity in area networks. We find that even indicator groups comprised of randomly chosen, taxonomically unrelated species perform better than randomly chosen areas, and we demonstrate the improved efficiency of protected-area networks possible when using indicator groups chosen on the basis of species’ characteristics.

[1]  B. Mathew,et al.  Atlas Florae Europaeae. Distribution of Vascular Plants in Europe. 9 Paeoniaceae to Capparaceae , 1973 .

[2]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Classification and Regression Trees , 1984 .

[3]  C. Rahbek,et al.  Flagship species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub‐Saharan Africa , 2000 .

[4]  W. Hagemeijer,et al.  The EBCC Atlas of European Breeding Birds , 1997 .

[5]  G. Daily,et al.  Does butterfly diversity predict moth diversity? Testing a popular indicator taxon at local scales , 2002 .

[6]  R. Noss.  Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach , 1990 .

[7]  Claire Kremen,et al.  Assessing the Indicator Properties of Species Assemblages for Natural Areas Monitoring. , 1992, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[8]  W. V. Reid,et al.  Biodiversity hotspots. , 1998, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[9]  Randall T Ryti,et al.  Effect of the Focal Taxon on the Selection of Nature Reserves. , 1992, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[10]  J. Swenson,et al.  Conservation of biodiversity in Scandinavian boreal forests: large carnivores as flagships, umbrellas, indicators, or keystones? , 2000, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[11]  Paul H. Williams,et al.  Biodiversity indicators: graphical techniques, smoothing and searching for what makes relationships work , 1998 .

[12]  Jan Zima,et al.  The Atlas of European Mammals , 1999 .

[13]  J. Downing,et al.  CRC Handbook of Mammalian Body Masses , 1995 .

[14]  Andrew Balmford,et al.  Complementarity and the use of indicator groups for reserve selection in Uganda , 1998, Nature.

[15]  Mansell,et al.  Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategies , 1998, Science.

[16]  J. Diamond,et al.  Dinosaurs, dragons, and dwarfs: The evolution of maximal body size , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  C. Rahbek,et al.  Integrating biodiversity priorities with conflicting socio-economic values in the Guinean–Congolian forest region , 2003, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[18]  T. Halliday,et al.  Atlas of Amphibians and Reptiles in Europe , 1997 .

[19]  Carsten Rahbek,et al.  Cross‐taxon congruence in complementarity and conservation of temperate biodiversity , 2002 .

[20]  J. Travis,et al.  Flexibility and the use of indicator taxa in the selection of sites for nature reserves , 2001, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[21]  J. Lawton,et al.  Rare species, the coincidence of diversity hotspots and conservation strategies , 1993, Nature.

[22]  D. Pearson,et al.  Global Patterns of Species Richness: Spatial Models for Conservation Planning Using Bioindicator and Precipitation Data , 1998 .

[23]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  A Comparison of Richness Hotspots, Rarity Hotspots, and Complementary Areas for Conserving Diversity of British Birds , 1996 .

[24]  S. Andelman,et al.  Umbrellas and flagships: efficient conservation surrogates or expensive mistakes? , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  J. W. Thomas,et al.  Ecological Uses of Vertebrate Indicator Species: A Critique , 1988 .

[26]  P. Walker,et al.  How do indicator groups provide information about the relative biodiversity of different sets of areas?: on hotspots, complementarity and pattern-based approaches , 1996 .