Addressing longitudinal connectivity in the systematic conservation planning of fresh waters

SUMMARY 1. Freshwater conservation has received less attention than its terrestrial or marine counterparts. Given the accelerated rate of change and intensive human use that freshwater ecosystems are submitted to, it is urgent to focus more attention on fresh waters. Existing conservation planning tools – such as Marxan – need to be modified to account for the special nature of these systems. Connectivity plays a key role in freshwater ecosystems. Threats are mediated along river corridors, and the condition of the entire catchment influences river biodiversity downstream. This needs to be considered in conservation planning. 2. The probabilities of occurrence of nine native freshwater fish species in a Mediterranean river basin, obtained from Multivariate Adaptive Regression SplinesGeneralized Linear Model (MARS-GLM) models, were used as features to develop spatial conservation priorities. The priorities accounted for complementarity and spatial design issues. 3. To deal with the connected nature of rivers, we modified Marxan’s boundary length penalty, avoiding the selection of isolated planning units and forcing the inclusion of closer upstream areas. We introduced ‘virtual boundaries’ between nonheadwater stream segments and added distance-weighted penalties to the overall connectivity cost (CP) when stream segments upstream of the selected planning units are not selected. 4. This approach to prioritising connectivity is concordant with ecological theory, as it considers the natural and roughly exponential decay of upstream influences with distance. It accounts for the natural capacity of rivers to mitigate impacts when designing reserves. When connectivity was not emphasised, Marxan prioritised natural corridors for longitudinal movements. In contrast, whole sub-basins were prioritised when connectivity was emphasised. Changing the relative emphasis on connectivity substantially changed the spatial prioritisation; our conservation investment could move from one basin to another. 5. Our novel approach to dealing with directional connectivity enables managers of freshwater systems to set ecologically meaningful spatial conservation priorities.

[1]  S. Linke,et al.  Identifying priority sites for the conservation of freshwater fish biodiversity in a Mediterranean basin with a high degree of threatened endemics , 2009, Hydrobiologia.

[2]  B. Kendall,et al.  Striking a Balance between Biodiversity Conservation and Socioeconomic Viability in the Design of Marine Protected Areas , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[3]  Hugh P Possingham,et al.  Planning for persistence in marine reserves: a question of catastrophic importance. , 2008, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[4]  Jane Elith,et al.  A method for spatial freshwater conservation prioritization , 2008 .

[5]  Richard M Cowling,et al.  Conservation planning in a changing world. , 2007, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[6]  S. Sarkar,et al.  Systematic conservation planning , 2000, Nature.

[7]  Robert C. Bailey,et al.  Management options for river conservation planning: condition and conservation re‐visited , 2007 .

[8]  Jane Elith,et al.  Predicting species distributions from museum and herbarium records using multiresponse models fitted with multivariate adaptive regression splines , 2007 .

[9]  Dirk J. Roux,et al.  Rivers in peril inside and outside protected areas: a systematic approach to conservation assessment of river ecosystems , 2007 .

[10]  T. Light,et al.  Distinguishing between Invasions and Habitat Changes as Drivers of Diversity Loss among California's Freshwater Fishes , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[11]  JEFFREY D. PARRISH,et al.  Improving the Key Biodiversity Areas Approach for Effective Conservation Planning , 2007 .

[12]  T. Hastie,et al.  Comparative performance of generalized additive models and multivariate adaptive regression splines for statistical modelling of species distributions , 2006 .

[13]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  Replacement cost: A practical measure of site value for cost-effective reserve planning , 2006 .

[14]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  Connectivity, Probabilities and Persistence: Comparing Reserve Selection Strategies , 2006, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[15]  Jonathan B. Oetting,et al.  Systematic reserve design as a dynamic process: F-TRAC and the Florida Forever program , 2006 .

[16]  J. L. Parra,et al.  Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas , 2005 .

[17]  T. Hastie,et al.  Using multivariate adaptive regression splines to predict the distributions of New Zealand ’ s freshwater diadromous fish , 2005 .

[18]  J. Prenda,et al.  Fish–habitat relationships and fish conservation in small coastal streams in southern Spain , 2005 .

[19]  Robert L Pressey,et al.  Measuring and Incorporating Vulnerability into Conservation Planning , 2005, Environmental management.

[20]  J. Elith,et al.  Sensitivity of conservation planning to different approaches to using predicted species distribution data , 2005 .

[21]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, 2nd Edition , 2001, Springer Series in Statistics.

[22]  Matthew E. Watts,et al.  Is maximizing protection the same as minimizing loss? Efficiency and retention as alternative measures of the effectiveness of proposed reserves , 2004 .

[23]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  Combining probabilities of occurrence with spatial reserve design , 2004 .

[24]  Ian G. Cowx,et al.  Selection of Priority Areas for Fish Conservation in Guadiana River Basin, Iberian Peninsula , 2004 .

[25]  G. Teugels,et al.  Fish diversity and its relationships with environmental variables in a West African basin , 2003, Hydrobiologia.

[26]  Mar Cabeza,et al.  Habitat loss and connectivity of reserve networks in probability approaches to reserve design , 2003 .

[27]  J. Olden.  A Species‐Specific Approach to Modeling Biological Communities and Its Potential for Conservation , 2003 .

[28]  H. Dunn.  Can Conservation Assessment Criteria Developed for Terrestrial Systems be Applied to Riverine Systems? , 2003 .

[29]  Paul H. Williams,et al.  Dynamics of extinction and the selection of nature reserves , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  R. Abell.  Conservation Biology for the Biodiversity Crisis: a Freshwater Follow‐up , 2002 .

[31]  R. L. Pressey,et al.  Representing biodiversity: Data and procedures for identifying priority areas for conservation , 2002, Journal of Biosciences.

[32]  B. Malmqvist,et al.  Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world , 2002, Environmental Conservation.

[33]  K. Fausch,et al.  Landscapes to Riverscapes: Bridging the Gap between Research and Conservation of Stream Fishes , 2002 .

[34]  J. Wiens.  Riverine landscapes: taking landscape ecology into the water , 2002 .

[35]  K. Tockner,et al.  Riverine landscape diversity , 2002 .

[36]  K. Tockner,et al.  Landscape ecology: a framework for integrating pattern and process in river corridors , 2002, Landscape Ecology.

[37]  J. Meeuwig,et al.  Freshwater Protected Areas: Strategies for Conservation , 2002, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[38]  C. Pringle.  HYDROLOGIC CONNECTIVITY AND THE MANAGEMENT OF BIOLOGICAL RESERVES: A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE , 2001 .

[39]  Miguel B. Araújo,et al.  Selecting areas for species persistence using occurrence data , 2000 .

[40]  Simon Ferrier,et al.  Using abiotic data for conservation assessments over extensive regions : quantitative methods applied across New South Wales, Australia , 2000 .

[41]  Andrew R. Solow,et al.  Choosing reserve networks with incomplete species information , 2000 .

[42]  Simon Ferrier,et al.  A new predictor of the irreplaceability of areas for achieving a conservation goal, its application to real-world planning, and a research agenda for further refinement , 2000 .

[43]  V. Resh,et al.  Streams in Mediterranean Climate Regions: Abiotic Influences and Biotic Responses to Predictable Seasonal Events , 1999 .

[44]  Sahotra Sarkar,et al.  Wilderness preservation and biodiversity conservation—keeping divergent goals distinct , 1999 .

[45]  R. L. Knight,et al.  Private Lands: The Neglected Geography , 1999 .

[46]  Angela Lee,et al.  Perspectives on … Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc , 1997 .

[47]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves , 1997 .

[48]  John Bell,et al.  A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models , 1997, Environmental Conservation.

[49]  J. Prenda,et al.  Self-purification, temporal variability and the macroinvertebrate community in small lowland Mediterranean streams receiving crude domestic sewage effluents , 1996 .

[50]  E. Werner,et al.  MECHANISMS CREATING COMMUNITY STRUCTURE ACROSS A FRESHWATER HABITAT GRADIENT , 1996 .

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

[52]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  The cost of ad hoc reservation: a case study in western New South Wales. , 1994 .

[53]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  Ad Hoc Reservations: Forward or Backward Steps in Developing Representative Reserve Systems? , 1994 .

[54]  R L Pressey,et al.  Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection. , 1993, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[55]  J. Ward,et al.  The Four-Dimensional Nature of Lotic Ecosystems , 1989, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[56]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Generalized additive models for medical research , 1995, Statistical methods in medical research.

[57]  Matthew E. Watts,et al.  Incorporating ecological and evolutionary processes into continental-scale conservation planning. , 2009, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[58]  W. Darwall,et al.  The Status and Distribution of the Freshwater Fish Endemic to the Mediterranean Basin , 2006 .

[59]  W. A. Rochester,et al.  Conservation planning with irreplaceability: does the method matter? , 2006, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[60]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Protected areas: Goals, limitations, and design , 2006 .

[61]  J. Franklin,et al.  The Roles of Spatial Heterogeneity and Ecological Processes in Conservation Planning , 2005 .

[62]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Opportunity cost of ad hoc marine reserve design decisions: an example from South Australia , 2003 .

[63]  D. Maidment.  Arc hydro : GIS for water resources , 2002 .

[64]  S. Andelman,et al.  Mathematical Methods for Identifying Representative Reserve Networks , 2000 .

[65]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Optimality in reserve selection algorithms: When does it matter and how much? , 1996 .

[66]  Alexander S. Flecker,et al.  Biodiversity conservation in running waters , 1993 .

[67]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  Efficiency in conservation evaluation: Scoring versus iterative approaches , 1989 .

[68]  A. O. Nicholls,et al.  Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity , 1988 .

[69]  G. Minshall,et al.  The River Continuum Concept , 1980 .