Why and how might genetic and phylogenetic diversity be reflected in the identification of key biodiversity areas?

‘Key biodiversity areas' are defined as sites contributing significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity. The identification of these sites builds from existing approaches based on measures of species and ecosystem diversity and process. Here, we therefore build from the work of Sgró et al. (2011 Evol. Appl. 4, 326–337. (doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2010.00157.x)) to extend a framework for how components of genetic diversity might be considered in the identification of key biodiversity areas. We make three recommendations to inform the ongoing process of consolidating a key biodiversity areas standard: (i) thresholds for the threatened species criterion currently consider a site's share of a threatened species' population; expand these to include the proportion of the species' genetic diversity unique to a site; (ii) expand criterion for ‘threatened species' to consider ‘threatened taxa’ and (iii) expand the centre of endemism criterion to identify as key biodiversity areas those sites holding a threshold proportion of the compositional or phylogenetic diversity of species (within a taxonomic group) whose restricted ranges collectively define a centre of endemism. We also recommend consideration of occurrence of EDGE species (i.e. threatened phylogenetic diversity) in key biodiversity areas to prioritize species-specific conservation actions among sites

Assessing the cost of global biodiversity and conservation knowledge

Knowledge products comprise assessments of authoritative information supported by standards, governance, quality control, data, tools, and capacity building mechanisms. Considerable resources are dedicated to developing and maintaining knowledge products for biodiversity conservation, and they are widely used to inform policy and advise decision makers and practitioners. However, the financial cost of delivering this information is largely undocumented. We evaluated the costs and funding sources for developing and maintaining four global biodiversity and conservation knowledge products: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, Protected Planet, and the World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas. These are secondary data sets, built on primary data collected by extensive networks of expert contributors worldwide. We estimate that US$160 million (range: US$116-204 million), plus 293 person-years of volunteer time (range: 278-308 person-years) valued at US$14 million (range US$12-16 million), were invested in these four knowledge products between 1979 and 2013. More than half of this financing was provided through philanthropy, and nearly three-quarters was spent on personnel costs. The estimated annual cost of maintaining data and platforms for three of these knowledge products (excluding the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems for which annual costs were not possible to estimate for 2013 ) is US$6.5 million in total (range: US$6.2-6.7 million). We estimated that an additional US$114 million will be needed to reach pre-defined baselines of data coverage for all the four knowledge products, and that once achieved, annual maintenance costs will be approximately US$12 million. These costs are much lower than those to maintain many other, similarly important, global knowledge products. Ensuring that biodiversity and conservation knowledge products are sufficiently up to date, comprehensive and accurate is fundamental to inform decision-making for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Thus, the development and implementation of plans for sustainable long-term financing for them is critical

Utility of In Vivo Transcription Profiling for Identifying Pseudomonas aeruginosa Genes Needed for Gastrointestinal Colonization and Dissemination

Microarray analysis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa mRNA transcripts expressed in vivo during animal infection has not been previously used to investigate potential virulence factors needed in this setting. We compared mRNA expression in bacterial cells recovered from the gastrointestinal (GI) tracts of P. aeruginosa-colonized mice to that of P. aeruginosa in the drinking water used to colonize the mice. Genes associated with biofilm formation and type III secretion (T3SS) had markedly increased expression in the GI tract. A non-redundant transposon library in P. aeruginosa strain PA14 was used to test mutants in genes identified as having increased transcription during in vivo colonization. All of the Tn-library mutants in biofilm-associated genes had an attenuated ability to form biofilms in vitro, but there were no significant differences in GI colonization and dissemination between these mutants and WT P. aeruginosa PA14. To evaluate T3SS factors, we tested GI colonization and neutropenia-induced dissemination of both deletional (PAO1 and PAK) and insertional (PA14) mutants in four genes in the P. aeruginosa T3SS, exoS or exoU, exoT, and popB. There were no significant differences in GI colonization among these mutant strains and their WT counterparts, whereas rates of survival following dissemination were significantly decreased in mice infected by the T3SS mutant strains. However, there was a variable, strain-dependent effect on overall survival between parental and T3SS mutants. Thus, increased transcription of genes during in vivo murine GI colonization is not predictive of an essential role for the gene product in either colonization or overall survival following induction of neutropenia

Synergies between the key biodiversity area and systematic conservation planning approaches

Systematic conservation planning and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are the two most widely used approaches for identifying important sites for biodiversity. However, there is limited advice for conservation policy makers and practitioners on when and how they should be combined. Here we provide such guidance, using insights from the recently developed Global Standard for the Identification of KBAs and the language of decision science to review and clarify their similarities and differences. We argue the two approaches are broadly similar, with both setting transparent environmental objectives and specifying actions. There is however greater contrast in the data used and actions involved, as the KBA approach uses biodiversity data alone and identifies sites for monitoring and vigilance actions at a minimum, whereas systematic conservation planning combines biodiversity and implementation‐relevant data to guide management actions. This difference means there is much scope for combining approaches, so conservation planners should use KBA data in their analyses, setting context‐specific targets for each KBA type, and planners and donors should use systematic conservation planning techniques when prioritizing between KBAs for management action. In doing so, they will benefit conservation policy, practice and research by building on the collaborations formed through the KBA Standard's development

The Biodiversity of the Mediterranean Sea: Estimates, Patterns, and Threats

The Mediterranean Sea is a marine biodiversity hot spot. Here we combined an extensive literature analysis with expert opinions to update publicly available estimates of major taxa in this marine ecosystem and to revise and update several species lists. We also assessed overall spatial and temporal patterns of species diversity and identified major changes and threats. Our results listed approximately 17,000 marine species occurring in the Mediterranean Sea. However, our estimates of marine diversity are still incomplete as yet—undescribed species will be added in the future. Diversity for microbes is substantially underestimated, and the deep-sea areas and portions of the southern and eastern region are still poorly known. In addition, the invasion of alien species is a crucial factor that will continue to change the biodiversity of the Mediterranean, mainly in its eastern basin that can spread rapidly northwards and westwards due to the warming of the Mediterranean Sea. Spatial patterns showed a general decrease in biodiversity from northwestern to southeastern regions following a gradient of production, with some exceptions and caution due to gaps in our knowledge of the biota along the southern and eastern rims. Biodiversity was also generally higher in coastal areas and continental shelves, and decreases with depth. Temporal trends indicated that overexploitation and habitat loss have been the main human drivers of historical changes in biodiversity. At present, habitat loss and degradation, followed by fishing impacts, pollution, climate change, eutrophication, and the establishment of alien species are the most important threats and affect the greatest number of taxonomic groups. All these impacts are expected to grow in importance in the future, especially climate change and habitat degradation. The spatial identification of hot spots highlighted the ecological importance of most of the western Mediterranean shelves (and in particular, the Strait of Gibraltar and the adjacent Alboran Sea), western African coast, the Adriatic, and the Aegean Sea, which show high concentrations of endangered, threatened, or vulnerable species. The Levantine Basin, severely impacted by the invasion of species, is endangered as well

Evaluer la peur de tomber chez les personnes âgées à domicile: Un modèle qualitatif

Cet article (2006) décrit la démarche qui a fondé le développement de l'instrument d'évaluation de la peur de tomber à travers des "portraits" chez des personnes âgées vivant à domicile "chuteuses ou non chuteuses" (non publiés). Une analyse qualitative originale a été développée dans ce contexte la QUAPA (QUAlitative Pattern Analysis): une analyse des patterns permettant de décrire les différents degrés d'intensité auxquels la peur de tomber est décrites par les personnes âgées elles-mêmes. Cet instrument se base sur une validité "écologique". Il s'ancre dans le vécu des personnes âgées tel qu'il est rapporté et décrit par elles. L'évaluation de la peur de tomber réalisée à l'aide de ces portraits doit être confrontée à celle effectuée à l'aide d'autres instruments validés et largement utilisés dans le domaine de l'évaluation de la peur de tomber: FES, FES-I. Autres références publiées: Piot-Ziegler C (2002). La peur de tomber: comment l'évaluer ? Actualités Psychologiques, 12, 51-68. In C. Piot-Ziegler, (Vol. Ed.), Actualités Psychologiques: Vol. 12. Les chutes chez les personnes âgées: une approche interdisciplinaire (pp. 1-120). Piot-Ziegler C, Cuttelod T et Santiago M (2007). Définir la "peur de tomber" chez les personnes âgées à domicile. Etude qualitative. Bulletin de psychologie, 60(6), nov-déc, 515-525. Références non publiées: Piot-Ziegler C, Cuttelod T (2004). Evaluation de la peur de tomber: portraits issus du vécu des patients (questionnaire-portraits pour évaluer la peur de tomber chez des personnes âgées « chuteuses et non chuteuses ». Piot-Ziegler C, Cuttelod T (2004). Evaluation de la peur de tomber: portraits issus du vécu des patients (Guide de l'utilisateur).L'objectif de cet article (rédigé en 2006) est de dégager un modèle permettant d'évaluer l'intensité de la peur de tomber chez des personnes âgées vivant à domicile sur la base de données qualitatives récoltées dans une première étude (étude publiée: Piot-Ziegler et al. 2007).Dans cette étude qualitative, 58 entretiens semi-structurés ont été réalisés chez des personnes âgées vivant à domicile. Les thèmes abordés par les personnes âgées montrent que la peur de tomber se définit transversalement à travers les conséquences fonctionnelles, sociales et psychologiques consécutives à leur(s) chute(s).Afin d'explorer la possible existence de patterns, permettant de rendre compte de l'intensité de la peur de tomber, une méthode originale d'analyse qualitative (non informatisée) a été développée: la QUAPA (QUAlitative Patterns Analysis).Les résultats de cette analyse montrent l'existence d'une cohérence interne transversale (patterns) dans les trois dimensions définissant la peur de tomber (fonctionnelles, sociales et psychologiques) en fonction de l'intensité de la peur de tomber. Quatre patterns différents ont été mis en évidence. Ils débouchent sur une modélisation rendant compte des différents degrés d'intensité à laquelle la peur de tomber s'exprime chez les personnes âgées.Ce modèle en "patterns" permet d'évaluer la peur de tomber ressentie par une personne âgée en fonction des conséquences fonctionnelles, sociales et psychologiques à long terme consécutives à une ou plusieurs chutes. Ce modèle devra être mis à l'épreuve sur un grand échantillon de personnes âgées vivant à domicile ou dans d'autres espaces de vie (institutions), mais il constitue une alternative originale aux questionnaires utilisés actuellement qui se basent principalement sur le concept d'efficacité personnelle. Surtout il se base sur le vécu tel qu'il est rapporté par les personnes âgées elles-mêmes.Pour obtenir le questionnaire d'évaluation par "portraits" de la peur de tomber (e.mail: [email protected]). Les documents suivants seront mis à disposition.Piot-Ziegler et C, Cuttelod T (2004). Evaluation de la peur de tomber: portraits issus du vécu des patients (questionnaire-portraits pour évaluer la peur de tomber chez des personnes âgées « chuteuses et non chuteuses » (Questionnaire).Piot-Ziegler et C, Cuttelod T (2004). Evaluation de la peur de tomber: portraits issus du vécu des patients (Guide de l'utilisateur).Mots-clés : chute ; peur de tomber ; personne âgée ; domicile ; recherche; approche compréhensive ; évaluation ; méthode qualitative ; pattern, QUAPA