A multitaxonomic assessment of Natura 2000 effectiveness across European biogeographic regions

AbstractThe Natura 2000 (N2K) protected area (PA) network is a crucial tool to limit biodiversity loss in Europe. Despite covering 18% of EU's land area, its effectiveness at conserving biodiversity across taxa and biogeographic regions remains uncertain. Testing this effectiveness is, however, difficult as it requires considering the non‐random location of PAs, and many possible confounding factors. Here, we used propensity score matching accounting for the confounding effects of biogeographic regions, terrain ruggedness, and land cover, when assessing the effectiveness of N2K PAs on the distribution of 1,769 priority species from EU's Birds and Habitats Directives, including mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, arthropods, fishes, molluscs, vascular and non‐vascular plants. We compared alpha, beta, and gamma diversity between matched selections of protected and non‐protected areas across EU's biogeographic regions using generalized linear models, generalized mixed models, and non‐parametric tests for paired samples, respectively, for each taxonomic group and for the entire set of species. While we found N2K PAs to host significantly more priority species than non‐protected land, this difference was not consistent across biogeographic regions and taxa. Total alpha diversity as well as alpha diversity of amphibians, arthropods, birds, mammals, and vascular plants were significantly higher inside PAs than outside, except in the Boreal region. Beta diversity was in general significantly higher inside N2K PAs than outside. Similarly, gamma diversity showed the highest values within N2K PAs, with some exceptions in Boreal and Atlantic regions. The planned expansion of the N2K network, as dictated by the European Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, should therefore target areas in the southern part of the Boreal region, areas with high species diversity of amphibians, arthropods, birds, mammals, and vascular plants, which are currently underrepresented in the N2K network.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserve

Investigating elevational gradients of species richness in a Mediterranean plant hotspot using a published flora

The Apuan Alps are one of the most peculiar mountain chain in the Mediterranean, being very close to the coastline and reaching an elevation of almost 2000 m. Based on published flora, we investigated the distribution of plant species richness along the whole elevational gradient of this chain considering: (i) all species, (ii) endemic versus alien species; and (iii) functional groups of species based on Raunkiær life forms (RLF). Generalized Linear Models (GLMs) were used to analyse richness patterns along the elevational gradient, and elevational richness models versus the area of the elevational belts were fitted to test the effect of surface area. Our results showed decreasing species richness with increasing elevation. In contrast, endemic species richness increased along the elevational gradient. Alien species were mainly distributed at low elevations, but this result should be taken with caution since we used historical data. Species life forms were not equally distributed along the elevation gradient: chamaephytes and hemicryptophytes were the richest groups at high elevations, while therophytes showed highest species richness at low elevations. Our findings suggest that in the Apuan Alps there is a major elevational gradient in species composition that could reflect plant evolutionary history. Furthermore, we highlight the key role of published floras as a relevant source of biodiversity data.publishedVersio

Investigating sacred natural sites and protected areas for forest area changes in Italy

Forests will be critical to mitigate the effects of climate and global changes. Therefore, knowledge on the drivers of forest area changes are important. Although the drivers of deforestation are well known, drivers of afforestation are almost unexplored. Moreover, protected areas (PAs) effectively decrease deforestation, but other types of area-based conservation measures exist. Among these, sacred natural sites (SNS) deliver positive conservation out- comes while making up an extensive “shadow network” of conservation. How- ever, little is known on the capacity of SNS to regulate land-use changes. Here, we explored the role of SNS and PAs as drivers of forest loss and forest gain in Italy between 1936 and 2018. We performed a descriptive analysis and modeled forest gain and forest loss by means of spatial binomial generalized linear models with residual autocovariates. The main drivers of forest area changes were geographical position and elevation, nonetheless SNS and PAs significantly decreased forest loss and increased forest gain. Although the neg- ative relationship between SNS and forest loss is a desirable outcome, the posi- tive relationship with forest gain is concerning because it could point to abandonment of cultural landscapes with consequent loss of open habitats. We suggest a legal recognition of SNS and an active ecological monitoring and planning to help maintain their positive role in biodiversity conservation. As a novel conservation planning approach, SNS can be used as stepping stones between PAs increasing connectivity and also to conserve small habitat patches threatened by human activities

Probabilistic and preferential sampling approaches offer integrated perspectives of Italian forest diversity

Aim: Assessing the performances of different sampling approaches for documenting community diversity may help to identify optimal sampling efforts and strategies, and to enhance conservation and monitoring planning. Here, we used two data sets based on probabilistic and preferential sampling schemes of Italian forest vegetation to analyze the multifaceted performances of the two approaches across three major forest types at a large scale. Location: Italy. Methods: We pooled 804 probabilistic and 16,259 preferential forest plots as samples of vascular plant diversity across the country. We balanced the two data sets in terms of sizes, plot size, geographical position, and vegetation types. For each of the two data sets, 1000 subsets of 201 random plots were compared by calculating the shared and exclusive indicator species, their overlap in the multivariate space, and the areas encompassed by spatially-constrained rarefaction curves. We then calculated an index of performance using the ratio between the additional and total information collected by each sampling approach. The performances were tested and evaluated across the three major forest types. Results: The probabilistic approach performed better in estimating species richness and diversity of species assemblages, but did not detect other components of the regional diversity, such as azonal forests. The preferential approach outperformed the probabilistic approach in detecting forest-specialist species and plant diversity hotspots. Conclusions: Using a novel workflow based on vegetation-plot exclusivities and commonalities, our study suggests probabilistic and preferential sampling approaches are to be used in combination for better conservation and monitor planning purposes to detect multiple aspects of plant community diversity. Our findings can assist the implementation of national conservation planning and large-scale monitoring of biodiversit

Diversity of European habitat types is correlated with geography more than climate and human pressure

Habitat richness, that is, the diversity of ecosystem types, is a complex, spatially explicit aspect of biodiversity, which is affected by bioclimatic, geographic, and anthropogenic variables. The distribution of habitat types is a key component for understanding broad-scale biodiversity and for developing conservation strategies. We used data on the distribution of European Union (EU) habitats to answer the following questions: (i) how do bioclimatic, geographic, and anthropogenic variables affect habitat richness? (ii) Which of those factors is the most important? (iii) How do interactions among these variables influence habitat richness and which combinations produce the strongest interactions? The distribution maps of 222 terrestrial habitat types as defined by the Natura 2000 network were used to calculate habitat richness for the 10 km × 10 km EU grid map. We then investigated how environmental variables affect habitat richness, using generalized linear models, generalized additive models, and boosted regression trees. The main factors associated with habitat richness were geographic variables, with negative relationships observed for both latitude and longitude, and a positive relationship for terrain ruggedness. Bioclimatic variables played a secondary role, with habitat richness increasing slightly with annual mean temperature and overall annual precipitation. We also found an interaction between anthropogenic variables, with the combination of increased landscape fragmentation and increased population density strongly decreasing habitat richness. This is the first attempt to disentangle spatial patterns of habitat richness at the continental scale, as a key tool for protecting biodiversity. The number of European habitats is related to geography more than climate and human pressure, reflecting a major component of biogeographical patterns similar to the drivers observed at the species level. The interaction between anthropogenic variables highlights the need for coordinated, continental-scale management plans for biodiversity conservation.Research contributing to this study was funded by the project “Development of a National Plan for Biodiversity Monitoring” (Italian National Institute for Environmental Protection and Research – ISPRA). BIOME Group was partially supported by the H2020 SHOWCASE (Grant agreement No 862480) and by the H2020 COST Action CA17134 ‘Optical synergies for spatiotemporal sensing of scalable ecophysiological traits (SENECO)’

A grid-based map for the biogeographical regions of Europe

© Pensoft Publishers. Background Biogeographical units are widely adopted in ecological research and nature conservation management, even though biogeographical regionalisation is still under scientific debate. The European Environment Agency provided an official map of the European Biogeographical Regions (EBRs), which contains the official boundaries used in the Habitats and Birds Directives. However, these boundaries bisect cells in the official EU 10 km x 10 km grid used for many purposes, including reporting species and habitat data, meaning that 6881 cells overlap two or more regions. Therefore, superimposing the EBRs vector map over the grid creates ambiguities in associating some cells with European Biogeographical Regions. New information To provide an operational tool to unambiguously define the boundaries of the eleven European Biogeographical Regions, we provide a specifically developed raster map of Grid-Based European Biogeographical Regions (GB-EBRs). In this new map, the borders of the EBRs are reshaped to coherently match the standard European 10 km x 10 km grid imposed for reporting tasks by Article 17 of the Habitats Directive and used for many other datasets. We assign each cell to the EBR with the largest area within the cell

Analysing the distribution of strictly protected areas toward the EU2030 target

Protecting global biodiversity is one of the most urgent tasks for the coming decades. Area-based conservation is a pillar for preserving ecosystems and species. Strictly protected areas specifically preserve biodiversity and ecosystem processes. The “EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030” targets strict protection for 10% of land area. Here we performed the first analysis of strictly protected areas (as IUCN type Ia, Ib, and II) across Europe, by investigating their area coverage at the level of biogeographical regions, countries and elevation gradients. We show that, with few exceptions, the amount of strictly protected area is very limited and the spatial distribution of such protected areas is biased towards higher elevation sites, as in the case of other protected areas. Then, we suggest that potential areas should be identified to expand strictly protected areas with low economic and social costs including, for instance, areas with high biodiversity value, low population, and low productive land use. Finally, we propose that a coordinated effort and a strategic plan to achieve continental-scale conservation are fundamental, and at least half of this land under strict conservation (i.e. 5%) should be under the protection categories Ia and Ib

An overview of the Italian forest biodiversity and its conservation level, based on the first outcomes of the 4th Habitat Report ex-Art. 17

In 2019 the 4th Report ex-Art. 17 on the conservation status (CS) of Annex I Habitats of the 92/43/EEC Directive was expected by every EU/28 country, with reference to the period 2013-18. In Italy, the process was in charge to the Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), on behalf of the Ministry for Environment, Land and Sea Protection (MATTM), with the scientific support of the Italian Botanical Society (SBI). A large group of thematic and territorial experts elaborated the available data concerning the 124 types of terrestrial and inland water Habitats present in Italy, 39 of which are represented by Forest Habitats (Group 9),. The main aim of the work was the evaluation of the overall CS of each Habitat by Biogeographic Region (Mediterranean, Continental and Alpine), for a total amount of 294 assessments. A high proportion of these (92, corresponding to 31% of the total) referred to Forest Habitats, including 20 marginal types for which the CS was not requested. The analysis was carried out at different scales: a) administrative territory, through the data contained in the ISPRA database, whose compilation was in charge to the Regions and Autonomous Provinces; b) Natura 2000 site, with the latest updates available (Standard Data Forms updated to 2018); c) national scale, implementing the distribution maps for each Habitat based on the European grid ETRS89-LAEA5210 (10x10 km2 mesh); d) Biogeographic Region, scale of the final assessment. Cartographic outcomes, associated databases and additional data used for the assessments will be available online on the ISPRA Portal as soon as the validation process by the European Commission will be completed. A dedicated archive named "HAB_IT" has been created in the national database "VegItaly" (1), managed by the Italian Society of Vegetation Science, where the phytosociological relevés representative of the various Annex I Habitats in Italy will be archived and freely accessible. An overview of the results regarding the Forest habitats is here provided, including a comparison with the outcomes of the former reporting cycle, the 3rd Report ex-Art. 17 (2). In several cases (e.g. 9120, 91L0), the distribution maps have been remarkably improved due to better knowledge and more fitful interpretation. The conservation status resulted as Favourable (FV) for 6,7%, Inadequate (U1) for 58,7% and Bad (U1) for 32,0% of the 72 assessed forest Habitat types. In no case there was an improvement of the conservation status, while in 6 cases a worsening of the conditions resulted from the data analysis, pointing out the Habitats types with a higher need of action. Similarly to other projects carried out as a team by the network of Annex I Habitat experts of the Italian Botanical Society and the Italian Society for Vegetation Science (e.g. 3, 4), this is another step in the direction of supporting the implementation of the 92/43/EEC "Habitat" Directive in Italy and Europe. On this ground, the high biodiversity of the Italian forest Habitats could be emphasized, however results pointed out that some rare or endemic types (e.g. Alnus cordata or Betula aetnensis-dominated forests) are still scarcely acknowledged by the most prominent EU conservation tools such as the Annex I to the "Habitat" Directive. 1) F. Landucci et al. (2012) Plant Biosyst., 146(4), 756-763 2) P. Genovesi et al. (2014) ISPRA, Serie Rapporti, 194/2014 3) E. Biondi et al. (2009) Società Botanica Italiana, MATTM, D.P.N., http://vnr.unipg.it/habitat/ 4) D. Gigante et al. (2016) Plant Sociology, 53(2), 77-8

Diversity of European habitat types is correlated with geography more than climate and human pressure

Habitat richness, that is, the diversity of ecosystem types, is a complex, spatially explicit aspect of biodiversity, which is affected by bioclimatic, geographic, and anthropogenic variables. The distribution of habitat types is a key component for understanding broad-scale biodiversity and for developing conservation strategies. We used data on the distribution of European Union (EU) habitats to answer the following questions: (i) how do bioclimatic, geographic, and anthropogenic variables affect habitat richness? (ii) Which of those factors is the most important? (iii) How do interactions among these variables influence habitat richness and which combinations produce the strongest interactions? The distribution maps of 222 terrestrial habitat types as defined by the Natura 2000 network were used to calculate habitat richness for the 10 km × 10 km EU grid map. We then investigated how environmental variables affect habitat richness, using generalized linear models, generalized additive models, and boosted regression trees. The main factors associated with habitat richness were geographic variables, with negative relationships observed for both latitude and longitude, and a positive relationship for terrain ruggedness. Bioclimatic variables played a secondary role, with habitat richness increasing slightly with annual mean temperature and overall annual precipitation. We also found an interaction between anthropogenic variables, with the combination of increased landscape fragmentation and increased population density strongly decreasing habitat richness. This is the first attempt to disentangle spatial patterns of habitat richness at the continental scale, as a key tool for protecting biodiversity. The number of European habitats is related to geography more than climate and human pressure, reflecting a major component of biogeographical patterns similar to the drivers observed at the species level. The interaction between anthropogenic variables highlights the need for coordinated, continental-scale management plans for biodiversity conservation