Freshwater megafauna diversity: Patterns, status and threats

Aim: Freshwater megafauna remain underrepresented in research and conservation, despite a disproportionately high risk of extinction due to multiple human threats. Therefore, our aims are threefold; (i) identify global patterns of freshwater megafauna richness and endemism, (ii) assess the conservation status of freshwater megafauna and (iii) demonstrate spatial and temporal patterns of human pressure throughout their distribution ranges. Location: Global. Methods: We identified 207 extant freshwater megafauna species, based on a 30 kg weight threshold, and mapped their distributions using HydroBASINS subcatchments (level 8). Information on conservation status and population trends for each species was extracted from the IUCN Red List website. We investigated human impacts on freshwater megafauna in space and time by examining spatial congruence between their distributions and human pressures, described by the Incident Biodiversity Threat Index and Temporal Human Pressure Index. Results: Freshwater megafauna occur in 76% of the world s main river basins (level 3 HydroBASINS), with species richness peaking in the Amazon, Congo, Orinoco, Mekong and Ganges-Brahmaputra basins. Freshwater megafauna are more threatened than their smaller counterparts within the specific taxonomic groups (i.e., fishes, mammals, reptiles and amphibians). Out of the 93 freshwater megafauna species with known population trends, 71% are in decline. Meanwhile, IUCN Red List assessments reported insufficient or outdated data for 43% of all freshwater megafauna species. Since the early 1990s, human pressure has increased throughout 63% of their distribution ranges, with particularly intense impacts occurring in the Mekong and Ganges-Brahmaputra basins. Main conclusions: Freshwater megafauna species are threatened globally, with intense and increasing human pressures occurring in many of their biodiversity hotspots. We call for research and conservation actions for freshwater megafauna, as they are highly sensitive to present and future pressures including a massive boom in hydropower dam construction in their biodiversity hotspots. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons LtdBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, Grant/Award Number: “GLANCE” project (01 LN1320A); European Union’s Horizon 2020 Programme for Research, Technological ?evelopment and demonstration, Grant/Award Number: AQUACROSS (642317); Villum Fonden, Grant/Award Number: VKR023371; Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (Erasmus Mundus Joint ?octorate programme “SMART”); EU Marie Sklodowska-Curie programme, Grant/Award Number: H2020-MSCA-IF-2015-706784, H2020-MSCA-IF-2016-748625; Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg (Junior Professorship Program

Quantifying uncertainty about how interventions are assigned would improve impact evaluation in conservation: reply to Rasolofoson 2022

Non peer reviewe

An assessment of threats to terrestrial protected areas

Protected areas (PAs) represent a cornerstone of efforts to safeguard biodiversity, and if effective should reduce threats to biodiversity. We present the most comprehensive assessment of threats to terrestrial PAs, based on in-situ data from 1,961 PAs across 149 countries, assessed by PA managers and local stakeholders. Unsustainable hunting was the most commonly reported threat and occurred in 61% of all PAs, followed by disturbance from recreational activities occurring in 55%, and natural system modifications from fire or its suppression in 49%. The number of reported threats was lower in PAs with greater remoteness, higher control of corruption and lower human development scores. The main reported threats in developing countries were linked to overexploitation for resource extraction, while negative impacts from recreational activities dominated in developed countries. Our results show that many of the most serious threats to PAs are difficult to monitor with remote sensing, and highlight the importance of in situ threat data to inform the implementation of more effective biodiversity conservation in the global protected area estate

A global analysis of management capacity and ecological outcomes in terrestrial protected areas

Protecting important sites is a key strategy for halting the loss of biodiversity. However, our understanding of the relationship between management inputs and biodiversity outcomes in protected areas (PAs) remains weak. Here, we examine biodiversity outcomes using species population trends in PAs derived from the Living Planet Database in relation to management data derived from the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) database for 217 population time‐series from 73 PAs. We found a positive relationship between our METT‐based scores for Capacity and Resources and changes in vertebrate abundance, consistent with the hypothesis that PAs require adequate resourcing to halt biodiversity loss. Additionally, PA age was negatively correlated with trends for the mammal subsets and PA size negatively correlated with population trends in the global subset. Our study highlights the paucity of appropriate data for rigorous testing of the role of management in maintaining species populations across multiple sites, and describes ways to improve our understanding of PA performance

A global analysis of management capacity and ecological outcomes in terrestrial protected areas

Protecting important sites is a key strategy for halting the loss of biodiversity. However, our understanding of the relationship between management inputs and biodiversity outcomes in protected areas (PAs) remains weak. Here, we examine biodiversity outcomes using species population trends in PAs derived from the Living Planet Database in relation to management data derived from the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) database for 217 population time-series from 73 PAs. We found a positive relationship between our METT-based scores for Capacity and Resources and changes in vertebrate abundance, consistent with the hypothesis that PAs require adequate resourcing to halt biodiversity loss. Additionally, PA age was negatively correlated with trends for the mammal subsets and PA size negatively correlated with population trends in the global subset. Our study highlights the paucity of appropriate data for rigorous testing of the role of management in maintaining species populations across multiple sites, and describes ways to improve our understanding of PA performance

Evaluating impact using time-series data

This is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recordHumanity’s impact on the environment is increasing, as are strategies to conserve biodiversity, but a lack of understanding about how interventions affect ecological and conservation outcomes hampers decision-making. Time-series are often used to assess impacts, but ecologists tend to compare average values from before to after an impact; overlooking the potential for the intervention to elicit a change in trend. Without methods that allow for a range of responses, erroneous conclusions can be drawn. This is especially so for large, multi-time-series datasets which are increasingly available. Drawing on literature in other disciplines and pioneering work in ecology, we present a standardised framework to robustly assesses how interventions, like natural disasters or conservation policies, affect ecological time series.Royal Commission 1851Cambridge Trust Poynton ScholarshipCambridge Department of Zoology J.S. Gardiner StudentshipCambridge Philosophical SocietyAustralian Research Council (ARC)University of QueenslandEuropean Union Horizon 2020Villum FondenArcadiaLeverhulme Trus

Using the IUCN Red List to map threats to terrestrial vertebrates at global scale

The Anthropocene is characterized by unparalleled human impact on other species, potentially ushering in the sixth mass extinction. Yet mitigation efforts remain hampered by limited information on the spatial patterns and intensity of the threats driving global biodiversity loss. Here we use expert-derived information from the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List on threats to 23,271 species, representing all terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals, to generate global maps of the six major threats to these groups: agriculture, hunting and trapping, logging, pollution, invasive species, and climate change. Our results show that agriculture and logging are pervasive in the tropics and that hunting and trapping is the most geographically widespread threat to mammals and birds. Additionally, current representations of human pressure underestimate the overall pressure on biodiversity, due to the exclusion of threats such as hunting and climate change. Alarmingly, this is particularly the case in areas of the highest biodiversity importance

Widespread shortfalls in protected area resourcing undermine efforts to conserve biodiversity

© 2019 The Authors. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment published by Wiley Periodicals Inc. on behalf of the Ecological Society of America. Protected areas (PAs) are a key tool in efforts to safeguard biodiversity against increasing anthropogenic threats. As signatories to the 2011–2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, 196 nations pledged support for expansion in the extent of the global PA estate and the quality of PA management. While this has resulted in substantial increases in PA designations, many sites lack the resources needed to guarantee effective biodiversity conservation. Using management reports from 2167 PAs (with an area representing 23% of the global terrestrial PA estate), we demonstrate that less than a quarter of these PAs report having adequate resources in terms of staffing and budget. Using data on the geographic ranges of the 11,919 terrestrial vertebrate species overlapping our sample of PAs, we estimate that only 4–9% of terrestrial amphibians, birds, and mammals are sufficiently represented within the existing global PA estate, when only adequately resourced PAs are considered. While continued expansion of the world's PAs is necessary, a shift in emphasis from quantity to quality is critical to effectively respond to the current biodiversity crisis