Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact.

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a "Green List of Species" (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species' progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species' viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species' recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard

Figure 2 in Reptiles as principal prey? Adaptations for durophagy and prey selection by jaguar (Panthera onca)

Figure 2. Percentage of Jaguar (Panthera onca) diet composed by peccaries or armadillos compared with cougars (Puma concolor). Jaguar prey more extensively over armoured and dangerous prey. Data were pooled from reviewed literature where faeces of cougars and jaguars were collected at the same site. Bars represents means while whiskers represent standard errors for each prey group.Published as part of Miranda, Everton B.P., de Menezes, Jorge F.S. & Rheingantz, Marcelo L., 2016, Reptiles as principal prey? Adaptations for durophagy and prey selection by jaguar (Panthera onca), pp. 2021-2035 in Journal of Natural History 50 on page 2028, DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2016.1180717, http://zenodo.org/record/399336

Figure 1 in Reptiles as principal prey? Adaptations for durophagy and prey selection by jaguar (Panthera onca)

Figure 1. Jaguar (Panthera onca) preference for different prey species. Preference was measured with a Jacob index based on the number of individuals of a given species consumed compared to abundance data in number of individuals. Data was pooled from reviewed literature on the subject. Each datum is an average of each study. A value of 0 indicates that jaguars consume this resource with a frequency proportional to its relative abundance in the environment. A positive value indicates that it consumes more than expected by chance. A negative value indicates consumption occurred at a value less than expected by random (avoidance).Published as part of Miranda, Everton B.P., de Menezes, Jorge F.S. & Rheingantz, Marcelo L., 2016, Reptiles as principal prey? Adaptations for durophagy and prey selection by jaguar (Panthera onca), pp. 2021-2035 in Journal of Natural History 50 on page 2027, DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2016.1180717, http://zenodo.org/record/399336

Reptiles as principal prey? Adaptations for durophagy and prey selection by jaguar (Panthera onca)

Miranda, Everton B.P., de Menezes, Jorge F.S., Rheingantz, Marcelo L. (2016): Reptiles as principal prey? Adaptations for durophagy and prey selection by jaguar (Panthera onca). Journal of Natural History 50: 2021-2035, DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2016.1180717, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222933.2016.118071

Seasonal and spatial differences in feeding habits of the Neotropical otter Lontra longicaudis (Carnivora: Mustelidae) in a coastal catchment of southeastern Brazil

The diet of the Neotropical otter Lontra longicaudis (Olfers, 1818) is one of the best known aspects of its biology throughout its distribution range. However, most dietary studies have been undertaken during short time periods, making it difficult to identify temporal patterns in the feeding behavior of the species. The present study aimed to describe the diet of L. longicaudis in the lower region of the Mambucaba Catchment, state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, during a three year period, based on analyses of spraints (feces). The results show fish as the main prey item (frequency of occurrence, FO = 85.78%), as already described in previous studies. Crustaceans were the second main prey (FO = 70.67%), occurring in the spraints during the whole year, however presenting a higher frequency of occurrence than fish in samples collected during some months. Anurans were the third most important prey item (FO = 9.56%) and mammals, birds and reptiles were preyed upon only rarely (less than 4%). Fish and crustaceans were present in the diet of the species throughout the year and frogs were important mostly from June to August (dry season). This higher rate of predation on amphibians during the drier months was probably related to the decrease of the main prey

Rewilding the Atlantic Forest: Restoring the fauna and ecological interactions of a protected area

The loss or reduction of animal populations and consequent extinction of ecological interactions in Neotropical forests demand urgent conservation initiatives to reverse these trends. One of the rainforests with the highest levels of mammal defaunation is the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Local mammalian extinctions in the biome were evaluated to set out priorities. Researchers, reserve managers and ex situ animal keepers throughout the Atlantic Forest were connected through a reintroduction network. From 2010 to 2017, we reintroduced two important seed dispersers, the red-humped agouti and the brown howler monkey, in Tijuca National Park, Rio de Janeiro, with other species on their way. We monitored the reintroduced populations regarding demography, spatial patterns, diet and their effect on ecological interactions. They interacted with several plant species, including large-seeded ones. We found 25 dung beetles’ species interacting with howlers’ feces. As TNP lacked medium and large sized frugivores, the increased dispersal can have a disproportional effect on forest regeneration. Among the main constraints for refaunation programs we pointed out delays to obtain environmental licenses, scarcity of source populations and difficulties regarding quarantine, release and monitoring of the animals. Refaunation has shown promise as a low-cost, effective way to restore ecological processes in defaunated Neotropical forests.Fil: Fernandez, Fernando A.S.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Rheingantz, Marcelo L.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Genes, Luísa. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Kenup, Caio F.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Galliez, Maron. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Cezimbra, Tomaz. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Cid, Bruno. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Macedo, Leandro. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Araujo, Bernardo B.A.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Moraes, Bruno S.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Monjeau, Jorge Adrian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte; Argentina. Fundación Bariloche; Argentina. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Pires, Alexandra S.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; Brasi