Brazilian Botanic Gardens

We argue that botanic gardens, as plant conservation focused institutions, have been tested in temperate regions that possess a relatively robust conservation infrastructure and a relatively low number of threatened species. The ability of the Brazilian botanic gardens to support plant conservation is especially challenging, given their small number relative to Brazil’s plant diversity and the increasing rate of habitat loss and plant endangerment. This study, the first for Brazil, assesses the conservation capacity of Brazilian botanic gardens. An assessment is made of the status of conservation facilities in Brazilian botanic gardens and the conservation status of their plant collections.This was based on a survey sent to thirty-six Brazilian botanic gardens in 2011– 2013 using information from the 2008 Brazilian Red List, and seven state conservation lists. The results identified a small percentage of threatened species (n =102/21 per cent) in ex situ collections of 22 botanic gardens and less than 10 per cent representation for each state red list. An assessment based on the updated Brazilian Red List (2014) showed that 425 threatened species were maintained in living collections of 18 botanic gardens. Despite the extensive size of some collections, the proportion of threatened species in the collections was found to be very low. Improvement in infrastructure, technical capacity, including horticultural skills, and development of policies and protocols will benecessary to increase the effectiveness of the collections for conservation aims

Biology, Fishery, Conservation and Management of Indian Ocean Tuna Fisheries

The focus of the study is to explore the recent trend of the world tuna fishery with special reference to the Indian Ocean tuna fisheries and its conservation and sustainable management. In the Indian Ocean, tuna catches have increased rapidly from about 179959 t in 1980 to about 832246 t in 1995. They have continued to increase up to 2005; the catch that year was 1201465 t, forming about 26% of the world catch. Since 2006 onwards there has been a decline in the volume of catches and in 2008 the catch was only 913625 t. The Principal species caught in the Indian Ocean are skipjack and yellowfin. Western Indian Ocean contributed 78.2% and eastern Indian Ocean 21.8% of the total tuna production from the Indian Ocean. The Indian Ocean stock is currently overfished and IOTC has made some recommendations for management regulations aimed at sustaining the tuna stock. Fishing operations can cause ecological impacts of different types: by catches, damage of the habitat, mortalities caused by lost or discarded gear, pollution, generation of marine debris, etc. Periodic reassessment of the tuna potential is also required with adequate inputs from exploratory surveys as well as commercial landings and this may prevent any unsustainable trends in the development of the tuna fishing industry in the Indian Ocean

Indicators to support an ecosystem approach to fisheries

Indicators are needed to support the implementation of an ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF), by providing information on the state of the ecosystem, the extent and intensity of effort or mortality and the progress of management in relation to objectives. Here, I review recent work on the development, selection and application of indicators and consider how indicators might support an EAF. Indicators should guide the management of fishing activities that have led to, or are most likely to lead to, unsustainable impacts on ecosystem components or attributes. The numbers and types of indicators used to support an EAF will vary among management regions, depending on resources available for monitoring and enforcement, and actual and potential fishing impacts. State indicators provide feedback on the state of ecosystem components or attributes and the extent to which management objectives, which usually relate to state, are met. State can only be managed if the relationships with fishing (pressure) and management (response) are known. Predicting such relationships is fundamental to developing a management system that supports the achievement of objectives. In a management framework supported by pressure, state and response indicators, the relationship between the value of an indicator and a target or limit reference point, reference trajectory or direction provides guidance on the management action to take. Values of pressure, state and response indicators may be affected by measurement, process, model and estimation error and thus different indicators, and the same indicators measured at different scales and in different ways, will detect true trends on different timescales. Managers can use several methods to estimate the effects of error on the probability of detecting true trends and/or to account for error when setting reference points, trajectories and directions. Given the high noise to signal ratio in many state indicators, pressure and response indicators would often guide short-term management decision making more effectively, with state indicators providing longer-term policy-focused feedback on the effects of management action