A vegetação na Reserva Mata Viva, Curitiba, Paraná, Brasil

The vegetation in the Reserve "Mata Viva", Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil A vegetação na Reserva Mata Viva, Curitiba, Paraná, Brasil</htm

Is habitat fragmentation good for biodiversity?

Habitat loss is a primary threat to biodiversity across the planet, yet contentious debate has ensued on the importance of habitat fragmentation ‘per se’ (i.e., altered spatial configuration of habitat for a given amount of habitat loss). Based on a review of landscape-scale investigations, Fahrig (2017; Ecological responses to habitat fragmentation per se. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 48:1-23) reports that biodiversity responses to habitat fragmentation ‘per se’ are more often positive rather than negative and concludes that the widespread belief in negative fragmentation effects is a ‘zombie idea’. We show that Fahrig's conclusions are drawn from a narrow and potentially biased subset of available evidence, which ignore much of the observational, experimental and theoretical evidence for negative effects of altered habitat configuration. We therefore argue that Fahrig's conclusions should be interpreted cautiously as they could be misconstrued by policy makers and managers, and we provide six arguments why they should not be applied in conservation decision-making. Reconciling the scientific disagreement, and informing conservation more effectively, will require research that goes beyond statistical and correlative approaches. This includes a more prudent use of data and conceptual models that appropriately partition direct vs indirect influences of habitat loss and altered spatial configuration, and more clearly discriminate the mechanisms underpinning any changes. Incorporating these issues will deliver greater mechanistic understanding and more predictive power to address the conservation issues arising from habitat loss and fragmentation

Atlantic mammal traits: a dataset of morphological traits of mammals in the atlantic forest of south America

Measures of traits are the basis of functional biological diversity. Numerous works consider mean species-level measures of traits while ignoring individual variance within species. However, there is a large amount of variation within species and it is increasingly apparent that it is important to consider trait variation not only between species, but also within species. Mammals are an interesting group for investigating trait-based approaches because they play diverse and important ecological functions (e.g., pollination, seed dispersal, predation, grazing) that are correlated with functional traits. Here we compile a data set comprising morphological and life history information of 279 mammal species from 39,850 individuals of 388 populations ranging from −5.83 to −29.75 decimal degrees of latitude and −34.82 to −56.73 decimal degrees of longitude in the Atlantic forest of South America. We present trait information from 16,840 individuals of 181 species of non-volant mammals (Rodentia, Didelphimorphia, Carnivora, Primates, Cingulata, Artiodactyla, Pilosa, Lagomorpha, Perissodactyla) and from 23,010 individuals of 98 species of volant mammals (Chiroptera). The traits reported include body mass, age, sex, reproductive stage, as well as the geographic coordinates of sampling for all taxa. Moreover, we gathered information on forearm length for bats and body length and tail length for rodents and marsupials. No copyright restrictions are associated with the use of this data set. Please cite this data paper when the data are used in publications. We also request that researchers and teachers inform us of how they are using the data.Fil: Gonçalves, Fernando. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Bovendorp, Ricardo S.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Beca, Gabrielle. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Bello, Carolina. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Costa Pereira, Raul. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Muylaert, Renata L.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Rodarte, Raisa R.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Villar, Nacho. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Souza, Rafael. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Graipel, Maurício E.. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; BrasilFil: Cherem, Jorge J.. Caipora Cooperativa, Florianopolis; BrasilFil: Faria, Deborah. Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz; BrasilFil: Baumgarten, Julio. Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz; BrasilFil: Alvarez, Martín R.. Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz; BrasilFil: Vieira, Emerson M.. Universidade do Brasília; BrasilFil: Cáceres, Nilton. Universidade Federal de Santa María. Santa María; BrasilFil: Pardini, Renata. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Leite, Yuri L. R.. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Costa, Leonora Pires. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Mello, Marco Aurelio Ribeiro. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; BrasilFil: Fischer, Erich. Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul; BrasilFil: Passos, Fernando C.. Universidade Federal do Paraná; BrasilFil: Varzinczak, Luiz H.. Universidade Federal do Paraná; BrasilFil: Prevedello, Jayme A.. Universidade do Estado de Rio do Janeiro; BrasilFil: Cruz-Neto, Ariovaldo P.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Carvalho, Fernando. Universidade do Extremo Sul Catarinense; BrasilFil: Reis Percequillo, Alexandre. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Paviolo, Agustin Javier. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Duarte, José M. B.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; Brasil. Fundación Oswaldo Cruz; BrasilFil: Bernard, Enrico. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Agostini, Ilaria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Lamattina, Daniela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste; Argentina. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación; ArgentinaFil: Vanderhoeven, Ezequiel Andres. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste; Argentin

Uso do espaço por pequenos mamíferos: uma análise dos estudos realizados no Brasil

Utilization of space refers to the intensity of exploitation of a habitat by a species, including the amount and quality of the exploited habitat. It is an important factor driving the abundance and distribution of animal species. Brazilian small mammals have been used as models to evaluate space utilization by tropical mammals in general, but it is yet unclear whether knowledge about the species, biomes, different aspects of space use, and even the techniques being employed in Brazil are representative of other regions. The present study presents a review of studies on space utilization by small mammals in Brazil published from 1945 to 2007. Fifty-eight publications were found, most of which were conducted in the Atlantic Forest (65%). Within this biome, marsupials were the most common taxon examined (86%) followed by rodents (53%). In the Cerrado, these fi gures changed to 44% and 100%, respectively. Only 14% of the studies dealt with vertical utilization of space. The great majority of the publications (75%) used capture-mark-recapture methods with livetraps (CMR). Current knowledge of space utilization by Brazilian small mammals was mainly based on few genera from a single biome � the Atlantic Forest � using a technique that records only part of the movement patterns of these animals (CMR). Future studies that fi ll the gaps indicated here will hopefully allow the detection and establishment of more general patterns of space use by tropical mammals.O uso do espaço refere-se à quantidade, qualidade e intensidade de exploração do habitat em uma determinada localidade, sendo importante determinante da distribuição e abundância de espécies animais. Os pequenos mamíferos brasileiros têm sido utilizados como modelos para avaliar o uso do espaço por mamíferos tropicais, mas pouco se sabe sobre a representatividade do conhecimento obtido em termos de espécies, biomas, atributos abordados e técnicas utilizadas. Neste estudo, fi zemos uma revisão da literatura publicada sobre o tema no período de 1945 a 2007. Foram encontrados 58 estudos, a maioria (65%) destes realizada na Mata Atlântica. Neste bioma, marsupiais e roedores foram analisados em 86% e 53% dos artigos respectivamente, mas no Cerrado essas proporções mudaram para 44% e 100%. Um pequeno número de gêneros de marsupiais e roedores concentra a maior parte das informações existentes sobre o uso do espaço. Somente 14% dos estudos avaliaram o uso vertical do espaço. A grande maioria (75%) das publicações utilizou a técnica de captura-marcação-recaptura com armadilhas (CMR). O conhecimento atual sobre o uso do espaço é limitado por ser baseado principalmente em um pequeno número de gêneros de um único bioma (Mata Atlântica), em estudos que utilizaram uma técnica que não amostra grande parte da movimentação dos animais (CMR). Novos estudos que preencham as lacunas aqui apontadas podem permitir a detecção e o estabelecimento de padrões mais gerais de uso do espaço por mamíferos tropicais

Data from: The importance of scattered trees for biodiversity conservation: a global meta-analysis

1. Scattered trees are thought to be keystone structures for biodiversity in landscapes worldwide. However, such trees have been largely neglected by researchers and their importance for biodiversity remains unclear. 2. We completed a global meta-analysis to quantify relationships between scattered trees and the species richness, abundance and composition of vertebrates, arthropods and plants. First, we tested whether areas near scattered trees support higher levels of species richness and abundance than nearby open areas. Second, we compared levels of species richness and abundance in matrix areas with scattered trees and areas embedded within nearby habitat patches. We also compared the composition of biological communities inhabiting habitat patches, open areas and areas with scattered trees. 3. A total of 62 studies contained suitable data for our quantitative analyses. The local abundance of arthropods, vertebrates and woody plants was 60-430% greater and overall species richness was 50-100% higher in areas with scattered trees than in open areas. Conversely, for herbaceous plants, there was no consistent relationship between species abundance and the occurrence of scattered trees, although species richness was, on average, 43% lower. 4. The abundance and richness of all taxonomic groups was similar in matrix areas supporting scattered trees and habitat patches, although the species richness of epiphytes was, on average, 50% higher in habitat patches. Communities inhabiting habitat patches were more similar in composition to the communities inhabiting areas with scattered trees, and less similar to the communities of open areas. 5. Synthesis and applications. Areas with scattered trees support greater levels of biodiversity than open areas, as well as communities that are more similar to those inhabiting habitat patches. Scattered trees can be regarded as keystone structures for vertebrates, arthropods and terrestrial plants in landscapes worldwide. The maintenance of scattered trees may be compatible with livestock grazing in some agricultural landscapes. Greater management effort and targeted, long-term policies are needed to retain or re-establish scattered trees in many farming landscapes in both forest and non-forest biomes around the world.04-May-201

The importance of scattered trees for biodiversity conservation: a global meta- analysis

Scattered trees are thought to be keystone structures for biodiversity in landscapes world-wide. However, such trees have been largely neglected by researchers and their importance for biodiversity remains unclear. We completed a global meta-analysis to quantify relationships between scattered trees and the species richness, abundance and composition of vertebrates, arthropods and plants. First, we tested whether areas near scattered trees support higher levels of species richness and abundance than nearby open areas. Second, we compared levels of species richness and abundance in matrix areas with scattered trees and areas embedded within nearby habitat patches. We also compared the composition of biological communities inhabiting habitat patches, open areas and areas with scattered trees. A total of 62 studies contained suitable data for our quantitative analyses. The local abundance of arthropods, vertebrates and woody plants was 60%–430% greater and overall species richness was 50%–100% higher in areas with scattered trees than in open areas. Conversely, for herbaceous plants, there was no consistent relationship between species abundance and the occurrence of scattered trees, although species richness was, on average, 43% lower. The abundance and richness of all taxonomic groups was similar in matrix areas supporting scattered trees and habitat patches, although the species richness of epiphytes was, on average, 50% higher in habitat patches. Communities inhabiting habitat patches were more similar in composition to the communities inhabiting areas with scattered trees, and less similar to the communities of open areas. Synthesis and applications. Areas with scattered trees support greater levels of biodiversity than open areas, as well as communities that are more similar to those inhabiting habitat patches. Scattered trees can be regarded as keystone structures for vertebrates, arthropods and terrestrial plants in landscapes world-wide. The maintenance of scattered trees may be compatible with livestock grazing in some agricultural landscapes. Greater management effort and targeted, long-term policies are needed to retain or re-establish scattered trees in many farming landscapes in both forest and non-forest biomes around the world

Datasets compiled for the analyses of species abundance and richness

Summary of the four datasets compiled for the analyses of species abundance and richness, including the study ID, the taxonomic group studied, the biome and the logarithm of the response ratio (Log(RR)). Log(RR) was not calculated (“NA”) when the abundance or richness was zero in any of the treatments under comparison. a) Studies comparing abundance between scattered trees and open areas. b) Studies comparing richness between scattered trees and open areas. c) Studies comparing abundance between habitat patches and scattered trees. d) Studies comparing richness between habitat patches and scattered trees

Datasets compiled for the analyses of community composition

Summary of the two datasets compiled for the analyses of community composition. a) Studies comparing abundance between scattered trees and open areas. b) Studies comparing abundance between scattered trees and habitat patches. c) Studies comparing abundance between habitat patches and open areas

Data from: Edge effects and geometric constraints: a landscape-level empirical test

Edge effects are pervasive in landscapes yet their causal mechanisms are still poorly understood. Traditionally, edge effects have been attributed to differences in habitat quality along the edge-interior gradient of habitat patches, under the assumption that no edge effects would occur if habitat quality was uniform. This assumption was questioned recently after the recognition that geometric constraints tend to reduce population abundances near the edges of habitat patches, the so-called “geometric edge effect” (GEE). Here we present the first empirical, landscape-level evaluation of the importance of the GEE in shaping abundance patterns in fragmented landscapes. Using a dataset on the distribution of small mammals across 18 forest fragments, we assessed whether the incorporation of the GEE into the analysis changes the interpretation of edge effects and the degree to which predictions based on the GEE match observed responses. Quantitative predictions were generated for each fragment using simulations that took into account home range, density and matrix use for each species. The incorporation of the GEE into the analysis changed substantially the interpretation of overall observed edge responses at the landscape scale. Observed abundances alone would lead to the conclusion that the small mammals as a group have no consistent preference for forest edges or interiors, and that the black-eared opossum Didelphis aurita (a numerically dominant species in the community) has on average a preference for forest interiors. In contrast, incorporation of the GEE suggested that the small mammal community as a whole has a preference for forest edges, whereas D. aurita has no preference for forest edges or interiors. Unexplained variance in edge responses was reduced by the incorporation of GEE, but remained large, varying greatly on a fragment-by-fragment basis. This study demonstrates how to model and incorporate the GEE in analyses of edge effects, and that this incorporation is necessary to properly interpret edge effects in landscapes. It also suggests that geometric constraints alone are unlikely to explain the variability in edge responses of a same species among different areas, highlighting the need to incorporate other ecological factors into explanatory models of edge effects

Impacts of forestation and deforestation on local temperature across the globe.

Changing forest cover is a key driver of local climate change worldwide, as it affects both albedo and evapotranspiration (ET). Deforestation and forestation are predicted to have opposing influences on surface albedo and ET rates, and thus impact local surface temperatures differently. Relationships between forest change, albedo, ET, and local temperatures may further vary regionally, as the strengths of warming by albedo effects and cooling by ET effects vary with latitude. Despite these important relationships, the magnitude of forest cover effects on local surface temperature across the globe remains unclear. Using recently-released global forest change data, we first show that forestation and deforestation have pervasive and opposite effects on LST, ET and albedo worldwide. Deforestation from 2000 to 2010 caused consistent warming of 0.38 ± 0.02 (mean ± SE) and 0.16 ± 0.01°C in tropical and temperate regions respectively, while forestation caused cooling in those regions of -0.18 ± 0.02 and -0.19 ± 0.02°C. Tropical forests were particularly sensitive to the climate effects of forest change, with forest cover losses of ~50% associated with increased LST of 1.08 ± 0.25°C, whereas similar forest cover gains decreased LST by -1.11 ± 0.26°C. Secondly, based on a new structural equation model, we show that these changes on LST were largely mediated by changes in albedo and ET. Finally, based on this model, we show that predicted forest changes in Brazil associated with a business-as-usual land use scenario through 2050 may increase LST up to 1.45°C. Our results contribute to a better understanding of the mechanistic inter-relationships between forest change and changes in albedo, ET and LST, and provide additional evidence that forestation has the potential to reverse deforestation impacts on local climate, especially in tropical and temperate regions