Appendix C. Results of 30% target and selection frequency outputs from Marxan analysis.

Results of 30% target and selection frequency outputs from Marxan analysis

Appendix B. Detailed descriptions of input data and resulting cost layers.

Detailed descriptions of input data and resulting cost layers

Appendix A. Detailed information of threatened species used in this study.

Detailed information of threatened species used in this study

Frequency of inclusion by proposed conservation plans.

<p>The number of schemes including a particular area and the total % included are reported in the legend.</p

Flow chart of decision-making process for whether to take actions on land or in the ocean to best benefit marine ecosystems.

<p>Guidelines are based on [<a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.2001886#pbio.2001886.ref024" target="_blank">24</a>, <a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.2001886#pbio.2001886.ref037" target="_blank">37</a>] and the modelling results in <a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.2001886#pbio.2001886.g004" target="_blank">Fig 4</a> obtained using a dynamic landscape model.</p

Correspondence between the different proposed conservation plans. Values above the diagonal (marked by empty cells) are the overall correspondence between pairs of proposals.

<p>Values below the diagonal are the kappa index of agreement (see <i>Methods</i>).</p

Effects of $50 million per year investment in each of 4 conservation actions, restoration or protection on land or in the ocean, on marine ecosystems.

<p>(A) area of suitable (but not necessarily occupied) marine habitat; (B) area of intact marine habitat; (C) area of protected intact marine habitat; (D) annual sediment load. Y-axis is proportional to values which would have been achieved with no investment. Lines have varying thicknesses so that overlapping lines are visible.</p

Study site in Queensland, Australia used to quantify how investment in conservation actions (restoration or protection) on land or in the ocean affects the extent of marine habitats (seagrass). See Materials and methods for data sources.

<p>Study site in Queensland, Australia used to quantify how investment in conservation actions (restoration or protection) on land or in the ocean affects the extent of marine habitats (seagrass). See <a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.2001886#sec004" target="_blank">Materials and methods</a> for data sources.</p

Main characteristics of the six existing conservation plans in the Mediterranean Sea (additional information in SOM).

1<p>Biodiversity driven: The priority areas were selected considering biophysical data only; Threats: The priority areas were selected after consideration of biophysical data and threats to habitats/species/ecosystems; Socioeconomic considerations: The priority areas were selected after consideration biophysical and socio-economic data and were located in places were conservation goals where achieved with minimum socio-economic cost.</p

Proposed framework for regional marine conservation planning.

<p>The 11 stages of conservation planning presented in Pressey and Bottrill (2009) are on the left, and the additional steps we propose for effective conservation planning within complex marine regions, such as the Mediterranean Sea, are added to the right.</p