Towards a protocol for community monitoring of caribou body condition

Effective ecological monitoring is central to the sustainability of subsistence resources of indigenous communities. For caribou, Arctic indigenous people's most important terrestrial subsistence resource, body condition is a useful measure because it integrates many ecological factors that influence caribou productivity and is recognized by biologists and hunters as meaningful. We draw on experience working with indigenous communities to develop a body condition monitoring protocol for harvested animals. Local indigenous knowledge provides a broad set of caribou health indicators and explanations of how environmental conditions may affect body condition. Scientific research on caribou body condition provides a basis to develop a simple dichotomous key that includes back fat, intestinal fat, kidney fat and marrow¬fat, as measures of body fat, which in autumn to early winter correlates with the likelihood of pregnancy. The dichotomous key was formulated on "expert knowledge" and validated against field estimates of body composition. We compare local indigenous knowledge indicators with hunter documented data based on the dichotomous key. The potential con¬tribution of community body condition monitoring can be realized through the continued comparative analysis of datasets. Better communication among hunters and scientists, and refinement of data collection and analysis methods are recommended. Results suggest that specific local knowledge may become generalized and integrated between regions if the dichotomous key is used as a generalized (semi-quantitative) index and complemented with other science and community-based assessments

Climate Change Winners: Receding Ice Fields Facilitate Colony Expansion and Altered Dynamics in an Adélie Penguin Metapopulation

There will be winners and losers as climate change alters the habitats of polar organisms. For an Adelie penguin (Pygoscelis adeliae) colony on Beaufort Island (Beaufort), part of a cluster of colonies in the southern Ross Sea, we report a recent population increase in response to increased nesting habitat as glaciers have receded. Emigration rates of birds banded as chicks on Beaufort to colonies on nearby Ross Island decreased after 2005 as available habitat on Beaufort increased, leading to altered dynamics of the metapopulation. Using aerial photography beginning in 1958 and modern satellite imagery, we measured change in area of available nesting habitat and population size of the Beaufort colony. Population size varied with available habitat, and both increased rapidly since the 1990s. In accord with glacial retreat, summer temperatures at nearby McMurdo Station increased by similar to 0.50 degrees C per decade since the mid-1980s. Although the Ross Sea is likely to be the last ocean with an intact ecosystem, the recent retreat of ice fields at Beaufort that resulted in increased breeding habitat exemplifies a process that has been underway in the Ross Sea during the entire Holocene. Furthermore, our results are in line with predictions that major ice shelves and glaciers will retreat rapidly elsewhere in the Antarctic, potentially leading to increased breeding habitat for Adelie penguins. Results further indicated that satellite imagery may be used to estimate large changes in Adelie penguin populations, facilitating our understanding of metapopulation dynamics and environmental factors that influence regional populations

Working with Indigenous, local and scientific knowledge in assessments of nature and nature's linkages with people

Working with indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) is vital for inclusive assessments of nature and nature's linkages with people. Indigenous peoples' concepts about what constitutes sustainability, for example, differ markedly from dominant sustainability discourses. The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services (IPBES) is promoting dialogue across different knowledge systems globally. In 2017, member states of IPBES adopted an ILK Approach including: procedures for assessments of nature and nature's linkages with people; a participatory mechanism; and institutional arrangements for including indigenous peoples and local communities. We present this Approach and analyse how it supports ILK in IPBES assessments through: respecting rights; supporting care and mutuality; strengthening communities and their knowledge systems; and supporting knowledge exchange. Customary institutions that ensure the integrity of ILK, effective empowering dialogues, and shared governance are among critical capacities that enable inclusion of diverse conceptualizations of sustainability in assessments

Scientists' Warning to Humanity on Threats to Indigenous and Local Knowledge Systems

The knowledge systems and practices of Indigenous Peoples and local communities play critical roles in safeguarding the biological and cultural diversity of our planet. Globalization, government policies, capitalism, colonialism, and other rapid social-ecological changes threaten the relationships between Indigenous Peoples and local communities and their environments, thereby challenging the continuity and dynamism of Indigenous and Local Knowledge (ILK). In this article, we contribute to the “World Scientists' Warning to Humanity,” issued by the Alliance of World Scientists, by exploring opportunities for sustaining ILK systems on behalf of the future stewardship of our planet. Our warning raises the alarm about the pervasive and ubiquitous erosion of knowledge and practice and the social and ecological consequences of this erosion. While ILK systems can be adaptable and resilient, the foundations of these knowledge systems are compromised by ongoing suppression, misrepresentation, appropriation, assimilation, disconnection, and destruction of biocultural heritage. Three case studies illustrate these processes and how protecting ILK is central to biocultural conservation. We conclude with 15 recommendations that call for the recognition and support of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and their knowledge systems. Enacting these recommendations will entail a transformative and sustained shift in how ILK systems, their knowledge holders, and their multiple expressions in lands and waters are recognized, affirmed, and valued. We appeal for urgent action to support the efforts of Indigenous Peoples and local communities around the world to maintain their knowledge systems, languages, stewardship rights, ties to lands and waters, and the biocultural integrity of their territories—on which we all depend.Peer reviewe

Biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation

Pollinators underpin sustainable livelihoods that link ecosystems, spiritual and cultural values, and customary governance systems with indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) across the world. Biocultural diversity is a short-hand term for this great variety of people-nature interlinkages that have developed over time in specific ecosystems. Biocultural approaches to conservation explicitly build on the conservation practices inherent in sustaining these livelihoods. We used the Conceptual Framework of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services to analyse the biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation by indigenous peoples and local communities globally. The analysis identified biocultural approaches to pollinators across all six elements of the Conceptual Framework, with conservation-related practices occurring in sixty countries, in all continents except Antarctica. Practices of IPLC that are significant for biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation can be grouped into three categories: the practice of valuing diversity and fostering biocultural diversity; landscape management practices; and diversified farming systems. Particular IPLCs may use some or all of these practices. Policies that recognise customary tenure over traditional lands, strengthen Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas, promote heritage listing and support diversified farming within a food sovereignty approach, are among several identified that strengthen biocultural approaches to pollinator conservation, and thereby deliver mutual benefits for pollinators and people

Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services

Forests are critical habitats for biodiversity and they are also essential for the provision of a wide range of ecosystem services that are important to human well-being. There is increasing evidence that biodiversity contributes to forest ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services. Here we provide a review of forest ecosystem services including biomass production, habitat provisioning services, pollination, seed dispersal, resistance to wind storms, fire regulation and mitigation, pest regulation of native and invading insects, carbon sequestration, and cultural ecosystem services, in relation to forest type, structure and diversity. We also consider relationships between forest biodiversity and multifunctionality, and trade-offs among ecosystem services. We compare the concepts of ecosystem processes, functions and services to clarify their definitions. Our review of published studies indicates a lack of empirical studies that establish quantitative and causal relationships between forest biodiversity and many important ecosystem services. The literature is highly skewed; studies on provisioning of nutrition and energy, and on cultural services, delivered by mixed-species forests are under-represented. Planted forests offer ample opportunity for optimising their composition and diversity because replanting after harvesting is a recurring process. Planting mixed-species forests should be given more consideration as they are likely to provide a wider range of ecosystem services within the forest and for adjacent land uses. This review also serves as the introduction to this special issue of Biodiversity and Conservation on various aspects of forest biodiversity and ecosystem services

The retrospective analysis of Antarctic tracking data project

The Retrospective Analysis of Antarctic Tracking Data (RAATD) is a Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research project led jointly by the Expert Groups on Birds and Marine Mammals and Antarctic Biodiversity Informatics, and endorsed by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. RAATD consolidated tracking data for multiple species of Antarctic meso- and top-predators to identify Areas of Ecological Significance. These datasets and accompanying syntheses provide a greater understanding of fundamental ecosystem processes in the Southern Ocean, support modelling of predator distributions under future climate scenarios and create inputs that can be incorporated into decision making processes by management authorities. In this data paper, we present the compiled tracking data from research groups that have worked in the Antarctic since the 1990s. The data are publicly available through biodiversity.aq and the Ocean Biogeographic Information System. The archive includes tracking data from over 70 contributors across 12 national Antarctic programs, and includes data from 17 predator species, 4060 individual animals, and over 2.9 million observed locations

The retrospective analysis of Antarctic tracking data project

The Retrospective Analysis of Antarctic Tracking Data (RAATD) is a Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research project led jointly by the Expert Groups on Birds and Marine Mammals and Antarctic Biodiversity Informatics, and endorsed by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. RAATD consolidated tracking data for multiple species of Antarctic meso- and top-predators to identify Areas of Ecological Significance. These datasets and accompanying syntheses provide a greater understanding of fundamental ecosystem processes in the Southern Ocean, support modelling of predator distributions under future climate scenarios and create inputs that can be incorporated into decision making processes by management authorities. In this data paper, we present the compiled tracking data from research groups that have worked in the Antarctic since the 1990s. The data are publicly available through biodiversity.aq and the Ocean Biogeographic Information System. The archive includes tracking data from over 70 contributors across 12 national Antarctic programs, and includes data from 17 predator species, 4060 individual animals, and over 2.9 million observed locations.Supplementary Figure S1: Filtered location data (black) and tag deployment locations (red) for each species. Maps are Lambert Azimuthal projections extending from 90° S to 20° S.Supplementary Table S1: Names and coordinates of the major study sites in the Southern Ocean and on the Antarctic Continent where tracking devices were deployed on the selected species (indicated by their 4-letter codes in the last column).Online Table 1: Description of fields (column names) in the metadata and data files.Supranational committees and organisations including the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Life Science Group and BirdLife International. National institutions and foundations, including but not limited to Argentina (Dirección Nacional del Antártico), Australia (Australian Antarctic program; Australian Research Council; Sea World Research and Rescue Foundation Inc., IMOS is a national collaborative research infrastructure, supported by the Australian Government and operated by a consortium of institutions as an unincorporated joint venture, with the University of Tasmania as Lead Agent), Belgium (Belgian Science Policy Office, EU Lifewatch ERIC), Brazil (Brazilian Antarctic Programme; Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq/MCTI) and CAPES), France (Agence Nationale de la Recherche; Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB; www.fondationbiodiversite.fr) in the context of the CESAB project “RAATD”; Fondation Total; Institut Paul-Emile Victor; Programme Zone Atelier de Recherches sur l’Environnement Antarctique et Subantarctique; Terres Australes et Antarctiques Françaises), Germany (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Hanse-Wissenschaftskolleg - Institute for Advanced Study), Italy (Italian National Antarctic Research Program; Ministry for Education University and Research), Japan (Japanese Antarctic Research Expedition; JSPS Kakenhi grant), Monaco (Fondation Prince Albert II de Monaco), New Zealand (Ministry for Primary Industries - BRAG; Pew Charitable Trusts), Norway (Norwegian Antarctic Research Expeditions; Norwegian Research Council), Portugal (Foundation for Science and Technology), South Africa (Department of Environmental Affairs; National Research Foundation; South African National Antarctic Programme), UK (Darwin Plus; Ecosystems Programme at the British Antarctic Survey; Natural Environment Research Council; WWF), and USA (U.S. AMLR Program of NOAA Fisheries; US Office of Polar Programs).http://www.nature.com/sdataam2021Mammal Research Institut