Generation lengths of the world's birds and their implications for extinction risk

Birds have been comprehensively assessed on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List more times than any other taxonomic group. However, to date, generation lengths have not been systematically estimated to scale population trends when undertaking assessments, as required by the criteria of the IUCN Red List. We compiled information from major databases of published life-history and trait data for all birds and imputed missing life-history data as a function of species traits with generalized linear mixed models. Generation lengths were derived for all species, based on our modeled values of age at first breeding, maximum longevity, and annual adult survival. The resulting generation lengths varied from 1.42 to 27.87 years (median 2.99). Most species (61%) had generation lengths <3.33 years, meaning that the period of 3 generations—over which population declines are assessed under criterion A—was <10 years, which is the value used for IUCN Red List assessments of species with short generation times. For these species, our trait-informed estimates of generation length suggested that 10 years is a robust precautionary value for threat assessment. In other cases, however, for whole families, genera, or individual species, generation length had a substantial impact on their estimated extinction risk, resulting in higher extinction risk in long-lived species than in short-lived species. Although our approach effectively addressed data gaps, generation lengths for some species may have been underestimated due to a paucity of life-history data. Overall, our results will strengthen future extinction-risk assessments and augment key databases of avian life-history and trait data.     

Understanding the drivers of expert opinion when classifying species as extinct

The criteria as laid out by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List are the gold standard by which the extinction risk of a species is assessed and where appropriate biological extinctions are declared. However, unlike all other categories, the category of extinct lacks a quantitative framework for assigning this category. Given its subjective nature, we surveyed expert assessors working on a diversity of taxa to explore the attributes they used to declare a species extinct. Using a choice experiment approach, we surveyed 674 experts from the IUCN Species Survival Commission specialist groups and taskforces. Data availability, time from the last sighting, detectability, habitat availability, and population decline were all important attributes favored by assessors when inferring extinction. Respondents with red-listing experience assigned more importance to the attributes data availability, time from the last sighting, and detectability when considering a species extinction, whereas those respondents working with well-known taxa gave more importance to the time from the last sighting. Respondents with no red-listing experience and those working with more well-known taxa (i.e., mammals and birds) were overall less likely to consider species extinct. Our findings on the importance assessors place on attributes used to declare a species extinct provide a basis for informing the development of specific criteria for more accurately assessing species extinctions.     

A strategy for the next decade to address data deficiency in neglected biodiversity

Measuring progress toward international biodiversity targets requires robust information on the conservation status of species, which the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species provides. However, data and capacity are lacking for most hyperdiverse groups, such as invertebrates, plants, and fungi, particularly in megadiverse or high-endemism regions. Conservation policies and biodiversity strategies aimed at halting biodiversity loss by 2020 need to be adapted to tackle these information shortfalls after 2020. We devised an 8-point strategy to close existing data gaps by reviving explorative field research on the distribution, abundance, and ecology of species; linking taxonomic research more closely with conservation; improving global biodiversity databases by making the submission of spatially explicit data mandatory for scientific publications; developing a global spatial database on threats to biodiversity to facilitate IUCN Red List assessments; automating preassessments by integrating distribution data and spatial threat data; building capacity in taxonomy, ecology, and biodiversity monitoring in countries with high species richness or endemism; creating species monitoring programs for lesser-known taxa; and developing sufficient funding mechanisms to reduce reliance on voluntary efforts. Implementing these strategies in the post-2020 biodiversity framework will help to overcome the lack of capacity and data regarding the conservation status of biodiversity. This will require a collaborative effort among scientists, policy makers, and conservation practitioners.     

Trait‐based prediction of extinction risk of small‐bodied freshwater fishes

Small body size is generally correlated with r‐selected life‐history traits, including early maturation, short‐generation times, and rapid growth rates, that result in high population turnover and a reduced risk of extinction. Unlike other classes of vertebrates, however, small freshwater fishes appear to have an equal or greater risk of extinction than large fishes. We explored whether particular traits explain the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List conservation status of small‐bodied freshwater fishes from 4 temperate river basins: Murray‐Darling, Australia; Danube, Europe; Mississippi‐Missouri, North America; and the Rio Grande, North America. Twenty‐three ecological and life‐history traits were collated for all 171 freshwater fishes of ≤120 mm total length. We used generalized linear mixed‐effects models to assess which combination of the 23 traits best explained whether a species was threatened or not threatened. We used the best models to predict the probability of 29 unclassified species being listed as threatened. With and without controlling for phylogeny at the family level, small body size—among small‐bodied species—was the most influential trait correlated with threatened species listings. The k‐folds cross‐validation demonstrated that body size and a random effect structure that included family predicted the threat status with an accuracy of 78% (SE 0.5). We identified 10 species likely to be threatened that are not listed as such on the IUCN Red List. Small body size is not a trait that provides universal resistance to extinction, particularly for vertebrates inhabiting environments affected by extreme habitat loss and fragmentation. We hypothesize that this is because small‐bodied species have smaller home ranges, lower dispersal capabilities, and heightened ecological specialization relative to larger vertebrates. Trait data and further model development are needed to predict the IUCN conservation status of the over 11,000 unclassified freshwater fishes, especially those under threat from proposed dam construction in the world's most biodiverse river basins.     

Global gap analysis of cactus species and priority sites for their conservation

Knowing how much biodiversity is captured by protected areas (PAs) is important to meeting country commitments to international conservation agreements, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, and analyzing gaps in species coverage by PAs contributes greatly to improved locating of new PAs and conservation of species. Regardless of their importance, global gap analyses have been conducted only for a few taxonomic groups (e.g., mangroves, corals, amphibians, birds, mammals). We conducted the first global gap analysis for a complete specious plant group, the highly threatened Cactaceae. Using geographic distribution data of 1438 cactus species, we assessed how well the current PA network represents them. We also systematically identified priority areas for conservation of cactus species that met and failed to meet conservation targets accounting for their conservation status. There were 261 species with no coverage by PAs (gap species). A greater percentage of cacti species (18%) lacked protection than mammals (9.7%) and birds (5.6%), and also a greater percentage of threatened cacti species (32%) were outside protected areas than amphibians (26.5%), birds (19.9%), or mammals (16%). The top 17% of the landscape that best captured covered species represented on average 52.9% of species ranges. The priority areas for gap species and the unprotected portion of the ranges of species that only partially met their conservation target (i.e., partial gap) captured on average 75.2% of their ranges, of which 100 were threatened gap species. These findings and knowledge of the threats affecting species provide information that can be used to improve planning for cacti conservation and highlight the importance of assessing the representation of major groups, such as plants, in PAs to determining the performance of the current PA network.     

Combined effects of land use and hunting on distributions of tropical mammals

Land use and hunting are 2 major pressures on biodiversity in the tropics. Yet, their combined impacts have not been systematically quantified at a large scale. We estimated the effects of both pressures on the distributions of 1884 tropical mammal species by integrating species’ range maps, detailed land-use maps (1992 and 2015), species-specific habitat preference data, and a hunting pressure model. We further identified areas where the combined impacts were greatest (hotspots) and least (coolspots) to determine priority areas for mitigation or prevention of the pressures. Land use was the main driver of reduced distribution of all mammal species considered. Yet, hunting pressure caused additional reductions in large-bodied species’ distributions. Together, land use and hunting reduced distributions of species by 41% (SD 30) on average (year 2015). Overlap between impacts was only 2% on average. Land use contributed more to the loss of distribution (39% on average) than hunting (4% on average). However, hunting reduced the distribution of large mammals by 29% on average; hence, large mammals lost a disproportional amount of area due to the combination of both pressures. Gran Chaco, the Atlantic Forest, and Thailand had high levels of impact across the species (hotspots of area loss). In contrast, the Amazon and Congo Basins, the Guianas, and Borneo had relatively low levels of impact (coolspots of area loss). Overall, hunting pressure and human land use increased from 1992 to 2015 and corresponding losses in distribution increased from 38% to 41% on average across the species. To effectively protect tropical mammals, conservation policies should address both pressures simultaneously because their effects are highly complementary. Our spatially detailed and species-specific results may support future national and global conservation agendas, including the design of post-2020 protected area targets and strategies.     

Toward quantification of the impact of 21st‐century deforestation on the extinction risk of terrestrial vertebrates

Conservation actions need to be prioritized, often taking into account species’ extinction risk. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List provides an accepted, objective framework for the assessment of extinction risk. Assessments based on data collected in the field are the best option, but the field data to base these on are often limited. Information collected through remote sensing can be used in place of field data to inform assessments. Forests are perhaps the best‐studied land‐cover type for use of remote‐sensing data. Using an open‐access 30‐m resolution map of tree cover and its change between 2000 and 2012, we assessed the extent of forest cover and loss within the distributions of 11,186 forest‐dependent amphibians, birds, and mammals worldwide. For 16 species, forest loss resulted in an elevated extinction risk under red‐list criterion A, owing to inferred rapid population declines. This number increased to 23 when data‐deficient species (i.e., those with insufficient information for evaluation) were included. Under red‐list criterion B2, 484 species (855 when data‐deficient species were included) were considered at elevated extinction risk, owing to restricted areas of occupancy resulting from little forest cover remaining within their ranges. The proportion of species of conservation concern would increase by 32.8% for amphibians, 15.1% for birds, and 24.7% for mammals if our suggested uplistings are accepted. Central America, the Northern Andes, Madagascar, the Eastern Arc forests in Africa, and the islands of Southeast Asia are hotspots for these species. Our results illustrate the utility of satellite imagery for global extinction‐risk assessment and measurement of progress toward international environmental agreement targets.