Indigenous Uses, Population Density, and Conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plants in Protected Areas of the Indian Himalayas

Abstract:  For 10 years I monitored the population density of threatened medicinal plant species in seven protected areas in the Indian Himalayas. I also documented the indigenous uses of threatened medicinal plants through interviews with 138 herbal healers (83 Tibetan healers and 55 Ayurvedic healers) residing in the buffer zone villages of these protected areas. To assess the population status of threatened medicinal plant species, I sampled the 10 major habitat types in the protected areas. In all, I found 60 threatened medicinal plant species during the study period, of which 54 species occurred in the sampling plots. Twenty-two percent of threatened medicinal plant species were critically endangered, 16% were endangered, and 27% were vulnerable. Thirty-two threatened medicinal plant species were endemic to the Himalayan region. The density of threatened medicinal plant species varied with protected areas. The Valley of Flowers protected area had the highest number of threatened medicinal plant species. The "moist" habitat type was richest in these species among all 10 habitat types sampled. Arnebia euchroma (Royle ex Benth.) Johnston and Ephedra gerardiana Wall. ex Stapf. were the most common threatened medicinal plant species. The indigenous groups of healers used these threatened species in curing about 45 different ailments. Based on my findings, I believe that to ensure the long-term sustainability of threatened medicinal plants, medicinal-plant conservation areas should be established.     

Conservation Prioritization Using GAP Data

Data collected by the Gap Analysis Program in the state of Idaho (U.S.A.) are used to prioritize the selection of locations for conservation action and research. Set coverage and integer programming algorithms provide a sequence of localities that maximize the number of species or vegetation classes represented at each step. Richness maps of vegetation cover class diversity, terrestrial vertebrate species diversity ("hot spot analysis"), endangered, threatened, and candidate species diversity, and unprotected vertebrate species diversity ("gap analysis"), when prioritized, show a rapid accumulation of species as more localities are chosen for terrestrial vertebrates and unprotected vertebrates. Gap analysis identifies four target areas ("gaps") that include 79 of the 83 vertebrate species not currently protected. Accumulation of vegetation cover classes and endangered, threatened, and candidate species is much slower. Sweep analysis is used to determine how well prioritizing on one component of diversity accumulates other components. Endangered, threatened, and candidate species do not sweep total vertebrates as well as unprotected vertebrates do, but are better than vegetation classes. Total vertebrates sweep endangered, threatened, and candidate species better than unprotected vertebrates do, which in turn are better than vegetation classes. We emphasize that prioritization must be part of conservation efforts at multiple scales and that prioritization points out important localities where more detailed work mast be undertaken.     

Ecological‐Niche Modeling and Prioritization of Conservation‐Area Networks for Mexican Herpetofauna

Abstract: One of the most important tools in conservation biology is information on the geographic distribution of species and the variables determining those patterns. We used maximum‐entropy niche modeling to run distribution models for 222 amphibian and 371 reptile species (49% endemics and 27% threatened) for which we had 34,619 single geographic records. The planning region is in southeastern Mexico, is 20% of the country's area, includes 80% of the country's herpetofauna, and lacks an adequate protected‐area system. We used probabilistic data to build distribution models of herpetofauna for use in prioritizing conservation areas for three target groups (all species and threatened and endemic species). The accuracy of species‐distribution models was better for endemic and threatened species than it was for all species. Forty‐seven percent of the region has been deforested and additional conservation areas with 13.7% to 88.6% more native vegetation (76% to 96% of the areas are outside the current protected‐area system) are needed. There was overlap in 26 of the main selected areas in the conservation‐area network prioritized to preserve the target groups, and for all three target groups the proportion of vegetation types needed for their conservation was constant: 30% pine and oak forests, 22% tropical evergreen forest, 17% low deciduous forest, and 8% montane cloud forests. The fact that different groups of species require the same proportion of habitat types suggests that the pine and oak forests support the highest proportion of endemic and threatened species and should therefore be given priority over other types of vegetation for inclusion in the protected areas of southeastern Mexico.     

IsAmmophila arenaria (Marram grass) a threat to South African dune fields?

Ammophila arenaria (marram grass) was introduced to South Africa from Europe as a means of stabilizing the Cape Flats in the 1870s, but was only successfully established in the 1890s as it was found that seeds from the first introductions did not readily germinate. By the end of the last century, it was successfully used as a dune stabilizing grass. It is now widely used in stabilization projects along the Cape coastline, being established by planting cuttings or whole plants. Because of problems experienced of marram becoming invasive, especially on the west coast of North America, and the fact that we have many invasive species which threaten our indigenous dune fields, studies have been initiated on this plant in South Africa. Most work to date has involved investigating the methods used to establish the plant in stabilization sites, and very little has been done on the biology of the species in this country. Marram is generally thought not to seed in South Africa, and thus its spread has been limited. However, in the light of recent reports of successful germination of the seed, detailed studies on the phenology of seed production and establishment in natural areas will be undertaken. Studies on the natural control by fungal species and nematodes will be carried out in conjunction with work done in the Netherlands, so that a comparison of the biology of the species in South Africa can be made with that in Europe, where it is used extensively to stabilize dunes. Nomenclature: Arnold & de Wet (1993) for vascular plants.     

Identification of Conservation-Worthy Areas in Northern Zululand, South Africa

Abstract: We used spatial and statistical analyses to identify and prioritize broad areas for conservation attention in the northern Zululand region of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. We attempted to identify conservation-worthy areas based on species, vegetation types, ecological processes, and threats to biodiversity. Information on species was limited and so could not form the basis of the analysis. Priority vegetation types were identified by degree of endemicity, extent of protection and transformation, and degree of fragmentation. These priority vegetation types and threats to biodiversity were used to define broad linkages between existing protected areas. We set a goal of 10% protection for each vegetation type and 25% for each species. We identified several important (endemic or threatened) animal species and predicted their ranges using a simple model. Species ranges and their hotspots were compared with the distribution of protected areas and the suggested linkages to evaluate increased species representation. Generally, the eastern part of the study area was well protected. Unprotected conservation-worthy areas under greatest threat lay in the west, and protecting these areas is a priority. Furthermore, several vegetation types were not protected by provincial authorities, a situation that also needs to be addressed. The findings of our study need to be reassessed at a finer land-parcel scale, and implementation of a range of land-use options considered.     

Is Ammophila arenaria (Marram grass) a threat to South African dune fields?

Ammophila arenaria (marram grass) was introduced to South Africa from Europe as a means of stabilizing the Cape Flats in the 1870s, but was only successfully established in the 1890s as it was found that seeds from the first introductions did not readily germinate. By the end of the last century, it was successfully used as a dune stabilizing grass. It is now widely used in stabilization projects along the Cape coastline, being established by planting cuttings or whole plants. Because of problems experienced of marram becoming invasive, especially on the west coast of North America, and the fact that we have many invasive species which threaten our indigenous dune fields, studies have been initiated on this plant in South Africa. Most work to date has involved investigating the methods used to establish the plant in stabilization sites, and very little has been done on the biology of the species in this country. Marram is generally thought not to seed in South Africa, and thus its spread has been limited. However, in the light of recent reports of successful germination of the seed, detailed studies on the phenology of seed production and establishment in natural areas will be undertaken. Studies on the natural control by fungal species and nematodes will be carried out in conjunction with work done in the Netherlands, so that a comparison of the biology of the species in South Africa can be made with that in Europe, where it is used extensively to stabilize dunes.     

Spatial mismatch between wild bee diversity hotspots and protected areas

Wild bees are critical for multiple ecosystem functions but are currently threatened. Understanding the determinants of the spatial distribution of wild bee diversity is a major research gap for their conservation. We modeled wild bee α and β taxonomic and functional diversity in Switzerland to uncover countrywide diversity patterns and determine the extent to which they provide complementary information, assess the importance of the different drivers structuring wild bee diversity, identify hotspots of wild bee diversity, and determine the overlap between diversity hotspots and the network of protected areas. We used site-level occurrence and trait data from 547 wild bee species across 3343 plots and calculated community attributes, including taxonomic diversity metrics, community mean trait values, and functional diversity metrics. We modeled their distribution with predictors describing gradients of climate, resource availability (vegetation), and anthropogenic influence (i.e., land-use types and beekeeping intensity). Wild bee diversity changed along gradients of climate and resource availability; high-elevation areas had lower functional and taxonomic α diversity, and xeric areas harbored more diverse bee communities. Functional and taxonomic β diversities diverged from this pattern, with high elevations hosting unique species and trait combinations. The proportion of diversity hotspots included in protected areas depended on the biodiversity facet, but most diversity hotspots occurred in unprotected land. Climate and resource availability gradients drove spatial patterns of wild bee diversity, resulting in lower overall diversity at higher elevations, but simultaneously greater taxonomic and functional uniqueness. This spatial mismatch among distinct biodiversity facets and the degree of overlap with protected areas is a challenge to wild bee conservation, especially in the face of global change, and calls for better integrating unprotected land. The application of spatial predictive models represents a valuable tool to aid the future development of protected areas and achieve wild bee conservation goals.     

Targeting Conservation Action through Assessment of Protection and Exurban Threats

Abstract:   Landscape-level assessments of biodiversity strive to guide land-use planning and conservation activities by providing information about areas of high biodiversity value and low protection status. I developed a methodology to assess the level of threat to conservation of biodiversity to help guide conservation action. This method incorporates socioeconomic indicators of risk, including developed and roaded areas, and measures the proportion of conservation lands affected by developed areas. In addition, I developed a metric called conservation potential to measure the degree of fragmentation of patches caused by development. As an illustration I applied this methodology to Colorado (U.S.A.). Protection levels were determined by examining land ownership, resulting in protected lands (status levels 1 and 2) and unprotected lands (status levels 3 and 4). Areas were considered threatened (at risk) if a land-cover patch had >20% roaded area, >15% developed area, or was highly fragmented. Although 24 of 43 natural land-cover types were unprotected (49% of the state), 9 additional types were threatened. Combining conservation-status protection levels with patterns of threat targets the geographic area where conservation action is needed, provides a way to determine where so-called protected areas are at risk, and allows conservation strategies to be better refined.     

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.     

The Capacity of Australia's Protected‐Area System to Represent Threatened Species

Abstract: The acquisition or designation of new protected areas is usually based on criteria for representation of different ecosystems or land‐cover classes, and it is unclear how well‐threatened species are conserved within protected‐area networks. Here, we assessed how Australia's terrestrial protected‐area system (89 million ha, 11.6% of the continent) overlaps with the geographic distributions of threatened species and compared this overlap against a model that randomly placed protected areas across the continent and a spatially efficient model that placed protected areas across the continent to maximize threatened species’ representation within the protected‐area estate. We defined the minimum area needed to conserve each species on the basis of the species’ range size. We found that although the current configuration of protected areas met targets for representation of a given percentage of species’ ranges better than a random selection of areas, 166 (12.6%) threatened species occurred entirely outside protected areas and target levels of protection were met for only 259 (19.6%) species. Critically endangered species were among those with the least protection; 12 (21.1%) species occurred entirely outside protected areas. Reptiles and plants were the most poorly represented taxonomic groups, and amphibians the best represented. Spatial prioritization analyses revealed that an efficient protected‐area system of the same size as the current protected‐area system (11.6% of the area of Australia) could meet representation targets for 1272 (93.3%) threatened species. Moreover, the results of these prioritization analyses showed that by protecting 17.8% of Australia, all threatened species could reach target levels of representation, assuming all current protected areas are retained. Although this amount of area theoretically could be protected, existing land uses and the finite resources available for conservation mean land acquisition may not be possible or even effective for the recovery of threatened species. The optimal use of resources must balance acquisition of new protected areas, where processes that threaten native species are mitigated by the change in ownership or on‐ground management jurisdiction, and management of threatened species inside and outside the existing protected‐area system.     

Effects of stewardship on protected area effectiveness for coastal birds

Evaluation of protected area effectiveness is critical for conservation of biodiversity. Protected areas that prioritize biodiversity conservation are, optimally, located and managed in ways that support relatively large and stable or increasing wildlife populations. Yet evaluating conservation efficacy remains a challenging endeavor. We used an extensive community science data set, eBird, to evaluate the efficacy of protected areas for birds across the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coasts of the United States. We modeled trends (2007–2018) for 12 vulnerable waterbirds that use coastal areas during breeding or wintering. We compared two types of protected areas—sites where conservation organizations implemented active stewardship or management or both to reduce human disturbance (hereafter stewardship sites) and local, state, federal, and private protected areas managed to maintain natural land cover (hereafter protected areas)—as well as unprotected areas. We evaluated differences in trends between stewardship, protected, and unprotected areas across the Gulf and Atlantic coasts as a whole. Similar to a background sample, stewardship was known to occur at stewardship sites, but unknown at protected and unprotected areas. Four of 12 target species—Black Skimmer (Rynchops niger), Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis), Least Tern (Sternula antillarum), and Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus)—had more positive trends (two to 34 times greater) at stewardship sites than protected areas. Furthermore, five target species showed more positive trends at sites with stewardship programs than unprotected sites during at least one season, whereas seven species showed more positive trends at protected than unprotected areas. No species had more negative trends at stewardship sites than unprotected areas, and two species had more negative trends at protected than unprotected areas. Anthropogenic disturbance is a serious threat to coastal birds, and our findings demonstrate that stewardship to reduce its negative impacts helps ensure conservation of vulnerable waterbirds.     

Spatial patterns of carbon,biodiversity, deforestation threat,and REDD+ projects in Indonesia

There are concerns that Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) may fail to deliver potential biodiversity cobenefits if it is focused on high carbon areas. We explored the spatial overlaps between carbon stocks, biodiversity, projected deforestation threats, and the location of REDD+ projects in Indonesia, a tropical country at the forefront of REDD+ development. For biodiversity, we assembled data on the distribution of terrestrial vertebrates (ranges of amphibians, mammals, birds, reptiles) and plants (species distribution models for 8 families). We then investigated congruence between different measures of biodiversity richness and carbon stocks at the national and subnational scales. Finally, we mapped active REDD+ projects and investigated the carbon density and potential biodiversity richness and modeled deforestation pressures within these forests relative to protected areas and unprotected forests. There was little internal overlap among the different hotspots (richest 10% of cells) of species richness. There was also no consistent spatial congruence between carbon stocks and the biodiversity measures: a weak negative correlation at the national scale masked highly variable and nonlinear relationships island by island. Current REDD+ projects were preferentially located in areas with higher total species richness and threatened species richness but lower carbon densities than protected areas and unprotected forests. Although a quarter of the total area of these REDD+ projects is under relatively high deforestation pressure, the majority of the REDD+ area is not. In Indonesia at least, first‐generation REDD+ projects are located where they are likely to deliver biodiversity benefits. However, if REDD+ is to deliver additional gains for climate and biodiversity, projects will need to focus on forests with the highest threat to deforestation, which will have cost implications for future REDD+ implementation.     

Use of ecoacoustics to determine biodiversity patterns across ecological gradients

The variety of local animal sounds characterizes a landscape. We used ecoacoustics to noninvasively assess the species richness of various biotopes typical of an ecofriendly forest plantation with diverse ecological gradients and both nonnative and indigenous vegetation. The reference area was an adjacent large World Heritage Site protected area (PA). All sites were in a global biodiversity hotspot. Our results showed how taxa segregated into various biotopes. We identified 65 singing species, including birds, frogs, crickets, and katydids. Large, natural, protected grassland sites in the PA had the highest mean acoustic diversity (14.1 species/site). Areas covered in nonnative timber or grass species were devoid of acoustic species. Sites grazed by native and domestic megaherbivores were fairly rich (5.1) in acoustic species but none were unique to this habitat type, where acoustic diversity was greater than in intensively managed grassland sites (0.04). Natural vegetation patches inside the plantation mosaic supported high mean acoustic diversity (indigenous forests 7.6, grasslands 8.0, wetlands 9.1), which increased as plant heterogeneity and patch size increased. Indigenous forest patches within the plantation mosaic contained a highly characteristic acoustic species assemblage, emphasizing their complementary contribution to local biodiversity. Overall, acoustic signals determined spatial biodiversity patterns and can be a useful tool for guiding conservation.     

Past and Present Effectiveness of Protected Areas for Conservation of Naturally and Anthropogenically Rare Plant Species

Abstract:  The Global Strategy of Plant Conservation states that at least 60% of threatened plant species should be within protected areas. This goal has been met in some regions with long traditions of plant protection. We used gap analysis to explore how particular groups of species of conservation interest, representing different types of natural or anthropogenic rarity, have been covered by protected areas on a national scale in Estonia during the last 100 years. Species-accumulation curves indicated that plant species that are naturally rare (restricted global or local distribution, always small populations, or very rare habitat requirements) needed almost twice as many protected areas to reach the 60% target as plant species that are rare owing to lack of suitable management (species depending on grassland management, moderate forest disturbances, extensive traditional agriculture, or species potentially threatened by collecting). Temporal analysis of the establishment of protected areas suggested that grouping plant species according to the predominant cause of rarity accurately reflected the history of conservation decision making. Species found in very rare habitats have previously received special conservation attention; species dependent on traditional extensive agriculture have been largely ignored until recently. Legislative initiative and new nature-protection schemes (e.g., Natura 2000, network of protected areas in the European Union) have had a positive influence on all species groups. Consequently, the species groups needing similar action for their conservation are sensitive indicators of the effectiveness of protected-area networks. Different species groups, however, may not be uniformly conserved within protected areas, and all species groups should fulfill the target of 60% coverage within protected areas.     

Protected‐Area Boundaries as Filters of Plant Invasions

Abstract: Human land uses surrounding protected areas provide propagules for colonization of these areas by non‐native species, and corridors between protected‐area networks and drainage systems of rivers provide pathways for long‐distance dispersal of non‐native species. Nevertheless, the influence of protected‐area boundaries on colonization of protected areas by invasive non‐native species is unknown. We drew on a spatially explicit data set of more than 27,000 non‐native plant presence records for South Africa's Kruger National Park to examine the role of boundaries in preventing colonization of protected areas by non‐native species. The number of records of non‐native invasive plants declined rapidly beyond 1500 m inside the park; thus, we believe that the park boundary limited the spread of non‐native plants. The number of non‐native invasive plants inside the park was a function of the amount of water runoff, density of major roads, and the presence of natural vegetation outside the park. Of the types of human‐induced disturbance, only the density of major roads outside the protected area significantly increased the number of non‐native plant records. Our findings suggest that the probability of incursion of invasive plants into protected areas can be quantified reliably.     

A Conservation Gap Analysis of Brazil''s Amazonian Vegetation

Vegetation types lacking protection in the existing conservation units of the nine states in the Brazilian Legal Amazon were identified, and locations were noted where these vegetation types could be protected. Maps of vegetation, protected areas, and semi-protected areas, such as Amerindian and forestry reserves, were digitized and overlaid using a geographic information system. There are 28 natural vegetation types in the Brazilian Legal Amazon. Locations of new areas for protection were selected using a minimum criterion of protecting at least one example of each vegetation type in each state (here called "vegetation zones"). There are 111 vegetation zones in the Legal Amazon, of which only 37 (33%) have some portion of their area protected. There are few protected areas in the most heavily deforested states along the southeastern fringe of the forest. In Maranhão, where 60% of the original forest had been lost by 1990, only one of 10 vegetation types is protected. Negotiating agreements with indigenous tribes, and to a lesser extent with extractivists who harvest nontimber products from the forest, represents a major opportunity to increase significantly the area and representativeness of the conservation units. Additional conservation units need to be established quickly before rapidly increasing deforestation and land prices preclude this opportunity; otherwise, some vegetation types may virtually disappear.     

Analytical Solutions to Trade‐Offs between Size of Protected Areas and Land‐Use Intensity

Abstract: Land‐use change is affecting Earth's capacity to support both wild species and a growing human population. The question is how best to manage landscapes for both species conservation and economic output. If large areas are protected to conserve species richness, then the unprotected areas must be used more intensively. Likewise, low‐intensity use leaves less area protected but may allow wild species to persist in areas that are used for market purposes. This dilemma is present in policy debates on agriculture, housing, and forestry. Our goal was to develop a theoretical model to evaluate which land‐use strategy maximizes economic output while maintaining species richness. Our theoretical model extends previous analytical models by allowing land‐use intensity on unprotected land to influence species richness in protected areas. We devised general models in which species richness (with modified species‐area curves) and economic output (a Cobb–Douglas production function) are a function of land‐use intensity and the proportion of land protected. Economic output increased as land‐use intensity and extent increased, and species richness responded to increased intensity either negatively or following the intermediate disturbance hypothesis. We solved the model analytically to identify the combination of land‐use intensity and protected area that provided the maximum amount of economic output, given a target level of species richness. The land‐use strategy that maximized economic output while maintaining species richness depended jointly on the response of species richness to land‐use intensity and protection and the effect of land use outside protected areas on species richness within protected areas. Regardless of the land‐use strategy, species richness tended to respond to changing land‐use intensity and extent in a highly nonlinear fashion.     

Bias in protected‐area location and its effects on long‐term aspirations of biodiversity conventions

To contribute to the aspirations of recent international biodiversity conventions, protected areas (PAs) must be strategically located and not simply established on economically marginal lands as they have in the past. With refined international commitments under the Convention on Biological Diversity to target protected areas in places of “importance to biodiversity,” perhaps they may now be. We analyzed location biases in PAs globally over historic (pre‐2004) and recent periods. Specifically, we examined whether the location of protected areas are more closely associated with high concentrations of threatened vertebrate species or with areas of low agricultural opportunity costs. We found that both old and new protected areas did not target places with high concentrations of threatened vertebrate species. Instead, they appeared to be established in locations that minimize conflict with agriculturally suitable lands. This entrenchment of past trends has substantial implications for the contributions these protected areas are making to international commitments to conserve biodiversity. If protected‐area growth from 2004 to 2014 had strategically targeted unrepresented threatened vertebrates, >30 times more species (3086 or 2553 potential vs. 85 actual new species represented) would have been protected for the same area or the same cost as the actual expansion. With the land available for conservation declining, nations must urgently focus new protection on places that provide for the conservation outcomes outlined in international treaties.     

Conservation of the Brazilian Cerrado

Abstract:  The Cerrado is one of the world's biodiversity hotspots. In the last 35 years, more than 50% of its approximately 2 million km² has been transformed into pasture and agricultural lands planted in cash crops. The Cerrado has the richest flora among the world's savannas (>7000 species) and high levels of endemism. Species richness of birds, fishes, reptiles, amphibians, and insects is equally high, whereas mammal diversity is relatively low. Deforestation rates have been higher in the Cerrado than in the Amazon rainforest, and conservation efforts have been modest: only 2.2% of its area is under legal protection. Numerous animal and plant species are threatened with extinction, and an estimated 20% of threatened and endemic species do not occur in protected areas. Soil erosion, the degradation of the diverse Cerrado vegetation formations, and the spread of exotic grasses are widespread and major threats. The use of fire for clearing land and to encourage new growth for pasture has also caused damage, even though the Cerrado is a fire-adapted ecosystem. Ecosystem experiments and modeling show that change in land cover is altering the hydrology and affecting carbon stocks and fluxes. Cerrado agriculture is lucrative, and agricultural expansion is expected to continue, requiring improvements in and extension of the transportation infrastructure, which will affect not only the Cerrado but also the Amazon forest. Large-scale landscape modification and threats to numerous species have led to renewed interest from various sectors in promoting the conservation of the Cerrado, particularly through strengthening and enlarging the system of protected areas and improving farming practices and thus the livelihoods of local communities.     

On how much biodiversity is covered in Europe by national protected areas and by the Natura 2000 network: insights from terrestrial vertebrates

The European Union has made extensive biodiversity conservation efforts with the Habitats and Birds Directives and with the establishment of the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, one of the largest networks of conservation areas worldwide. We performed a gap analysis of the entire Natura 2000 system plus national protected areas and all terrestrial vertebrates (freshwater fish excluded). We also evaluated the level of connectivity of both systems, providing therefore a first estimate of the functionality of the Natura 2000 system as an effective network of protected areas. Together national protected areas and the Natura 2000 network covered more than one‐third of the European Union. National protected areas did not offer protection to 13 total gap species (i.e., species not covered by any protected area) or to almost 300 partial gap species (i.e., species whose representation target is not met). Together the Natura 2000 network and national protected areas left 1 total gap species and 121 partial gap species unprotected. The terrestrial vertebrates listed in the Habitats and Birds Directives were relatively well covered (especially birds), and overall connectivity was improved considerably by Natura 2000 sites that act as stepping stones between national protected areas. Overall, we found that the Natura 2000 network represents at continental level an important network of protected areas that acts as a good complement to existing national protected areas. However, a number of problems remain that are mainly linked to the criteria used to list the species in the Habitats and Birds Directives. The European Commission initiated in 2014 a process aimed at assessing the importance of the Birds and Habitats Directives for biodiversity conservation. Our results contribute to this assessment and suggest the system is largely effective for terrestrial vertebrates but would benefit from further updating of the species lists and field management.