The Consistency of Extinction Risk Classification Protocols

Abstract:  Systematic protocols that use decision rules or scores are seen to improve consistency and transparency in classifying the conservation status of species. When applying these protocols, assessors are typically required to decide on estimates for attributes that are inherently uncertain. Input data and resulting classifications are usually treated as though they are exact and hence without operator error. We investigated the impact of data interpretation on the consistency of protocols of extinction risk classifications and diagnosed causes of discrepancies when they occurred. We tested three widely used systematic classification protocols employed by the World Conservation Union, NatureServe, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. We provided 18 assessors with identical information for 13 different species to infer estimates for each of the required parameters for the three protocols. The threat classification of several of the species varied from low risk to high risk, depending on who did the assessment. This occurred across the three protocols investigated. Assessors tended to agree on their placement of species in the highest (50–70%) and lowest risk categories (20–40%), but there was poor agreement on which species should be placed in the intermediate categories. Furthermore, the correspondence between the three classification methods was unpredictable, with large variation among assessors. These results highlight the importance of peer review and consensus among multiple assessors in species classifications and the need to be cautious with assessments carried out by a single assessor. Greater consistency among assessors requires wide use of training manuals and formal methods for estimating parameters that allow uncertainties to be represented, carried through chains of calculations, and reported transparently.     

Correlations among Extinction Risks Assessed by Different Systems of Threatened Species Categorization

Abstract:  Many different systems are used to assess levels of threat faced by species. Prominent ones are those used by the World Conservation Union, NatureServe, and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission (now the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission). These systems assign taxa a threat ranking by assessing their demographic and ecological characteristics. These threat rankings support the legislative protection of species and guide the placement of conservation programs in order of priority. It is not known, however, whether these assessment systems rank species in a similar order. To resolve this issue, we assessed 55 mainly vertebrate taxa with widely differing life histories under each of these systems and determined the rank correlations among them. Moderate, significant positive correlations were seen among the threat rankings provided by the three systems (correlations 0.58–0.69). Further, the threat rankings for taxa obtained using these systems were significantly correlated to their rankings based on predicted probability of extinction within 100 years as determined by population viability analysis (correlations 0.28–0.37). The different categorization systems, then, yield related but not identical threat rankings, and these rankings are associated with predicted extinction risk.     

Importance of Assessing Population Genetic Structure before Eradication of Invasive Species: Examples from Insular Norway Rat Populations

Abstract:  Determining the inter-island migration abilities of pest species and delimiting eradication units enable more viable long-term eradication campaigns because recurrent colonization from neighboring islands is avoided. We examined the genetic structure of the invasive Norway rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) to identify gene flow between islands and delimit population units at different geographical scales. We investigated variation in eight microsatellite loci in rat populations from 18 islands, representing five archipelagos off the Brittany coast (France). Although most of the islands are isolated from each other, short genetic distances, weak F_ST values between close islands, and a high level of cross-assignment showed that individuals collected on different islands could represent a single population unit. A Bayesian clustering method also supported the existence of high levels of gene flow between some neighboring islands. Thus, the statement "one island equals one population" can be false when inter-island distances are less than a few hundred meters. Genetic studies enable the definition of island clusters among which migration may occur that should be considered eradication units. To avoid reinvasion and to minimize ecological and economic costs, rats on all islands in an eradication unit should be eradicated simultaneously. We suggest that the genetic monitoring we performed here can be applied for management of any pest.