Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Biodiversity”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2017

Monitoring Hawaiian biodiversity: Pilot study to assess changes to forest birds and their habitat

Biological diversity, or biodiversity, is the variety and abundance of species in a defined area, and is one of the oldest and most basic descriptions of biological communities. Understanding how populations and communities are structured and change over space and time in response to internal and external forces is a management priority. Effective management practices and conservation strategies depend on our understanding of the relationship between changes in biodiversity and ecological drivers such as invasive species, land use and climate change. To demonstrate how changes in biodiversity may be monitored over a large (400 km2) tract of native forest habitat, we compared bird and plant community composition and structure in an upper montane region of Hawai‘i Island originally surveyed in 1977 as part of the Hawai‘i Forest Bird Survey (Scott et al. 1986) with a comprehensive sample of the same region in 2015. Our findings suggest that across a region spanning an elevation range of 600 to 2,000 m considerable changes occurred in the plant and bird communities between 1977 and 2015. Endemic and indigenous plants species richness (i.e., total number of species) decreased dramatically in the low and middle elevations below an invasive weed front, whereas naturalized plant species richness did not change between the two periods at any elevation. Endemic bird abundance decreased and two species were lost in the lower elevations (< 1,100 m) between 1977 and 2015, while naturalized bird abundance and the numbers of species increased in the same area. In addition to changes in community composition, the structure of the forest showed evidence of changes in dominant and sub-dominant tree canopy cover, shrub and herbaceous cover, dominant tree canopy height, and matted fern cover. Biodiversity monitoring helps to define specific conservation targets and to measure progress towards reaching those targets. It is difficult to ascribe causative factors to a change in biodiversity without directly manipulating the environment. Forest habitat in a variety of settings (i.e., islands and regions with differing land-use histories and elevation ranges), however, can provide opportunities to evaluate the influence of ecological drivers. Declines in native bird biodiversity in low-elevation areas may be attributed to invasive species as land use and climate conditions have remained relatively similar over the 40-year period. Thus, the shift from an endemic-naturalized co-dominated community in 1977 to one dominated by naturalized, alien birds in 2015, and reduction in native bird abundance over that period, may reflect increasing dominance by naturalized plants within this forested area. Inferences drawn from analyses of region-wide surveys, especially with replicate datasets, will facilitate the identification of broad-scale changes in biodiversity, and provide a needed current datum in Hawaiian plant and bird biodiversity monitoring.

Hawaii↗
USGS2019

Social equity shapes zone-selection: Balancing aquatic biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services delivery in the transboundary Danube River Basin

Freshwater biodiversity is declining, despite national and international efforts to manage and protect freshwater ecosystems. Ecosystem-based management (EBM) has been proposed as an approach that could more efficiently and adaptively balance ecological and societal needs. However, this raises the question of how social and ecological objectives can be included in an integrated management plan. Here, we present a generic model-coupling framework tailored to address this question for freshwater ecosystems, using three components: biodiversity, ecosystem services (ESS), and a spatial prioritisation that aims to balance the spatial representation of biodiversity and ESS supply and demand. We illustrate this model-coupling approach within the Danube River Basin using the spatially explicit, potential distribution of (i) 85 fish species as a surrogate for biodiversity as modelled using hierarchical Bayesian models, and (ii) four estimated ESS layers produced by the Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) platform (with ESS supply defined as carbon storage and flood regulation, and demand specified as recreation and water use). These are then used for (iii) a joint spatial prioritisation of biodiversity and ESS employing Marxan with Zones, laying out the spatial representation of multiple management zones. Given the transboundary setting of the Danube River Basin, we also run comparative analyses including the country-level purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) and each country's percent cover of the total basin area as potential cost factors, illustrating a scheme for balancing the share of establishing specific zones among countries. We demonstrate how emphasizing various biodiversity or ESS targets in an EBM model-coupling framework can be used to cost-effectively test various spatially explicit management options across a multi-national case study. We further discuss possible limitations, future developments, and requirements for effectively managing a balance between biodiversity and ESS supply and demand in freshwater ecosystems.

Science of the Total Environment↗
USGS2020

Multiple elements of soil biodiversity drive ecosystem functions across biomes

The role of soil biodiversity in regulating multiple ecosystem functions is poorly understood, limiting our ability to predict how soil biodiversity loss might affect human wellbeing and ecosystem sustainability. Here, combining a global observational study with an experimental microcosm study, we provide evidence that soil biodiversity (bacteria, fungi, protists and invertebrates) is significantly and positively associated with multiple ecosystem functions. These functions include nutrient cycling, decomposition, plant production, and reduced potential for pathogenicity and belowground biological warfare. Our findings also reveal the context dependency of such relationships and the importance of the connectedness, biodiversity and nature of the globally distributed dominant phylotypes within the soil network in maintaining multiple functions. Moreover, our results suggest that the positive association between plant diversity and multifunctionality across biomes is indirectly driven by soil biodiversity. Together, our results provide insights into the importance of soil biodiversity for maintaining soil functionality locally and across biomes, as well as providing strong support for the inclusion of soil biodiversity in conservation and management programmes.

Nature Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS2022

Circumpolar patterns of Arctic freshwater fish biodiversity: A baseline for monitoring

Climate change, biological invasions, and anthropogenic disturbance pose a threat to the biodiversity and function of Arctic freshwater ecosystems. Understanding potential changes in fish species distribution and richness is necessary, given the great importance of fish to the function of freshwater ecosystems and as a resource to humans. However, information gaps limit large-scale studies and our ability to determine patterns and trends in space and time. This study takes the first step in determining circumpolar patterns of fish species richness and composition, which provides a baseline to improve both monitoring and conservation of Arctic freshwater biodiversity. Information on species presence/absence was gathered from the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program's Freshwater Database and used to examine patterns of freshwater fish γ-, α-, and β-diversity across 234° of longitude in the Arctic. The metrics of diversity provided information on species richness and composition across hydrobasins, ecoregions, and Arctic zones. Circumpolar patterns of fish species biodiversity varied with latitude, isolation, and coarse ecoregion characteristics; patterns were consistent with historic and contemporary barriers to colonisation and environmental characteristics. Gamma-diversity was lower in the high Arctic compared to lower latitude zones, but α-diversity did not decrease with increasing latitude below 71°N, reflecting glacial history. Alpha-diversity was reduced to a single species, Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus , in ecoregions above 71°N, where γ-diversity was the lowest. Beta-diversity indicated little variation in the composition and richness of species across the High Arctic; at lower latitudes, ecoregions contained more species, although species composition turned over across large spatial extents. In an analysis of five ecoregions in the circumpolar Arctic, physical isolation, and ecoregion area and topography were identified as strong drivers of γ-, α-, and β-diversity. Physical isolation reduced the γ- and α-diversity, and changes in β-diversity between adjacent locations were due mainly to losses in species richness, rather than due to differences in species composition. Heterogeneity of habitats, environmental gradients, and geographic distance probably contributed to patterns of fish dissimilarity within and across ecoregions. This study presents the first analysis of large-scale patterns of freshwater fish biodiversity in the circumpolar Arctic. However, information gaps in space, time, and among taxonomic groups remain. Future inclusion of extensive archive and new data will allow future studies to test for changes and drivers of the observed patterns of biodiversity. This is important given the potential impacts of ongoing and accelerating climate change, land use, and biotic exchange on Arctic fish biodiversity.

Freshwater Biology↗
USGS2009

Indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: A synthesis across ecosystems and spatial scales

According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, common indicators are needed to monitor the loss of biodiversity and the implications for the sustainable provision of ecosystem services. However, a variety of indicators are already being used resulting in many, mostly incompatible, monitoring systems. In order to synthesise the different indicator approaches and to detect gaps in the development of common indicator systems, we examined 531 indicators that have been reported in 617 peer-reviewed journal articles between 1997 and 2007. Special emphasis was placed on comparing indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services across ecosystems (forests, grass- and shrublands, wetlands, rivers, lakes, soils and agro-ecosystems) and spatial scales (from patch to global scale). The application of biological indicators was found most often focused on regional and finer spatial scales with few indicators applied across ecosystem types. Abiotic indicators, such as physico-chemical parameters and measures of area and fragmentation, are most frequently used at broader (regional to continental) scales. Despite its multiple dimensions, biodiversity is usually equated with species richness only. The functional, structural and genetic components of biodiversity are poorly addressed despite their potential value across habitats and scales. Ecosystem service indicators are mostly used to estimate regulating and supporting services but generally differ between ecosystem types as they reflect ecosystem-specific services. Despite great effort to develop indicator systems over the past decade, there is still a considerable gap in the widespread use of indicators for many of the multiple components of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and a need to develop common monitoring schemes within and across habitats. Filling these gaps is a prerequisite for linking biodiversity dynamics with ecosystem service delivery and to achieving the goals of global and sub-global initiatives to halt the loss of biodiversity. ?? 2009 Oikos.

Oikos↗
USGS2023

Future-proofing the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity

Freshwater biodiversity loss is accelerating globally, but humanity can change this trajectory through actions that enable recovery. To be successful, these actions require coordination and planning at a global scale. The Emergency Recovery Plan for global freshwater biodiversity aims to reduce the risk for freshwater biodiversity loss through six priority actions: (1) accelerate implementation of environmental flows; (2) improve water quality to sustain aquatic life; (3) protect and restore critical habitats; (4) manage exploitation of freshwater species and riverine aggregates; (5) prevent and control nonnative species invasions in freshwater habitats; and (6) safeguard and restore freshwater connectivity. These actions can be implemented using future-proofing approaches that anticipate future risks (e.g., emerging pollutants, new invaders, and synergistic effects) and minimize likely stressors to make conservation of freshwater biodiversity more resilient to climate change and other global environmental challenges. While uncertainty with respect to past observations is not a new concern for freshwater biodiversity, future-proofing has the distinction of accounting for the uncertainty of future conditions that have no historical baseline. The level of uncertainty with respect to future conditions is unprecedented. Future-proofing of the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity will require anticipating future changes and developing and implementing actions to address those future changes. Here, we showcase future-proofing approaches likely to be successful using local case studies and examples. Ensuring that response options within the Emergency Recovery Plan are future-proofed will provide decision makers with science-informed choices, even in the face of uncertain and potentially new future conditions. We are at an inflection point for global freshwater biodiversity loss; learning from defeats and successes can support improved actions toward a sustainable future.

Environmental Reviews↗
USGS2015

Climate-smart management of biodiversity

Determining where biodiversity is likely to be most vulnerable to climate change and methods to reduce that vulnerability are necessary first steps to incorporate climate change into biodiversity management plans. Here, we use a spatial climate change vulnerability assessment to (1) map the potential vulnerability of terrestrial biodiversity to climate change in the northeastern United States and (2) provide guidance on how and where management actions for biodiversity could provide long-term benefits under climate change (i.e., climate-smart management considerations). Our model suggests that biodiversity will be most vulnerable in Delaware, Maryland, and the District of Columbia due to the combination of high climate change velocity, high landscape resistance, and high topoclimate homogeneity. Biodiversity is predicted to be least vulnerable in Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire because large portions of these states have low landscape resistance, low climate change velocity, and low topoclimate homogeneity. Our spatial climate-smart management considerations suggest that: (1) high topoclimate diversity could moderate the effects of climate change across 50% of the region; (2) decreasing local landscape resistance in conjunction with other management actions could increase the benefit of those actions across 17% of the region; and (3) management actions across 24% of the region could provide long-term benefits by promoting short-term population persistence that provides a source population capable of moving in the future. The guidance and framework we provide here should allow conservation organizations to incorporate our climate-smart management considerations into management plans without drastically changing their approach to biodiversity conservation.

Ecosphere↗
USGS2022

Temporal coherence patterns of prairie pothole wetlands indicate the importance of landscape linkages and wetland heterogeneity in maintaining biodiversity

Wetland ecosystems are diverse, productive habitats that are essential reservoirs of biodiversity. Not only are they home to numerous wetland-specialist species, but they also provide food, water, and shelter that support terrestrial wildlife populations. However, like observed patterns of biodiversity loss, wetland habitats have experienced widespread loss and degradation. In order to conserve and restore wetlands, and thereby the biodiversity they support, it is important to understand how biodiversity in wetland habitats is maintained. Habitat heterogeneity and connectivity are thought to be predominate drivers of wetland biodiversity. We quantified temporal coherence (i.e., spatial synchrony) of wetland invertebrate communities using intra-class correlations among 16 wetlands sampled continuously over 24 years to better understand the relative influences wetland heterogeneity (i.e., internal processes specific to individual wetlands and spatial connectivity and external processes occurring on the landscape) on wetland biodiversity. We found that while wetlands with different ponded-water regimes (temporarily ponded or permanently ponded) often hosted different invertebrate communities, temporal shifts in invertebrate composition were synchronous. We also found the relative importance of internal versus external forces in determining community assembly vary depending on a wetland’s hydrologic function and climate influences. Our results confirm that heterogeneity and spatial connectivity of wetland landscapes are important drivers of wetland biodiversity.

North Dakota↗
USGS2018

Advancing marine biological observations and data requirements of the complementary Essential Ocean Variables (EOVs) and Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) Frameworks

Measurements of the status and trends of key indicators for the ocean and marine life are required to inform policy and management in the context of growing human uses of marine resources, coastal development, and climate change. Two synergistic efforts identify specific priority variables for monitoring: Essential Ocean Variables (EOVs) through the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), and Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) from the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON). Both systems support reporting against internationally agreed conventions and treaties. GOOS, established under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), plays a leading role in coordinating global monitoring of the ocean and in the definition of EOVs. GEO BON is a global biodiversity observation network that coordinates observations to enhance management of the world’s biodiversity and promote both the awareness and accounting of ecosystem services. Convergence and agreement between these two efforts are required to streamline existing and new marine observation programs to advance scientific knowledge effectively and to support the sustainable use and management of ocean spaces and resources. In this context, the Marine Biodiversity Observation Network (MBON), a thematic component of GEO BON, is collaborating with GOOS, the Ocean Biogeographic Information System (OBIS), and the Integrated Marine Biosphere Research (IMBeR) project to ensure that EBVs and EOVs are complementary, representing alternative uses of a common set of scientific measurements. This work is informed by the Joint Technical Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology (JCOMM), an intergovernmental body of technical experts that helps international coordination on best practices for observing, data management and services, combined with capacity development expertise. Characterizing biodiversity and understanding its drivers will require incorporation of observations from traditional and molecular taxonomy, animal tagging and tracking efforts, ocean biogeochemistry, and ocean observatory initiatives including deep ocean and seafloor. The partnership between large-scale ocean observing and product distribution initiatives (MBON, OBIS, JCOMM, and GOOS) is an expedited, effective way to support international policy-level assessments (e.g., the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services or IPBES), along with the implementation of international development goals (e.g., the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals).

Frontiers in Marine Science↗
USGS2016

Setting priorities for private land conservation in fire-prone landscapes: Are fire risk reduction and biodiversity conservation competing or compatible objectives?

Although wildfire plays an important role in maintaining biodiversity in many ecosystems, fire management to protect human assets is often carried out by different agencies than those tasked for conserving biodiversity. In fact, fire risk reduction and biodiversity conservation are often viewed as competing objectives. Here we explored the role of management through private land conservation and asked whether we could identify private land acquisition strategies that fulfill the mutual objectives of biodiversity conservation and fire risk reduction, or whether the maximization of one objective comes at a detriment to the other. Using a fixed budget and number of homes slated for development, we simulated 20 years of housing growth under alternative conservation selection strategies, and then projected the mean risk of fires destroying structures and the area and configuration of important habitat types in San Diego County, California, USA. We found clear differences in both fire risk projections and biodiversity impacts based on the way conservation lands are prioritized for selection, but these differences were split between two distinct groupings. If no conservation lands were purchased, or if purchases were prioritized based on cost or likelihood of development, both the projected fire risk and biodiversity impacts were much higher than if conservation lands were purchased in areas with high fire hazard or high species richness. Thus, conserving land focused on either of the two objectives resulted in nearly equivalent mutual benefits for both. These benefits not only resulted from preventing development in sensitive areas, but they were also due to the different housing patterns and arrangements that occurred as development was displaced from those areas. Although biodiversity conflicts may still arise using other fire management strategies, this study shows that mutual objectives can be attained through land-use planning in this region. These results likely generalize to any place where high species richness overlaps with hazardous wildland vegetation.

California↗
USGS2019

Report on the workshop 'Global modelling of biodiversity and ecosystem services'

A three-day workshop on ‘Global Modelling of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services’, was held in the Hague, Netherlands, from 24th to 26th June 2019. The workshop, attended by 35 modelling and scenario-building experts, was organised on behalf of the former IPBES1 expert group on scenarios and models of the first IPBES work programme by its interim technical support unit, and hosted by the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. The workshop drew on the ‘nature futures’ participatory scenario-building exercise initiated by the IPBES expert group on scenarios and models, and other biodiversity modelling initiatives such as the ISIMIP project2 working on adding biodiversity to the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) scenarios framework, the 'bending the curve' initiative3 led by IIASA4 and WWF5, and GEOBON6 working on modelling Essential Biodiversity Variables. The workshop was a step towards coordinating across biodiversity modelling initiatives, to build on each other’s work, and to seek synergies for the production of innovative scenarios on biodiversity and ecosystem services to inform the post-2020 agenda of the Convention on Biological Diversity, as well as the Sustainable Development Goals. The aims of the workshop were to: 1. Compile material as input for a first draft of the fifth Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-5) based on recent scenario work, including the ‘bending the curve’ scenarios and the newly developed PBL scenarios (modified from the Rio+20 scenarios), and existing models (to be completed by August 2019) 2. Develop a protocol for modelling trends and near term projections on indicators relevant to the Nature Futures Framework7 using models that are readily available (to be completed by early 2020) 3. Set the agenda and define the aims for a larger meeting at the end of 2019 to discuss the long term strategy towards the development of appropriate indicators and models to produce Nature Futures scenarios (to continue beyond Jan 2020)

Report↗
USGS2016

Scaling-up camera traps: monitoring the planet's biodiversity with networks of remote sensors

Countries committed to implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2011–2020 strategic plan need effective tools to monitor global trends in biodiversity. Remote cameras are a rapidly growing technology that has great potential to transform global monitoring for terrestrial biodiversity and can be an important contributor to the call for measuring Essential Biodiversity Variables. Recent advances in camera technology and methods enable researchers to estimate changes in abundance and distribution for entire communities of animals and to identify global drivers of biodiversity trends. We suggest that interconnected networks of remote cameras will soon monitor biodiversity at a global scale, help answer pressing ecological questions, and guide conservation policy. This global network will require greater collaboration among remote-camera studies and citizen scientists, including standardized metadata, shared protocols, and security measures to protect records about sensitive species. With modest investment in infrastructure, and continued innovation, synthesis, and collaboration, we envision a global network of remote cameras that not only provides real-time biodiversity data but also serves to connect people with nature.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗
USGS2018

Habitat mosaics and path analysis can improve biological conservation of aquatic biodiversity in ecosystems with low-head dams

Conserving native biodiversity depends on restoring functional habitats in the face of human-induced disturbances. Low-head dams are a ubiquitous human impact that degrades aquatic ecosystems worldwide. To improve our understanding of how low-head dams impact habitat and associated biodiversity, our research examined complex interactions among three spheres of the total environment. i.e., how low-head dams ( anthroposphere ) affect aquatic habitat ( hydrosphere ), and native biodiversity ( biosphere ) in streams and rivers. Creation of lake-like habitats upstream of low-head dams is a well-documented major impact of dams. Alterations downstream of low head dams also have important consequences, but these downstream dam effects are more challenging to detect. In a multidisciplinary field study at five dammed and five undammed sites within the Neosho River basin, KS, we tested hypotheses about two types of habitat sampling (transect and mosaic) and two types of statistical analyses (analysis of covariance and path analysis). We used fish as our example of biodiversity alteration. Our research provided three insights that can aid environmental professionals who seek to conserve and restore fish biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems threatened by human modifications. First, a mosaic approach identified habitat alterations below low-head dams (e.g. increased proportion of riffles) that were not detected using the more commonly-used transect sampling approach. Second, the habitat mosaic approach illustrated how low-head dams reduced natural variation in stream habitat. Third, path analysis, a statistical approach that tests indirect effects, showed how dams, habitat, and fish biodiversity interact. Specifically, path analysis revealed that low-head dams increased the proportion of riffle habitat below dams, and, as a result, indirectly increased fish species richness . Furthermore, the pool habitat that was created above low-head dams dramatically decreased fish species richness. As we show here, mosaic habitat sampling and path analysis can help conservation practitioners improve science-based management plans for disturbed aquatic systems worldwide.

Kansas↗
USGS2013

Biodiversity and disease: a synthesis of ecological perspectives on Lyme disease transmission.

Recent reviews have argued that disease control is among the ecosystem services yielded by biodiversity. Lyme disease (LD) is commonly cited as the best example of the ‘diluting’ effect of biodiversity on disease transmission, but many studies document the opposite relationship, showing that human LD risk can increase with forestation. Here, we unify these divergent perspectives and find strong evidence for a positive link between biodiversity and LD at broad spatial scales (urban to suburban to rural) and equivocal evidence for a negative link between biodiversity and LD at varying levels of biodiversity within forests. This finding suggests that, across zoonotic disease agents, the biodiversity–disease relationship is scale dependent and complex.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS2024

Biodiversity loss reduces global terrestrial carbon storage

Natural ecosystems store large amounts of carbon globally, as organisms absorb carbon from the atmosphere to build large, long-lasting, or slow-decaying structures such as tree bark or root systems. An ecosystem’s carbon sequestration potential is tightly linked to its biological diversity. Yet when considering future projections, many carbon sequestration models fail to account for the role biodiversity plays in carbon storage. Here, we assess the consequences of plant biodiversity loss for carbon storage under multiple climate and land-use change scenarios. We link a macroecological model projecting changes in vascular plant richness under different scenarios with empirical data on relationships between biodiversity and biomass. We find that biodiversity declines from climate and land use change could lead to a global loss of between 7.44-103.14 PgC (global sustainability scenario) and 10.87-145.95 PgC (fossil-fueled development scenario). This indicates a self-reinforcing feedback loop, where higher levels of climate change lead to greater biodiversity loss, which in turn leads to greater carbon emissions and ultimately more climate change. Conversely, biodiversity conservation and restoration can help achieve climate change mitigation goals.

Nature Communications↗
USGS2015

Biodiversity influences plant productivity through niche–efficiency

The loss of biodiversity is threatening ecosystem productivity and services worldwide, spurring efforts to quantify its effects on the functioning of natural ecosystems. Previous research has focused on the positive role of biodiversity on resource acquisition (i.e., niche complementarity), but a lack of study on resource utilization efficiency, a link between resource and productivity, has rendered it difficult to quantify the biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationship. Here we demonstrate that biodiversity loss reduces plant productivity, other things held constant, through theory, empirical evidence, and simulations under gradually relaxed assumptions. We developed a theoretical model named niche–efficiency to integrate niche complementarity and a heretofore-ignored mechanism of diminishing marginal productivity in quantifying the effects of biodiversity loss on plant productivity. Based on niche–efficiency, we created a relative productivity metric and a productivity impact index (PII) to assist in biological conservation and resource management. Relative productivity provides a standardized measure of the influence of biodiversity on individual productivity, and PII is a functionally based taxonomic index to assess individual species’ inherent value in maintaining current ecosystem productivity. Empirical evidence from the Alaska boreal forest suggests that every 1% reduction in overall plant diversity could render an average of 0.23% decline in individual tree productivity. Out of the 283 plant species of the region, we found that large woody plants generally have greater PII values than other species. This theoretical model would facilitate the integration of biological conservation in the international campaign against several pressing global issues involving energy use, climate change, and poverty.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of↗
USGS2021

A new approach to evaluate and reduce uncertainty of model-based biodiversity projections for conservation policy formulation

Biodiversity projections with uncertainty estimates under different climate, land-use, and policy scenarios are essential to setting and achieving international targets to mitigate biodiversity loss. Evaluating and improving biodiversity predictions to better inform policy decisions remains a central conservation goal and challenge. A comprehensive strategy to evaluate and reduce uncertainty of model outputs against observed measurements and multiple models would help to produce more robust biodiversity predictions. We propose an approach that integrates biodiversity models and emerging remote sensing and in-situ data streams to evaluate and reduce uncertainty with the goal of improving policy-relevant biodiversity predictions. In this article, we describe a multivariate approach to directly and indirectly evaluate and constrain model uncertainty, demonstrate a proof of concept of this approach, embed the concept within the broader context of model evaluation and scenario analysis for conservation policy, and highlight lessons from other modeling communities.

BioScience↗
USGS2017

Conservation, biodiversity and infectious disease: scientific evidence and policy implications

Habitat destruction and infectious disease are dual threats to nature and people. The potential to simultaneously advance conservation and human health has attracted considerable scientific and popular interest; in particular, many authors have justified conservation action by pointing out potential public health benefits . One major focus of this debate—that biodiversity conservation often decreases infectious disease transmission via the dilution effect—remains contentious. Studies that test for a dilution effect often find a negative association between a diversity metric and a disease risk metric, but how such associations should inform conservation policy remains unclear for several reasons. For one, diversity and infection risk have many definitions, making it possible to identify measures that conform to expectations. Furthermore, the premise that habitat destruction consistently reduces biodiversity is in question, and disturbance or conservation can affect disease in many ways other than through biodiversity change. To date, few studies have examined the broader set of mechanisms by which anthropogenic disturbance or conservation might increase or decrease infectious disease risk to human populations. Due to interconnections between biodiversity change, economics and human behaviour, moving from ecological theory to policy action requires understanding how social and economic factors affect conservation. This Theme Issue arose from a meeting aimed at synthesizing current theory and data on ‘biodiversity, conservation and infectious disease’ (4–6 May 2015). Ecologists, evolutionary biologists, economists, epidemiologists, veterinary scientists, public health professionals, and conservation biologists from around the world discussed the latest research on the ecological and socio-economic links between conservation, biodiversity and infectious disease, and the open questions and controversies in these areas. By combining ecological understanding with insights from the social and economic sciences, the papers in this Theme Issue address the complex relationships, patterns and ecological mechanisms that influence conservation, infectious disease, and the policy options available to protect nature and human health.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B:↗