Density-impact functions for terrestrial vertebrate pests and indigenous biota: Guidelines for conservation managers

Density-impact functions for terrestrial vertebrate pests and indigenous biota: Guidelines for... The relationship between the density of a pest and its impact on a valued resource is critical for cost-effective management. Despite their simplistic representation of dynamic and often complex systems, density-impact functions (DIFs) are appealing because they provide managers with tangible goals for pest control. Historically, these relationships have focused on agricultural resources: relatively few have been quantified for conservation assets. We provide empirical evidence for six theoretical forms of DIF. Linear functions are the default condition based on the notion that some conservation benefit will result from any level of pest control, but they comprised less than one fifth of DIFs reviewed. More than half were strongly non-linear, with substantial benefits for indigenous species when pests were suppressed to low levels. Recovery of species, however, is usually a function of multiple processes, not just removal of pests, and recovery tends to be place- and time-specific. Thus, guidelines to help conservation managers derive and use DIFs in ways that maximise their value without overextending their utility are: 1) minimise influences of factors other than pests; 2) where necessary, undertake site-specific experiments, rather than generalising from other studies; 3) use time scales that recognise delays for biota to adjust to pest control; 4) measure instantaneous responses (e.g. demographic rates) as early indicators; and 5) use DIFs to guide short-term pest management, and trophic-interactive modelling for longer-term management. DIFs derived and used in this way are a significant improvement over unguided biodiversity management, and provide managers with an evidence base for decision-making. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Biological Conservation Elsevier

Density-impact functions for terrestrial vertebrate pests and indigenous biota: Guidelines for conservation managers

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/density-impact-functions-for-terrestrial-vertebrate-pests-and-UQc3apIj0R
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V.
ISSN
0006-3207
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.biocon.2015.07.031
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The relationship between the density of a pest and its impact on a valued resource is critical for cost-effective management. Despite their simplistic representation of dynamic and often complex systems, density-impact functions (DIFs) are appealing because they provide managers with tangible goals for pest control. Historically, these relationships have focused on agricultural resources: relatively few have been quantified for conservation assets. We provide empirical evidence for six theoretical forms of DIF. Linear functions are the default condition based on the notion that some conservation benefit will result from any level of pest control, but they comprised less than one fifth of DIFs reviewed. More than half were strongly non-linear, with substantial benefits for indigenous species when pests were suppressed to low levels. Recovery of species, however, is usually a function of multiple processes, not just removal of pests, and recovery tends to be place- and time-specific. Thus, guidelines to help conservation managers derive and use DIFs in ways that maximise their value without overextending their utility are: 1) minimise influences of factors other than pests; 2) where necessary, undertake site-specific experiments, rather than generalising from other studies; 3) use time scales that recognise delays for biota to adjust to pest control; 4) measure instantaneous responses (e.g. demographic rates) as early indicators; and 5) use DIFs to guide short-term pest management, and trophic-interactive modelling for longer-term management. DIFs derived and used in this way are a significant improvement over unguided biodiversity management, and provide managers with an evidence base for decision-making.

Journal

Biological ConservationElsevier

Published: Nov 1, 2015

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off