Flagship species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub‐Saharan Africa

Flagship species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in... More biodiversity could be protected in situ if the few species that attract the most popular support (the ‘flagship’ species) had distributions that also covered the broader diversity of organisms. We studied how well different groups of mammals performed for representing the diversity of mammals and breeding birds among 1° areas of sub‐Saharan Africa. We demonstrate that choosing areas of sub‐Saharan Africa using either conservationists' six primary flagship mammals, or the six ‘Big Five’ mammals popular with wildlife tourists, is not significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than choosing areas at random. Furthermore, neither of these groups is significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than groups of the same number of species chosen at random. We show that in order to succeed in representing many mammals and birds in area selection, it is not sufficient for the groups used for selection to occur in many different eco‐regions, they must also have low overlaps in distribution, so as to provide high ecological complementarity (a similar pattern of ecological complementarity must be shared by the larger group of species to be represented). Therefore there may be a need for an explicit policy to balance the requirements of flagship conservation and broader biodiversity conservation, which will have implications for the distribution of resources. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Animal Conservation Wiley

Flagship species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub‐Saharan Africa

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/flagship-species-ecological-complementarity-and-conserving-the-Iv48fqv1E6
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
"Copyright © 2000 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company"
ISSN
1367-9430
eISSN
1469-1795
DOI
10.1111/j.1469-1795.2000.tb00110.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

More biodiversity could be protected in situ if the few species that attract the most popular support (the ‘flagship’ species) had distributions that also covered the broader diversity of organisms. We studied how well different groups of mammals performed for representing the diversity of mammals and breeding birds among 1° areas of sub‐Saharan Africa. We demonstrate that choosing areas of sub‐Saharan Africa using either conservationists' six primary flagship mammals, or the six ‘Big Five’ mammals popular with wildlife tourists, is not significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than choosing areas at random. Furthermore, neither of these groups is significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than groups of the same number of species chosen at random. We show that in order to succeed in representing many mammals and birds in area selection, it is not sufficient for the groups used for selection to occur in many different eco‐regions, they must also have low overlaps in distribution, so as to provide high ecological complementarity (a similar pattern of ecological complementarity must be shared by the larger group of species to be represented). Therefore there may be a need for an explicit policy to balance the requirements of flagship conservation and broader biodiversity conservation, which will have implications for the distribution of resources.

Journal

Animal ConservationWiley

Published: Aug 1, 2000

References

  • Conservation in a changing world
    Balmford, A.; Mace, G. M.; Ginsberg, J. R.
  • Reserve selection as a maximal covering location problem
    Church, R. L.; Stoms, D. M.; Davis, F. W.
  • A field guide to the larger mammals of Africa
    Dorst, J.; Dandelot, P.
  • Conservation in a changing world
    Fjeldså, J.; Rahbek, C.
  • Proceedings of the 22nd International Ornithological Congress, Durban
    Fjeldså, J.; Burgess, N.; Klerk, H.; Hansen, L.; Rahbek, C.
  • Nature reserve selection in the Transvaal, South Africa: what data should we be using
    Freitag, S.; Nicholls, A. O.; Jaarsveld, A. S.
  • Cladistic biogeography
    Humphries, C. J.; Parenti, L. R.
  • Putting biodiversity on the map: priority areas for global conservation.
  • Review of the protected areas system in the Afrotropical realm.
    MacKinnon, J.; MacKinnon, K.
  • Global biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wilderness areas
    Mittermeier, R. A.; Myers, N.; Thomsen, J. B.; Fonseca, G. A. B.; Olivieri, S.

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, 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 folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month