Species Richness, Endemism, and the Choice of Areas for Conservation

Species Richness, Endemism, and the Choice of Areas for Conservation Although large reserve networks will be integral components in successful biodiversity conservation, implementation of such systems is hindered by the confusion over the relative importance of endemism and species richness. There is evidence ( Prendergast et al. 1993) that regions with high richness for a taxon tend to be different from those with high endemism. I tested this finding using distribution and richness data for 368 species from Mammalia, Lasioglossum, Plusiinae, and Papilionidae. The study area, subdivided into 336 quadrats, was the continuous area of North America north of Mexico. I also tested the hypothesis that the study taxa exhibit similar diversity patterns in North America. I found that endemism and richness patterns within taxa were generally similar. Therefore, the controversy over the relative importance of endemism and species richness may not be necessary if an individual taxon were the target of conservation efforts. I also found, however, that richness and endemism patterns were not generally similar between taxa. Therefore, centering nature reserves around areas that are important for mammal diversity (the umbrella species concept) may lead to large gaps in the overall protection of biodiversity because the diversity and endemism of other taxa tend to be concentrated elsewhere. I investigated this further by selecting four regions in North America that might form the basis of a hypothetical reserve system for Carnivora. I analyzed the distribution of the invertebrate taxa relative to these regions and found that this preliminary carnivore reserve system did not provide significantly different protection for these invertebrates than randomly selected quadrats. I conclude that the use of Carnivora as an umbrella taxon is an unreliable method for invertebrate conservation. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

Species Richness, Endemism, and the Choice of Areas for Conservation

Conservation Biology, Volume 11 (5) – Oct 16, 1997

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/species-richness-endemism-and-the-choice-of-areas-for-conservation-mzIoLHK0a4
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Society for Conservation Biology
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
DOI
10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.96089.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Although large reserve networks will be integral components in successful biodiversity conservation, implementation of such systems is hindered by the confusion over the relative importance of endemism and species richness. There is evidence ( Prendergast et al. 1993) that regions with high richness for a taxon tend to be different from those with high endemism. I tested this finding using distribution and richness data for 368 species from Mammalia, Lasioglossum, Plusiinae, and Papilionidae. The study area, subdivided into 336 quadrats, was the continuous area of North America north of Mexico. I also tested the hypothesis that the study taxa exhibit similar diversity patterns in North America. I found that endemism and richness patterns within taxa were generally similar. Therefore, the controversy over the relative importance of endemism and species richness may not be necessary if an individual taxon were the target of conservation efforts. I also found, however, that richness and endemism patterns were not generally similar between taxa. Therefore, centering nature reserves around areas that are important for mammal diversity (the umbrella species concept) may lead to large gaps in the overall protection of biodiversity because the diversity and endemism of other taxa tend to be concentrated elsewhere. I investigated this further by selecting four regions in North America that might form the basis of a hypothetical reserve system for Carnivora. I analyzed the distribution of the invertebrate taxa relative to these regions and found that this preliminary carnivore reserve system did not provide significantly different protection for these invertebrates than randomly selected quadrats. I conclude that the use of Carnivora as an umbrella taxon is an unreliable method for invertebrate conservation.

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Oct 16, 1997

There are no references for this article.

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

PDF Discount

20% off