Threatened Status, Rarity, and Diversity as Alternative Selection Measures for Protected Areas: A Test Using Afrotropical Antelopes

Threatened Status, Rarity, and Diversity as Alternative Selection Measures for Protected Areas: A... A major aim of conservation today is the maintenance of biodiversity. Practically, this pursuit might involve protecting a representative sample of the current biotic diversity (where diversity can have a variety of different meanings as in Vane‐Wright et al. 1991), safeguarding species with traits that may be correlated with susceptibility to extinction (see International Council for Bird Preservation 1992), or protecting those species that are currently categorized as under short‐term threat of extinction. Priority areas for conservation may vary, however, depending on which of these three approaches is taken. We investigated the designation of priority areas using these different approaches for Afrotropical antelope. Sites were selected on the basis of (1) biotic diversity—simple species richness and taxonomic diversity; (2) uniqueness of the fauna relative to other sites—how geographically restricted the component species were; and (3) degree of endangerment of the fauna. When insufficient sites to represent all the species could be selected, there was little agreement between the priority sites selected using the different methods. Sites selected by each approach were also generally poor at representing the diversity components ranked highly by other approaches. Also, many of the species were represented in only one site in the selected network, which on its own probably does not represent a viable population for the species. Therefore, it is important that the precise aims and consequences of any selection procedure be understood. A combination of different approaches, emphasizing different aspects of biodiversity and implemented sequentially, may be the best compromise for preserving a full range of biotic diversity. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

Threatened Status, Rarity, and Diversity as Alternative Selection Measures for Protected Areas: A Test Using Afrotropical Antelopes

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/threatened-status-rarity-and-diversity-as-alternative-selection-O0NEwLaxm3
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
D.O.I.
10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.9020324.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

A major aim of conservation today is the maintenance of biodiversity. Practically, this pursuit might involve protecting a representative sample of the current biotic diversity (where diversity can have a variety of different meanings as in Vane‐Wright et al. 1991), safeguarding species with traits that may be correlated with susceptibility to extinction (see International Council for Bird Preservation 1992), or protecting those species that are currently categorized as under short‐term threat of extinction. Priority areas for conservation may vary, however, depending on which of these three approaches is taken. We investigated the designation of priority areas using these different approaches for Afrotropical antelope. Sites were selected on the basis of (1) biotic diversity—simple species richness and taxonomic diversity; (2) uniqueness of the fauna relative to other sites—how geographically restricted the component species were; and (3) degree of endangerment of the fauna. When insufficient sites to represent all the species could be selected, there was little agreement between the priority sites selected using the different methods. Sites selected by each approach were also generally poor at representing the diversity components ranked highly by other approaches. Also, many of the species were represented in only one site in the selected network, which on its own probably does not represent a viable population for the species. Therefore, it is important that the precise aims and consequences of any selection procedure be understood. A combination of different approaches, emphasizing different aspects of biodiversity and implemented sequentially, may be the best compromise for preserving a full range of biotic diversity.

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Apr 1, 1995

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, 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 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