Where Should Nature Reserves Be Located in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa? Models for the Spatial Configuration of a Reserve Network Aimed at Maximizing the Protection of Floral Diversity

Where Should Nature Reserves Be Located in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa? Models for... Abstract: The SLOSS debate can only be resolved by considering the optimal spatial configuration of a nature‐reserve system. Only when target species have been identified by such considerations can the size of the constituent reserves be determined. We explored two null models for a spatial configuration of reserves in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa, based on the distribution of species in the family Proteaceae (Angiospermae: Rosidae). In the first model, reserves (12 × 13 km grid squares) were assigned at random for comparison with existing, proposed, and theoretically ideal configurations. In the second model, the theoretically ideal reserve configuration was constructed using the first model as a preassigned configuration. Two methods were used to iteratively select a reserve from the grid system: richness of unprotected species (species‐richness algorithm), and the sum of the rarity indexes for each unprotected species (rarity algorithm). Both algorithms yielded configurations requiring fewer reserves than those contained in proposed or existing configurations, although neither algorithm was perfect. The existing reserve configuration performed no better than the random model, assuming that the principal goal is protection of all species. We confirm that the best approach to designing a reserve configuration that maximizes the protection of species richness is to identify areas of high endemism and richness within particular biogeographical regions. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

Where Should Nature Reserves Be Located in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa? Models for the Spatial Configuration of a Reserve Network Aimed at Maximizing the Protection of Floral Diversity

Conservation Biology, Volume 6 (2) – Jun 1, 1992

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/where-should-nature-reserves-be-located-in-the-cape-floristic-region-4zsyMd2qC7
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
"Copyright © 1992 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company"
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
DOI
10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.620243.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract: The SLOSS debate can only be resolved by considering the optimal spatial configuration of a nature‐reserve system. Only when target species have been identified by such considerations can the size of the constituent reserves be determined. We explored two null models for a spatial configuration of reserves in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa, based on the distribution of species in the family Proteaceae (Angiospermae: Rosidae). In the first model, reserves (12 × 13 km grid squares) were assigned at random for comparison with existing, proposed, and theoretically ideal configurations. In the second model, the theoretically ideal reserve configuration was constructed using the first model as a preassigned configuration. Two methods were used to iteratively select a reserve from the grid system: richness of unprotected species (species‐richness algorithm), and the sum of the rarity indexes for each unprotected species (rarity algorithm). Both algorithms yielded configurations requiring fewer reserves than those contained in proposed or existing configurations, although neither algorithm was perfect. The existing reserve configuration performed no better than the random model, assuming that the principal goal is protection of all species. We confirm that the best approach to designing a reserve configuration that maximizes the protection of species richness is to identify areas of high endemism and richness within particular biogeographical regions.

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Jun 1, 1992

References

  • Biotic diversity in southern Africa
    Bond, W. J.
  • Efficiency in conservation evaluation: scoring versus iterative approaches
    Pressey, R. L.; Nicholls, O. A.

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