Effectiveness of environmental surrogates for the selection of conservation area networks

Conservation Biology

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 815-825

  Sarkar, Sahotra ^a   Justus, James ^a   Fuller, Trevon ^a   Kelley, Chris ^a   Garson, Justin ^a   Mayfield, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Area selection; Biodiversity; Conservation planning; Place prioritization; Reserve network selection; Surrogate species

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BIOINDICATOR; CONSERVATION PLANNING; RESERVE DESIGN; SITE SELECTION;

AUSTRALASIA; AUSTRALIA; CANADA; EASTERN HEMISPHERE; NORTH AMERICA; QUEBEC [CANADA]; QUEENSLAND; WESTERN HEMISPHERE; WORLD;

EID: 20044391132     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00236.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Andelman, S. J., and W. F. Fagan. 2000. Umbrellas and flagships: efficient conservation surrogates, or expensive mistakes? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 97:5954-5959.
2. Araújo, M. B., P. J. Densham, and C. Humphries. 2003. Predicting species diversity with ED: the quest for evidence. Ecography 26:380-383.
3. Araújo, M. B., P. J. Densham, R. Lampinen, W. J. M. Hagemeijer, A. J. Mitchell-Jones, and J. P. Gase. 2001. Would environmental diversity be a good surrogate for species diversity? Ecography 24:103-110.
4. Armstrong, A. J., and H. J. van Hensbergen. 1999. Identification of priority regions for animal conservation in afforestable montane grasslands of the Northern Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Biological Conservation 87:93-103.
5. Austin, M. P., and C. R. Margules. 1986. Assessing representativeness. Pages 45-67 in M. B. Usher, editor. Wildlife conservation evaluation. Chapman and Hall, London.
6. Caro, T. M., and G. O'Doherty. 1999. On the use of surrogate species in conservation biology. Conservation Biology 13:805-814.
7. Christensen, K., S. A. Di Collobiano, M. Hall, and H. J. Jensen. 2002. Tangled nature: a model of evolutionary ecology. Journal of Theoretical Biology 216:73-84.
8. Dobson, A. P., J. P. Rodriguez, W. M. Roberts, and D. S. Wilcove. 1997. Geographic distribution of endangered species in the United States. Science 275:550-553.
9. ESRI (Environmental Systems Resource Institute). 2002. ArcMap 8.1. ESRI, Redlands, California.
10. Faith, D. P. 2003. Environmental diversity (ED) as surrogate information for species-level diversity. Ecography 26:374-379.
11. Faith, D. P., and P. A. Walker. 1996. Environmental diversity: on the best-possible use of surrogate data for assessing the relative biodiversity of sets of areas. Biodiversity and Conservation 5:399-415.
12. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1993. World soil resources: an explanatory note on the FAO world soil resources map at 1:25,000,000 scale. World soil resources report 66, rev. 1. FAO, Rome. Available from http://www.fao.org/sd/eidirect/gis/chap7.htm (accessed May 2003).
13. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) Agrometeorology Group. 2000. FAOCLIM 2: a worldwide agroclimatic database. Environment and natural resources working paper 5. FAO, Rome. Available from http://www.fao.org/sd/2001/EN1102_en.htm (accessed May 2003).
14. Ferner, S. 2002. Mapping spatial pattern in biodiversity for regional conservation planning: where to from here? Systematic Biology 51:331-363.
15. Ferrier, S., and G. Watson. 1997. An evaluation of the effectiveness of environmental surrogates and modelling techniques in predicting the distribution of biological diversity: consultancy report to the Biodiversity Convention and Strategy Section of the Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia. Environment Australia, Arimidale. Available from http://www.ea.gov.au/biodiversity/ publications/technical/surrogates/(accessed May 2003).
16. Fleishman, E., R. B. Blair, and D. D. Murphy. 2001. Empirical validation of a method for umbrella species selection. Ecological Applications 11:1489-1501.
17. Garson, J., and S. Sarkar. 2002. Surrogacy version 1.1 manual. University of Texas Biodiversity and Biocultural Conservation Laboratory, Austin, Texas. Available from http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~consbio/Cons/ResNet.html (accessed December 2004).
18. Garson, J., A. Aggarwal, and S. Sarkar. 2002a. Birds as surrogates for biodiversity: an analysis of a data set from southern Québec. Journal of Biosciences 27:347-360.
19. Garson, J., A. Aggarwal, and S. Sarkar. 2002b. ResNet version 1,2 manual. University of Texas Biodiversity and Biocultural Conservation Laboratory, Austin, Texas. Available from http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~ consbio/Cons/ResNet. html (accessed December 2004).
20. Guisan, A., T. C. Edwards, and T. Hastie. 2002. Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: setting the scene. Ecological Modelling 157:89-100.
21. Houlder, D., M. Hutchinson, H. Nix, and J. McMahon. 2000. AUNCLIM user's guide, version 5.1. Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University, Canberra. Available from http://cres.anu.edu.au/outputs/ anuclim.html (accessed May 2003).
22. Hutchinson, M. F. 1991. The application of thin plate smoothing splines to continent-wide data assimilation. Pages 104-113 in J. D. Jasper, editor. Data assimilation systems. Bureau of Meteorology research report 27. Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne.
23. Hutchinson, M. F. 2000. ANUSPLIN user guide version 4.1. Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University, Canberra. Available from http://cres.anu.edu.au/outputs/anusplin.html (accessed May 2003).
24. Hutchinson, M. F., L. Belbin, A. O. Nicholls, H. A. Nix, J. P. McMahon, and K. D. Ord. 1996. BioRap. Volume 2. Spatial modeling tools. The Australian BioRap Consortium, Canberra.
25. Iwasa, Y., F. Michor, and M. A. Nowak, 2004. Evolutionary dynamics of invasion and escape. Journal of Theoretical Biology 226:205-214.
26. Kirkpatrick, J. B., and M. J. Brown. 1994. A comparison of direct and environmental domain approaches to planning reservation of forest higher plant communities and species in Tasmania. Conservation Biology 8:217-224.
27. Landres, P. B., J. Verner, and J. W. Thomas. 1988. Ecological uses of vertebrate indicator species: a critique. Conservation Biology 2:316-328.
28. Lawler, J. J., D. White, J. C. Sifneos, and L. L. Master. 2003. Rare species and the use of indicator groups for conservation planning. Conservation Biology 17:875-882.
29. Lund, M., and C. Rahbek. 2002. Cross-taxon congruence in complementarity and conservation of temperate biodiversity. Animal Conservation 5:163-171.
30. Margules, C. R., A. O. Nicholls, and R. L. Pressey. 1988. Selecting networks of reserves to maximize biological diversity. Biological Conservation 43:63-76.
31. Meffe, G. K., and C. R. Carroll. 1994. Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
32. Moritz, C., K. S. Richardson, S. Ferrier, G. B. Monteith, J. Stanisic, S. E. Williams, and T. Whiffin. 2001. Biogeographic concordance and efficiency of taxon indicators for establishing conservation priority in a tropical rainforest biota. Proceedings of the Royal Society (London) B 268:1875-1881.
33. Nix, H. A., et al. 2000. The BioRap toolbox: a national study of biodiversity assessment and planning for Papua New Guinea. CSIRO Press, Canberra, Australia.
34. Pharo, E. J., A. J. Beattie, and R. L. Pressey. 2000. Effectiveness of using vascular plants to select reserves for bryophytes and lichens. Biological Conservation 96:371-378.
35. Revers, B., A. S. van Jaarsveld, and M. Kruger. 2000. Complementarity as a biodiversity indicator strategy. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences Series B 267:505-513.
36. Sarakinos, H., A. O. Nicholls, A. Tubert, A. Aggarwal, C. R. Margules, and S. Sarkar. 2001. Area prioritization for biodiversity conservation in Québec on the basis of species distributions: a preliminary analysis. Biodiversity and Conservation 10:1419-1472.
37. Sarkar, S., and C. R. Margules. 2002. Operationalizing biodiversity for conservation planning. Journal of Biosciences 27:299-308.
38. Sarkar, S., N. C. Parker, J. Garson, A. Aggarwal, and S. Haskell. 2000. Place prioritization for Texas using GAP data: the use of biodiversity and environmental surrogates within socioeconomic constraints. Gap Analysis Program Bulletin 9:48-50.
39. Sarkar, S., A. Aggarwal, J. Garson, C. R. Margules, and J. Zeidler. 2002. Place prioritization for biodiversity content. Journal of Biosciences 27:339-346.
40. Sarkar, S., C. Pappas, J. Garson, A. Aggarwal, and S. Cameron. 2004. Place prioritization for biodiversity conservation using probabilistic surrogate distribution data. Diversity and Distributions 10:125-133.
41. Scott, J. M., P. J. Heglund, M. L. Morrison, J. B. Haufler, M. G. Raphael, W. A. Wall, and F. B. Samson, editors. 2002. Predicting species occurrences: issues of accuracy and scale. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
42. Soulé, M. E., and M: A. Sanjayan. 1998. Conservation targets: do they help? Science 279:2060-2061.
43. Sullivan, M., and J. Chesson. 1993. The use of surrogate measurements for determining species distribution and abundance. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia.
44. Syrjala, S. E. 1996. A statistical test for a difference between the spatial distributions of two populations. Ecology 77:75-80.
45. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 1998. GTOPO30 Global 30 Arc-second Digital Elevation Model. USGS, Reston, Virginia. Available from http://edcdaac.usgs. gov/gtopo30/gtopo30.html (accessed May 2003).