Conservation assessment and prioritization of areas in Northeast India: Priorities for amphibians and reptiles

Biological Conservation

Volumn 136, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 346-361

  Pawar, Samraat ^a   Koo, Michelle S ^b   Kelley, Chris ^a   Ahmed, M Firoz ^c   Chaudhuri, Sujoy ^d,e   Sarkar, Sahotra ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (United States)

^c Aaranyak   (India)

^d Center for Applied Biodiversity Science   (United States)

^e Ecollage   (India)

Author keywords

Amphibians; Area prioritization; Conservation planning; Northeast India; Reptiles; Species distribution models

Indexed keywords

AMPHIBIAN; AREAL INTERPOLATION; BIOLOGICAL SURVEY; CONSERVATION PLANNING; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; LOCATION-ALLOCATION MODEL; NICHE; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; PRIORITIZATION; REPTILE; RESERVE DESIGN; SPECIES CONSERVATION;

ASIA; EURASIA; INDIA; MYANMAR; SOUTH ASIA; SOUTHEAST ASIA;

AMPHIBIA; REPTILIA;

EID: 33947226783     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.12.012     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Alford R.A., and Richards S.J. Global amphibian declines: a problem in applied ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30 (1999) 133-165
2. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, The Herpetologists' League, Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, 1987. Guidelines for the use of live amphibians and reptiles in field research. Journal of Herpetology Suppl. 4, 1-14.
3. Araujo M.B. Matching species with reserves - uncertainties from using data at different resolutions. Biological Conservation 118 (2004) 533-538
4. Araujo M.B., Williams P.H., and Fuller R.J. Dynamics of extinction and the selection of nature reserves. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 269 (2002) 1971-1980
5. Balmford A., Lyon A.J.E., and Lang R.M. Testing the higher-taxon approach to conservation planning in a megadiverse group: the macrofungi. Biological Conservation 93 (2000) 209-217
6. Cabeza M. Habitat loss and connectivity of reserve networks in probability approaches to reserve design. Ecology Letters 6 (2003) 665-672
7. Cabeza M., Araujo M.B., Wilson R.J., Thomas C.D., Cowley M.J.R., and Moilanen A. Combining probabilities of occurrence with spatial reserve design. Journal of Applied Ecology 41 (2004) 252-262
8. Carrascal L.M., Seoane J., Palomino D., Alonso C.L., and Lobo J.M. Species-specific features affect the ability of census-derived models to map winter avian distribution. Ecological Research 21 (2006) 681-691
9. Conservation International, 2006. Biodiversity Hotspots. http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/Hotspots/ (accessed 08.09.2006.).
10. Elith J., Graham C.H., Anderson R.P., Dudik M., Ferrier S., Guisan A., Hijmans R.J., Huettmann F., Leathwick J.R., Lehmann A., Li J., Lohmann L.G., Loiselle B.A., Manion G., Moritz C., Nakamura M., Nakazawa Y., Overton J.M., Peterson A.T., Phillips S.J., Richardson K., Scachetti-Pereira R., Schapire R.E., Soberon J., Williams S., Wisz M.S., and Zimmermann N.E. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29 (2006) 129-151
11. Flather C.H., Wilson K.R., Dean D.J., and McComb W.C. Identifying gaps in conservation networks: of indicators and uncertainty in geographic-based analyses. Ecological Applications 7 (1997) 531-532
12. Fuller T., Munguia M., Mayfield M., Sanchez-Corderdo V., and Sarkar S. Incorporating connectivity into conservation planning: a multi-criteria case study from Central Mexico. Biological Conservation 133 (2006) 131-142
13. Garson, J., Aggarwal, A., Sarkar, S., 2002. ResNet Manual, V.1.2. University of Texas at Austin, Biodiversity and Biocultural Conservation Laboratory.
14. Graham C.H., Moritz C., and Williams S.E. Habitat history improves prediction of biodiversity in rainforest fauna. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (2006) 632-636
15. Guisan A., Broennimann O., Engler R., Vust M., Yoccoz N.G., Lehmann A., and Zimmermann N.E. Using niche-based models to improve the sampling of rare species. Conservation Biology 20 (2006) 501-511
16. Hansen, M., DeFries, R., Townshend, J.R.G., Sohlberg, R., 1998. Land Cover Classification Derived from AVHRR (1 km), Version 1.0. The Global Land Cover Facility, College Park, MD. http://glcf.umiacs.umd.edu/data/landcover/index.shtml. (accessed 09.09.2006.).
17. Hijmans R.J., Cameron S.E., Parra J.L., Jones P.G., and Jarvis A. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology 25 (2005) 1965-1978
18. Hummell M. Protecting Canada's endangered spaces (1995), Key Porter Books, Toronto, Ontario
19. International Council for Bird Preservation, 1992. Putting biodiversity on the map: priority areas for global conservation, International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK.
20. Islam M.Z., and Rahmani A.R. Important bird areas in India: priority sites for conservation (2004), Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai
21. IUCN, 1983. Parks and Life: Report of the IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Gland.
22. Kati V., Devillers P., Dufrene M., Legakis A., Vokou D., and Lebrun P. Testing the value of six taxonomic groups as biodiversity indicators at a local scale. Conservation Biology 18 (2004) 667-675
23. Kearney M. Habitat, environment and niche: what are we modelling?. Oikos 115 (2006) 186-191
24. Kelley C., Garson J., Aggarwal A., and Sarkar S. Place prioritization for biodiversity reserve network design: a comparison of the SITES and ResNet software packages for coverage and efficiency. Diversity and Distributions 8 (2002) 297-306
25. Khan M.L., Menon S., and Bawa K.S. Effectiveness of the protected area network in biodiversity conservation: a case-study of Meghalaya state. Biodiversity and Conservation 6 (1997) 853-868
26. Larsen F.W., and Rahbek C. The influence of spatial grain size on the suitability of the higher-taxon approach in continental priority-setting. Animal Conservation 8 (2005) 389-396
27. Lund M.P., and Rahbek C. Cross-taxon congruence in complementarity and conservation of temperate biodiversity. Animal Conservation 5 (2002) 163-171
28. Mani M.S. Ecology and Biogeography in India (1974), Dr. W. Junk b.v. Publishersz, The Hague
29. Margules C.R., Nicholls A.O., and Pressey R.L. Selecting networks of reserves to maximize biological diversity. Biological Conservation 43 (1988) 63-76
30. Margules C.R., Pressey R.L., and Williams P.H. Representing biodiversity: data and procedures for identifying priority areas for conservation. Journal of Biosciences 27 (2002) 309-326
31. Menon S., Pontius R.G., Rose J., Khan M.L., and Bawa K.S. Identifying conservation-priority areas in the tropics: a land-use change modeling approach. Conservation Biology 15 (2001) 501-512
32. Mittermeier, R.A., Gil, R.P., Hoffmann, M., Pilgrim, J., Brooks, T., Mittermeier, C.G., Lamoreux, J., da Fonseca, G.A.B., 2004. Hotspots revisited: Earth's biologically richest and most endangered terrestrial ecosystems, Cemex, Mexico.
33. Moilanen A. Reserve selection using nonlinear species distribution models. American Naturalist 165 (2005) 695-706
34. Moilanen A., Runge M.C., Elith J., Tyre A., Carmel Y., Fegraus E., Wintle B.A., Burgman M., and Ben-Haim Y. Planning for robust reserve networks using uncertainty analysis. Ecological Modelling 199 (2006) 115-124
35. Moritz C., Richardson K.S., Ferrier S., Monteith G.B., Stanisic J., Williams S.E., and Whiffin T. Biogeographical concordance and efficiency of taxon indicators for establishing conservation priority in a tropical rainforest biota. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 268 (2001) 1875-1881
36. Myers N., Mittermeier R.A., Mittermeier C.A., da Fonseca G.A.B., and Kent J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403 (2000) 853-858
37. O'Dea N., Araujo M.B., and Whittaker R.J. How well do important bird areas represent species and minimize conservation conflict in the tropical Andes?. Diversity & Distributions 12 (2006) 205-214
38. Olson D., and Dinerstein E. The Global 200: priority ecoregions for global conservation. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 89 (2002) 199-224
39. Olson D.M., Dinerstein E., Wikramanayake E.D., Burgess N.D., Powell G.V.N., Underwood E.C., D'Amico J.A., Itoua I., Strand H.E., Morrison J.C., Loucks C.J., Allnutt T.F., Ricketts T.H., Kura Y., Lamoreux J.F., Wettengel W.W., Hedao P., and Kassem K.R. Terrestrial ecoregions of the worlds: a new map of life on Earth. BioScience 51 (2001) 933-938
40. Pain D.J., Fishpool L., Byaruhanga A., Arinaitwe J., and Balmford A. Biodiversity representation in Uganda's forest IBAs. Biological Conservation 125 (2005) 133-138
41. Pawar, S., Birand, A., 2001. A survey of amphibians, reptiles, and birds in Northeast India. Centre for Ecological Research and Conservation, Mysore, India.
42. Pawar, S.S., Birand, A.C., Ahmed, M.F., Sengupta, S., Raman, T.R.S., 2006. Conservation biogeography in Northeast India: hierarchical analysis of cross-taxon distributional congruence. Diversity and Distributions, in press. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2006.00298.x.
43. Pearce J., Ferrier S., and Scotts D. An evaluation of the predictive performance of distributional models for flora and fauna in north-east New South Wales. Journal of Environmental Management 62 (2001) 171-184
44. Peterson A.T., Soberón J., and Sanchez-Cordero V. Conservation of ecological niches in evolutionary time. Science 285 (1999) 1265-1267
45. Phillips S.J., Anderson R.P., and Schapire R.E. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modelling 190 (2006) 259
46. Phillips S.J., Dudik M., and Schapire R.E. A Maximum Entropy Approach to Species Distribution Modeling (2004), ACM Press, New York, NY, USA
47. Pressey R.L., and Logan V.S. Size of selection units for future reserves and its influence on actual vs targeted representation of features: a case study in western New South Wales. Biological Conservation 85 (1998) 305-319
48. Pressey R.L., and Nicholls A.O. Efficiency in conservation planning: scoring versus iterative approaches. Biological Conservation 50 (1981) 199-218
49. ReVelle C.S., Williams J.C., and Boland J.J. Counterpart models in facility location science and reserve selection science. Environmental Modeling & Assessment 7 (2002) 71-80
50. Roy P.S., and Behera M.D. Assessment of biological richness in different altitudinal zones in the Eastern Himalayas, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Current Science 88 (2005) 250-257
51. Sanchez-Cordero V., Cirelli V., Munguía M., and Sarkar S. Place prioritization for biodiversity representation using species' ecological niche modeling. Biodiversity Informatics 2 (2005) 11-23
52. Sarkar S., Aggarwal A., Garson J., Margules C.R., and Zeidler J. Place prioritization for biodiversity content. Journal of Biosciences 27 (2002) 339-346
53. Sarkar S., Justus J., Fuller T., Kelley C., Garson J., and Mayfield M. Effectiveness of environmental surrogates for the selection of conservation area networks. Conservation Biology 19 (2005) 815-825
54. Sarkar S., Mayfield M., Cameron S., Fuller T., and Garson J. Conservation area networks for the Indian ecoregion: systematic methods and future prospects. In: Stevenson R., Ganeshaiah K.N., and Bawa K.S. (Eds). Ecoinformatics for Biodiversity Conservation: Prospects and Challenges (2006), I.K. International Private Limited, Bangalore, India
55. Sarkar S., Pappas C., Garson J., Aggarwal A., and Cameron S. Place prioritization for biodiversity conservation using probabilistic surrogate distribution data. Diversity and Distributions 10 (2004) 125-133
56. Seoane J., Carrascal L.M., Alonso C.L., and Palomino D. Species-specific traits associated to prediction errors in bird habitat suitability modelling. Ecological Modelling 185 (2005) 299-308
57. Stockman A.K., Beamer D.A., and Bond J.E. An evaluation of a GARP model as an approach to predicting the spatial distribution of non-vagile invertebrate species. Diversity & Distributions 12 (2006) 81-89
58. Tognelli M.F. Assessing the utility of indicator groups for the conservation of South American terrestrial mammals. Biological Conservation 121 (2005) 409-417
59. Tole L. Choosing reserve sites probabilistically: a Colombian Amazon case study. Ecological Modelling 194 (2006) 344-356
60. Tushabe H., Kalema J., Byaruhanga A., Asasira J., Ssegawa P., Balmford A., Davenport T., Fjeldsa J., Friis I., Pain D., Pomeroy D., Williams P., and Williams C. A nationwide assessment of the biodiversity value of Uganda's important bird areas network. Conservation Biology 20 (2006) 85-99
61. WDPA Consortium, 2006. World Database on Protected Areas. World Conservation Union (IUCN) and UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). http://maps.geog.umd.edu/WDPA/WDPA_info/English/WDPA2005.html (accessed 10.11.2006).
62. Wieczorek J., Guo Q.G., and Hijmans R.J. The point-radius method for georeferencing locality descriptions and calculating associated uncertainty. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 18 (2004) 745-767
63. Wiens J.J., and Graham C.H. Niche conservatism: integrating evolution, ecology, and conservation biology. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 36 (2005) 519-539
64. Wilson K.A., Westphal M.I., Possingham H.P., and Elith J. Sensitivity of conservation planning to different approaches to using predicted species distribution data. Biological Conservation 122 (2005) 99-112
65. World Wildlife Fund, 2006. Terrestrial Ecoregions GIS Database. World Wildlife Fund. http://www.worldwildlife.org/science/data/terreco.cfm (accessed 06.07.2006).