The influence of uncertainty on conservation assessments: Australian frogs as a case study

Biological Conservation

Volumn 144, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 1516-1525

  Gillespie, Graeme R ^a   Scroggie, Michael P ^b   Roberts, J Dale ^c   Cogger, Harold G ^d   Mahony, Michael J ^e   McDonald, Keith R ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b ARTHUR RYLAH INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^d AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM   (Australia)

^e UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

^f DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT   (Australia)

Author keywords

Amphibian declines; Conservation status; Extinction risk; IUCN; Ranking system; Threatened species; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; CONSERVATION STATUS; DEMOGRAPHY; ENDANGERED SPECIES; EXTINCTION RISK; FROG; GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION; IDENTIFICATION METHOD; INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION; POPULATION SIZE; REPRODUCTION; TAXONOMY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

AUSTRALIA;

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; MYOBATRACHIDAE;

EID: 79956208066     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.10.031     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Akçakaya H.R., Ferson S., Burgman M.A., Keith D.A., Mace G.M., Todd C.R. Making consistent IUCN classifications under uncertainty. Conservation Biology 2000, 14:1001-1013.
2. Alvo R., Oldham M.J. The status of Canada's amphibian and reptile species: a comparison of three ranking systems. Canadian Field Naturalist 2000, 114:520-540.
3. Berger L., Speare R., Daszak P., Earl Green D., Cunningham A.A., Goggin C.L., Slocombe R., Ragan M.A., Hyatt A.D., McDonald K.R., Hines H.B., Lips K.R., Marantelli G., Parkes H. Chytridiomycosis causes amphibian mortality associated with population declines in the rainforests of Australia and Central America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1998, 95:9031-9036.
4. Burgman M.A., Keith D.A., Rohlf F.J., Todd C.R. Probabilistic classification rules for setting conservation priorities. Conservation Biology 1999, 89:227-231.
5. Burgman M.A., Keith D.A., Walshe T.V. Uncertainty in comparative risk analysis for threatened Australian plant taxa. Risk analysis 1999, 19:585-598.
6. Campbell, A., 1999. Declines and Disappearances of Australian Frogs. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia, Canberra.
7. Chalson, J.M, Keith, D.A., 1995. A Risk Assessment Scheme for Vascular Plants: A Pilot Application to the Flora of New South Wales. Project No. 450. Commonwealth Endangered Taxa Program, The Australian Nature Conservation Agency, National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville, New South Wales.
8. Cofré H., Marquet P.A. Conservation status, rarity, and geographic priorities for conservation of Chilean mammals: an assessment. Biological Conservation 1999, 88:53-68.
9. Cogger, H.G., Cameron, E.E., Sadlier, R.A., Eggler, P., 1993. The Action Plan for Australian Reptiles. Australian Nature Conservation Agency Endangered Species Program Project Number 124. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 254 pp.
10. Collar N.J. The reasons for red data books. Oryx 1998, 30:121-130.
11. Collins J.P., Storfor S. Global amphibian declines: sorting the hypotheses. Diversity and Distributions 2003, 9:89-98.
12. DEWHA, 2009. Significant Impact Guidelines for the Vulnerable Green and Golden Bellfrog (Litoria aurea). Nationally threatened species and ecological communities Background Paper to the EPBC Act policy statement 3.19. Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia.
13. DEWHA, 2010. (accessed 2010). http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery-list-common.html.
14. Doughty P., Anstis M. A new species of rock-dwelling hylid frog (Anura: Hylidae) from the eastern Kimberley region of Western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum 2007, 23:241-257.
15. DSE List of Approved Action Statements, 2010. (accessed 2010). http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/dse/nrenpa.nsf/FID/-0488335CD48EC1424A2567C10006BF6D.
16. Gillespie G.R. The role of introduced trout in the decline of the Spotted Tree Frog (Litoria spenceri) in south-eastern Australia. Biological Conservation 2001, 100:187-198.
17. Hamer A.J., Lane S.J., Mahony M.J. Using probabilistic models to investigate the disappearance of a widespread frog-species complex in high-altitude regions of south-eastern Australia. Animal Conservation 2010, 13:275-285.
18. Hero J.-M., Williams S.E., Magnusson W.E. Ecological characteristics of declining amphibians: are they more susceptible to extinction?. Journal of Zoology London 2005, 267:221-232.
19. Hero J.-M., Morrison C., Gillespie G.R., Roberts J.D., Newell D.A., Meyer E., McDonald K., Lemckert F., Mahony M., Osborne W., Hines H., Richards S., Hoskin K., Clarke L., Doak N., Shoo L. Overview of the conservation status of Australian frogs. Pacific Conservation Biology 2006, 12:314-320.
20. Hoskin, C., Hero, J.-M., 2008. Rainforest Frogs of the Wet Tropics. Griffith University Publishing, Gold Coast.
21. IUCN, 1994. International Union for the Conservation of Nature Red List Categories. IUCN Taxa Survival Commission, Gland, Switzerland.
22. IUCN, 2001. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
23. IUCN, 2002. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 3.1. IUCN Council. (accessed 2009). http://www.redlist.org.
24. Keith D.A., McCarthy M.A., Regan H., Regan T., Bowles C., Drill C., Craig C., Pellow B., Burgman M.A., Master L.A., Ruckelshaus M., Mackenzie B., Andelman S.J., Wade P.R. Protocols for listing threatening species can forecast extinction. Ecological Letters 2004, 7:1101-1108.
25. Knapp S.M., Russell R.E., Swihart R.K. Setting priorities for conservation: the influence of uncertainty on taxa rankings of Indiana Mammals. Biological Conservation 2003, 111:223-234.
26. Lunney D., Curtin A., Ayers D., Cogger H.G., Dickman C.R. An ecological approach to identifying the endangered fauna of New South Wales. Pacific Conservation Biology 1996, 5:148-157.
27. Mace G.M. Classifying threatened taxa: means and ends. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 1994, 344:91-97.
28. Martin C.M. Recovering endangered taxa and restoring ecosystems: conservation planning for the twenty-first century in the United States. Conservation Biology 1994, 137:198-203.
29. Master L.L. Assessing threat and setting priorities for conservation. Conservation Biology 1991, 5:559-563.
30. Master L.L., Stein B.A., Kutner L.S., Hammerson G.A. Vanishing assets: conservation status of US species. Precious heritage. The Status of Diversity in the United States 2000, 93-118. Oxford University Press, New York. B.A. Stein, L.S. Kutner, J.S. Adams (Eds.).
31. Mehlman D.W., Rosenberg K.V., Wells J.V., Robertson B. A comparison of the North American avian conservation ranking systems. Biological Conservation 2004, 120:383-390.
32. Millsap B.A., Gore J.A., Runde D.E., Cerulean S.I. Setting priorities for the conservation of fish and wildlife taxa in Florida. Wildlife Monographs 1990, 111:1-57.
33. Murray B.R., Hose H.C. Life-history and ecological correlates of decline and extinction in the endemic Australian frog fauna. Austral Ecology 2005, 30:564-571.
34. O'Grady J.J., Burgman M.A., Keith D.A., Master L.L., Andelman S.J., Brook B.W., Hammerson G.A., Ragen T., Frankham R. Correlations among extinction risks assessed by different systems of threatened species categorization. Conservation Biology 2004, 18:1624-1653.
35. Possingham H.P., Andelman S.J., Burgman M.A., Medellin R.A., Master L.L., Keith D.A. Limits to the use of threatened taxa lists. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2002, 17:503-507.
36. Regan H.M., Colyvan M., Burgman M.A. A proposal for fuzzy international union for conservation of nature (IUCN) categories and criteria. Biological Conservation 2000, 92:101-108.
37. Retallick R.W.H., McCallum R., Speare R. Endemic infection of the amphibian chytrid fungus in a frog community post-decline. PLoS Biology 2004, 2:e351.
38. Richards S.J., McDonald K.R., Alford R.A. Declines in populations of Australia's endemic tropical rainforest frogs. Pacific Conservation Biology 1993, 1:66-77.
39. Skerratt L.F., Berger L., Speare R., Cashins S., McDonald K.R., Phillott A.D., Hines H.B., Kenyon N. Spread of chytridiomycosis has caused the rapid global decline and extinction of frogs. EcoHealth 2007, 4:125-134.
40. Conservation Biology: the Science of Scarcity and Diversity 1986, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland. M.E. Soulé (Ed.).
41. Stuart S.N., Chanson J.S., Cox N.A., Young B.E., Rodrigues A.S.L., Fischman D.L., Waller R.W. Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 2004, 306:1783-1786.
42. Todd C.R., Burgman M.A. Assessment of threat and conservation priorities under realistic levels of uncertainty and reliability. Conservation Biology 1998, 12:966-974.
43. Williams S.E., Hero J.-M. Rainforest frogs of the Australian wet tropics: guild classification and ecological similarity of declining species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 1998, 265:597-602.
44. Woodhams D.C., Alford R.A. Ecology of chytridiomycosis in rainforest stream frog assemblages of tropical Queensland. Conservation Biology 2005, 19:1449-1459.