How do butterflies define ecosystems? A comparison of ecological regionalization schemes

被引:14
作者
Andrew, Margaret E. [1 ]
Wulder, Michael A. [1 ]
Coops, Nicholas C. [2 ]
机构
[1] Nat Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Serv, Pacific Forestry Ctr, Victoria, BC V8Z 1M5, Canada
[2] Univ British Columbia, Dept Forest Resource Management, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
关键词
Biodiversity surrogates; Conservation planning; Environmental domain classification; MODIS; Productivity; ENVIRONMENTAL DOMAIN CLASSIFICATION; SPECIES RICHNESS; PRIORITY AREAS; PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITY; SPATIAL-PATTERNS; CLUSTER-ANALYSIS; CONSERVATION; BIODIVERSITY; SURROGATES; DIVERSITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.biocon.2011.01.010
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Ecological regionalizations, such as ecoregions or environmental clusters, are often used as coarse filters for conservation. To be effective biodiversity surrogates, regionalizations should contain distinct species assemblages. This condition is not frequently evaluated and regionalizations are rarely assessed comparatively. We used a national dataset of Canadian butterfly collections to evaluate four regionalizations (ecoregions, land cover and productivity regime classifications, and a spatial grid) at two thematic resolutions using analysis of similarity (ANOSIM) and species indicator values. Overall, the spatially constrained schemes (ecoregions and grids) best captured patterns of butterfly community composition and species affinities, indicating that butterfly communities are strongly structured by space at the continent scale. In contrast, when comparing regions only within spatial or environmental neighbourhoods (i.e., comparing between regions that are adjacent along geographic or environmental gradients), all regionalizations performed similarly. Adjacency in environmental space is thus as important as physical adjacency at determining community dissimilarity. Productivity regimes and land cover will be useful biodiversity surrogates when considered in conjunction with space or within a spatially constrained area. This finding was confirmed with two ecoregional case studies (of the Algonquin-Lake Nipissing and Thompson-Okanagan Plateau ecoregions), which also revealed that the relative performance of regionalizations depends upon the context of the study area. We conclude that including species data can improve the efficiency of environmental surrogates for systematic conservation planning. Crown Copyright (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1409 / 1418
页数:10
相关论文
共 74 条
[1]   Conservation and the botanist effect [J].
Ahrends, Antje ;
Rahbek, Carsten ;
Bulling, Mark T. ;
Burgess, Neil D. ;
Platts, Philip J. ;
Lovett, Jon C. ;
Kindemba, Victoria Wilkins ;
Owen, Nisha ;
Sallu, Albert Ntemi ;
Marshall, Andrew R. ;
Mhoro, Boniface E. ;
Fanning, Eibleis ;
Marchant, Rob .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2011, 144 (01) :131-140
[2]   Would environmental diversity be a good surrogate for species diversity? [J].
Araújo, MB ;
Humphries, CJ ;
Densham, PJ ;
Lampinen, R ;
Hagemeijer, WJM ;
Mitchell-Jones, AJ ;
Gasc, JP .
ECOGRAPHY, 2001, 24 (01) :103-110
[3]   Negative relationship between dispersal distance and demography in butterfly metapopulations [J].
Baguette, M ;
Schtickzelle, N .
ECOLOGY, 2006, 87 (03) :648-654
[4]   ECOLOGICAL REGIONALIZATION IN CANADA AND THE UNITED-STATES [J].
BAILEY, RG ;
ZOLTAI, SC ;
WIKEN, EB .
GEOFORUM, 1985, 16 (03) :265-275
[5]   Primary productivity and species richness: relationships among functional guilds, residency groups and vagility classes at multiple spatial scales [J].
Bailey, SA ;
Horner-Devine, MC ;
Luck, G ;
Moore, LA ;
Carney, KM ;
Anderson, S ;
Betrus, C ;
Fleishman, E .
ECOGRAPHY, 2004, 27 (02) :207-217
[6]   ENVIRONMENTAL REPRESENTATIVENESS - REGIONAL PARTITIONING AND RESERVE SELECTION [J].
BELBIN, L .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 1993, 66 (03) :223-230
[7]   A MULTIVARIATE APPROACH TO THE SELECTION OF BIOLOGICAL RESERVES [J].
BELBIN, L .
BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, 1995, 4 (09) :951-963
[8]   Capturing biodiversity: selecting priority areas for conservation using different criteria [J].
Bonn, A ;
Gaston, KJ .
BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, 2005, 14 (05) :1083-1100
[9]   PARTIALLING OUT THE SPATIAL COMPONENT OF ECOLOGICAL VARIATION [J].
BORCARD, D ;
LEGENDRE, P ;
DRAPEAU, P .
ECOLOGY, 1992, 73 (03) :1045-1055
[10]   Planning iterative investment for landscape restoration: Choice of biodiversity indicator makes a difference [J].
Butler, Don William .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2009, 142 (10) :2202-2216