BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGICAL REDUNDANCY

被引:1072
作者
WALKER, BH
机构
[1] CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology, Lyneham, Australian Capital Territory, 2602
关键词
D O I
10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610018.x
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
This paper addresses the problem of which biota to choose to best satisfy the conservation goals for a particular region in the face of inadequate resources. Biodiversity is taken to be the integration of biological variability across all scales, from the genetic, through species and ecosystems, to landscapes. Conserving biodiversity is a daunting task, and the paper asserts that focusing on species is not the best approach. The best way to minimize species loss is to maintain the integrity of ecosystem function. The important questions therefore concern the kinds of biodiversity that are significant to ecosystem functioning. To best focus our efforts we need to establish how much (or how little) redundancy there is in the biological composition of ecosystems. An approach is suggested, based on the use of functional groups of organisms defined according to ecosystem processes. Functional groups with little or no redundancy warrant priority conservation effort. Complementary species-based approaches for maximizing the inclusion of biodiversity within a set of conservation areas are compared to the functional-group approach.
引用
收藏
页码:18 / 23
页数:6
相关论文
共 10 条
  • [1] Cowling R.M., Gibbs-Russell G.E., Hoffman M.T., Hilton-Taylor C., Patterns of plant species diversity in southern Africa, Biodiversity in southern Africa: concepts and conservation, pp. 19-50, (1989)
  • [2] Ehrlich P.R., Ehrlich A.H., Extinction, The causes and consequences of the disappearance of species, (1981)
  • [3] Faith D.P., Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity
  • [4] Imai H.T., Taylor R.W., Crosland M.W.J., Crozier R.H., Modes of spontaneous chromosomal mutation and karyotype evolution in ants with reference to the minimum interaction hypothesis, Japanese Journal of Genetics, 63, pp. 159-185, (1988)
  • [5] May R.M., Will a large complex ecosystem be stable?, Nature, 128, pp. 413-414, (1972)
  • [6] May R.M., Taxonomy as destiny, Nature, 347, pp. 129-130, (1990)
  • [7] Norton, Commodity, amenity and morality. The limits of quantification to valuing biodiversity, Biodiversity, pp. 200-205, (1988)
  • [8] Noss R.F., Indicators for monitoring biodiversity
  • [9] a hierarchical approach, Conservation Biology, 44, pp. 355-364, (1990)
  • [10] Vane-Wright R.I., Humphreys C.J., Williams P.H., What to protect—systematics and the agony of choice, Biological Conservation, 55, pp. 235-254, (1991)