Human-driven land-use changes increasingly threaten biodiversity, particularly in tropical forests where both species diversity and human pressures on natural environments are high. The rapid conversion of tropical forests for agriculture, timber production and other uses has generated vast, human-dominated landscapes with potentially dire consequences for tropical biodiversity. Today, few truly undisturbed tropical forests exist, whereas those degraded by repeated logging and fires, as well as secondary and plantation forests, are rapidly expanding. Here we provide a global assessment of the impact of disturbance and land conversion on biodiversity in tropical forests using a meta-analysis of 138 studies. We analysed 2,220 pairwise comparisons of biodiversity values in primary forests (with little or no human disturbance) and disturbed forests. We found that biodiversity values were substantially lower in degraded forests, but that this varied considerably by geographic region, taxonomic group, ecological metric and disturbance type. Even after partly accounting for confounding colonization and succession effects due to the composition of surrounding habitats, isolation and time since disturbance, we find that most forms of forest degradation have an overwhelmingly detrimental effect on tropical biodiversity. Our results clearly indicate that when it comes to maintaining tropical biodiversity, there is no substitute for primary forests.

No abstract

No abstract

There is controversy concerning the role of genetic factors in species extinctions. Many authors have asserted that species are usually driven to extinction before genetic factors have time to impact them, but few studies have seriously addressed this issue. If this assertion is true, there will be little difference in genetic diversity between threatened and taxonomically related nonthreatened species. We compared average heterozygosities in 170 threatened taxa with those in taxonomically related nonthreatened taxa in a comprehensive metaanalysis. Heterozygosity was lower in threatened taxa in 77% of comparisons, a highly significant departure from the predictions of the no genetic impact hypothesis. Heterozygosity was on average 35% lower (median 40%) in threatened taxa than in related nonthreatened ones. These differences in heterozygosity indicate lowered evolutionary potential, compromised reproductive fitness, and elevated extinction risk in the wild. Independent evidence from stochastic computer projections has demonstrated that inbreeding depression elevates extinction risk for threatened species in natural habitats when all other threatening processes are included in the models. Thus, most taxa are not driven to extinction before genetic factors affect them adversely.