The distributions of amphibians, birds and mammals have underpinned global and local conservation priorities, and have been fundamental to our understanding of the determinants of global biodiversity. In contrast, the global distributions of reptiles, representing a third of terrestrial vertebrate diversity, have been unavailable. This prevented the incorporation of reptiles into conservation planning and biased our understanding of the underlying processes governing global vertebrate biodiversity. Here, we present and analyse the global distribution of 10,064 reptile species (99% of extant terrestrial species). We show that richness patterns of the other three tetrapod classes are good spatial surrogates for species richness of all reptiles combined and of snakes, but characterize diversity patterns of lizards and turtles poorly. Hotspots of total and endemic lizard richness overlap very little with those of other taxa. Moreover, existing protected areas, sites of biodiversity significance and global conservation schemes represent birds and mammals better than reptiles. We show that additional conservation actions are needed to effectively protect reptiles, particularly lizards and turtles. Adding reptile knowledge to a global complementarity conservation priority scheme identifies many locations that consequently become important. Notably, investing resources in some of the world’s arid, grassland and savannah habitats might be necessary to represent all terrestrial vertebrates efficiently

No abstract

Longevity is an important life-history trait, directly linked to the core attributes of fitness (reproduction and survival), yet large-scale comparative studies quantifying its implications for the ecology and life history of ectotherms are scarce. We tested the allometry of longevity in squamates and the tuatara, and determined how longevity is related to key environmental characteristics and life-history traits. Predictions based on life-history theory are expected to hold true for ectotherms, similarly to mammals and birds. Location: World-wide. Methods: We assembled from the literature a dataset of the maximum longevities of more than a thousand squamate species, representing c. 10 of their known species diversity, their phylogenetic relationships and multiple life-history and ecological variables. Correcting for phylogeny, we modelled the link between squamate longevity and both key life-history traits, such as body mass and age at first reproduction, and important environmental factors, such as latitude and primary productivity within species distributional ranges. Results: Large-bodied species live for longer than small ones, but body size explains far less of the variance in longevity than it does in mammals and birds. Accounting for body size, squamate brood frequency is negatively correlated with longevity, while age at first reproduction is positively correlated with longevity. This points to a continuum of slow-to-fast life-history strategies. Squamates in high latitudes and cold regions live for longer, probably because a shorter season of activity translates to slower development, older age at first reproduction and hence to increased longevity. Individuals live longer in captivity than in the wild. Herbivorous and omnivorous squamates live for longer than carnivorous ones. We postulate that low-quality nutrition reduces growth rates, promotes a relative decline in reproductive rates and thus prolongs life. Main conclusions: Our results support key predictions from life-history theory and suggest that reproducing more slowly and at older ages, being herbivorous and, plausibly, lowering metabolism, result in increased longevity

To meet the ambitious objectives of biodiversity and climate conventions, countries and the international community require clarity on how these objectives can be operationalized spatially, and multiple targets be pursued concurrently 1 . To support governments and political conventions, spatial guidance is needed to identify which areas should be managed for conservation to generate the greatest synergies between biodiversity and nature's contribution to people (NCP). Here we present results from a joint optimization that maximizes improvements in species conservation status, carbon retention and water provisioning and rank terrestrial conservation priorities globally. We found that, selecting the top-ranked 30% (respectively 50%) of areas would conserve 62.4% (86.8%) of the estimated total carbon stock and 67.8% (90.7%) of all clean water provisioning, in addition to improving the conservation status for 69.7% (83.8%) of all species considered. If priority was given to biodiversity only, managing 30% of optimally located land area for conservation may be sufficient to improve the conservation status of 86.3% of plant and vertebrate species on Earth. Our results provide a global baseline on where land could be managed for conservation. We discuss how such a spatial prioritisation framework can support the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions.

Comprehensive assessments of species’ extinction risks have documented the extinction crisis1 and underpinned strategies for reducing those risks2. Global assessments reveal that, among tetrapods, 40.7% of amphibians, 25.4% of mammals and 13.6% of birds are threatened with extinction3. Because global assessments have been lacking, reptiles have been omitted from conservation-prioritization analyses that encompass other tetrapods4–7. Reptiles are unusually diverse in arid regions, suggesting that they may have different conservation needs6. Here we provide a comprehensive extinction-risk assessment of reptiles and show that at least 1,829 out of 10,196 species (21.1%) are threatened—confirming a previous extrapolation8 and representing 15.6 billion years of phylogenetic diversity. Reptiles are threatened by the same major factors that threaten other tetrapods—agriculture, logging, urban development and invasive species—although the threat posed by climate change remains uncertain. Reptiles inhabiting forests, where these threats are strongest, are more threatened than those in arid habitats, contrary to our prediction. Birds, mammals and amphibians are unexpectedly good surrogates for the conservation of reptiles, although threatened reptiles with the smallest ranges tend to be isolated from other threatened tetrapods. Although some reptiles—including most species of crocodiles and turtles—require urgent, targeted action to prevent extinctions, efforts to protect other tetrapods, such as habitat preservation and control of trade and invasive species, will probably also benefit many reptiles.

Digital data are accumulating at unprecedented rates. These contain a lot of information about the natural world, some of which can be used to answer key ecological questions. Here, we introduce iEcology (i.e., internet ecology), an emerging research approach that uses diverse online data sources and methods to generate insights about species distribution over space and time, interactions and dynamics of organisms and their environment, and anthropogenic impacts. We review iEcology data sources and methods, and provide examples of potential research applications. We also outline approaches to reduce potential biases and improve reliability and applicability. As technologies and expertise improve, and costs diminish, iEcology will become an increasingly important means to gain novel insights into the natural world. Information Age, Big Data, and iEcologyThe information age is characterized by rapid accumulation of myriad types of digital data [1]. Central to this revolution is the Internet, which is a source of unprecedented amounts of diverse and readily accessible data, via webpages, social media, and various other data platforms. These data are constantly created and stored in the digital realm and form an omnipresent part of the modern world. They also provide novel opportunities for research that the scientific community is only beginning to explore. Here, we describe an emerging research approach -iEcology (i.e., internet ecology), which we define as the study of ecological patterns and processes using online data generated for other purposes and stored digitally (Figure 1). These data can be used to address fundamental ecological questions and to analyze ecological processes at a range of spatiotemporal scales and across a diverse range of contexts. As such, iEcology has the potential to provide new understandings of ecological dynamics and mechanisms, complementing more traditional methods of obtaining ecological data.While iEcology can be considered to fit within the wider scope of ecological informatics (see Glossary), it is distinct from other uses of Big Data sources in the biological sciences in that data are not specifically and intentionally generated to address ecological and environmental questions [2][3][4]. Moreover, iEcology expands on the traditional scope of ecological informatics with new data sources and dedicated methods to analyze them. iEcology is predominantly focused on collecting, collating, and exploring data generated online by human society, either passively or unintentionally (e.g., Internet search activity, social media interactions, and uploaded data and media), a process also referred to as passive crowdsourcing [5]. iEcology uses digital methods to access, handle, and analyze these data, in a manner akin to techniques from other research fields such as sociology, culture and media studies, biomedical sciences, computer sciences, and economics [6,7]. iEcology also shares part of its toolbox with conservation culturomicsan emerging research area in conservation science [8-10]alb...

The global lockdown to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic health risks has altered human interactions with nature. Here, we report immediate impacts of changes in human activities on wildlife and environmental threats during the early lockdown months of 2020, based on 877 qualitative reports and 332 quantitative assessments from different studies. Hundreds of reports of unusual species observations from around the world suggest that animals quickly responded to the reductions in human presence. However, negative effects of lockdown on conservation also emerged, as confinement resulted in some park officials being unable to perform conservation, restoration and enforcement tasks, resulting in local increases in illegal activities such as hunting. Overall, there is a complex mixture of positive and negative effects of the pandemic lockdown on nature, all of which have the potential to lead to cascading responses which in turn impact wildlife and nature conservation. While the net effect of the lockdown will need to be assessed over years as data becomes available and persistent effects emerge, immediate responses were detected across the world. Thus, initial qualitative and quantitative data arising from this serendipitous global quasi-experimental perturbation highlights the dual role that humans play in threatening and protecting species and ecosystems. Pathways to favorably tilt this delicate balance include reducing impacts and increasing conservation effectiveness.

Evolutionary plasticity is limited, to a certain extent, by phylogenetic constraints. We asked whether the diel activity patterns of animals reflect their phylogenies by analyzing daily activity patterns in the order Rodentia. We carried out a literature survey of activity patterns of 700 species, placing each in an activity time category: diurnal, nocturnal, or active at both periods (a-rhythmic). The proportion of rodents active at these categories in the entire order, was compared to the activity patterns of species of different families for which we had data for over ten species each: Dipodidae, Echimyidae, Geomyidae, Heteromyidae, Muridae, and Sciuridae. Activity times of rodents from different habitat types were also compared to the ordinal activity time pattern. We also calculated the probability that two random species (from a particular subgroup: family, habitat, etc.) will be active in the same period of the day and compared it to this probability with species drawn from the entire order. Activity patterns at the family level were significantly different from the ordinal pattern, emphasizing the strong relationship between intra-family taxonomic affiliation and daily activity patterns. Large families (Muridae and Sciuridae) analyzed by subfamilies and tribes showed a similar but stronger pattern than that of the family level. Thus it is clear that phylogeny constrains the evolution of activity patterns in rodents, and may limit their ability to use the time niche axis for ecological separation. Rodents living in cold habitats differed significantly from the ordinal pattern, showing more diurnal and Electronic Supplementary Material Supplementary material is available for this article at http:// www.dx.a-rhythmic activity patterns, possibly due to physiological constraints. Ground-dwelling rodents differed significantly, showing a high tendency towards a-rhythmic activity, perhaps reflecting their specialized habitat.