Balancing phylogenetic diversity and species numbers in conservation prioritization, using a case study of threatened species in New Zealand

Abstract

18Funding for managing threatened species is currently insufficient to assist recovery of all species, so 19 management projects must be prioritized. In attempts to maximize phylogenetic diversity conserved, 20 prioritization protocols for threatened species are increasingly weighting species using metrics that 21 incorporate their evolutionary distinctiveness. In a case study using 700 of the most threatened species in 22New Zealand, we examined trade-offs between emphasis on species' evolutionary distinctiveness 23 weights, and the numbers of species prioritized, as well as costs and probabilities of success for recovery 24 projects. Increasing emphasis on species' evolutionary distinctiveness weights in the prioritization 25 protocol led to greater per-species costs and higher risk of project failure. In a realistic, limited-budget 26 scenario, this resulted in fewer species prioritized, which imposed limits on the total phylogenetic 27 diversity that could be conserved. However, by systematically varying the emphasis on evolutionary 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 2 distinctiveness weight in the prioritization protocol we were able to minimize trade-offs, and obtain 29 species groups that were near-optimal for both species numbers and phylogenetic diversity conserved. 30 *Manuscript Click here to view linked ReferencesPhylogenetic diversity may not equate perfectly with functional diversity or evolutionary potential, and 31 conservation agencies may be reluctant to sacrifice species numbers. Thus, we recommend prioritizing 32 species groups that achieve an effective balance between maximizing phylogenetic diversity and number 33 of species conserved. 34

Biodiversity gains from efficient use of private sponsorship for flagship species conservation

“…For W i , we used the phylogeny, threat and endemism (PTE) measure, which was the metric used by the NZ DOC for conservation prioritization (see [18] for details). Details regarding the estimation of other parameters are found in Joseph et al [4].…”

Genetic diversity and structure analysis of the endangered plant speciesHorsfieldia hainanensisMerr. in China

“…Species conservation is essential to protect the genetic diversity and evolutionary potential. The higher the genetic diversity, the stronger the species' adaptability to environments and the greater the evolutionary potential [11,31,32]. Because of the high degree of genetic diversity in H. hainanensis at the species level, especially within populations, we believe that there is still high adaptability and evolutionary potential in the natural H. hainanensis population, and thus, in situ conservation should be the primary measure.…”

An overview of the applicability of functional diversity in Biological Conservation

“…Functional diversity responds differently to changes in land use and management than other measures, particularly the traditional ones showing that conserving other diversity components (such as species number or abundance) will not necessarily conserve functional diversity (Bennett et al, 2014;Katovai et al, 2012;Van Capelle et al, 2012). In some cases measures of functional diversity or trait-based approach responded more precisely than other measures (Dengler et al, 2014;Pelosi et al, 2014), suggesting that this approach can potentially better predict the impacts, although other corroborative studies are needed.…”

“…Most of them focused on the responses of different metrics of biological diversity to environmental and spatial variation, including functional diversity and also phylogenetic diversity, relative rarity, ecological specialisation, and acoustic diversity (Schirmel et al, 2012;Schuldt et al, 2013;Winter et al, 2013;Gasc et al, 2013;Leroy et al, 2014;Granger et al, 2015;Bennett et al, 2014;Dengler et al, 2014;Callisto et al, 2001). Overall, authors recommend the inclusion of other facets of biodiversity beyond traditional indices on conservation strategies, with emphasis on functional diversity.…”