Extinction

Purvis, Andy; Jones, Kate E.; Mace, Georgina M.

doi:10.1002/1521-1878(200012)22:12<1123::aid-bies10>3.0.co;2-c

Cited by 180 publications

(159 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

135

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many facets of geography (including human population density), ecology, and life history were tested as predictors of extinction risk, by using phylogenetically independent contrasts. A phylogenetic approach is needed because, although extinction risk and some of the possible predictors listed above (e.g., geographic range size) do not evolve along the phylogeny's branches like, say, body size does, they nonetheless tend to show phylogenetic signal [i.e., they tend to take more similar values in close relatives than in species chosen at random; (41,45,46)]. Minimum adequate models were derived from a large initial set of predictors.…”

Section: Comparative Analyses Of Mammalian Extinction Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic trees and the future of mammalian biodiversity

Davies

Fritz²,

Grenyer

et al. 2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

136

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phylogenies describe the origins and history of species. However, they can also help to predict species' fates and so can be useful tools for managing the future of biodiversity. This article starts by sketching how phylogenetic, geographic, and trait information can be combined to elucidate present mammalian diversity patterns and how they arose. Recent diversification rates and standing diversity show different geographic patterns, indicating that cradles of diversity have moved over time. Patterns in extinction risk reflect both biological differences among mammalian lineages and differences in threat intensity among regions. Phylogenetic comparative analyses indicate that for small-bodied mammals, extinction risk is governed mostly by where the species live and the intensity of the threats, whereas for large-bodied mammals, ecological differences also play an important role. This modeling approach identifies species whose intrinsic biology renders them particularly vulnerable to increased human pressure. We outline how the approach might be extended to consider future trends in anthropogenic drivers, to identify likely future battlegrounds of mammalian conservation, and the likely casualties. This framework could help to highlight consequences of choosing among different future climatic and socioeconomic scenarios. We end by discussing priority-setting, showing how alternative currencies for diversity can suggest very different priorities. We argue that aiming to maximize long-term evolutionary responses is inappropriate, that conservation planning needs to consider costs as well as benefits, and that proactive conservation of largely intact systems should be part of a balanced strategy. extinction risk ͉ latent risk ͉ mammals T he Tree of Life-phylogeny-is a powerful metaphor for life's diversity, showing all species, including our own, as part of an interrelated whole. But phylogeny is more than a metaphor. It is also a research tool-the result of evolutionary processes integrated over the history of life, it can be analyzed for insights into how those processes have shaped today's biota (1). This approach is becoming increasingly powerful as the trees become ever more inclusive, built from rapidly accumulating databases using methods that continue to be improved (2, 3).Species' histories are of interest, but their futures are of more pressing concern. The Tree of Life is currently under sustained attack, as people increasingly dominate landscapes (4). Comparisons of extinction rates between today and geological history are difficult for many reasons (5), but the Tree of Life is already being pruned more quickly than it is growing (6), and extinction rates are projected to rise by at least another order of magnitude over the next centuries (7). This article describes how phylogeny has a role to play in understanding the pattern of survivors and casualties and how it can help us both to predict species' futures and to estimate some of the biodiversity value that would be lost if they went extinct.We focus o...

show abstract

Section: Comparative Analyses Of Mammalian Extinction Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic trees and the future of mammalian biodiversity

Davies

Fritz²,

Grenyer

et al. 2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

136

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Habitat modification and invasive species are the most important contemporary drivers of biodiversity loss (Purvis et al 2000;Didham et al 2007;Fischer & Lindenmayer 2007;Brook et al 2008;Doherty et al 2015). However, these two threatening processes are often studied independently rather than as drivers that interact synergistically; few studies have focused on their possible interactions, and indirect effects on species declines that may occur as a result of these interactions (Hobbs 2001;Didham et al 2005Didham et al , 2007Brook et al 2008;Chalfoun & Martin 2009;Conner et al 2011;McGregor et al 2014;Hradsky et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeling the pressure at home: Predator activity at the burrow entrance of an endangered arid‐zone skink

Moore

Kearney

Paltridge³

et al. 2017

Austral Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Habitat modification and invasive species are among the most important contemporary drivers of biodiversity loss. These two threatening processes are often studied independently and few studies have focused on how they interact to influence species declines. Here we assess the predation pressure placed on the threatened great desert skink (Liopholis kintorei) and how this interacts with fire-induced habitat modifications. We collected daily track data of potential predators for 1 month at 30 great desert skink burrow-systems where vegetation cover varied significantly after experimental burns. We used these data to evaluate potential predation pressure at the burrow-system and assess whether fire influenced predator pressure. We supplemented this analysis by documenting predation via the inspection of large mammalian predator scats collected from great desert skink habitat. The level of feral cat activity at a burrow-system entrance was significantly higher than that of any other potential predator, however fire had no effect on the visitation rates of feral cats, dingoes or large snakes to great desert skink burrow-systems. The remains of great desert skink were found significantly more frequently in feral cat scats, compared to fox and dingo scats. We provide the first direct evidence that feral cats are a significant predator for great desert skink, thus supporting the hypothesis that feral cat predation is a key threatening process. Feral cat activity was not influenced by small-scale experimental burns, however, this does not preclude an effect of larger scale fires and we recommend further research exploring this possible interaction.

show abstract

“…macroecology | macroevolution | Paleogene | Bivalvia | multigroup analysis A ll species eventually go extinct, and biological correlates of extinction risk have been the focus of many studies of extant and extinct taxa (1)(2)(3)(4). Most studies have analyzed biological factors separately, tacitly assuming independence among them.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Direct and indirect effects of biological factors on extinction risk in fossil bivalves

Harnik

2011

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological factors, such as abundance and body size, may contribute directly to extinction risk and indirectly through their influence on other biological characteristics, such as geographic range size. Paleontological data can be used to explicitly test many of these hypothesized relationships, and general patterns revealed through analysis of the fossil record can help refine predictive models of extinction risk developed for extant species. Here, I use structural equation modeling to tease apart the contributions of three canonical predictors of extinction-abundance, body size, and geographic range size-to the duration of bivalve species in the early Cenozoic marine fossil record of the eastern United States. I find that geographic range size has a strong direct effect on extinction risk and that an apparent direct effect of abundance can be explained entirely by its covariation with geographic range. The influence of geographic range on extinction risk is manifest across three ecologically disparate bivalve clades. Body size also has strong direct effects on extinction risk but operates in opposing directions in different clades, and thus, it seems to be decoupled from extinction risk in bivalves as a whole. Although abundance does not directly predict extinction risk, I reveal weak indirect effects of both abundance and body size through their positive influence on geographic range size. Multivariate models that account for the pervasive covariation between biological factors and extinction are necessary for assessing causality in evolutionary processes and making informed predictions in applied conservation efforts.A ll species eventually go extinct, and biological correlates of extinction risk have been the focus of many studies of extant and extinct taxa (1-4). Most studies have analyzed biological factors separately, tacitly assuming independence among them. However, few biological characteristics are independent, and unaccounted for covariation confounds causal interpretation, weakens the power of predictive models, and inhibits successful synthesis. In addition, most studies have considered only the direct effects of biological factors on extinction. However, factors can contribute both directly and indirectly through their influence on other more proximal biological characteristics, and thus, accounting for indirect effects can be important when assessing the relative influence of multiple factors (5-7).Here, I investigate the direct and indirect effects of multiple biological factors on extinction risk using the early Cenozoic marine fossil record of the eastern United States. I focus on the contributions of abundance, body size, and geographic range size to the observed stratigraphic range (termed duration hereafter) of species. Measures of geographic range and abundance are commonly used to set conservation priorities (8), and empirical support exists for the influence of both on extinction risk over geologic time scales (9-14). Body size is also widely believed to influence extinction risk, altho...

show abstract

Extinction

Cited by 180 publications

References 83 publications

Phylogenetic trees and the future of mammalian biodiversity

Phylogenetic trees and the future of mammalian biodiversity

Feeling the pressure at home: Predator activity at the burrow entrance of an endangered arid‐zone skink

Direct and indirect effects of biological factors on extinction risk in fossil bivalves

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About