How are Natura 2000 protected areas covering different components of avian diversity in Spain?

Morelli, Federico; Benedetti, Yanina; Floigl, Kristina; Ibáñez‐Álamo, Juan Diego

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108452

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evaluating and monitoring the performance of N2K PAs is crucial to ensure the EU is effectively protecting its priority species. Although previous studies mostly report higher biodiversity levels inside PAs than outside PAs, these studies focused on single taxonomic groups (Kukkala, Santangeli, et al., 2016; Musilová et al., 2018; Pellissier et al., 2020; Rada et al., 2019) or on specific European regions (Dähler et al., 2019; Gruber et al., 2012; Knapp et al., 2008; Maiorano et al., 2015; Morelli et al., 2021) and the comparison of protected versus unprotected areas seldom accounted for confounding covariates via matching. Until now, a multitaxa, European‐wide evaluation of N2K effectiveness has been lacking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multitaxonomic assessment of Natura 2000 effectiveness across European biogeographic regions

Ricci,

Di Musciano,

Sabatini

et al. 2024

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Natura 2000 (N2K) protected area (PA) network is a crucial tool to limit biodiversity loss in Europe. Despite covering 18% of EU's land area, its effectiveness at conserving biodiversity across taxa and biogeographic regions remains uncertain. Testing this effectiveness is, however, difficult as it requires considering the non‐random location of PAs, and many possible confounding factors. Here, we used propensity score matching accounting for the confounding effects of biogeographic regions, terrain ruggedness, and land cover, when assessing the effectiveness of N2K PAs on the distribution of 1,769 priority species from EU's Birds and Habitats Directives, including mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, arthropods, fishes, molluscs, vascular and non‐vascular plants. We compared alpha, beta, and gamma diversity between matched selections of protected and non‐protected areas across EU's biogeographic regions using generalized linear models, generalized mixed models, and non‐parametric tests for paired samples, respectively, for each taxonomic group and for the entire set of species. While we found N2K PAs to host significantly more priority species than non‐protected land, this difference was not consistent across biogeographic regions and taxa. Total alpha diversity as well as alpha diversity of amphibians, arthropods, birds, mammals, and vascular plants were significantly higher inside PAs than outside, except in the Boreal region. Beta diversity was in general significantly higher inside N2K PAs than outside. Similarly, gamma diversity showed the highest values within N2K PAs, with some exceptions in Boreal and Atlantic regions. The planned expansion of the N2K network, as dictated by the European Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, should therefore target areas in the southern part of the Boreal region, areas with high species diversity of amphibians, arthropods, birds, mammals, and vascular plants, which are currently underrepresented in the N2K network.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multitaxonomic assessment of Natura 2000 effectiveness across European biogeographic regions

Ricci,

Di Musciano,

Sabatini

et al. 2024

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They promote the conservation of coastal resources and point out that the diversity and abundance of species and habitats make mangroves and estuaries the most valuable and productive ecosystems on the planet [18,72]. Not only do they have a rich habitat diversity for birds [96], but they also have coral communities [30] and fish fauna [56]; further, they improve water quality, reduce the impact of flooding, store large amounts of carbon [97], and have a variety of substrate nutrients [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Planning of the Coastal Marine Socioecological System—Case Study: Punta Carnero, Ecuador

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine-coastal ecosystems are productive and valuable habitats worldwide due to their significant contributions to human wellbeing. However, human activities, limited territorial planning, and unsustainable demand and consumption of natural goods and services put pressure on marine-coastal ecosystems. In this sense, marine-coastal planning is a management tool to contrast these forces because it manages different human activities on the coast and in the oceans over space and time, strengthening political, social, and tourist development and the economy of the territory. Our objective is to propose marine-coastal spatial planning strategies through an ecosystem-based approach for allocating a mangrove and estuarine zone conservation area. The study methodology is: (i) Compilation of information from the study area with an emphasis on regulations and protected areas. (ii) Analysis of human relations with marine-coastal ecosystems. (iii) Mapping and zoning of the conservation area. (iv) Analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats and threats, weaknesses, opportunities, strengths (SWOT–TWOS) matrix to recommend strategies and guarantee the viability of marine-coastal protection. The results show zoning maps of the sector proposed as a conservation area comprising mangroves and an estuarine zone. It also approaches governance strategies or conservation management measures and protection of the marine-coastal space. Finally, as a recommendation, we propose improvements to the current municipal ordinances, guaranteeing the management and protection of the study area, and furthering achievements in the comprehensive development of land-use planning.

show abstract

“…Evidence of biological invasions suggests the positive association of taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional diversity with bird species richness, emphasizing the importance of considering different facets of biodiversity in wildlife management (Andrikou‐Charitidou et al, 2020). A study conducted in protected areas in Spain indicates that taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity show differences among environment types, which suggests the importance of considering different facets of biodiversity simultaneously for a better spatial prioritization (Morelli, Benedetti, Floigl, & Ibáñez‐Álamo, 2021; Morelli, Benedetti, Ibáñez‐Álamo, et al, 2021). These experiences can be used as a guide to study the pattern of bird diversity in different matrix types in and around the airport.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This continuous urban development leads to the fragmentation, isolation, and degradation of natural habitats, and is accompanied by severe impacts on the biotic communities living in urban landscapes (Schütz & Schulze, 2015). Many studies have shown that building cover is detrimental to bird richness and more generalist birds are found in human‐developed habitats (Cresswell et al, 2020; Morelli, Benedetti, Floigl, & Ibáñez‐Álamo, 2021; Morelli, Benedetti, Ibáñez‐Álamo, et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of landscape in shaping bird community and implications for landscape management at Nanjing Lukou International Airport

Yuan

Miao

Qian

et al. 2023

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the patterns of bird diversity and its driving force is necessary for bird strike prevention. In this study, we investigated the effects of landscape on phylogenetic and functional diversity of bird communities at Nanjing Lukou International Airport (NLIA). Bird identifications and counting of individuals were carried out from November 2017 to October 2019. Based on the land‐cover data, the landscape was divided into four main types, including farmlands, woodlands, wetlands, and urban areas. Bird phylogenetic and functional diversity were strongly affected by landscape matrix types. Species richness and Faith's phylogenetic distance were highest in woodlands, while mean pairwise distance (MPD), mean nearest‐taxon distance (MNTD), and functional dispersion (FDis) were highest in wetlands. Based on the feeding behavior, carnivorous birds had the lowest species richness but had the highest FDis, which implied that carnivorous birds occupied most niches at the NLIA. Moreover, bird assemblages exhibited phylogenetic and functional clustering in the four kinds of landscapes. A variety of landscape attributes had significant effects on species diversity, phylogenetic and functional diversity. Landscape‐scale factors played an important role in the shaping of bird communities around NLIA. Our results suggest that landscape management surrounding airports can provide new approaches for policymakers to mitigate wildlife strikes.

show abstract

How are Natura 2000 protected areas covering different components of avian diversity in Spain?

Cited by 5 publications

References 73 publications

A multitaxonomic assessment of Natura 2000 effectiveness across European biogeographic regions

A multitaxonomic assessment of Natura 2000 effectiveness across European biogeographic regions

Spatial Planning of the Coastal Marine Socioecological System—Case Study: Punta Carnero, Ecuador

The role of landscape in shaping bird community and implications for landscape management at Nanjing Lukou International Airport

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About