Multifaceted diversity–area relationships reveal global hotspots of mammalian species, trait and lineage diversity

Abstract

The fact that PD/FD reach faster their maximal value than SR may suggest that the two former facets might be less vulnerable to habitat loss than the latter. While this point is expected, it is the first time that it is quantified at global scale and should have important consequences in conservation. Incorporating species relative coverage into the delineation of multifaceted hotspots of diversity lead to weak congruence between SR, PD and FD hotspots. This means that maximizing species number may fail at preserving those nodes (in the phylogenetic or functional tree) that are relatively abundant in the ecoregion. As a consequence it may be of prime importance to adopt a multifaceted biodiversity perspective to inform conservation strategies at global scale.

Global priorities for conservation across multiple dimensions of mammalian diversity

“…Global priority regions for mammal conservation have been identified (9,10,28,29), but few have included different [i.e., taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional (15,21)] dimensions of mammal biodiversity simultaneously, and few have used a complementarity-based prioritization framework globally (30)(31)(32)(33). Further, all prioritization analyses for mammals incorporate taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional information by using alpha diversity indexes (15,21,23).…”

“…For example, species richness was an effective surrogate for the functional and phylogenetic dimensions of local rodent assemblages in Manu (25). In contrast, Mazel et al (15) identified strong geographical mismatches among global hotspots of taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional diversity of mammals. Low geographical congruence was also found in prioritization analyses based on taxonomic, phylogenetic, and trait diversity of birds and mammals in Brazil (21).…”

“…If we measure only species numbers, we might miss unique ecological and evolutionary information. Therefore the taxonomic dimension may not sufficiently capture other facets of diversity, such as evolutionary history and functional traits (13)(14)(15). Evolutionary history captures the uniqueness of linages through deep time (16) and can influence species' susceptibility to extinction, because extinction risk is phylogenetically nonrandom (17)(18)(19).…”

“…There is clearly a need for spatial conservation priorities that account for multiple dimensions of biological diversity, including taxonomy, phylogeny, and traits (15,21,22). However, the relationships among these dimensions across the globe are poorly understood and vary depending on the metric used and the scale of the analysis (15,23).…”

“…However, the relationships among these dimensions across the globe are poorly understood and vary depending on the metric used and the scale of the analysis (15,23). Some studies have shown a high correlation among taxonomic, phylogenetic, and trait diversity of global mammals (23,24), especially when using diversity indices affected by species richness, i.e., phylogenetic diversity (14) and functional diversity (20).…”