The BIOTA Biodiversity Observatories in Africa—a standardized framework for large-scale environmental monitoring

Jürgens, Norbert; Schmiedel, Ute; Haarmeyer, Daniela H.; Dengler, Jürgen; Finckh, Manfred; Goetze, Dethardt; Gröngröft, Alexander; Hahn, Karen; Koulibaly, Annick; Luther-Mosebach, Jona; Muche, Gerhard; Oldeland, Jens; Petersen, Andreas; Porembski, Stefan; Rutherford, M. C.; Schmidt, Marco; Sinsin, Brice; Strohbach, Ben J.; Thiombiano, Adjima; Wittig, Rüdiger; Zizka, Georg

doi:10.1007/s10661-011-1993-y

Cited by 60 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…After the Convention on Biological Diversity was signed in 1992, there was an increase in LTER Networks establishment in Africa. Sites were progressively installed across the continent by: ROSELT/ OSS in 1992 (Aïdoud et al, 2008); BIOTA-AFRICA in 2000 (Jürgens et al, 2012) Approximately 10 networks were aligned with the long-term ecosystem monitoring initiatives and together they have established approximately 1640 sites. Of these sites, only 1089 (66.4%) fulfilled the stated conditions and were considered for further analysis.…”

Section: Network and Site Distribution Across Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is the first project to initiate a long-term biodiversity monitoring network across Africa (Jürgens et al, 2012). Its goal was to create scientific support for decision makers for conservation planning and for a feasible and sustainable management of the use of biodiversity.…”

Section: Long-term Ecological Research (Lter) In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on project funds, its activities were implemented in three phases until 2010. For most of its sites, two phases were implemented, and the longest vascular plant data collection was completed in the northern and southern Africa (Jürgens et al, 2012).…”

Section: Long-term Ecological Research (Lter) In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding LTER, Africa is ranked behind other continents that own national to regional and even continental scale monitoring networks (Gray and Kalpers, 2005;Saidi and Pauw, 2010;Jürgens et al, 2012). However, Africa has many programs and projects involving wildlife conservation and ecosystem monitoring through International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs) initiatives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apart from the INGOs, there are initiatives at both national and regional scales dedicated to the long-term monitoring of biodiversity in Africa. Bennun et al, 2005;Gray and Kalpers, 2005;Joubert and Trollip, 2011;Jürgens et al, 2012;Henschel and Lancaster, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Building African Ecosystem Research Network for sustaining local ecosystem goods and services

Yevide

et al. 2015

Chin. Geogr. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A new form of producing and sharing knowledge has emerged as an international (United States of America, Asia, and Europe) research collaboration, known as the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network. Although Africa boasts rich biodiversity, including endemic species, it lacks the long-term initiatives to underpin sustainable biodiversity managements. At present, climate change may exacerbate hunger and poverty concerns in addition to resulting in ecosystem degradation, land use change, and other threats in Africa. Therefore, ecosystem monitoring was suggested to understanding the effects of climate change and setting strategies to mitigate these changes. This paper aimed to investigate ecosystem monitoring ground sites and address their coverage gaps in Africa to provide a foundation for optimizing the African Ecosystem Research Network (AERN) ground sites. The geographic coordinates and characteristics of ground sites-based ecosystem monitoring were collected from various networks aligned with the LTER implementation in Africa. Additionally, climatic data and biodiversity distribution maps were retrieved from various sources. These data were used to assess the size of existing ground sites and the gaps in description, ecosystems and biomes. The results reveal that there were 1089 sites established by various networks. Among these sites, 30.5%, 27.5%, and 28.8% had no information of area, year of establishment, current status, respectively. However, 68.0% of them had an area equal to or greater than 1 km 2 . Sites were created progressively over the course of the years, with 68.9% being created from 2000 to 2005. To date, only 41.5% of the sites were operational. The sites were scattered across Africa, but they were concentrated in Eastern and Southern Africa. The unbalanced distribution pattern of the sites left Central and Northern Africa hardly covered, and many unique ecosystems in Central Africa were not included. To sustain these sites, the AERN should be based on operational sites, seeking secure funding by establishing multiple partnerships.

show abstract

Section: Network and Site Distribution Across Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Long-term Ecological Research (Lter) In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Long-term Ecological Research (Lter) In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Building African Ecosystem Research Network for sustaining local ecosystem goods and services

Yevide

et al. 2015

Chin. Geogr. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Forb ecology research in dry African savannas: Knowledge, gaps, and future perspectives

Siebert

Dreber

2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Savannas are commonly described as a vegetation type with a grass layer interspersed with a discontinuous tree or shrub layer. On the contrary, forbs, a plant life form that can include any nongraminoid herbaceous vascular plant, are poorly represented in definitions of savannas worldwide. While forbs have been acknowledged as a diverse component of the herbaceous layer in savanna ecosystems and valued for the ecosystem services and functions they provide, they have not been the primary focus in most savanna vegetation studies. We performed a systematic review of scientific literature to establish the extent to which forbs are implicitly or explicitly considered as a discrete vegetation component in savanna research. The overall aims were to summarize knowledge on forb ecology, identify knowledge gaps, and derive new perspectives for savanna research and management with a special focus on arid and semiarid ecosystems in Africa. We synthesize and discuss our findings in the context of different overarching research themes: (a) functional organization and spatial patterning, (b) land degradation and range management, (c) conservation and reserve management, (d) resource use and forage patterning, and (e) germination and recruitment. Our results revealed biases in published research with respect to study origin (country coverage in Africa), climate (more semiarid than arid systems), spatial scale (more local than landscape scale), the level at which responses or resource potential was analyzed (primarily plant functional groups rather than species), and the focus on interactions between life forms (rather seldom between forbs and grasses and/or trees). We conclude that the understanding of African savanna community responses to drivers of global environmental change requires knowledge beyond interactions between trees and grasses only and beyond the plant functional group level. Despite multifaceted evidence of our current understanding of forbs in dry savannas, there appear to be knowledge gaps, specifically in linking drivers of environmental change to forb community responses. We therefore propose that more attention be given to forbs as an additional ecologically important plant life form in the conventional tree–grass paradigm of savannas.

show abstract

Conceptual guidelines for the implementation of the ecosystem approach in biodiversity monitoring

Mueller

Geist

2016

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The theoretical concept of the ecosystem approach (EA) aims at assessing ecosystem function based on integrative assessments of multiple levels of biological organization. Since the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992, the EA has been increasingly integrated into environmental policy and legislation, but to date, its practical implementation remains vague with a lack of universal guidelines and concrete recommendations for its use across ecosystem boundaries. On the basis of a review of scientific literature, worldwide environmental legislation and existing monitoring approaches, we identified the most important factors which hamper the feasibility of the EA. We propose a generally applicable methodology for implementing the EA in ecological and environmental monitoring across different ecosystems and habitat types. Successful application of the EA largely depends on adequately standardized and synchronized sampling designs for all abiotic and biotic components, appropriate depth of taxonomic identification, and sufficient spatial and temporal replication. The proposed step‐by‐step guidelines for using the EA are valid across ecosystem types, geographic regions, and for a variety of data types, making them promising tools for ecological monitoring.

show abstract

The BIOTA Biodiversity Observatories in Africa—a standardized framework for large-scale environmental monitoring

Cited by 60 publications

References 64 publications

Building African Ecosystem Research Network for sustaining local ecosystem goods and services

Building African Ecosystem Research Network for sustaining local ecosystem goods and services

Forb ecology research in dry African savannas: Knowledge, gaps, and future perspectives

Conceptual guidelines for the implementation of the ecosystem approach in biodiversity monitoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About