131
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Scientific Foundations for an IUCN Red List of Ecosystems

      research-article
      1 , 2 , * , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 3 , 5 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 6 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 16 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 1 , 25 , 26 , 7 , 10 , 4 , 15 , 27 , 7 , 28 , 29 , 3
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          An understanding of risks to biodiversity is needed for planning action to slow current rates of decline and secure ecosystem services for future human use. Although the IUCN Red List criteria provide an effective assessment protocol for species, a standard global assessment of risks to higher levels of biodiversity is currently limited. In 2008, IUCN initiated development of risk assessment criteria to support a global Red List of ecosystems. We present a new conceptual model for ecosystem risk assessment founded on a synthesis of relevant ecological theories. To support the model, we review key elements of ecosystem definition and introduce the concept of ecosystem collapse, an analogue of species extinction. The model identifies four distributional and functional symptoms of ecosystem risk as a basis for assessment criteria: A) rates of decline in ecosystem distribution; B) restricted distributions with continuing declines or threats; C) rates of environmental (abiotic) degradation; and D) rates of disruption to biotic processes. A fifth criterion, E) quantitative estimates of the risk of ecosystem collapse, enables integrated assessment of multiple processes and provides a conceptual anchor for the other criteria. We present the theoretical rationale for the construction and interpretation of each criterion. The assessment protocol and threat categories mirror those of the IUCN Red List of species. A trial of the protocol on terrestrial, subterranean, freshwater and marine ecosystems from around the world shows that its concepts are workable and its outcomes are robust, that required data are available, and that results are consistent with assessments carried out by local experts and authorities. The new protocol provides a consistent, practical and theoretically grounded framework for establishing a systematic Red List of the world’s ecosystems. This will complement the Red List of species and strengthen global capacity to report on and monitor the status of biodiversity

          Related collections

          Most cited references108

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Metapopulation dynamics

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Understanding the Complexity of Economic, Ecological, and Social Systems

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Diversity and productivity in a long-term grassland experiment.

              Plant diversity and niche complementarity had progressively stronger effects on ecosystem functioning during a 7-year experiment, with 16-species plots attaining 2.7 times greater biomass than monocultures. Diversity effects were neither transients nor explained solely by a few productive or unviable species. Rather, many higher-diversity plots outperformed the best monoculture. These results help resolve debate over biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, show effects at higher than expected diversity levels, and demonstrate, for these ecosystems, that even the best-chosen monocultures cannot achieve greater productivity or carbon stores than higher-diversity sites.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2013
                8 May 2013
                : 8
                : 5
                : e62111
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Australian Wetlands Rivers and Landscapes Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [2 ]New South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage, Hurstville, New South Wales, Australia
                [3 ]Centro de Ecología, Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas, Caracas, Venezuela
                [4 ]Provita, Caracas, Venezuela
                [5 ]EcoHealth Alliance, New York, New York, United States of America
                [6 ]IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management and IUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland, Switzerland
                [7 ]Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [8 ]Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, Finland
                [9 ]Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, Washington, D.C., United States of America
                [10 ]Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, England
                [11 ]Department of Biological and Environmental Science, Ecotekne Center, University of Salento, Lecce, Italy
                [12 ]IUCN Global Ecosystem Management Programme, Nairobi, Kenya
                [13 ]Royal Botanic Gardens Trust, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
                [14 ]Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, New South Wales, Australia
                [15 ]Science Resource Centre, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
                [16 ]NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America
                [17 ]Australian Centre of Excellence for Risk Assessment, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [18 ]NatureServe, Boulder, Colorado, United States of America
                [19 ]Pyrenean Institute of Ecology, Zaragoza. Spain
                [20 ]Environment Agency Austria, Vienna, Austria
                [21 ]Department of Conservation Biology, Vegetation and Landscape Ecology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
                [22 ]School of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
                [23 ]Landcare Research, Lincoln, New Zealand
                [24 ]Department of Geography, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, United States of America
                [25 ]School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Warnambool, Victoria, Australia
                [26 ]Australian Centre for Biodiversity, School of Biological Sciences Monash University, Victoria, Australia
                [27 ]Tour du Valat Research Center, Arles, France
                [28 ]German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn, Germany
                [29 ]The Nature Conservancy and Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England
                University of Florida, United States of America
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: Provita is a non-governmental conservation organization based in Venezuela, focused on the conservation of threatened species and ecosystems ( www.provitaonline.org or www.provita.org.ve). Provita has been involved with the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems effort for several years, and has therefore sponsored some of the authors’ activities (which they acknowledge). This does not alter the authors’ adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: DAK JPR KMR EN KA AA MA SB AB EGB JSB MJB RB TMB MAB PC FAC FE DFL PGF RJH MJ RTK REL RM MAM PP BP TJR UR MDS. Performed the experiments: DAK JPR SB AB JSB MJB RB FE PGF RJH RTK REL RM JM MAOM PP BP UR MDS. Analyzed the data: DAK JPR KMR EN MA SB AB JSB MJB RB FE PGF RJH RTK REL RM JM MAOM PP BP UR MDS SZM. Wrote the paper: DAK JPR KMR EN KA MA SB AB EGB JSB MJB RB TMB MAB PC FAC FE DFL PGF RJH MJ RTK REL RM MAM PP BP TJR UR MDS.

                Article
                PONE-D-13-01642
                10.1371/journal.pone.0062111
                3648534
                23667454
                16c38752-d193-489d-8946-ba0307b1158d
                Copyright @ 2013

                This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

                History
                : 8 January 2013
                : 16 March 2013
                Page count
                Pages: 25
                Funding
                The authors gratefully acknowledge funding support from the MAVA Foundation, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Smithsonian Institution, EcoHealth Alliance, Provita, the Fulbright Program, Tour du Valat, the Australian Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions and Centre de Suive Ecologique. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology
                Ecology
                Community Ecology
                Ecological Risk
                Biodiversity
                Conservation Science
                Ecological Environments
                Ecological Metrics
                Ecosystems
                Global Change Ecology
                Restoration Ecology
                Systems Ecology
                Theoretical Ecology
                Theoretical Biology

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                2021-02-21 21:37 UTC
                +1

                This publication has inspired several blog posts highlighting the most threatened ecosystems:

                TOP 10 MOST THREATENED ECOSYSTEMS

                30 ecosystems at risk and the endangered species that live there

                2021-02-21 21:35 UTC
                +1

                Comment on this article