Taxon surrogates among Amazonian mammals: Can total species richness be predicted by single orders?

Limited financial sources and the difficulty in performing complete surveys, allied to the speed of habitat fragmentation and the urgent necessity in select conservation areas, create the necessity of using some methodologies which bypass these problems. One possibility is the use of surrogate taxa that might be used as indicator of others groups richness and even total richness of an area. We investigated if the use of surrogate taxon is useful among seven mammal orders in Amazon. We tested through Pearson`s correlation (Bonferroni`s adjusted) if (1) there was a correlation between richness of total species and some order; (2) there was a significant pair wise correlation between species richness of each order; and (3) the combination of two orders would give better results as a surrogate for the total richness. The correlations found, in general, were positive. It means that the increase in the richness of an order was followed by its increase in another order, as well as in the total species richness. Only Didelphimorphia was significantly correlated with the total species richness. In the pair wise analyses only one assembly, Primates and Artiodactyla, was significantly correlated with total richness. Since indicator species are more effective within taxonomic groups (life-history characteristics are likely to be more different among than within major taxonomic groups), we suggest that an indicator group might be chosen for each one. In this case, for mammals from Amazon, it would be Didelphimorphia. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Comparing species and measures of landscape structure as indicators of conservation importance

P>1. The use of indicators to identify areas of conservation importance has been challenged on several grounds, but nonetheless retains appeal as no more parsimonious approach exists. Among the many variants, two indicator strategies stand out: the use of indicator species and the use of metrics of landscape structure. While the first has been thoroughly studied, the same cannot be said about the latter. We aimed to contrast the relative efficacy of species-based and landscape-based indicators by: (i) comparing their ability to reflect changes in community integrity at regional and landscape spatial scales, (ii) assessing their sensitivity to changes in data resolution, and (iii) quantifying the degree to which indicators that are generated in one landscape or at one spatial scale can be transferred to additional landscapes or scales. 2. We used data from more than 7000 bird captures in 65 sites from six 10 000-ha landscapes with different proportions of forest cover in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Indicator species and landscape-based indicators were tested in terms of how effective they were in reflecting changes in community integrity, defined as deviations in bird community composition from control areas. 3. At the regional scale, indicator species provided more robust depictions of community integrity than landscape-based indicators. At the landscape scale, however, landscape-based indicators performed more effectively, more consistently and were also more transferable among landscapes. The effectiveness of high resolution landscape-based indicators was reduced by just 12% when these were used to explain patterns of community integrity in independent data sets. By contrast, the effectiveness of species-based indicators was reduced by 33%. 4. Synthesis and applications. The use of indicator species proved to be effective; however their results were variable and sensitive to changes in scale and resolution, and their application requires extensive and time-consuming field work. Landscape-based indicators were not only effective but were also much less context-dependent. The use of landscape-based indicators may allow the rapid identification of priority areas for conservation and restoration, and indicate which restoration strategies should be pursued, using remotely sensed imagery. We suggest that landscape-based indicators might often be a better, simpler, and cheaper strategy for informing decisions in conservation.

Assessing the impact of deforestation and climate change on the range size and environmental niche of bird species in the Atlantic forests, Brazil

Aim Habitat loss and climate change are two major drivers of biological diversity. Here we quantify how deforestation has already changed, and how future climate scenarios may change, environmental conditions within the highly disturbed Atlantic forests of Brazil. We also examine how environmental conditions have been altered within the range of selected bird species. Location Atlantic forests of south-eastern Brazil. Methods The historical distribution of 21 bird species was estimated using Maxent. After superimposing the present-day forest cover, we examined the environmental niches hypothesized to be occupied by these birds pre- and post-deforestation using environmental niche factor analysis (ENFA). ENFA was also used to compare conditions in the entire Atlantic forest ecosystem pre- and post-deforestation. The relative influence of land use and climate change on environmental conditions was examined using analysis of similarity and principal components analysis. Results Deforestation in the region has resulted in a decrease in suitable habitat of between 78% and 93% for the Atlantic forest birds included here. Further, Atlantic forest birds today experience generally wetter and less seasonal forest environments than they did historically. Models of future environmental conditions within forest remnants suggest generally warmer conditions and lower annual variation in rainfall due to greater precipitation in the driest quarter of the year. We found that deforestation resulted in a greater divergence of environmental conditions within Atlantic forests than that predicted by climate change. Main conclusions The changes in environmental conditions that have occurred with large-scale deforestation suggest that selective regimes may have shifted and, as a consequence, spatial patterns of intra-specific variation in morphology, behaviour and genes have probably been altered. Although the observed shifts in available environmental conditions resulting from deforestation are greater than those predicted by climate change, the latter will result in novel environments that exceed temperatures in any present-day climates and may lead to biotic attrition unless organisms can adapt to these warmer conditions. Conserving intra-specific diversity over the long term will require considering both how changes in the recent past have influenced contemporary populations and the impact of future environmental change.