Mapping wader biodiversity along the East Asian-Australasian flyway.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
03
08
2018
accepted:
27
12
2018
entrez:
26
1
2019
pubmed:
27
1
2019
medline:
19
11
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The study is conducted to facilitate conservation of migratory wader species along the East Asian-Australasian Flyway, particularly to 1) Identify hotspots of wader species richness along the flyway and effectively map how these might change between breeding, non-breeding and migratory phases; 2) Determine if the existing network of protected areas (PA) is sufficient to effectively conserve wader biodiversity hotspots along the EAAF; 3) Assess how species distribution models can provide complementary distribution estimates to existing BirdLife range maps. We use a species distribution modelling (SDM) approach (MaxEnt) to develop temporally explicit individual range maps of 57 migratory wader species across their annual cycle, including breeding, non-breeding and migratory phases, which in turn provide the first biodiversity hotspot map of migratory waders along the EAAF for each of these phases. We assess the protected area coverage during each migration period, and analyse the dominant environmental drivers of distributions for each period. Additionally, we compare model hotspots to those existing range maps of the same species obtained from the BirdLife Internationals' database. Our model results indicate an overall higher and a spatially different species richness pattern compared to that derived from a wader biodiversity hotspot map based on BirdLife range maps. Field observation records from the eBird database for our 57 study species confirm many of the hotspots revealed by model outputs (especially within the Yellow Sea coastal region), suggesting that current richness of the EAAF may have been underestimated and certain hotspots overlooked. Less than 10% of the terrestrial zones area (inland and coastal) which support waders are protected and, only 5% of areas with the highest 10% species richness is protected. The study results suggest the need for new areas for migratory wader research and conservation priorities including Yellow Sea region and Russian far-East. It also suggests a need to increase the coverage and percentage of current PA network to achieve Aichi Target 11 for Flyway countries, including giving stronger consideration to the temporal dynamics of wader migration.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND GOAL
The study is conducted to facilitate conservation of migratory wader species along the East Asian-Australasian Flyway, particularly to 1) Identify hotspots of wader species richness along the flyway and effectively map how these might change between breeding, non-breeding and migratory phases; 2) Determine if the existing network of protected areas (PA) is sufficient to effectively conserve wader biodiversity hotspots along the EAAF; 3) Assess how species distribution models can provide complementary distribution estimates to existing BirdLife range maps.
METHODS
We use a species distribution modelling (SDM) approach (MaxEnt) to develop temporally explicit individual range maps of 57 migratory wader species across their annual cycle, including breeding, non-breeding and migratory phases, which in turn provide the first biodiversity hotspot map of migratory waders along the EAAF for each of these phases. We assess the protected area coverage during each migration period, and analyse the dominant environmental drivers of distributions for each period. Additionally, we compare model hotspots to those existing range maps of the same species obtained from the BirdLife Internationals' database.
RESULTS
Our model results indicate an overall higher and a spatially different species richness pattern compared to that derived from a wader biodiversity hotspot map based on BirdLife range maps. Field observation records from the eBird database for our 57 study species confirm many of the hotspots revealed by model outputs (especially within the Yellow Sea coastal region), suggesting that current richness of the EAAF may have been underestimated and certain hotspots overlooked. Less than 10% of the terrestrial zones area (inland and coastal) which support waders are protected and, only 5% of areas with the highest 10% species richness is protected.
MAIN CONCLUSIONS
The study results suggest the need for new areas for migratory wader research and conservation priorities including Yellow Sea region and Russian far-East. It also suggests a need to increase the coverage and percentage of current PA network to achieve Aichi Target 11 for Flyway countries, including giving stronger consideration to the temporal dynamics of wader migration.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30682055
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210552
pii: PONE-D-18-22685
pmc: PMC6347144
doi:
Types de publication
Historical Article
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0210552Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e53986
pubmed: 23326554
PLoS One. 2010 Oct 22;5(10):e13569
pubmed: 21042575
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Jul 9;110(28):E2602-10
pubmed: 23803854
Environ Manage. 2014 Jan;53(1):163-71
pubmed: 24202282
Conserv Biol. 2008 Feb;22(1):110-9
pubmed: 18273953
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 29;9(8):e105992
pubmed: 25171179
Conserv Biol. 2017 Jun;31(3):646-656
pubmed: 27641210
Trends Ecol Evol. 2006 Feb;21(2):71-6
pubmed: 16701477
Science. 2014 Nov 21;346(6212):912-4
pubmed: 25414287
PLoS Biol. 2007 Jun;5(6):e157
pubmed: 17550306
Nature. 2000 Feb 24;403(6772):853-8
pubmed: 10706275
Nat Commun. 2017 Apr 13;8:14895
pubmed: 28406155
PLoS One. 2013 Aug 07;8(8):e70907
pubmed: 23951037
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 03;11(8):e0160566
pubmed: 27487238
Ecol Appl. 2012 Jun;22(4):1131-45
pubmed: 22827123
Mar Pollut Bull. 2014 Jun 15;83(1):366-75
pubmed: 24703395
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 11;10(6):e0129833
pubmed: 26065417
Mar Pollut Bull. 2001 Feb;42(2):132-6
pubmed: 11381883
Conserv Biol. 2018 Jun;32(3):568-575
pubmed: 27488935
Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Jun 22;280(1761):20130325
pubmed: 23760637
Nature. 2000 May 11;405(6783):220-7
pubmed: 10821282
Science. 2015 Dec 4;350(6265):1255-8
pubmed: 26785490
Mov Ecol. 2015 Feb 02;3(1):3
pubmed: 25709838
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 14;8(10):e76308
pubmed: 24155899
PeerJ. 2017 Mar 14;5:e3093
pubmed: 28316894
Glob Chang Biol. 2017 Mar;23(3):1085-1094
pubmed: 27362976