Cargando…

Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas

Native forests are shrinking worldwide, causing a loss of biological diversity. Our ability to prioritize forest conservation actions is hampered by a lack of information about the relative impacts of different types of forest loss on biodiversity. In particular, we lack rigorous comparisons of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haskell, David G., Evans, Jonathan P., Pelkey, Neil W.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1762314/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17183694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000063
_version_ 1782131537304616960
author Haskell, David G.
Evans, Jonathan P.
Pelkey, Neil W.
author_facet Haskell, David G.
Evans, Jonathan P.
Pelkey, Neil W.
author_sort Haskell, David G.
collection PubMed
description Native forests are shrinking worldwide, causing a loss of biological diversity. Our ability to prioritize forest conservation actions is hampered by a lack of information about the relative impacts of different types of forest loss on biodiversity. In particular, we lack rigorous comparisons of the effects of clearing forests for tree plantations and for human settlements, two leading causes of deforestation worldwide. We compared avian diversity in forests, plantations and exurban areas on the Cumberland Plateau, USA, an area of global importance for biodiversity. By combining field surveys with digital habitat databases, and then analyzing diversity at multiple scales, we found that plantations had lower diversity and fewer conservation priority species than did other habitats. Exurban areas had higher diversity than did native forests, but native forests outscored exurban areas for some measures of conservation priority. Overall therefore, pine plantations had impoverished avian communities relative to both native forests and to exurban areas. Thus, reports on the status of forests give misleading signals about biological diversity when they include plantations in their estimates of forest cover but exclude forested areas in which humans live. Likewise, forest conservation programs should downgrade incentives for plantations and should include settled areas within their purview.
format Text
id pubmed-1762314
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-17623142007-01-04 Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas Haskell, David G. Evans, Jonathan P. Pelkey, Neil W. PLoS One Research Article Native forests are shrinking worldwide, causing a loss of biological diversity. Our ability to prioritize forest conservation actions is hampered by a lack of information about the relative impacts of different types of forest loss on biodiversity. In particular, we lack rigorous comparisons of the effects of clearing forests for tree plantations and for human settlements, two leading causes of deforestation worldwide. We compared avian diversity in forests, plantations and exurban areas on the Cumberland Plateau, USA, an area of global importance for biodiversity. By combining field surveys with digital habitat databases, and then analyzing diversity at multiple scales, we found that plantations had lower diversity and fewer conservation priority species than did other habitats. Exurban areas had higher diversity than did native forests, but native forests outscored exurban areas for some measures of conservation priority. Overall therefore, pine plantations had impoverished avian communities relative to both native forests and to exurban areas. Thus, reports on the status of forests give misleading signals about biological diversity when they include plantations in their estimates of forest cover but exclude forested areas in which humans live. Likewise, forest conservation programs should downgrade incentives for plantations and should include settled areas within their purview. Public Library of Science 2006-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC1762314/ /pubmed/17183694 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000063 Text en Haskell et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Haskell, David G.
Evans, Jonathan P.
Pelkey, Neil W.
Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas
title Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas
title_full Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas
title_fullStr Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas
title_full_unstemmed Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas
title_short Depauperate Avifauna in Plantations Compared to Forests and Exurban Areas
title_sort depauperate avifauna in plantations compared to forests and exurban areas
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1762314/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17183694
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000063
work_keys_str_mv AT haskelldavidg depauperateavifaunainplantationscomparedtoforestsandexurbanareas
AT evansjonathanp depauperateavifaunainplantationscomparedtoforestsandexurbanareas
AT pelkeyneilw depauperateavifaunainplantationscomparedtoforestsandexurbanareas