Cargando…

Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments

Effective environmental assessment and management requires quantifiable biodiversity targets. Biodiversity benchmarks define these targets by focusing on specific biodiversity metrics, such as species richness. However, setting fixed targets can be challenging because many biodiversity metrics are h...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yen, Jian D. L., Dorrough, Josh, Oliver, Ian, Somerville, Michael, McNellie, Megan J., Watson, Christopher J., Vesk, Peter A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6852130/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31302942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1970
_version_ 1783469760419201024
author Yen, Jian D. L.
Dorrough, Josh
Oliver, Ian
Somerville, Michael
McNellie, Megan J.
Watson, Christopher J.
Vesk, Peter A.
author_facet Yen, Jian D. L.
Dorrough, Josh
Oliver, Ian
Somerville, Michael
McNellie, Megan J.
Watson, Christopher J.
Vesk, Peter A.
author_sort Yen, Jian D. L.
collection PubMed
description Effective environmental assessment and management requires quantifiable biodiversity targets. Biodiversity benchmarks define these targets by focusing on specific biodiversity metrics, such as species richness. However, setting fixed targets can be challenging because many biodiversity metrics are highly variable, both spatially and temporally. We present a multivariate, hierarchical Bayesian method to estimate biodiversity benchmarks based on the species richness and cover of native terrestrial vegetation growth forms. This approach uses existing data to quantify the empirical distributions of species richness and cover within growth forms, and we use the upper quantiles of these distributions to estimate contemporary, “best‐on‐offer” biodiversity benchmarks. Importantly, we allow benchmarks to differ among vegetation types, regions, and seasons, and with changes in recent rainfall. We apply our method to data collected over 30 yr at ~35,000 floristic plots in southeastern Australia. Our estimated benchmarks were broadly consistent with existing expert‐elicited benchmarks, available for a small subset of vegetation types. However, in comparison with expert‐elicited benchmarks, our data‐driven approach is transparent, repeatable, and updatable; accommodates important spatial and temporal variation; aligns modeled benchmarks directly with field data and the concept of best‐on‐offer benchmarks; and, where many benchmarks are required, is likely to be more efficient. Our approach is general and could be used broadly to estimate biodiversity targets from existing data in highly variable environments, which is especially relevant given rapid changes in global environmental conditions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6852130
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68521302019-11-22 Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments Yen, Jian D. L. Dorrough, Josh Oliver, Ian Somerville, Michael McNellie, Megan J. Watson, Christopher J. Vesk, Peter A. Ecol Appl Articles Effective environmental assessment and management requires quantifiable biodiversity targets. Biodiversity benchmarks define these targets by focusing on specific biodiversity metrics, such as species richness. However, setting fixed targets can be challenging because many biodiversity metrics are highly variable, both spatially and temporally. We present a multivariate, hierarchical Bayesian method to estimate biodiversity benchmarks based on the species richness and cover of native terrestrial vegetation growth forms. This approach uses existing data to quantify the empirical distributions of species richness and cover within growth forms, and we use the upper quantiles of these distributions to estimate contemporary, “best‐on‐offer” biodiversity benchmarks. Importantly, we allow benchmarks to differ among vegetation types, regions, and seasons, and with changes in recent rainfall. We apply our method to data collected over 30 yr at ~35,000 floristic plots in southeastern Australia. Our estimated benchmarks were broadly consistent with existing expert‐elicited benchmarks, available for a small subset of vegetation types. However, in comparison with expert‐elicited benchmarks, our data‐driven approach is transparent, repeatable, and updatable; accommodates important spatial and temporal variation; aligns modeled benchmarks directly with field data and the concept of best‐on‐offer benchmarks; and, where many benchmarks are required, is likely to be more efficient. Our approach is general and could be used broadly to estimate biodiversity targets from existing data in highly variable environments, which is especially relevant given rapid changes in global environmental conditions. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-07-30 2019-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6852130/ /pubmed/31302942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1970 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecological Applications published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Ecological Society of America This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Articles
Yen, Jian D. L.
Dorrough, Josh
Oliver, Ian
Somerville, Michael
McNellie, Megan J.
Watson, Christopher J.
Vesk, Peter A.
Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments
title Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments
title_full Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments
title_fullStr Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments
title_full_unstemmed Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments
title_short Modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments
title_sort modeling biodiversity benchmarks in variable environments
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6852130/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31302942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1970
work_keys_str_mv AT yenjiandl modelingbiodiversitybenchmarksinvariableenvironments
AT dorroughjosh modelingbiodiversitybenchmarksinvariableenvironments
AT oliverian modelingbiodiversitybenchmarksinvariableenvironments
AT somervillemichael modelingbiodiversitybenchmarksinvariableenvironments
AT mcnelliemeganj modelingbiodiversitybenchmarksinvariableenvironments
AT watsonchristopherj modelingbiodiversitybenchmarksinvariableenvironments
AT veskpetera modelingbiodiversitybenchmarksinvariableenvironments