Cargando…

Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough

Species distribution data are fundamental to the understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes. Yet, such data are strongly affected by sampling biases, mostly related to site accessibility. The understanding of these biases is therefore crucial in systematics, biogeography, and conservation....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Farooq, Harith, Azevedo, Josué A R, Soares, Amadeu, Antonelli, Alexandre, Faurby, Søren
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8048386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33306123
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syaa090
_version_ 1783679211127439360
author Farooq, Harith
Azevedo, Josué A R
Soares, Amadeu
Antonelli, Alexandre
Faurby, Søren
author_facet Farooq, Harith
Azevedo, Josué A R
Soares, Amadeu
Antonelli, Alexandre
Faurby, Søren
author_sort Farooq, Harith
collection PubMed
description Species distribution data are fundamental to the understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes. Yet, such data are strongly affected by sampling biases, mostly related to site accessibility. The understanding of these biases is therefore crucial in systematics, biogeography, and conservation. Here we present a novel approach for quantifying sampling effort and its impact on biodiversity knowledge, focusing on Africa. In contrast to previous studies assessing sampling completeness (percentage of species recorded in relation to predicted), we investigate whether the lack of knowledge of a site attracts scientists to visit these areas and collect samples of species. We then estimate the time required to sample 90% of the continent under a Weibull distributed biodiversity sampling rate and the number of sampling events required to record [Formula: see text] 50% of the species. Using linear and spatial regression models, we show that previous sampling has been strongly influencing the resampling of areas, attracting repeated visits. This bias has existed for over two centuries, has increased in recent decades, and is most pronounced among mammals. It may take between 172 and 274 years, depending on the group, to achieve at least one sampling event per grid cell in the entire continent. Just one visit will, however, not be enough: in order to record [Formula: see text] 50% of the current diversity, it will require at least 12 sampling events for amphibians, 13 for mammals, and 27 for birds. Our results demonstrate the importance of sampling areas that lack primary biodiversity data and the urgency with which this needs to be done. Current practice is insufficient to adequately classify and map African biodiversity; it can lead to incorrect conclusions being drawn from biogeographic analyses and can result in misleading and self-reinforcing conservation priorities. [Amphibians; birds; mammals; sampling bias; sampling gaps; Wallacean shortfall.]
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8048386
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80483862021-04-20 Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough Farooq, Harith Azevedo, Josué A R Soares, Amadeu Antonelli, Alexandre Faurby, Søren Syst Biol Point of View Species distribution data are fundamental to the understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes. Yet, such data are strongly affected by sampling biases, mostly related to site accessibility. The understanding of these biases is therefore crucial in systematics, biogeography, and conservation. Here we present a novel approach for quantifying sampling effort and its impact on biodiversity knowledge, focusing on Africa. In contrast to previous studies assessing sampling completeness (percentage of species recorded in relation to predicted), we investigate whether the lack of knowledge of a site attracts scientists to visit these areas and collect samples of species. We then estimate the time required to sample 90% of the continent under a Weibull distributed biodiversity sampling rate and the number of sampling events required to record [Formula: see text] 50% of the species. Using linear and spatial regression models, we show that previous sampling has been strongly influencing the resampling of areas, attracting repeated visits. This bias has existed for over two centuries, has increased in recent decades, and is most pronounced among mammals. It may take between 172 and 274 years, depending on the group, to achieve at least one sampling event per grid cell in the entire continent. Just one visit will, however, not be enough: in order to record [Formula: see text] 50% of the current diversity, it will require at least 12 sampling events for amphibians, 13 for mammals, and 27 for birds. Our results demonstrate the importance of sampling areas that lack primary biodiversity data and the urgency with which this needs to be done. Current practice is insufficient to adequately classify and map African biodiversity; it can lead to incorrect conclusions being drawn from biogeographic analyses and can result in misleading and self-reinforcing conservation priorities. [Amphibians; birds; mammals; sampling bias; sampling gaps; Wallacean shortfall.] Oxford University Press 2020-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8048386/ /pubmed/33306123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syaa090 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Society of Systematic Biologists. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Point of View
Farooq, Harith
Azevedo, Josué A R
Soares, Amadeu
Antonelli, Alexandre
Faurby, Søren
Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough
title Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough
title_full Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough
title_fullStr Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough
title_full_unstemmed Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough
title_short Mapping Africa’s Biodiversity: More of the Same Is Just Not Good Enough
title_sort mapping africa’s biodiversity: more of the same is just not good enough
topic Point of View
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8048386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33306123
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syaa090
work_keys_str_mv AT farooqharith mappingafricasbiodiversitymoreofthesameisjustnotgoodenough
AT azevedojosuear mappingafricasbiodiversitymoreofthesameisjustnotgoodenough
AT soaresamadeu mappingafricasbiodiversitymoreofthesameisjustnotgoodenough
AT antonellialexandre mappingafricasbiodiversitymoreofthesameisjustnotgoodenough
AT faurbysøren mappingafricasbiodiversitymoreofthesameisjustnotgoodenough