Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 14, Issue 6, pp 1345–1364 | Cite as

Species richness coincidence: conservation strategies based on predictive modelling

  • Dirk Maes
  • Dirk Bauwens
  • Luc De Bruyn
  • Anny Anselin
  • Glenn Vermeersch
  • Wouter Van Landuyt
  • Geert De Knijf
  • Marius Gilbert
Article

Abstract

The present-day geographic distribution of individual species of five taxonomic groups (plants, dragonflies, butterflies, herpetofauna and breeding birds) is relatively well-known on a small scale (5 × 5 km squares) in Flanders (north Belgium). These data allow identification of areas with a high diversity within each of the species groups. However, differences in mapping intensity and coverage hamper straightforward comparisons of species-rich areas among the taxonomic groups. To overcome this problem, we modelled the species richness of each taxonomic group separately using various environmental characteristics as predictor variables (area of different land use types, biotope diversity, topographic and climatic features). We applied forward stepwise multiple regression to build the models, using a subset of well-surveyed squares. A separate set of equally well-surveyed squares was used to test the predictions of the models. The coincidence of geographic areas with high predicted species richness was remarkably high among the four faunal groups, but much lower between plants and each of the four faunal groups. Thus, the four investigated faunal groups can be used as relatively good indicator taxa for one another in Flanders, at least for their within-group species diversity. A mean predicted species diversity per mapping square was also estimated by averaging the standardised predicted species richness over the five taxonomic groups, to locate the regions that were predicted as being the most species-rich for all five investigated taxonomic groups together. Finally, the applicability of predictive modelling in nature conservation policy both in Flanders and in other regions is discussed.

Keywords

Breeding birds Butterflies Conservation priorities Dragonflies Flanders Herpetofauna Hotspots Plants Predictive modelling Species richness coincidence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Andelman, S.J., Fagan, W.F. 2000Umbrellas and flagships: efficient conservation surrogates or expensive mistakes?Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA9759545959Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Badgley, C., Fox, D.L. 2000Ecological biogeography of North American mammals: species diversity and ecological structure in relation to environmental gradientsJournal of Biogeography27 14371467Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bauwens, D., Claus, K. 1996Verspreiding van amfibieën en reptielen in VlaanderenDe WielewaalTurnhoutBelgiumGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bibby, C.J. 1999Making the most of birds as environmental indicatorsOstrich708188Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bio, A.M.F., De Becker, P., De Bie, E., Huybrechts, W., Wassen, M. 2002Prediction of plant species distribution in lowland river valleys in Belgium: modelling species response to site conditionsBiodiversity and Conservation1121892216Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blair, R.B. 1999Birds and butterflies along an urban gradient: surrogate taxa for assessing biodiversity?Ecological Applications9164170Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Caro, T.M., O’Doherty, G. 1999On the use of surrogate species in conservation biologyConservation Biology13805814Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clifford, P., Richardson, S., Hémon, D. 1989Assessing the significance of the correlation between two spatial processesBiometrics45123134PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crawley, M.J. 1993GLIM for EcologistsBlackwell Scientific PublicationsOxfordUKGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Blust, G. 2001

    De ecoregio’s

    Kuijken, E.Boeye, D.De Bruyn, L.De Roo, K.Dumortier, M.Peymen, J.Schneiders, A.van Straaten, D.Weyembergh, G. eds. Natuurrapport 2001. Toestand van de natuur in Vlaanderen: cijfers voor het beleidInstituut voor NatuurbehoudBrussel, Belgium1317
    Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    Decleer, K., Vanroose, S. 2001

    Verwerving van natuurgebieden

    Kuijken, E.Boeye, D.De Bruyn, L.De Roo, K.Dumortier, M.Peymen, J.Schneiders, A.van Straaten, D.Weyembergh, G. eds. Natuurrapport 2001. Toestand van de natuur in Vlaanderen: cijfers voor het beleidInstituut voor NatuurbehoudBrussel, Belgium183194
    Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    De Knijf, G., Anselin, A. 1996Een gedocumenteerde Rode lijst van de libellen van VlaanderenInstituut voor NatuurbehoudBrussel, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dennis, R.L.H., Hardy, P.B. 1999Targeting squares for survey: predicting species richness and incidence of species for a butterfly atlasGlobal Ecology and Biogeography Letters8443454Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dennis, R.L.H., Shreeve, T.G. 2003Gains and losses of French butterflies: tests of predictions, under-recording and regional extinction from data in a new atlasBiological Conservation110131139Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    Dennis, R.L.H., Thomas, C.D. 2000Bias in butterfly distributions maps: the influence of hot spots and recorder’s home rangeJournal of Insect Conservation47377Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dennis, R.L.H., Sparks, T.H., Hardy, P.B. 1999Bias in butterfly distribution maps: the effects of sampling effortJournal of Insect Conservation33342Google Scholar
  17. 15.
    Dennis, R.L.H., Shreeve, T.G., Sparks, T.H., Lhonore, J.E. 2002A comparison of geographical and neighbourhood models for improving atlas databasesBiological Conservation108143159Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dobson, A.P., Rodriguez, J.P., Roberts, W.M., Wilcove, D.S. 1997Geographic distribution of endangered species in the United StatesScience275550553PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dries, L. 2002

    Natura 2000 in Vlaanderen: een schakel in een Europees netwerk

    Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap – Afdeling Natuur i.s.m.WWF & NatuurpuntBrussel, Belgium
    Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dutilleul, P. 1993Modifying the t-test for assessing the correlation between two spatial processesBiometrics49305314Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Edwards, T.C., Deshler, E.T., Foster, D., Moisen, G.G. 1996Adequacy of wildlife habitat relation models for estimating spatial distributions of terrestrial vertebratesConservation Biology10263270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    EEA2002

    Environmental signals 2002.

    Benchmarking the millenniumEuropean Environment AgencyCopenhagen, Denmark
    Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fleishman, E., Austin, G.T., Murphy, D.D. 2001Biogeography of Great Basin butterflies: revisiting patterns, paradigms, and climate change scenariosBiological Journal of the Linnean Society74 501515Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fleishman, E., Mac Nally, R., Fay, J.P. 2003Validation tests of predictive models of butterfly occurrence based on environmental variablesConservation Biology17806817Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gower, J.C. 1971A general coefficiënt of similarity and some of its propertiesBiometrics27857871Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guisan, A., Zimmermann, N.E. 2000Predictive habitat distribution models in ecologyEcological Modelling13147186Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Isaaks, E.H., Srivastava, R.M. 1989An introduction to applied geostatisticsOxford University PressOxfordUK.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Keitt, T.H., Bjornstad, O.N., Dixon, P.M., Citron-Pousty, S. 2002Accounting for spatial pattern when modeling organism-environment interactionsEcography25616625Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kerr, J.T., Ostrovsky, M. 2003From space to species: ecological applications for remote sensingTrends in Ecology and Evolution18299305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kerr, J.T., Packer, L. 1997Habitat heterogeneity as a determinant of mammal species richness in high-energy regionsNature385252254Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kerr, J.T., Vincent, R., Currie, D.J. 1998Lepidopteran richness patterns in North AmericaEcoscience5448453Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Legendre, P., Legendre, L. 1998Numerical EcologyElsevierAmsterdamThe NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Littell, R.C., Milliken, G.A., Stroup, W.W., Wolfinger, R.D. 1996SAS System for Mixed ModelsSAS Institute Inc.Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  34. 35.
    Lobo, J.M., Martín-Piera, F. 2002Searching for a predictive model for species richness of Iberian dung beetle based on spatial and environmental variablesConservation Biology16158173Google Scholar
  35. 34.
    Lobo, J.M., Lumaret, J.P., JayRobert, P. 1997Taxonomic databases as tools in spatial biodiversity researchAnnales de La Societe Entomologique de France33129138Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Luoto, M., Toivonen, T., Heikinnen, R.K. 2002Prediction of total and rare plant species richness in agricultural landscapes from satellite images and topographic dataLandscape Ecology17 195217Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mac Nally, R. 2000Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between – and reconciliation of – ‘predictive’ and ‘explanatory’ modelsBiodiversity and Conservation9655671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mac Nally, R., Fleishman, E., Fay, J.P., Murphy, D.D. 2003Modelling butterfly species richness using mesoscale environmental variables: model construction and validation for mountain ranges in the Great Basin of western North AmericaBiological Conservation1102131Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Maddock, A., Du Plessis, M.A. 1999Can species data only be appropriately used to conserve biodiversity?Biodiversity and Conservation8603615Google Scholar
  40. 41.
    Maes, D., Van Dyck, H. 2001Butterfly diversity loss in Flanders (north Belgium): Europe’s worst case scenario?Biological Conservation99263276Google Scholar
  41. 40.
    Maes, D., Gilbert, M., Titeux, N., Goffart, P., Dennis, R. 2003Prediction of butterfly diversity hotspots in Belgium: a comparison of statistically-focused and land use-focused modelsJournal of Biogeography3019071920Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Magurran, A.E. 1988Ecological diversity and its measurementPrinceton University PressPrinceton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Moller, A.P., Jennions, M.D. 2002How much variance can be explained by ecologists and evolutionary biologists?Oecologia132492500Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., daFonseca, G.A.B., Kent, J. 2000Biodiversity hotspots for conservation prioritiesNature403853858CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nicholls, A.O. 1989How to make biological surveys go further with generalised linear modelsBiological Conservation505175Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Niemela, J., Baur, B. 1998Threatened species in a vanishing habitat: plants and invertebrates in calcareous grasslands in the Swiss Jura mountainsBiodiversity and Conservation714071416Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    OECD1998Environmental performance reviews BelgiumOECD EditionsParis, FranceGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Overmars, K.P., de Koning, G.H.J., Veldkamp, A. 2003Spatial autocorrelation in multi-scale land use modelsEcological Modelling164257270Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Pearson, D.L., Carroll, S.S. 1998Global patterns of species richness: spatial models for conservation planning using bioindicator and precipitation dataConservation Biology12809821Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pearson, D.L., Cassola, F. 1992World-wide species richness patterns of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae): indicator taxon for biodiversity and conservation studiesConservation Biology6 376391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pharo, E.J., Beattie, A.J., Binns, D. 1999Vascular plant diversity as a surrogate for bryophyte and lichen diversityConservation Biology13282292Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pimm, S.L., Russell, G.J., Gittleman, J.L., Brooks, T.M. 1995The future of biodiversityScience269347350Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Prendergast, J.R., Quinn, R.M., Lawton, J.H. 1999The gaps between theory and practice in selecting nature reservesConservation Biology13484492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Prendergast, J.R., Quinn, R.M., Lawton, J.H., Eversham, B.C., Gibbons, D.W. 1993Rare species, the coincidence of diversity hotspots and conservation strategiesNature365335337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Pullin, A.S., Knight, T.M. 2001Effectiveness in conservation practice: pointers from medicine and public healthConservation Biology155054Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Reid, W.V. 1998Biodiversity hotspotsTrends in Ecology and Evolution13275280Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Samways, M.J. 1993Insects in biodiversity conservation: some perspectives and directivesBiodiversity and Conservation2258282Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Simberloff, D. 1998Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: is single-species management passé in the landscape era?Biological Conservation83247257Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sparks, T.H., Dover, J.W., Warren, M.S., Cox, R. 1995

    How well can we model the distribution of butterflies at the landscape scale?

    Griffith, G.H. eds. Landscape Ecology: Theory and ApplicationsIALE(UK), Aberdeen2431
    Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Turner, W., Spector, S., Gardiner, N., Fladeland, M., Sterling, E., Steininger,  2003Remote sensing for biodiversity science and conservationTrends in Ecology and Evolution18306314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Van Hecke, E., Dickens, C. 1994

    Bevolking

    Verbruggen, A. eds. Leren om te keren, Milieu- en natuurrapport VlaanderenVlaamse Milieumaatschappij en Garant Uitgevers N.V.Leuven/ Apeldoorn4561
    Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    van Jaarsveld, A.S., Freitag, S., Chown, S.L., Muller, C., Koch, S., Hull, H. 1998Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategiesScience27921062108PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 64.
    Vanderklift, M.A., Ward, T.J., Phillips, J.C. 1998Use of assemblages derived from different taxonomic levels to select areas for conserving marine biodiversityBiological Conservation86307315Google Scholar
  64. 63.
    Van Landuyt, W., Heylen, O., Vanhecke, L., Van den Bremt, P., Baeté, H. 2000

    Verspreiding en evolutie van de botanische kwaliteit van ecotopen: gebaseerd op combinaties van indicatorsoorten uit Florabank

    Flo.Wer vzw, Instituut voor NatuurbehoudNationale PlantentuinUniversiteit GentBrussel/Meise/GentBelgium
    Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Vessby, K., Söderström, B., Glimskär, A., Svensson, B. 2002Species-richness correlations of six different taxa in Swedish seminatural grasslandsConservation Biology16430439Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Weibull, A.C., Bengtsson, J., Nohlgren, E. 2002Diversity of butterflies in the agricultural landscape: the role of farming system and landscape heterogeneityEcography23743750Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk Maes
    • 1
  • Dirk Bauwens
    • 1
  • Luc De Bruyn
    • 1
    • 2
  • Anny Anselin
    • 1
  • Glenn Vermeersch
    • 1
  • Wouter Van Landuyt
    • 1
  • Geert De Knijf
    • 1
  • Marius Gilbert
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Nature ConservationBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpenBelgium
  3. 3.Laboratoire de Biologie Animale et Cellulaire, CP 160/12Université Libre de BruxellesBrusselsBelgium
  4. 4.Fonds National de la Recherche ScientifiqueBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations