Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 18, Issue 9, pp 2307–2325 | Cite as

Global conservation status assessment of the threatened aquatic plant genus Baldellia (Alismataceae): challenges and limitations

  • Gregor Kozlowski
  • Stéphanie Rion
  • André Python
  • Sébastien Riedo
Original Paper

Abstract

In this study, the aquatic monocot Baldellia (Alismataceae) is used as a model for evaluating the general hindrances and shortfalls in the global conservation status assessment of a threatened taxon. Our study clearly shows that Linnean shortfalls (uncertainty in the number of species and taxonomy) and the Wallacean shortfall (fragmentary knowledge regarding distribution) form the basis for all other hindrances. We demonstrate that even in Europe, which has traditionally been very well investigated, between 60 and 75% of regions or countries possess no detailed distribution maps and/or data banks for Baldellia spp. Furthermore, between 50 and 60% of regions do not have any published red list category. Thus, only general conclusions concerning the global conservation status of the three Baldellia taxa are possible—a global assessment of conservation status for B. ranunculoides subsp. repens is nearly impossible. Baldellia ranunculoides s.str. shows a strong decline in practically all regions of its natural range, and thus it is probably the most threatened species in the genus. Baldellia alpestris is the least threatened species in the genus, even though it is a narrow endemic. Our case study clearly shows the need for reinforced coordination of research and conservation activities as well as an urgent need for data accessibility regarding taxonomic, chorological and conservation studies of endangered species.

Keywords

Aquatic macrophyte Conservation priority Wallacean shortfall Linnean shortfall Red list 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Benoît Clement and Susanne Bollinger from the Botanical Garden of the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) for their assistance during manuscript preparation. We are also indebted to Antony Buchala, University of Fribourg, for English improvement as well as to the Franklinia Foundation for its engagement and valuable support of field work. Further, we thank following local experts (alphabetical order): Paulo Alves, University of Porto, Portugal; Svein Baatvik, Directorat for Nature Management, Trondheim, Norway; Ramon Casimiro-Soriguer, Dep. Biologia Vegetal y Ecologia, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain; Kristijan Civic, State Institute for Nature Protection, Croatia; Christian Clerc, GEG Champ-Pittet, Switzerland; Antonio Crespi, Botanic Garden, University of Tras-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal; Mohamed Fennane, Dépt. de Botanique et d’écologie végétale, University of Rabat, Morocco; Abdelkrim Hacène, Dept. de Botanique, Institut National Agronomique, University of Alger, Algeria; Andrew R. Jones, Countryside Council for Wales, UK; Mitja Kaligaric, Katedra za geobotaniko, Slovenia; Mart Külvik, Head of Research Centre. Environmental Protection Institute, Estonia; Leht Malle, The Estonian naturalist society, Estonia; Viesturus Melecis, Institute of Biology, University of Latvia; David Draper Munt, Museum Nacional de História Natural, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugual; Baudewijn Odé, Director of Stichting Foron, Leiden, the Netherlands; Francis Olivereau, Diréction régionale de l’environnement de la region Centre, France; Salvatore Pasta, Tutela delle specie vegetali prioritarie delle Isole Eolie, Sicily; Henrik Ærenlund Pedersen, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Oscar Sánchez Pedraja, Grupo botànico cantàbrico, Cantabria, Spain; Uwe Raabe, Naturschutzamt Nordrhein-Westfalen, Deutschland; Jacqueline Saintenoy-Simon, A.M.B.E, Association pour l’Etude de la Floristique, Bruxelles, Belgium; Hanno Schäfer, author of “Flora of the Azores”; Anna Scoppola, Università Tuscia, Italy; Rubim da Silva, University of Porto, Portugal; Arne Strid, Göteborg Botanical Garden, Sweden; Thomas Raus, Botanischer Garten Berlin, Deutschland; Flora-Lise Vuille, University of Zürich, Switzerland; Joanna Zalewska, Department of Plant Taxonomy and Phytogeography, Institute of Botany, Jagiellonian University, Poland.

Supplementary material

10531_2009_9589_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (114 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 113 kb)

References

  1. Aronsson M (1999) Rödlistade kärlväxter i Sverige, vol 1. ArtDatabanken SLU, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  2. Bini LM, Diniz-Filho JAF, Ranger TFLVB, Bastos RP, Plaza Pinto M (2006) Challenging Wallacean and Linnean shortfalls: knowledge gradients and conservation planning in a biodiversity hotspot. Divers Distrib 12:475–482. doi: 10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00286.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown JH, Lomolino MV (1998) Biogeography, 2nd edn. Sinauer Press, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  4. Butchart SHM, Stattersfield AJ, Bennun SM, Shutes SM, Akçakaya HR, Baillie JEM, Stuart SN, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace GM (2004) Measuring global trends in the status of biodiversity: red list indices for birds. PLoS Biol 2:2294–2304. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0020383 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Casper SJ, Krausch H-D (1980) Pteridophyta und Anthophyta. In: Ettl H, Gerloff J, Heynig H (eds) Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, Teil 1. Band 23. VEB Gustav Fisher, Jena, pp 169–173Google Scholar
  6. Collar NJ (1998) Extinction by assumption: or, the Romeo Error on Zebu. Oryx 32:239. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3008.1998.d01-51.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cook CDK (1983) Aquatic plants endemic to Europe and the Mediterranean. Bot Jahrb 103:539–582Google Scholar
  8. Cools JMA (1989) Atlas van de Nordbrabantse Flora. Stichting Uitgeverij van de Koninklijke Natuurhistorische Vereniging, TilburgGoogle Scholar
  9. Cosson ES-C (1864) Description de deux espèces nouvelles d’Espagne. Bull Soc Bot Fr 11:332–333Google Scholar
  10. Delvosalle L, Vanhecke L (1982) Essai de notion quantitative de la rarefaction d’espèces aquatiques et palustres en Belgique entre 1960 et 1980. In: Symoens JJ, Hooper SS, Compère P (eds) Studies on aquatic vascular plants. Royal Botanical Society of Belgium, Brussels, pp 403–409Google Scholar
  11. Eggenberg S, Landolt E (2006) Für welche Pflanzenarten hat die Schweiz eine internationale Verantwortung? Bot Helv 116:119–133. doi: 10.1007/s00035-006-0763-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Snyder PK (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–573. doi: 10.1126/science.1111772 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glisson B (2004) Saussurea weberi Hulten (Weber’s saw-wort): a technical conservation assessment. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. http://www.fs.fed.us. Accessed 11 Oct 2007
  14. Glück H (1905) Biologische und morphologische Untersuchungen über Wasser- und Sumpfgewächse. Erster Teil: Die Lebensgeschichte der europäischen Alismaceen. Gustav Fischer, JenaGoogle Scholar
  15. Glück H (1906) Alismataceae. In: Kirchner O, Loew E, Schröter C (eds) Lebensgeschichte der Blütenpflanzen Mitteleuropas, Band I, Abteilung I. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 584–648Google Scholar
  16. Good TC, Zjhra ML, Kremen C (2006) Addressing data deficiency in classifying extinction risks: a case study of a radiation of Bignoniaceae from Madagascar. Conserv Biol 20:1099–1110. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00473.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ingelög T, Thor G, Hallingbäck T, Andersson R, Aronsson M (1991) Floravard i jordbrukslandskapet. Skyddsvärda växter, SBT, LundGoogle Scholar
  18. IUCN (2001) IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Gland. Switzerland and Cambridge, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  19. Jones RA (2006) Creeping water-plantain (Dyfr lyriad ymlusgawl), Baldellia ranunculoides subsp. repens (Lam.) A. Löve & D. Löve in Wales. In: Leach SJ, Page CN, Peytoureau Y, Sanford MN (eds) Botanical links in the Atlantic arc. BSBI Conference Report No. 24, Camborne, pp 311–319Google Scholar
  20. Kozlowski G (2008) Is the global conservation status assessment of a threatened taxon a utopia? Biodivers Conserv 17:445–448. doi: 10.1007/s10531-007-9278-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kozlowski G, Jones RA, Nicholls-Vuille F-L (2008) Biological flora of Central Europe: Baldellia ranunculoides (Alismataceae). Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 10:109–142. doi: 10.1016/j.ppees.2007.12.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lawalrée A (1959) Baldellia repens (Lamk.) van Ooststroom en Belgique. Bull Jard Bot Etat Brux 29:7–14. doi: 10.2307/3666990 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lid J, Lid DT (2005) Norsk flora, 7th edn. Det Norske Samlaget, OsloGoogle Scholar
  24. Lindblad R, Ståhl B (1989) Krypfloka (Apium inundatum) och flocksvalting (Baldellia ranunculoides) i norra Halland (SW Sweden). Sven Bot Tidskr 83:211–217Google Scholar
  25. Lindblad R, Ståhl B (1990) Revsvalting, Baldellia repens, i Norden. Sven Bot Tidskr 84:253–258Google Scholar
  26. Lomolino MV, Heaney LR (eds) (2004) Frontiers of biogeography: new directions in the geography of nature. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  27. Marris E (2007a) The species and the specious. Nature 446:250–253. doi: 10.1038/446250a PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marris E (2007b) What to let go. Nature 450:152–155. doi: 10.1038/450152a PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Master LL (1991) Assessing threats and seting priorities for conservation. Conserv Biol 5:559–563. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1991.tb00370.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moreno Saiz JC, Sainz Ollero H (1992) Atlas corologico de las Monocotiledoneas endemicas de la poninsila Iberica y Baleares. Bases para una politica de conservacion. Colleccion Tecnica, IconaGoogle Scholar
  31. Mrosovsky N (1997) IUCN’s credibility critically endangered. Nature 389:436. doi: 10.1038/38873 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mrosovsky N (2004) Predicting extinction: fundamental flaws in IUCN’s red list system, exemplified by the case of Sea Turtles. University of Totonto press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  33. Pott R (1995) Die Pflanzengesellschaften Deutschlands, 2nd edn. Eugen Ulmer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  34. Preston CD, Croft JM (2001) Aquatic plants in Britain and Ireland. Harley Books, ColchesterGoogle Scholar
  35. Quayle JE, Ramsay LR (2005) Conservation status as a biodiversity trend indicator: recommendations from a decade of listing species at risks in British Columbia. Conserv Biol 19:1306–1311. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00083.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rich TCG, Karran AB (2006) Floristic changes in the British Isles: comparison of techniques for assessing changes in frequency of plants in time. Bot J Linn Soc 152:279–302. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8339.2006.00574.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rich TCG, Nicholls-Vuille F-L (2001) Taxonomy and distribution of European Damasonium (Alismataceae). Edinbourg J Bot 58:45–55Google Scholar
  38. Rodrigues ASL (2006) Are global conservation efforts successful? Science 311:1051–1052. doi: 10.1126/science.1131302 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schemske DW, Husband BC, Ruckelshaus MH, Goodwillie C, Parker IM, Bishop JD (1994) Evaluating approaches to the conservation of rare and endangered plants. Ecology 75:584–606. doi: 10.2307/1941718 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schubert R, Hilbig W, Klotz S (1995) Bestimmungsbuch der Pflanzengesellschaften Mittel- und Nordostdeutschlands. Gustav Fischer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  41. Terschuren J (1999) Plan d’action en faveur de Cypripedium calceolus en Europe. Sauvegarde de la Nature: 100. Editions du Conseil de l’EuropeGoogle Scholar
  42. Triest L, Vuille F-L (1991) Isozyme variation in several seed collections and hybrids of Baldellia (Alismataceae). In: Triest L (ed) isozymes in water plants. Opera Bot Belg 4:37–48Google Scholar
  43. Tutin TG (ed) (1980) Flora Europaea. Alismataceae to Orchidaceae, vol 5. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. Vasconçellos JC (1970) Novas combinaçoes momenclaturais de plantas da flora Portuguesa. Bol Soc Brot Ser 2(44):81–83Google Scholar
  45. Vuille F-L (1988) The reproductive biology of the genus Baldellia (Alismataceae). Plant Syst Evol 159:173–183. doi: 10.1007/BF00935970 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Welk E (2001) Arealkundliche Analyse und Bewertung der Schutzrelevanz seltener und gefährdeter Gefässpflanzen Deutschlands. PhD Thesis, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle/SaaleGoogle Scholar
  47. Whittaker RJ, Araujo MB, Jepson P, Ladle RJ, Watson JEM, Willis KJ (2005) Conservation biogeography: assessment and project. Divers Distrib 11:3–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00143.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilcove DS, Chen LY (1998) Management costs for endangered species. Conserv Biol 12:1405–1407. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.97451.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregor Kozlowski
    • 1
  • Stéphanie Rion
    • 1
    • 2
  • André Python
    • 2
  • Sébastien Riedo
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biology and Botanical GardenUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Geosciences, GeographyUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations