Range restriction is an important measure of species rarity that is also interpreted as endemism. A simple biodiversity metric, the sum of inverse range-sizes (‘SIR’) for species within a sampling unit is useful for conservation planning but has multiple names and applications: for example, to highlight areas of high biodiversity and biological uniqueness (the hotspots problem, e.g. ‘weighted endemism’) and as a range proportion-explicit metric for calculating complementarity in reserve selection (the representation problem, e.g. ‘rarity-weighted richness’). This paper outlines the development, implementation and duplication of SIR. We propose that terminology for equivalent metrics can be unified if:- ‘SIR’ refers to them generally; those based on site or grid cell occupancy, or area of occupancy, are referred to specifically as ‘range-rarity richness’); while those aimed at measuring endemism based on extent of occurrence are referred to specifically as ‘georeferenced weighted endemism’. The phylogenetic equivalents would then be ‘phylogenetic range-rarity’ and ‘georeferenced phylogenetic endemism’, respectively.
Area of occupancy Extent of occurrence Range rarity Rarity-weighted richness Species richness Weighted endemism
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
We thank the Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network and the South Australian Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources.
Crisp MD, Laffan S, Linder HP, Monro A (2001) Endemism in the Australian flora. J Biogeogr 28:183–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csuti B, Polasky S, Williams PH et al (1997) A comparison of reserve selection algorithms using data on terrestrial vertebrates in Oregon. Biol Conserv 80:83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dony JG, Denholm I (1985) Some quantitative methods of assessing the conservation value of ecologically similar sites. J Appl Ecol 22:229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerin GR, Ruokolainen L, Lowe AJ (2015) A georeferenced implementation of weighted endemism. Methods Ecol Evol 6:845–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kershaw M, Williams PH, Mace GM (1994) Conservation of Afrotropical antelopes: consequences and efficiency of using different site selection methods and diversity criteria. Biodivers Conserv 3:354–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kier G, Barthlott W (2001) Measuring and mapping endemism and species richness: a new methodological approach and its application on the flora of Africa. Biodivers Conserv 10:1513–1529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laffan SW, Crisp MD (2003) Assessing endemism at multiple spatial scales, with an example from the Australian vascular flora. J Biogeogr 30:511–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishler BD, Knerr N, González-Orozco CE et al (2014) Phylogenetic measures of biodiversity and neo- and paleo-endemism in Australian Acacia. Nat Commun 5:4473CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Peters H, O’Leary BC, Hawkins JP, Roberts CM (2015) Identifying species at extinction risk using global models of anthropogenic impact. Glob Chang Biol 21:618–628CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Rosauer D, Laffan SW, Crisp MD et al (2009) Phylogenetic endemism: a new approach for identifying geographical concentrations of evolutionary history. Mol Ecol 18:4061–4072CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Steck CE, Bürgi M, Coch T, Duelli P (2006) Hotspots and richness pattern of grasshopper species in cultural landscapes. Biodivers Conserv 16:2075–2086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szumik CA, Cuezzo F, Goloboff PA, Chalup AE (2002) An optimality criterion to determine areas of endemism. Syst Biol 51:806–816CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Williams P, Gibbons D, Margules C et al (1996) A Comparison of richness hotspots, rarity hotspots, and complementary areas for conserving diversity of British birds. Conserv Biol 10:155–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar