Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying complementary areas for conservation in Thailand: an example using owls, hawkmoths and tiger beetles

Biodiversity & Conservation volume 5, pages 841–858 (1996)Cite this article

Abstract

Setting priorities in biodiversity conservation requires that explicit, efficient and appropriate methods are developed and made available to conservation managers. The principle of complementarity is fundamental to the most efficient of these methods. Given a goal of only a single representation of each taxon, complementarity analysis of data sets of owls, hawkmoths and tiger beetles in Thailand yields near-minimum sets of 6, 14 and 34 areas, respectively. The consensus of these sets comprises 48 areas. However, when the data are combined into a single data set, complementarity analysis gives a more efficient solution of 46 areas. Over 90% of the owls, hawkmoths and tiger beetles are already represented as a minimum of one population within the current protected areas network of Thailand. However, an additional 18 areas are still required for complete representation. Several of these additional areas are discussed and their potential contribution to biodiversity conservation in Thailand examined. Khao Pok Yo and Doi Pa Hom Pok are noted as being of particular importance. The case of Sanpatong emphasizes the need to remain aware of the biology and ecology of the species under study.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

39,95 €

Price includes VAT (Netherlands)

References

  • Azuma, S. (1990) Some Sphingidae collected in Thailand (Lepidoptera). Esakia special issue. 1, 155–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedward, M., Pressey, R.L. and Keith, D.A. (1992) A new approach for selecting fully representative reserve networks: addressing efficiency, reserve design and land suitability with an iterative analysis. Biol. Conserv. 62, 115–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, T.R.D. and Scott, F.B. (1937) Moths. Sphingidae. In The Fauna of British India, Including Ceylon and Burma 5. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, N.M. and Morris, M.G. (1985) Threatened Swallowtail Butterflies of the World: the IUCN Red Data Book. Gland: UICN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, N.M., Sayer, J.A. and Whitmore, T.C. (1991) The Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forests Asia and the Pacific. London and Basingstoke: IUCN and Macmillan Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, R.K. and Coddington, J.A. (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. (B) 345, 101–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • D'Abrera, B. (1984) Butterflies of the Oriental Region. Part II. Nymphalidae, Satyridae & Amathusidae. Melbourne: Hill House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, E.W. (1980) Die Sphingiden Sumatras. Heterocera Sumatrana 1, 1–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faith, D.P. (1994) Phylogenetic diversity: a general framework for the prediction of feature diversity. In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 251–68. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, J.S. (1979) The information content of the phylogenetic system. Syst. Zool. 28, 483–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glowka, L., Burhenne-Guilmin, F. and Synge, H. in collaboration with McNeeley, J.A. and Gündling, L. (1994) A Guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Gland and Cambridge: IUCN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, D., Piprell, C. and Graham, M. (1991) National Parks of Thailand. Bangkok: Communications Resources (Thailand) Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillis, D.M. (1987) Molecular versus morphological approaches to systematics. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18, 23–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holloway, J.D. (1987) Superfamily Bombycoidea: families Lasiocampidae, Eupterotidae, Bombycidea, Brahmaeidae, Saturniidae, Sphingidae. Moths of Borneo 3, 1–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inoue, H. (1991) Records of the Sphingidae from Thailand, with descriptions of four new species. Tinea 13, 121–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kershaw, M., Mace, G.M. and Williams, P.H. (in press) Threatened status, rarity and diversity as alternative selection measures for protected areas: a test using Afrotropical antelopes. Conserv. Biol.

  • Kershaw, M. Williams, P.H. and Mace, G.M. (1994) Conservation of Afrotropical antelopes: consequences and efficiency of using different site selection methods and diversity criteria. Biodiv. Conserv. 3, 354–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimura, Y. (1994) Newly recorded nymphalid butterflies from Thailand since 1979. Butterflies 7, 18–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitching, I.J. and Rudge, S.A. (1993) First record of Darapsa myron (Sphingidae) from Thailand. J. Lepid. Soc. 79, 240–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluge, A.G. (1989) A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Zool. 38, 7–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lekagul, B. and Round, P.D. (1991) A Guide to the Birds of Thailand. Bangkok: Saha Karn Bhaet Co., Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C.R., Cresswell, I.D. and Nicholls, A.O. (1994) A scientific basis for establishing networks of protected areas. In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 327–50. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C.R., Nicholls, A.O. and Pressey, R.L. (1988) Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity. Biol. Conserv. 43, 63–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mickevitch, M.F. (1978) Taxonomic congruence. Syst. Zool. 27, 143–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyamoto, M.M. (1985) Consensus cladograms and general classifications. Cladistics 1, 186–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naviaux, R. (1991) Les Cicindèles de Thailande, étude faunistique (Coleoptera Cicindelidae). Bull. mens. Soc. linn. Lyon 60, 209–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nidek, C.M.C. Brouerius van (1980) Descriptions of some new Cicindelinae. Entomol. Bl. Biol. Syst. Käfer 75, 129–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishimura, M. (1994) Notes on Acraea violae (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae, Acraeinae) from Indo-China. Tyô to Ga 45, 200–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, D.L. and Cassola, F. (1992) World-wide species richness patterns of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae): indicator taxon for biodiversity and conservation studies. Conserv. Biol. 6, 376–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittaway, A.R. (1993) The hawkmoths of the western Palaearctic. Colchester: Harley Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Possingham, H.P., Day, J., Goldfinch, M. and Salzborn, F. (1993) The mathematics of designing a network of protected areas for conservation. In Proceedings of the 12th Australian Operations Research Conference (D. Sutton, E. Cousins and C. Pearce, eds) pp. 536–45. Adelaide: Adelaide University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L. and Nicholls, A.O. (1989) Application of a numerical algorithm to the selection of reserves in semi-arid New South Wales. Biol. Conserv. 50, 263–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L., Possingham, H.P. and Margules, C.R. (in press) Optimality in reserve selection algorithms: when does it matter and how much? Biol. Conserv.

  • Pressey, R.L. and Tully, S.L. (1994) The cost of ad hoc reservation: a case study in western New South Wales. Aust. J. Ecol. 19, 375–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, J. and Wiesner, J. (1994) Ãœber Sandlaufkäfer der Gattung Therates aus Thailand (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Ent. Z., Frankf a.M. 104, 92–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebelo, A.G. and Siegfried, W.R. (1990) Protection of fynbos vegetation: ideal and real-world options. Biol. Conserv. 54, 15–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, W.V., Barber, C. and Miller, K.R. (1992) Global Biodiversity Strategy: Guidelines for Action to Save, Study and use Earth's Biotic Wealth Sustainably and Equitably. New York: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Round, P.D. (1988) Resident Forest Birds in Thailand: their Conservation and Status. Cambridge: International Council for Bird Preservation Monograph No. 2.

  • Ryti, R. (1992) Effect of the focal taxon on the selection of nature reserves. Ecol. Appl. 2, 404–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sætersdal, M., Line, J.M. and Birks, H.J.B. (1993) How to maximize biological diversity in nature reserve selection: vascular plants and breeding birds in deciduous woodlands, western Norway. Biol. Conserv. 66, 131–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siebert, D.J. (1992) Tree statistics; trees and ‘confidence’; consensus trees; alternatives to parsimony; character weighting; character conflict and its resolution. In Cladistics. A Practical Course in Systematics (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries, I.J. Kitching, R.W. Scotland, D.J. Siebert and D.M. Williams) pp. 72–88. Systematics Association Publication No. 10. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takanishi (1988) First record of Acraea violae (Fabricius) in Thailand. Gekkan Mushi 209, 37. [In Japanese].

    Google Scholar 

  • Tams, W.H.T. (1924) List of the moths collected in Siam. J. nat. Hist. Soc. Siam 6, 229–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCED (1992) Rio declaration on environment and development.

  • Underhill, L.G. (1994) Optimal and suboptimal reserve selection algorithms. Biol. Conserv. 70, 85–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usher, M.B. (ed.) (1986) Wildlife Conservation Evaluation. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright, R.I. (1992) Species concepts. In Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's Living Resources (B. Groombridge) pp. 13–16. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright, R.I. (1994) Systematics and the conservation of biodiversity: global, national and local perspectives. In Perspectives on Insect Conservation (K.J. Gaston, T.R. New and M.J. Samways. eds) pp. 197–211. Andover: Intercept Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright, R.I. Identifying priorities for the conservation of biodiversity: systematic biological criteria within a socio-political framework. In Biodiversity: a biology of numbers and difference (K.J. Gaston, ed.) pp 309–38, 382–7. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

  • Vane-Wright, R.I., Humphries, C.J. and Williams, P.H. (1991) What to protect?-Systematics and the agony of choice. Biol. Conserv. 55, 235–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright, R.I., Smith, C.R. and Kitching, I.J. (1994) Systematic assessment of taxic diversity by summation. In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 309–26. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiesner, J. (1988) Die Gattung Therates Latr. und ihre Arten. 15. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Cicindelidae (Coleoptera). Mitt. münch. ent. Ges. 78, 5–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P.H. (1993) Choosing conservation areas: using taxonomy to measure more of biodiversity. In Manuscript Collection of International Symposium on Biodiversity and Conservation (KEI) (T.-Y. Moon, ed.) pp. 194–227. Seoul: Korean Entomological Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P.H. (1994) WORLDMAP Priority Areas for Biodiversity. Using Version 3. Privately distributed, London.

  • Williams, P.H. (in press) Biodiversity value and taxonomic relatedness. In The Genesis and Maintenance of Biological Diversity (M.E. Hochberg, J. Clobert and R. Barbault, eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Williams, P.H. and Gaston, K.J. (1994) Measuring more of biodiversity: can higher-taxon richness predict wholesale species richness? Biol. Conserv. 67, 211–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P.H., Gibbons, D.W., Margules, C.R., Rebelo, A.G., Humphries, C.J. and Pressey, R.L. (in press) Hotspots, rarity analysis and complementary areas-a comparison of three area-selection methods for conserving diversity using British breeding birds. Conserv. Biol.

  • Williams, P.H., Humphries, C.J. and Gaston, K.J. (1994) Centres of seed-plant diversity: the family way. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. (B) 256, 67–70.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biogeography and Conservation Laboratory, Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, SW7 5BD, London, UK

    Ian J. Kitching

Authors
  1. Ian J. Kitching
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kitching, I.J. Identifying complementary areas for conservation in Thailand: an example using owls, hawkmoths and tiger beetles. Biodivers Conserv 5, 841–858 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00054738

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00054738

Keywords

  • biodiversity
  • complementarity
  • conservation
  • Thailand

Search

Navigation