Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Extinction risk assessments at the population and species level: implications for amphibian conservation

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Amphibian populations are declining worldwide and this is causing growing concern. High levels of population declines followed by the expansion of red lists are creating demands for effective strategies to maximize conservation efforts for amphibians. Ideally, integrated and comprehensive strategies should be based on complementary information of population and species extinction risk. Here we evaluate the congruence between amphibian extinction risk assessments at the population level (Declining Amphibian Database––DAPTF) and at species level (GAA––IUCN Red List). We used the Declining Amphibian Database––DAPTF that covers 967 time-series records of amphibian population declines assigned into four levels of declines. We assigned each of its corresponding species into GAA––IUCN red list status, discriminated each species developmental mode, and obtained their geographic range size as well. Extinction risk assessments at the population and species level do not fully coincide across geographic realms or countries. In Paleartic, Neartic and Indo-Malayan realms less than 25% of species with reported population declines are formally classified as threatened. In contrast, more than 60% of all species with reported population declines that occur in Australasia and the Neotropics are indeed threatened according to the GAA––IUCN Red List. Species with aquatic development presented proportionally higher extinction risks at both population and species level than those with terrestrial development, being this pattern more prominent at Australasia, Paleartic, and Neartic realms. Central American countries, Venezuela, Mexico and Australia presented the highest congruence between both population and species risk. We address that amphibian conservation strategies could be improved by using complementary information on time-series population trends and species threat. Whenever feasible, conservation assessments should also include life-history traits in order to improve its effectiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Alford RA, Richards SJ (1999) Global amphibian declines: a problem in applied ecology. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 30:133–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell KE, Donnelly MA (2006) Influence of forest fragmentation on community structure of frogs and lizards in northeastern Costa Rica. Conserv Biol 20:1750–1760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brandon K, Fonseca GAB, Rylands AB et al (2005) Special section: Brazilian conservation: challenges and opportunities. Conserv Biol 19:595–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Lomolino MV (1998) Biogeography, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Bustamante MR, Ron SR, Coloma LA (2005) Cambios en la diversidad en siete comunidades de anuros en los Andes de Ecuador. Biotropica 37:180–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceballos G, Ehrlich PR (2002) Mammal population losses and the extinction crisis. Science 296:904–907

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ceballos G, Ehrlich PR, Soberon J et al (2005) Global mammal conservation: what must we manage? Science 309:603–607

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Channell R, Lomolino MV (2000) Trajectories to extinction: spatial dynamics of the contraction of geographical ranges. J Biogeogr 27:169–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins JP, Storfer A (2003) Global amphibian declines: sorting the hypotheses. Divers Distrib 9:89–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DAPTF (2007) Declining amphibian database––DAD. Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force. http://www.open.ac.uk/daptf

  • Duellman WE, Trueb L (1986) Biology of amphibians. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eterovick PC, Carnaval ACOD, Borges-Nojosa DM et al (2005) Amphibian declines in Brazil: an overview. Biotropica 37:166–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gascon C, Lovejoy TE, Bierregaard RO, Malcolm JR, Stouffer PC, Vasconcelos HL, Laurance WF, Zimmerman B, Tocher M, Borges S (1999) Matrix habitat and species richness in tropical forest remnants. Biol Conserv 91:223–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad CFB, Prado CPA (2005) Reproductive modes in frogs and their unexpected diversity in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Bioscience 55:207–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hero JM, Morrison C (2004) Frog declines in Australia: global implications. Herpetol J 14:175–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Hero JM, Williams SE, Magnusson WE (2005) Ecological traits of declining amphibians in upland areas of eastern Australia. J Zool (Lond) 267:221–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2001) IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK

  • IUCN, Conservation International, NatureServe (2006) Global amphibian assessment. http://www.globalamphibians.org

  • Lamoreux JF, Akçakaya HR, Bennun L, Collar NJ, Boitani L, Brackett D, Bräutigam A, Brooks TM, da Fonseca GAB, Mittermeier RA, Rylands AB, Gärdenfors U, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace G, Stein BA, Stuart S (2003) Value of the IUCN Red List. Trends Ecol Evol 18:214–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamoreux JF, Morrison JC, Ricketts TH et al (2006) Global tests of biodiversity concordance and the importance of endemism. Nature 440:212–214

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lewinsohn TM, Prado PI (2005) How many species are there in Brazil? Conserv Biol 19:619–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lips KR, Green DE, Papendick R (2003a) Chytridiomycosis in wild frogs from southern Costa Rica. J Herpetol 37:215–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lips KR, Reeve JD, Witters LR (2003b) Ecological traits predicting amphibian population declines in Central America. Conserv Biol 17:1078–1088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loyola RD, Kubota U, Lewinsohn TM (2007) Endemic vertebrates are the most effective surrogates for identifying conservation priorities among Brazilian ecoregions. Divers Distrib 13:389–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG (1997) Megadiversity: earth’s biologically wealthiest nations. CEMEX, Mexico City

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Brooks TM et al (2003) Wilderness and biodiversity conservation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:10309–10313

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mittermeier RA, Robles Gil P, Hoffman M et al (2004) Hotspots revisited: earth’s biologically richest and most endangered terrestrial ecoregions. CEMEX, Mexico City

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson DM, Dinerstein E (2002) The Global 200: priority ecoregions for global conservation. Ann Miss Bot Garden 89:199–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimenta BVS, Haddad CFB, Nascimento LB et al (2005) Comment on “Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide”. Science 309:1999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pounds JA, Fogden MPL, Campbell JH (1999) Biological response to climate change on a tropical mountain. Nature 398:611–615

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pounds JA, Bustamante MR, Coloma LA et al (2006) Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by global warming. Nature 439:161–167

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues ASL, Pilgrim JD, Lamoreux JF et al (2006) The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 21:71–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Silva WG, Metzger JP, Simões SJ et al (2007) Relief influence on the spatial distribution of the Atlantic Forest cover at the Ibiúna Plateau. SP Braz J Biol 67:631–637

    Google Scholar 

  • Silvano RAM, Udvardy S, Ceroni M et al (2005) An ecological integrity assessment of a Brazilian Atlantic Forest watershed based on surveys of stream health and local farmers’ perceptions: implications for management. Ecol Econ 53:369–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stattersfield AJ, Crosby MJ, Long AJ, Wege DC (1998) Endemic bird areas of the world. BirdLife International, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart SN, Chanson JS, Cox NA et al (2004) Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 306:1783–1786

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tocher MD, Gascon C, Meyer J (2001) Community composition and breeding success of Amazonian frogs in continuous forest and matrix habitat aquatic sites. In: Bierregaard RO, Gascon C, Lovejoy TE, Mesquita RCG (eds) Lessons from Amazonia: the ecology and conservation of a fragmented forest. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp 235–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbina-Cardona JN, Olivares-Perez M, Reynoso VH (2006) Herpetofauna diversity and microenvironment correlates across a pasture-edge-interior ecotone in tropical rainforest fragments in the Los Tuxtlas Biosphere Reserve of Veracruz, Mexico. Biol Conserv 132:61–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viana VM, Tabanez AAJ, Batista JL (1997) Restoration and management of fragmented landscapes. In: Laurance WF, Bierregaard RO (eds) Tropical forest remnants: ecology, management and conservation of fragmented communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Whiles MR, Lips KR, Pringle CM et al (2006) The effects of amphibian population declines on the structure and function of Neotropical stream ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 4:27–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to T. Halliday, J. Kauffman (Declining Amphibian Populations Task Force—DAPFT), S. Stuart and J. Chanson (Global Amphibian Assessment) for providing an early version of their databases. We thank T. Halliday, J. Kauffman, S. Stuart, J. Chanson, C. R. Fonseca, J. A. F. Diniz-Filho, P. C. Eterovick, S. Pawar, and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments on the manuscript. This study was carried out in the UNICAMP Graduate Program of Ecology. Carlos Guilherme Becker and Rafael Dias Loyola were respectively supported by FAPESP (04/13132-3) and CNPq (140267/2005-0).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Zoologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, P.O. Box 6109, 13083-970, Campinas, SP, Brazil

    Carlos Guilherme Becker & Rafael Dias Loyola

Authors
  1. Carlos Guilherme Becker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rafael Dias Loyola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rafael Dias Loyola.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Becker, C.G., Loyola, R.D. Extinction risk assessments at the population and species level: implications for amphibian conservation. Biodivers Conserv 17, 2297–2304 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9298-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9298-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation