Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Flexibility and the use of indicator taxa in the selection of sites for nature reserves

  • Published:
Biodiversity & Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

'Minimum' sets of complementary areas represent all species in a region a given number of times. In recent years, conservation assessments have centred around the evaluation of these 'minimum' sets. Previous research shows little overlap between 'minimum' sets and existing nature reserves and between 'minimum' sets for different taxonomic groups. The latter has been used as an argument to discount the use of indicator taxa in the selection of sites for nature reserves. However, these 'minimum' set analyses have only considered a single set for each taxonomic group when there are, in fact, a large number of equally valid 'minimum' sets. We present new methods for evaluating all of these alternative 'minimum' sets. We demonstrate that if all of the sets are evaluated, significantly higher levels of overlap are found between 'minimum' sets and nature reserves, and pairs of 'minimum' sets for different taxonomic groups. Furthermore, significantly higher proportions of species from non-target taxonomic groups are recorded in the 'minimum' sets of target groups. Our results suggest that previous conservation assessments using 'minimum' sets may have been unduly pessimistic.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ando A,Camm J,Polasky S andSolow A (1998) Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation. Science 279: 2126-2128

    Google Scholar 

  • Balmford A (1998) On hotspots and the use of indicators for reserve selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13: 409

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkham J andMacGuire F (1990) The heat is on. Natural World Winter 1990: 24-28

    Google Scholar 

  • Branch WR,Benn GA andLombard AT (1995) The tortoises (Testudinidae) and terrapins (Pelomedusidae) of southern Africa: their diversity, distribution and conservation. South African Journal of Zoology 30: 91-102

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullock JA (1991) The distribution of a taxon is that of its students and the diversity of a site is a matter of serendipity? Antenna 15: 6-7

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowling RM,Pressey RL,Lombard AT,Desmet PG andEllis AG (1999) From representation to persistence: requirements for a sustainable system of conservation areas in the species-rich mediterraneanclimate desert of southern Africa. Diversity and Distributions 5: 1-21

    Google Scholar 

  • Csuti B,Polasky S,Williams PH,Pressey RL,Camm JD,Kershaw M,Kiester AR,Downs B,Hamilton R,Huso M andSahr K (1997) A comparison of reserve selection algorithms using data on terrestrial vertebrates in Oregon. Biological Conservation 80: 83-97

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson AP,Rodriguez JP,Roberts WM andWilcove DS (1997) Geographic distribution of endangered species in the United States. Science 275: 550-553

    Google Scholar 

  • Freitag S,Hobson C,Biggs HC andvan Jaarsveld AS (1998) Testing for potential survey bias: the effects of roads, urban areas and nature reserves on a southern African mammal data set. Animal Conservation 1: 119-127

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ (1996) Spatial covariance in the species richness of higher taxa. In: Hochberg M,Clobert ME andBarbault R (eds) The Genesis and Maintenance of Biological Diversity, pp 221-242. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons DW,Reid JB andChapman RA (1993) The new atlas of breeding birds in Britain and Ireland: 1988-1991. T and AD Poyser, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Haes ECM andHarding PT (1997) Atlas of Grasshoppers, Crickets and Allied Insects in Britain and Ireland. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding PT (1990) National species distribution surveys. In: Goldsmith B (ed) Monitoring for Conservation and Ecology, pp 133-154. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding PT andSheail J (1990) The biological records centre: a pioneer in data gathering and retrieval. In: Harding PT (ed) Biological Recording of Changes in British Wildlife, pp 5-20. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath J,Pollard E andThomas JA (1984) Atlas of Butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Viking, Harmondsworth

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard PC,Viskanic P,Davenport TRB,Kigenyi FW,Baltzer M,Dickinson CJ,Lwanga JS,Matthews RA andBalmford A (1998) Complementarity and the use of indicator groups for reserve selection in Uganda. Nature 394: 472-475

    Google Scholar 

  • Kershaw M,Williams PH andMace GC (1994) Conservation of Afrotropical antelopes: consequences and efficiency of using different site selection methods and diversity criteria. Biodiversity and Conservation 3: 354-372

    Google Scholar 

  • Lack P (1986) The Atlas of Wintering Birds in Britain and Ireland. T and AD Poyser, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawton JH,Bignell DE,Bolton B,Bloemers GF,Eggleton P,Hammond PM,Hodda M,Holt RD,Larsen TB,Mawdsley NA,Stork NE,Srivastava DS andWatt AD (1998) Biodiversity inventories, indicator taxa and effects of habitat modification in tropical forest. Nature 391: 72-76

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard AT (1995) The problems with multi-species conservation: do hotspots, ideal reserves and existing reserves coincide? South African Journal of Zoology 30: 145-163

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard AT,Cowling RM,Pressey RL andMustart PJ (1997) Reserve selection in a species-rich and fragmented landscape on the Agulhas Plain, South Africa. Conservation Biology 11: 1101-1116

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard AT,Hilton-Taylor C,Rebelo AG,Pressey RL andCowling RM (1999) Reserve selection in the Succulent Karoo, South Africa: coping with high compositional turnover. Plant Ecology 142: 35-55

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard AT,Nicholls AO andAugust PV (1995) Where should nature reserves be located in South Africa? A snake's perspective. Conservation Biology 9: 363-372

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomolino MV (1994) An evaluation of alternative strategies for building networks of nature reserves. Biological Conservation 69: 243-249

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules CR,Nicholls AO andPressey RL (1988) Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity. Biological Conservation 43: 63-76

    Google Scholar 

  • Merritt R,Moore NW andEversham BC (1996) Atlas of the Dragonflies of Britain and Ireland. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mugo DN,Lombard AT,Bronner GN,Gelderblom CM andBenn GA (1995) Distribution and protection of endemic or threatened rodents, lagomorphs and macrosceledids in South Africa. South African Journal of Zoology 30: 115-126

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls AO andMargules CR (1993) An upgraded reserve selection algorithm. Biological Conservation 64: 165-169

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimm SL andLawton JH (1998) Planning for biodiversity. Science 279: 2068-2069

    Google Scholar 

  • Possingham H,Day J,Goldfinch M andSalzborn F (1993) The mathematics of designing a network of protected areas for conservation. In: Sutton DJ,Pearce CEM andCousins EA (eds) Decision Sciences: Tools for Today, pp 536-545. University of Adelaide

  • Prendergast JR (1994) Biodiversity hotspots in Britain. PhD Thesis, Imperial College, University of London

  • Prendergast JR andEversham BC (1997) Species richness covariance in higher taxa: empirical tests of the biodiversity indicator concept. Ecography 20: 210-216

    Google Scholar 

  • Prendergast JR,Quinn RM,Lawton JH,Eversham BC andGibbons DW (1993a) Rare species, the coincidence of diversity hotspots and conservation strategies. Nature 365: 335-337

    Google Scholar 

  • Prendergast JR,Wood SN,Lawton JH andEversham BC (1993b) Correcting for variation in recording effort in analyses of diversity hotspots. Biodiversity Letters 1: 39-53

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL (1998) Algorithms, politics and timber: an example of the role of science in a public, political negotiation process over new conservation areas in production forests. In: Wills R andHobbs R (eds) Ecology for Everyone: Communicating Ecology to Scientists, the Public and the Politicians, pp 73-87. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL,Humphries CJ,Margules CR,Vane-Wright RI andWilliams PH (1993) Beyond opportunism: key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 124-128

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL,Johnson IR andWilson PD (1994) Shades of irreplaceability: towards a measure of the contribution of sites to a reservation goal. Biodiversity and Conservation 3: 242-262

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL,Possingham HP andDay JR (1997) Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves. Biological Conservation 80: 207-219

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL,Possingham HP andMargules CR (1996) Optimality in reserve selection algorithms: when does it matter and how much? Biological Conservation 76: 259-267

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston CD andCroft JM (1997) Aquatic Plants in Britain and Ireland. Harley Books, Colchester

    Google Scholar 

  • Rich TCG andWoodruff ER (1992) Recording bias in botanical surveys. Watsonia 19: 73-95

    Google Scholar 

  • Saetersdal M,Line JM andBirks HJB (1993) How to maximize biological diversity in nature reserve selection: vascular plants and breeding birds in deciduous woodlands, western Norway. Biological Conservation 66: 131-138

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott JM,Davis F,Csuti B,Noss R,Butterfield B,Groves C,Anderson H,Caicco S,D'Erchia F,Edwards TC,Ulliman J andWright RG (1993) Gap Analysis: a geographic approach to protection of biological diversity. Wildlife Monographs 123: 1-41

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR andRohlf FJ (1995) Biometry: the Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, 3rd edn. WH Freeman and Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Trinder-Smith TH,Lombard AT andPicker MD (1996) Reserve scenarios for the Cape Peninsula: high-, middle-and low-road options for conserving the remaining biodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation 5: 649-669

    Google Scholar 

  • Underhill LG (1994) Optimal and suboptimal reserve selection algorithms. Biological Conservation 70: 85-87

    Google Scholar 

  • van Jaarsveld AS,Freitag S,Chown SL,Muller C,Koch S,Hull H,Bellamy C,Krüger M,Endrödy-Younga S,Mansell MW andScholtz CH (1998) Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategies. Science 279: 2106-2108

    Google Scholar 

  • Virolainen KM,Virola T,Suhonen J,Kuitunen M,Lammi A andSiikamäki P (1999) Selecting networks of nature reserves: methods do affect the long-term outcome. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 266: 1141-1146

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P,Burgess N andRahbek C (1999) Assessing large 'flagship' species for representing the diversity of sub-Saharan mammals, using hotspots of total richness, hotspots of endemism, and hotspots of complementary richness. In: Entwistle A andDunstone N (eds) Has the Panda Had its Day? Future Priorities for the Conservation of Mammalian Biodiversity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P,Gibbons D,Margules C,Rebelo A,Humphries C andPressey R (1996a) A comparison of richness hotspots, rarity hotspots, and complementary areas for conserving diversity of British birds. Conservation Biology 10: 155-174

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams PH (1998) WORLDMAP 4 WINDOWS: software and help document 4.19 (http:// www.nhm.ac.uk/science/projects/worldmap/)

  • Williams PH (1999) Key sites for conservation: area-selection methods for biodiversity. In: Mace GM,Balmford A andGinsberg JR (eds) Conservation in a Changing World: Integrating Processes into Priorities for Action, pp 211-249. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams PH andGaston KJ (1998) Biodiversity indicators: graphical techniques, smoothing and searching for what makes relationships work. Ecography 21: 551-560

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams PH,Prance GT,Humphries CJ andEdwards KS (1996b) Promise and problems in applying quantitative complementary areas for representing the diversity of some neotropical plants (families Dichapetalaceae, Lecythidaceae, Caryocaraceae, Chrysobalanaceae and Proteaceae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 58: 125-157

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis CK,Lombard AT,Cowling RM,Heydenrych BJ andBurgers CJ (1996) Reserve systems for limestone endemic flora of the Cape lowland fynbos: iterative versus linear programming. Biological Conservation 77: 53-62

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Richard D. Gregory

    Present address: NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE17 2LS, UK

  2. Justin M.J. Travis

    Present address: Department of Biology, Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7PY, UK

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NERC Centre for Population Biology, Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7PY, UK

    Paul Hopkinson

  2. NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE17 2LS, UK

    Paul Hopkinson & Mark G. Telfer

  3. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire, SG19 2DL, UK

    Julianne Evans

  4. British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk, IP24 2PU, UK

    Richard D. Gregory

  5. Biogeography and Conservation Laboratory, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, UK

    Paul H. Williams

Authors
  1. Paul Hopkinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Justin M.J. Travis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Julianne Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Richard D. Gregory
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mark G. Telfer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Paul H. Williams
    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

Hopkinson, P., Travis, J.M., Evans, J. et al. Flexibility and the use of indicator taxa in the selection of sites for nature reserves. Biodiversity and Conservation 10, 271–285 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008959829585

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008959829585

Search

Navigation