Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Emphasizing declining populations in the Living Planet Report

  • Matters Arising
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Matters Arising to this article was published on 26 January 2022

The Original Article was published on 18 November 2020

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: The effects of three different extreme population removal strategies to assess the sensitivity of overall growth rates.
Fig. 2: The probability of LPI populations’ sampling location to be inside protected areas for given species range overlap with protected areas.

Data availability

The Living Planet Database is available from the LPI website (https://livingplanetindex.org). The Protected Area maps are available at the World Database of Protected Area (https://www.protectedplanet.net). Species range size was obtained from the IUCN, BirdLife databases (https://www.iucnredlist.org; https://www.birdlife.org) and from Roll et al.10 for reptiles.

Code availability

The R codes associated with the study are provided in the Supplementary Information.

References

  1. Almond, R. E. A., Grooten, M. & Peterson, T. Living Planet Report 2020—Bending the Curve of Biodiversity Loss (World Wildlife Fund, 2020).

  2. Harrison, I. et al. The freshwater biodiversity crisis. Science 362, 1369–1369 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. He, F. et al. The global decline of freshwater megafauna. Global Change Biol. 25, 3883–3892 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pacoureau, N. et al. Half a century of global decline in oceanic sharks and rays. Nature 589, 567–571 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Leung, B. et al. Clustered versus catastrophic global vertebrate declines. Nature 588, 267–271 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Loh, J. et al. The Living Planet Index: using species population time series to track trends in biodiversity. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 360, 289–295 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Caughley, G. Directions in conservation biology. J. Anim. Ecol. 215–244 (1994).

  8. Watson, J. E., Dudley, N., Segan, D. B. & Hockings, M. The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature 515, 67–73 (2014).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gray, C. L. et al. Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nat. Commun. 7, 12306 (2016).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Roll, U. et al. The global distribution of tetrapods reveals a need for targeted reptile conservation. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1677–1682 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Israel Science Foundation (grant no. 406/19).

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Gopal Murali, Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira Caetano, Goni Barki

  2. These authors jointly supervised this work: Shai Meiri, Uri Roll

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jacob Blaustein Center for Scientific Cooperation, The Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet Ben-Gurion, Israel

    Gopal Murali & Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira Caetano

  2. Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology, The Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet Ben-Gurion, Israel

    Gopal Murali, Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira Caetano, Goni Barki & Uri Roll

  3. Albert Katz International School for Desert Studies, The Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet Ben-Gurion, Israel

    Goni Barki

  4. School of Zoology & The Steinhardt Museum of Natural History, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Shai Meiri

Authors
  1. Gopal Murali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira Caetano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Goni Barki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shai Meiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Uri Roll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All of the authors conceived the study. G.H.d.O.C. downloaded LPI data and conducted sensitivity analyses. G.H.d.O.C., G.B. and G.M. assembled and analysed the dataset. All of the authors drafted and substantially revised the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Uri Roll.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 The probability of LPI populations’ sampling location to be inside protected areas for given species range overlap with protected areas (by taxon).

Taxon was included as an interaction with the overlap area. The solid red line represents a generalized linear mixed model with the binomial fit and dashed lines 95% confidence interval. The black line represents the expected slope of 1 if populations were sampled at random in the species’ range. The histograms represent the proportion of overlap of species ranges with protected areas. Red, LPI locations found within protected areas; blue, LPI location found outside protected areas.

Extended Data Fig. 2 The probability of LPI populations’ sampling location to be inside protected areas for given species range overlap with protected areas (by realm–domain combination).

Realm-domain combination was included as interaction with overlap area. The solid red line represents a generalized linear mixed model with the binomial fit and dashed lines 95% confidence interval. The black line represents the expected slope of 1 if populations were sampled at random in the species’ range. The histograms represent the proportion of overlap of species ranges with protected areas. Red, LPI locations found within protected areas; blue, LPI location found outside protected areas.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Table 1 and Supplementary References, and the R code.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Murali, G., de Oliveira Caetano, G.H., Barki, G. et al. Emphasizing declining populations in the Living Planet Report. Nature 601, E20–E24 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04165-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04165-z

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation