湖北万朝山自然保护区珍稀濒危植物优先保护定量研究

该研究采用样线法和样地法,对湖北万朝山自然保护区的珍稀濒危保护植物资源进行了调查,并运用濒危系数、遗传价值系数和物种价值系数,计算出综合评价值,对其优先保护顺序进行了定量分析。结果表明:保护区内共有珍稀濒危保护植物47种,隶属于34科44属;根据综合评价值对珍稀濒危保护植物物种进行优先保护评价排序,其中Ⅰ级优先保护物种有9种,Ⅱ级优先保护物种有23种,Ⅲ级优先保护物种有12种,Ⅳ级优先保护有物种3种。通过分析珍稀濒危保护植物分布特征,发现该保护区珍稀濒危植物分布相对集中,并且在900~1 600 m海拔段,珍稀濒危保护植物物种和数量分布最多。该研究结果更加真实有效地为该保护区管理部门制定该地区珍稀濒危植物保护计划提供了科学依据,使其更加高效有力地指导本保护区的保护工作。     

海南岛生物多样性保护优先区评价与系统保护规划

选择海南岛140个濒危物种为指示物种,在物种栖息地评价的基础上,利用系统保护规划工具MARXAN模型进行迭代运算,提出了海南岛生物多样性保护优先区域,并对保护优先区进行评价.结果表明:海南岛保护优先区面积5383.7km2,占海南岛陆地面积的15.6%,集中分布于鹦哥岭、尖峰岭、五指山等林区和北部湿地;在保护优先区中,11个I级指示物种栖息地的保护比例均超过各自栖息地总面积的65%.通过对保护优先区与现有自然保护区的空缺分析,建议扩充尖峰岭保护区群、鹦哥岭-黎母山保护区群、五指山-吊罗山保护区群;新建抱龙林场-林鼻岭-福万岭保护体系;在海南岛北部建立以水源保护为主,同时兼顾珍稀物种保护的水源地保护带.     

基于ZONATION的岷山山系多物种保护规划

空间布局不尽合理是我国的自然保护区发展面临的问题之一,优化现有的自然保护区体系是在资源有限的情况下实现自然保护区的保护效益最大化的最佳途径。以岷山地区为主要研究区域,以25种珍稀濒危物种为主要研究对象,通过MAXENT与ZONATION模型模拟,鉴别出岷山地区珍稀濒危物种保护优先区,并提出了自然保护区空间选址的优化方案。研究结果表明,(1)在物种出现点记录较少的情况下,MAXENT模型依然能够比较准确地预测出物种的分布状况;(2)目前建立的保护区对25个物种的平均保护比例为51.8%;(3)通过ZONATION鉴定的优先区总面积为19958.7 km~2,岷山地区现有的29个自然保护区只保护了目标优先区的47.1%,九寨沟中部与南部,平武北部,平武与北川的交界处,北川西北部等地都存在保护空缺。建议在保护空缺的6个地方新建或扩建自然保护区,并在规划时考虑这些区域内部的优先次序。新提出的保护体系能将物种栖息地的保护比例提高至77.9%。研究结果对于岷山及全国其他生物多样性保护关键地区保护体系的规划都具有重要的借鉴意义。     

海洋生物多样性保护优先区域的确定

为了有效利用资源和资金,合理保护海洋生物多样性,海洋生物多样性保护优先区域的确定成为目前保护生物学领域的热点之一.本文首先探讨了生物多样性保护优先区域的定义和内涵,认为海洋生物多样性保护优先区域是指生物多样性丰富、物种特有化程度高、珍稀濒危物种分布集中、具有重要生态功能和过程的海洋区域.其次对保护优先区域确定的内容和方法进行了总结,主要包括单元区划、指标体系的构建及保护优先区域评估3个方面.继而根据我国海洋生物多样性现状提出保护优先区域确定的基本思路,即在海洋生物地理分区的基础上,根据物种和生境的生物多样性指标确定保护优先区域.最后针对存在问题提出建议,包括运用生物地理学方法进行单元区划、基于物种和生态系统的方法构建生物学指标以及信息网络数据库的构建等.     

湖北省优先保护森林生态系统的分布及其保护空缺分析

基于湖北省生物多样性数据调查,以湖北省优势生态系统、特殊生态系统、特有生态系统、物种丰富度高的生态系统和特殊生境等5项指标作为评价准则,在咨询专家的基础上,借助GIS分析工具,综合分析了湖北省森林生态系统类型及分布特点。结果表明,湖北省共有261类森林生态系统类型(以群系为单位),其中有75类需要优先保护,并据此提出了湖北省优先保护森林生态系统的优先保护地区;另外,通过综合分析湖北省自然保护区的分布特点,得出湖北省优先保护森林生态系统目前所存在的保护空缺。优先保护地区可作为湖北省森林生态系统优先保护的重点地区,而空缺分析研究结果对于合理布局湖北省森林生态系统自然保护区、提高湖北省生物多样性保护的有效性具有重要参考价值。     

北京山地植物多样性优先保护地区评价

为促进北京市植物多样性的保护及自然保护区的合理建设与布局,以2001～2006年间在北京市13个自然保护区、森林公园或者风景名胜区内实地调查的1168个样地数据为基础,根据在北京市分布的25种珍稀濒危植物种,以及丰富度高的群落类型、面积较大的天然森林群落类型和具有重要生态功能的森林群落的评定结果,采用等级赋值的方法,利用地理信息系统软件从植物物种和植物群落方面综合评定了北京市山地植物多样性的优先保护地区.评定出综合优先保护地区总面积为184474.64hm2,约占市国土面积的11.25%,其中一级优先保护地区总面积24850.50hm2,二级优先保护地区总面积78606 60hm2,三级优先保护地区总面积81017.54hm2.优先保护地区主要分布于怀柔区、延庆县、房山区和密云县等远郊区县,结合北京市自然保护区分布现状,提出了北京市自然保护区建设优化方案.     

中国陆地优先保护生态系统分析

明确我国优先保护生态系统类型与地区对于提高我国生物多样性的保护效率以及全面、合理的规划我国自然保护区具有重要意义。以《中国植被》、《中国湿地》和《中国植被图集》为主要数据源,以生态区的优势生态系统类型、反映了特殊的气候地理与土壤特征、只在中国分布、物种丰富度高、特殊生境等5项指标为评价准则,在专家问卷调查的基础上,借助地理信息系统软件Areview,综合分析了陆地生态系统的分布特点,并提出了我国的优先保护生态系统类型及其集中分布区。结果表明,我国683类陆地生态系统中有优先保护生态系统类型有135类,其中森林生态系统75类,湿地生态系统27类,灌丛生态系统8类,草原生态系统12类,草甸生态系统6类,荒漠生态系统7类。根据优先保护生态系统的分布特点,选取包括横断山地区在内的18个优先保护生态系统的集中分布区域,这些地区应该是生态系统保护的重点地区。这一研究结果对于合理布局我国自然保护区、提高我国生物多样性保护的有效性具有重要参考价值。     

湖北省珍稀濒危植物现状及其就地保护

本文论述了湖北省珍稀濒危植物的数量、分布及就地保护现状,并提出了保护的建议和措施。经调查研究,湖北省天然分布有62种珍稀濒危植物,占全国同类总数的15.97％;鄂西南和鄂西北为珍稀濒危植物的分布中心; 全省22个野生植物和森林生态系统自然保护区（点）现已就地保护55种,占总数的88.7％;在评价就地保护现状的基础上,提出了合理调整和布局自然保护区、大力发展自然保护小区、自然保护点和禁伐区以及将就地保护和其它手段相结合等建议。     

江豚有湖

<正>完善生物多样性保护制度。加强生物多样性保护优先区域监管,优化自然保护区空间布局,完善自然保护区管理制度和分级分类管理体系。加强长江江豚、候鸟及水生生物资源保护,建立珍稀濒危物种种群恢复机制。     

厦门市重点保护植物空间优先保护格局研究

生物多样性保护对维持城市生态系统功能具有重要意义。以39种厦门市重点保护植物为对象,通过物种分布模型MaxENT获得物种潜在分布栅格图,利用空间保护优先化定量工具Zonation软件识别理论上既适宜重点保护植物生存又能够保证景观连通性的区域,获得本地重点保护植物景观保护等级。根据2020年全球生物多样性目标,将景观保护等级最高的17%区域视为多物种空间优先保护区,结合Zonation模型生成的随景观丧失物种加权灭绝风险曲线,将保护等级最高的8%区域划为一级保护区,保护等级在8%-17%范围内的区域划为二级保护区。利用MaxENT模型中的jackknife刀切法发现海拔是对本地重点保护植物分布影响最大的环境因子,优先保护区集中分布于海拔较低的海岸带区域。将优先保护区与自然保护地建设现状、厦门市生态功能区规划、土地利用规划、城市总体规划对比发现厦门市岛外西部、北部的优先保护区得到了较好保护;岛外的西南部及东南部、岛内的东部及南部海岸带的优先保护区被建设用地大规模占用,已纳入自然保护地范围的区域较少,存在大量的海岸带优先保护区保护空缺;岛外东南部的部分优先保护区虽未被占用,但规划中属发展备用地,缺乏生态保护。为避免优先保护区面积的进一步萎缩,应重点关注海岸带区域优先保护区的生态保护,将目前属于发展备用地的优先保护区转划为生态留白空间,针对一级、二级优先保护区分别实施刚性和弹性的生态保育措施,在保护生物多样性的同时,严控对海岸带区域优先保护区的进一步开发利用,协调优先保护区内保护与开发利用间的关系。     

Exclusion of agricultural lands in spatial conservation prioritization strategies: consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem service representation

Agroecosystems have traditionally been considered incompatible with biological conservation goals, and often been excluded from spatial conservation prioritization strategies. The consequences for the representativeness of identified priority areas have been little explored. Here, we evaluate these for biodiversity and carbon storage representation when agricultural land areas are excluded from a spatial prioritization strategy for South America. Comparing different prioritization approaches, we also assess how the spatial overlap of priority areas changes. The exclusion of agricultural lands was detrimental to biodiversity representation, indicating that priority areas for agricultural production overlap with areas of relatively high occurrence of species. By contrast, exclusion of agricultural lands benefits representation of carbon storage within priority areas, as lands of high value for agriculture and carbon storage overlap little. When agricultural lands were included and equally weighted with biodiversity and carbon storage, a balanced representation resulted. Our findings suggest that with appropriate management, South American agroecosystems can significantly contribute to biodiversity conservation.     

Life After Logging: Strategic Withdrawal from the Garden of Eden or Tactical Error for Wilderness Conservation?

Conservation management has undergone a dramatic paradigm shift from the strong ‘wilderness conservation’ ethos of the 1980s and 1990s to the ‘biodiversity on degraded lands’ ethos of recent years. Most conservation biologists now consider that wilderness conservation alone is no longer sufficient to conserve biodiversity, and conservation strategies must also demand more effective protection for biodiversity on degraded lands. Recognition of this shifting paradigm in biodiversity conservation has led to an overt change in tone of recent studies, emphasizing relatively modest effects of human disturbance, and high biodiversity values on some degraded lands. A case in point is a series of studies from Southeast Asia reporting relatively modest impacts of logging on biodiversity, with the majority of species (75%) persisting after repeated intensive logging. This is a marked shift in conservation message after >30 yrs of research showing substantial adverse effects of logging on biodiversity, and raises serious questions about the appropriate ways to qualify the conflicting messages that ‘human impact degrades biodiversity’ yet ‘degraded habitats have high biodiversity value.’ Clearly logging is the lesser of two land‐use evils compared with conversion to intensive cattle pastures, crop fields or oil palm plantations, but there is a real risk that overselling the ‘biodiversity on degraded lands’ paradigm might end up being a double‐edged sword for conservation management. After all, if >75 percent of species are resilient to repeated logging, why bother trying to preserve the few remaining wilderness areas from being logged themselves? It remains to be seen whether this new message of ‘weak’ effects of logging on biodiversity will serve its strategic purpose of conserving biodiversity on degraded lands, or simply devalue the last vestiges of wild nature.     

云南被子植物菊类分支的系统发育多样性及其分布格局

全球气候变化与人为活动等因素导致的生物多样性丧失,引起了全球各界对生物多样性保护的高度关注。传统生物多样性保护主要对物种、特有种、受威胁物种的种类组成及其分布模式开展研究,忽视了进化历史在生物多样性保护中的作用。云南是全球生物多样性热点地区的交汇区,生物多样性的保护历来受到广泛关注,为了更好地探讨云南生物多样性的保护措施,该研究以云南被子植物菊类分支物种为研究对象,基于物种间的演化关系,结合其地理分布,从进化历史的角度探讨物种、特有种、受威胁物种的种类组成及系统发育组成的分布格局,并整合自然保护地的空间分布,识别生物多样性的重点保护区域。结果表明:云南被子植物菊类分支的物种、特有种及受威胁物种的物种密度与系统发育多样性均显著正相关; 通过零模型分析发现,由南向北标准化系统发育多样性逐渐降低; 云南南部、东南部、西北部是云南被子植物菊类分支的重点保护区域,加强这些区域的保护,将最大化地保护生物多样性的进化历史和进化潜能。由此可见,融合进化历史信息的植物多样性格局分析不仅有助于更加深入地理解植物多样性的形成与演变,也为生物多样性保护策略的制定提供更多的思路。     

Governance factors in the identification of global conservation priorities for mammals

Global conservation priorities have often been identified based on the combination of species richness and threat information. With the development of the field of systematic conservation planning, more attention has been given to conservation costs. This leads to prioritizing developing countries, where costs are generally low and biodiversity is high. But many of these countries have poor governance, which may result in ineffective conservation or in larger costs than initially expected. We explore how the consideration of governance affects the selection of global conservation priorities for the world's mammals in a complementarity-based conservation prioritization. We use data on Control of Corruption (Worldwide Governance Indicators project) as an indicator of governance effectiveness, and gross domestic product per capita as an indicator of cost. We show that, while core areas with high levels of endemism are always selected as important regardless of governance and cost values, there are clear regional differences in selected sites when biodiversity, cost or governance are taken into account separately. Overall, the analysis supports the concentration of conservation efforts in most of the regions generally considered of high priority, but stresses the need for different conservation approaches in different continents owing to spatial patterns of governance and economic development.     

Biodiversity hotspots: hot for what?

In complex areas of international policy, such as biodiversity conservation, there is a risk that well-promoted strategies will be received by decision makers as a cure-all. The U.S.-based Conservation International is promoting biodiversity hotspots as a 'silver bullet' strategy for conserving most species for least cost. We assess the degree to which this goal is compatible with four social values that characterize the conservation movement. We find that biodiversity hotspots provide only a partial response because conservation does not treat all species as equal. We argue that explicit recognition of such values is fundamental to a structured debate contributing to the development of a common strategy for biodiversity conservation.     

如何在北京充分实现受胁鸟类栖息地保护?

实现有效生物多样性保护的关键在于提升生物多样性丰富的人口密集区的保护效率。北京人口密集且生物多样性丰富, 存在3类具有生态保护功能的区划——自然保护区、生态保护红线和限制建设线。上述区域可视为生态保护潜力区。本文以在北京有分布的30种受胁鸟类为主要对象, 探讨现有生态保护潜力区对这些物种栖息地的覆盖程度, 并对如何改善上述受胁鸟类栖息地的保护状况进行了建议。根据物种对栖息地的选择, 基于高分辨率卫星解译的土地利用类型图, 利用最大熵模型(MaxEnt)掩膜栖息地分布图, 得到各受胁鸟类的预测空间分布。叠加这些分布获得北京受胁鸟类丰富度分布格局并进行验证。依据物种丰富度高低, 将受胁鸟类栖息地划分为一至四级(最重要的栖息地是一级栖息地, 以此类推)。同时, 依据地表覆盖类型和人类活动强度高低将北京市域划分为城市建成区、乡村生境区和自然生境区。分别计算3类保护潜力区对上述3类区域以及四级栖息地的覆盖面积比例。结果表明: (1) 95.64%的一级关键栖息地和86.32%的二级关键栖息地分布在乡村生境区, 但仅有0.69%和15.15%的乡村生境区分别被自然保护区和生态保护红线覆盖; (2)未受到自然保护区和生态保护红线覆盖的一、二级关键栖息地主要为水域和沼泽地等湿地、高覆盖度草地和部分耕地, 以及含有较高比例水体的大型城市绿地。基于以上结果, 我们建议至少在一定区域内试行如下保护措施: (1)严格保护湿地及其周边的高覆盖度草地, 确保面积不减少; (2)维持基本农田规模和粮食种植模式; (3)将乡村生境区位于河道附近的水域、沼泽地、高覆盖草地和灌木林纳入生态保护红线范围; (4)在公园绿地中划定生物多样性保护区; (5)优化平原地区林地结构。以上措施将使北京的受胁鸟类栖息地得到更好保护, 为中国东部人口密集区生物多样性保护提供示范。     

Do riparian forest strips in modified forest landscapes aid in conserving bat diversity?

Agricultural practices lead to losses of natural resources and biodiversity. Maintaining forests alongside streams (riparian forest strips) has been used as a mechanism to minimize the impact of clearing for agriculture on biodiversity. To test the contribution of riparian forest strips to conserve biodiversity in production landscapes, we selected bats as a biodiversity model system and examined two dimensions of diversity: taxonomic and functional. We compared bat diversity and composition in forest, with and without stream habitat, and in narrow forest riparian strips surrounded by areas cleared for agriculture. We tested the hypothesis that riparian forest strips provide potential conservation value by providing habitat and serving as movement corridors for forest bat species. Riparian forest strips maintained 75% of the bat species registered in forested habitats. We found assemblage in sites with riparian forest strips were dominated by a few species with high abundance and included several species with low abundance. Bat species assemblage was more similar between sites with streams than between those sites to forests without stream habitat. These results highlight the importance of stream habitat in predicting presence of bat species. We registered similar number of guilds between forest sites and riparian forest strips sites. Relative to matrix habitats, stream and edge habitats in riparian forest strips sites were functionally more diverse, supporting our hypothesis about the potential conservation value of riparian forest strips. Results from this study suggest that maintaining riparian forest strips within cleared areas for agricultural areas helps conserve the taxonomic and functional diversity of bats. Also, it provides basic data to evaluate the efficacy of maintaining these landscape features for mitigating impacts of agricultural development on biodiversity. However, we caution that riparian forest strips alone are not sufficient for biodiversity maintenance; their value depends on maintenance of larger forest areas in their vicinity.     

Protected areas and prime hoverfly areas: Safe haven for hoverflies or not?

The efficiency of protected areas (PAs) has often been questioned due to global decline of biodiversity. Invertebrates, especially insects, have been historically underrepresented in conservation studies. Our study focuses on hoverflies, an important group of insect pollinators and proven to be good bioindicators. Research was focused in Serbia, one of Europe's hotspots of hoverfly diversity, with a long tradition of hoverfly research, which provided sufficient information for achieving our aims: identifying areas of high hoverfly diversity, evaluating the efficiency of PAs and prime hoverfly areas (PHAs) in the conservation of hoverflies, determining how well they cover the distribution of hoverfly species, especially those of conservation concern, and testing the importance of the size of the area for conservation of hoverfly diversity. We applied weighting of the species to help stress the importance of species of conservation concern. The results indicated that PHAs cover the areas with high hoverfly diversity better than PA networks, especially when it comes to species of conservation concern. Generalized linear model results showed that the area size was a significant predictor of number of species in both PA and PHA. This indicates that area size is key when designating new areas important for conservation, but there are also other factors that need to be taken into account, such as habitat quality or suitability. Studies like this are useful in aiding designation of new areas important for conservation of certain species and in identifying sampling gaps, which could potentially aim future research in that direction.     

Do hotspots fall within protected areas? A Geographic Approach to Planning analysis of regional freshwater biodiversity

相似文献   

Funding begets biodiversity

Aim Effective conservation of biodiversity relies on an unbiased knowledge of its distribution. Conservation priority assessments are typically based on the levels of species richness, endemism and threat. Areas identified as important receive the majority of conservation investments, often facilitating further research that results in more species discoveries. Here, we test whether there is circularity between funding and perceived biodiversity, which may reinforce the conservation status of areas already perceived to be important while other areas with less initial funding may remain overlooked. Location Eastern Arc Mountains, Tanzania. Methods We analysed time series data (1980–2007) of funding (n = 134 projects) and plant species records (n = 75,631) from a newly compiled database. Perceived plant diversity, over three decades, is regressed against funding and environmental factors, and variances decomposed in partial regressions. Cross‐correlations are used to assess whether perceived biodiversity drives funding or vice versa. Results Funding explained 65% of variation in perceived biodiversity patterns – six times more variation than accounted for by 34 candidate environmental factors. Cross‐correlation analysis showed that funding is likely to be driving conservation priorities and not vice versa. It was also apparent that investment itself may trigger further investments as a result of reduced start‐up costs for new projects in areas where infrastructure already exists. It is therefore difficult to establish whether funding, perceived biodiversity, or both drive further funding. However, in all cases, the results suggest that regional assessments of biodiversity conservation importance may be biased by investment. Funding effects might also confound studies on mechanisms of species richness patterns. Main conclusions Continued biodiversity loss commands urgent conservation action even if our knowledge of its whereabouts is incomplete; however, by concentrating inventory funds in areas already perceived as important in terms of biodiversity and/or where start‐up costs are lower, we risk losing other areas of underestimated or unknown value.