Scale‐dependent complementarity of climatic velocity and environmental diversity for identifying priority areas for conservation under climate change

As most regions of the earth transition to altered climatic conditions, new methods are needed to identify refugia and other areas whose conservation would facilitate persistence of biodiversity under climate change. We compared several common approaches to conservation planning focused on climate resilience over a broad range of ecological settings across North America and evaluated how commonalities in the priority areas identified by different methods varied with regional context and spatial scale. Our results indicate that priority areas based on different environmental diversity metrics differed substantially from each other and from priorities based on spatiotemporal metrics such as climatic velocity. Refugia identified by diversity or velocity metrics were not strongly associated with the current protected area system, suggesting the need for additional conservation measures including protection of refugia. Despite the inherent uncertainties in predicting future climate, we found that variation among climatic velocities derived from different general circulation models and emissions pathways was less than the variation among the suite of environmental diversity metrics. To address uncertainty created by this variation, planners can combine priorities identified by alternative metrics at a single resolution and downweight areas of high variation between metrics. Alternately, coarse‐resolution velocity metrics can be combined with fine‐resolution diversity metrics in order to leverage the respective strengths of the two groups of metrics as tools for identification of potential macro‐ and microrefugia that in combination maximize both transient and long‐term resilience to climate change. Planners should compare and integrate approaches that span a range of model complexity and spatial scale to match the range of ecological and physical processes influencing persistence of biodiversity and identify a conservation network resilient to threats operating at multiple scales.     

Complementarity as a biodiversity indicator strategy

Richness, rarity, endemism and complementarity of indicator taxon species are often used to select conservation areas, which are then assumed to represent most regional biodiversity. Assessments of the degree to which these indicator conservation areas coincide across different taxa have been conducted on a variety of vertebrate, invertebrate and plant groups at a national scale in Britain, Canada, USA and South Africa and at a regional scale in Cameroon, Uganda and the USA. A low degree of spatial overlap among and within these selected indicator conservation areas has been demonstrated. These results tend to suggest that indicator conservation areas display little congruence across different taxa. However, some of these studies demonstrate that many conservation areas for indicator taxa capture a high proportion of non-target species. Thus it appears that indicator conservation areas might sample overall biodiversity efficiently. These indicator conservation areas may, however, exclude species essential for effective conservation, e.g. rare, endemic or endangered species. The present study investigated the value of indicator taxa as biodiversity surrogates using spatial congruence and representativeness of different indicator priority conservation areas. The conservation status of species excluded by the indicator approaches is also assessed. Indicator priority conservation areas demonstrate high land area requirements in order to fully represent non-target species. These results suggest that efficient priority area selection techniques must reach a compromise between maximizing non-target species gains and minimizing land-use requirements. Reserve selection procedures using indicator-based complementarity appear to be approaches which best satisfy this trade-off.     

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.     

Assessing priority areas by imperilled species: insights from the European butterflies

Biodiversity hotspots have been variously defined in terms of species richness, endemic species or imperilled species. The use of imperilled species to locate priority areas is particularly problematic, because an area that hosts a large number of imperilled species is likely to be under severe threats, making less effective conservation efforts. A possibly way to answer this problem is to assess species threats at two spatial scales. Then, areas which host concentrations of species that are imperilled at the larger scale, but not at the smaller scale, can be considered as priority areas where conservation efforts are expected to be more effective. An application of this procedure to the European butterfly fauna with the Biodiversity Conservation Concern index calculated with two IUCN red listings (European and national) allowed the construction of a four-celled model that reflects different types of conservation priority. This combined use of international and regional red lists may be a tool to make practical decisions (e.g. allocation of funds or legislative actions) to preserve imperilled species.     

Synergistic effects of climate and land-use change on representation of African bats in priority conservation areas

Bats are considered important bioindicators and deliver key ecosystem services to humans. However, it is not clear how the individual and combined effects of climate change and land-use change will affect their conservation in the future. We used a spatial conservation prioritization framework to determine future shifts in the priority areas for the conservation of 169 bat species under projected climate and land-use change scenarios across Africa. Specifically, we modelled species distribution models under four different climate change scenarios at the 2050 horizon. We used land-use change scenarios within the spatial conservation prioritization framework to assess habitat quality in areas where bats may shift their distributions. Overall, bats’ representation within already existing protected areas in Africa was low (∼5% of their suitable habitat in protected areas which cover ∼7% of Africa). Accounting for future land-use change resulted in the largest shift in spatial priority areas for conservation actions, and species representation within priority areas for conservation actions decreased by ∼9%. A large proportion of spatial conservation priorities will shift from forested areas with little disturbance under present conditions to agricultural areas in the future. Planning land use to reduce impacts on bats in priority areas outside protected areas where bats will be shifting their ranges in the future is crucial to enhance their conservation and maintain the important ecosystem services they provide to humans.     

Incorporating phylogenetic information for the definition of floristic districts in hyperdiverse Amazon forests: Implications for conservation

Using complementary metrics to evaluate phylogenetic diversity can facilitate the delimitation of floristic units and conservation priority areas. In this study, we describe the spatial patterns of phylogenetic alpha and beta diversity, phylogenetic endemism, and evolutionary distinctiveness of the hyperdiverse Ecuador Amazon forests and define priority areas for conservation. We established a network of 62 one‐hectare plots in terra firme forests of Ecuadorian Amazon. In these plots, we tagged, collected, and identified every single adult tree with dbh ≥10 cm. These data were combined with a regional community phylogenetic tree to calculate different phylogenetic diversity (PD) metrics in order to create spatial models. We used Loess regression to estimate the spatial variation of taxonomic and phylogenetic beta diversity as well as phylogenetic endemism and evolutionary distinctiveness. We found evidence for the definition of three floristic districts in the Ecuadorian Amazon, supported by both taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity data. Areas with high levels of phylogenetic endemism and evolutionary distinctiveness in Ecuadorian Amazon forests are unprotected. Furthermore, these areas are severely threatened by proposed plans of oil and mining extraction at large scales and should be prioritized in conservation planning for this region.     

Incorporating ecological functions in conservation decision making

Systematic conservation planning has become a standard approach globally, but prioritization of conservation efforts hardly considers species traits in decision making. This can be important for species persistence and thus adequacy of the conservation plan. Here, we developed and validated a novel approach of incorporating trophic information into a systematic conservation planning framework. We demonstrate the benefits of this approach using fish data from Europe's second largest river, the Danube. Our results show that adding trophic information leads to a different spatial configuration of priority areas at no additional cost. This can enhance identification of priority refugia for species in the lower position of the trophic web while simultaneously identifying areas that represent a more diverse species pool. Our methodological approach to incorporating species traits into systematic conservation planning is generally applicable, irrespective of realm, geographical area, and species composition and can potentially lead to more adequate conservation plans.     

Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems

Across large parts of the world, wildlife has to coexist with human activity in highly modified and fragmented landscapes. Combining concepts from population viability analysis and spatial reserve design, this study develops efficient quantitative methods for identifying conservation core areas at large, even national or continental scales. The proposed methods emphasize long-term population persistence, are applicable to both fragmented and natural landscape structures, and produce a hierarchical zonation of regional conservation priority. The methods are applied to both observational data for threatened butterflies at the scale of Britain and modelled probability of occurrence surfaces for indicator species in part of Australia. In both cases, priority landscapes important for conservation management are identified.     

Regional Scale Prioritisation for Key Ecosystem Services,Renewable Energy Production and Urban Development

Although the importance of addressing ecosystem service benefits in regional land use planning and decision-making is evident, substantial practical challenges remain. In particular, methods to identify priority areas for the provision of key ecosystem services and other environmental services (benefits from the environment not directly linked to the function of ecosystems) need to be developed. Priority areas are locations which provide disproportionally high benefits from one or more service. Here we map a set of ecosystem and environmental services and delineate priority areas according to different scenarios. Each scenario is produced by a set of weightings allocated to different services and corresponds to different landscape management strategies which decision makers could undertake. Using the county of Cornwall, U.K., as a case study, we processed gridded maps of key ecosystem services and environmental services, including renewable energy production and urban development. We explored their spatial distribution patterns and their spatial covariance and spatial stationarity within the region. Finally we applied a complementarity-based priority ranking algorithm (zonation) using different weighting schemes. Our conclusions are that (i) there are two main patterns of service distribution in this region, clustered services (including agriculture, carbon stocks, urban development and plant production) and dispersed services (including cultural services, energy production and floods mitigation); (ii) more than half of the services are spatially correlated and there is high non-stationarity in the spatial covariance between services; and (iii) it is important to consider both ecosystem services and other environmental services in identifying priority areas. Different weighting schemes provoke drastic changes in the delineation of priority areas and therefore decision making processes need to carefully consider the relative values attributed to different services.     

Connectivity and invasive species management: towards an integrated landscape approach

Invasive plants and animals are a major cause of global biodiversity loss. Invasive Species Management (ISM) helps conserve localized populations and ecosystems, but rarely have its potential benefits been explored at the landscape scale. We explore how ISM can enhance landscape connectivity, and how its incorporation into conservation planning algorithms could help design optimal reserve networks. Conversely, conservation planning and connectivity modelling can optimize targeting of ISM, achieving benefits for a wider range of taxa and ecological processes, without the need for additional resources. Empirical research must investigate the spatial pattern of benefits from ISM, and when to target priority conservation sites or the areas (matrix) between them. By bolstering populations within—and increasing connectivity between—focal patches, ISM should move beyond conserving individual sites to creating functionally connected networks of conservation areas.     

Climate change and opposing spatial conservation priorities for anuran protection in the Brazilian hotspots

In conservation biogeography, the process of spatial conservation prioritization (SCP) aims to select areas that meet biodiversity targets at a minimum set coverage. Here, we propose a SCP scheme for the highly endemic and diverse anuran fauna of the Atlantic Forest (AF) and Cerrado (CER) South American hotspots under different climate change scenarios. Specifically, we make use of predicted anuran occurrences, built for baseline and future (2050 and 2070) time slices, and address biological and conservation metrics to identify potential priority regions for anuran conservation over time using the software MARXAN. Considering each time slice separately, the percentage area needed for total anuran representation varies at magnitudes of 9.8–10.66% for the AF and 6.4–8.8% for the CER. Pooling all time slices together in the selected conservation network, the identified spatial priorities account for 15.56% and 13.25% of the total AF and CER areas respectively. However, we identified opposing strategies for the anuran spatial conservation prioritization in the AF and CER over the different time periods; the increasing of priority cells across time considering the potential species redistribution under climate change in the AF, and the selection of fewer priority cells in the future than the identified for the baseline climate in the CER. The southeastern AF coast was identified as a priority area for amphibian conservation in this hotspot, as well as some other smaller areas in the northern and southern regions. Priority areas identified in the CER, although patchy distributed across the hotspot, are found in specific central-northern, western, and southeastern regions. The different conservation strategies identified in the present SCP emphasize the need for establishing different conservation efforts according to a sequential scheduling of priority areas that optimizes the long-term conservation goals.     

Hierarchical population structure in greater sage-grouse provides insight into management boundary delineation

Understanding population structure is important for guiding ongoing conservation and restoration efforts. The greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) is a species of concern distributed across 1.2 million km² of western North America. We genotyped 1499 greater sage-grouse from 297 leks across Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota using a 15 locus microsatellite panel, then examined spatial autocorrelation, spatial principal components analysis, and hierarchical Bayesian clustering to identify population structure. Our results show that at distances of up to ~240 km individuals exhibit greater genetic similarity than expected by chance, suggesting that the cumulative effect of short-range dispersal translates to long-range connectivity. We found two levels of hierarchical genetic subpopulation structure. These subpopulations occupy significantly different elevations and are surrounded by divergent vegetative communities with different dominant subspecies of sagebrush, each with its own chemical defense against herbivory. We propose five management groups reflective of genetic subpopulation structure. These genetic groups are largely synonymous with existing priority areas for conservation. On average, 85.8 % of individuals within each conservation priority area assign to a distinct subpopulation. Our results largely support existing management decisions regarding subpopulation boundaries.     

Conservation prioritization through combined approach of umbrella species selection,occupancy estimation,habitat suitability and connectivity analysis of kingfisher: A study from an internationally important wetland complex (Ramsar site) in India

Assessment of occupancy status, as well as projection of suitable habitats and connectivity of wetland indicator species, and thereby identification of potential conservation umbrella and projection of conservation priority areas are often considered important for wetland conservation. Kingfishers are wetland indicators and suffer from habitat degradation due to world-wide destruction of wetlands. Therefore, they can be considered potential candidates for conservation intervention. The present knowledge about the spatial distribution of suitable areas and habitat connectivity of kingfishers at a landscape level is non-existent. We conducted extensive surveys and recorded four kingfisher species in East Kolkata Wetlands (EKW; Ramsar site No. 1208; ∼125 km²). The occupancy estimates were highest for White-throated kingfisher (Halcyon smyrnensis, WTK), followed by common kingfisher (Alcedo atthis, CK), stork-billed kingfisher (Pelargopsis capensis, SBK) and lowest for pied kingfisher (Ceryle rudis, PK). WTK has the highest amount of suitable areas followed by CK, PK and SBK. The spatial overlap of suitable habitats showed that SBK is the potential umbrella species and therefore provides conservation benefits to other kingfisher species and eventually to the EKW. In addition to water areas, emergent vegetation, crop lands and tree cover are other important habitats for kingfishers. The connectivity analyses revealed that suitable habitats were disjunct and are under various anthropogenic threats. Therefore, we need to protect suitable habitats and connectivity between them. Finally, we identified conservation priority areas. Conservation intervention on these high priority zones will not only be beneficial for kingfishers, but also for other avifauna having similar resource requirements as well as the wetland parse.     

What to do in the face of multiple threats? Incorporating dependencies within a return on investment framework for conservation

Aim Our study aimed to determine priority areas for conservation investment with explicit consideration of the impacts of multiple threatening processes, and the dependencies that exist between actions required to abate these threats. Location Australia. Methods We analysed the return on investment for two different management actions aimed at reducing the impact of invasive species on the native fauna and flora of Australia. We focussed on the management of the European red fox (Vulpes vulpes) and European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) at two spatial scales: across 72 biogeographic regions of Australia and within one high‐priority biogeographic region. We considered each action independently and also explicitly accounted for the option of an integrated fox and rabbit management action. We accounted for the spatial distributions of the threatened species within our analysis and determined how this refined spatial information influenced both the priority areas and the timing of this investment. Results Integrated fox and rabbit management was identified as a higher priority than singular threat abatement in most bioregions, whereas rabbit control alone was the most frequent priority if dependencies between actions were ignored. At the regional scale, funding was entirely directed to integrated action when seven or more species within the priority region were impacted by more than one threat. The total allocation of funding and timing of initial investment remained relatively insensitive to differences in the spatial overlap of species distributions. Main conclusions Our findings indicate that prioritizing conservation actions without explicit consideration of the impacts of multiple threats can reduce the cost‐effectiveness of investments. The benefits expected from investment in abating one threat alone may be overestimated where other processes continue to threaten species persistence. We conclude that future attention should be directed to refining our understanding of the cost‐efficiencies delivered through integrated actions and institutional mechanisms to achieve their delivery.     

The extent and predictability of the biodiversity–carbon correlation

Protecting biomass carbon stocks to mitigate climate change has direct implications for biodiversity conservation. Yet, evidence that a positive association exists between carbon density and species richness is contrasting. Here, we test how this association varies (1) across spatial extents and (2) as a function of how strongly carbon and species richness depend on environmental variables. We found the correlation weakens when moving from larger extents, e.g. realms, to narrower extents, e.g. ecoregions. For ecoregions, a positive correlation emerges when both species richness and carbon density vary as functions of the same environmental variables (climate, soil, elevation). In 20% of tropical ecoregions, there are opportunities to pursue carbon conservation with direct biodiversity co‐benefits, while other ecoregions require careful planning for both species and carbon to avoid potentially perverse outcomes. The broad assumption of a linear relationship between carbon and biodiversity can lead to undesired outcomes.     

Conservation planning with insects at three different spatial scales

Deciding which areas to protect, and where to manage and how, are no easy tasks. Many protected areas were established opportunistically under strong political and economic constraints, which may have resulted in inefficient and ineffective conservation. Systematic conservation planning has helped us move from ad-hoc decisions to a quantitative and transparent decision-making process, identifying conservation priorities that achieve explicit objectives in a cost-efficient manner. Here we use Finnish butterflies to illustrate different modeling approaches to address three different types of situations in conservation planning at three different spatial scales. First, we employ species distribution models at the national scale to construct a conservation priority map for 91 species at the resolution of 10×10  km. Species distribution models interpolate sparse occurrence data to infer variation in habitat suitability and to predict species responses to habitat loss, management actions and climate change. Second, at the regional scale we select the optimal management plan to protect a set of habitat specialist species. And third, at the landscape scale, we use a metapopulation approach to manage a network of habitat patches for long-term persistence of a single butterfly species. These different modeling approaches illustrate trade-offs between complexity and tractability and between generality and precision. General correlation-based models are helpful to set priorities for multiple species at large spatial scales. More specific management questions at smaller scales require further data and more complex models. The vast numbers of insect species with diverse ecologies provide a source of information that has remained little used in systematic conservation planning.     

Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation

Resources for biodiversity conservation are severely limited, requiring strategic investment. Understanding both the economic benefits and costs of conserving ecosystems will help to allocate scarce dollars most efficiently. However, although cost-benefit analyses are common in many areas of policy, they are not typically used in conservation planning. We conducted a spatial evaluation of the costs and benefits of conservation for a landscape in the Atlantic forests of Paraguay. We considered five ecosystem services (i.e., sustainable bushmeat harvest, sustainable timber harvest, bioprospecting for pharmaceutical products, existence value, and carbon storage in aboveground biomass) and compared them to estimates of the opportunity costs of conservation. We found a high degree of spatial variability in both costs and benefits over this relatively small (~3,000 km²) landscape. Benefits exceeded costs in some areas, with carbon storage dominating the ecosystem service values and swamping opportunity costs. Other benefits associated with conservation were more modest and exceeded costs only in protected areas and indigenous reserves. We used this cost-benefit information to show that one potential corridor between two large forest patches had net benefits that were three times greater than two otherwise similar alternatives. Spatial cost-benefit analysis can powerfully inform conservation planning, even though the availability of relevant data may be limited, as was the case in our study area. It can help us understand the synergies between biodiversity conservation and economic development when the two are indeed aligned and to clearly understand the trade-offs when they are not.     

The role of macroinvertebrates for conservation of freshwater systems

Freshwater ecosystems are the most threatened ecosystems worldwide. Argentinian‐protected areas have been established mainly to protect vertebrates and plants in terrestrial ecosystems. In order to create a comprehensive biodiverse conservation plan, it is crucial to integrate both aquatic and terrestrial systems and to include macroinvertebrates. Here, we address this topic by proposing priority areas of conservation including invertebrates, aquatic ecosystems, and their connectivity and land uses. Location: Northwest of Argentina. We modeled the ecological niches of different taxa of macroinvertebrates such as Coleoptera, Ephemeroptera, Hemiptera, Megaloptera, Lepidoptera, Odonata, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Acari, and Mollusca. Based on these models, we analyzed the contribution of currently established protected areas in the conservation of the aquatic biodiversity and we propose a spatial prioritization taking into account possible conflict regarding different land uses. Our analysis units were the real watersheds, to which were added longitudinal connectivity up and down the rivers. A total of 132 species were modeled in the priority area analyses. The analysis 1 showed that only an insignificant percentage of the macroinvertebrates distribution is within the protected areas in the North West of Argentina. The analyses 2 and 3 recovered similar values of protection for the macroinvertebrate species. The upper part of Bermejo, Salí‐Dulce, San Francisco, and the Upper part of Juramento basins were identified as priority areas of conservation. The aquatic ecosystems need special protection and 10% or even as much as 17% of land conservation is insufficient for species of macroinvertebrates. In turn the protected areas need to combine the aquatic and terrestrial systems and need to include macroinvertebrates as a key group to sustain the biodiversity. In many cases, the land uses are in conflict with the conservation of biodiversity; however, it is possible to apply the connectivity of the watersheds and create multiple‐use modules.     

Prioritising Mangrove Ecosystem Services Results in Spatially Variable Management Priorities

Incorporating the values of the services that ecosystems provide into decision making is becoming increasingly common in nature conservation and resource management policies, both locally and globally. Yet with limited funds for conservation of threatened species and ecosystems there is a desire to identify priority areas where investment efficiently conserves multiple ecosystem services. We mapped four mangrove ecosystems services (coastal protection, fisheries, biodiversity, and carbon storage) across Fiji. Using a cost-effectiveness analysis, we prioritised mangrove areas for each service, where the effectiveness was a function of the benefits provided to the local communities, and the costs were associated with restricting specific uses of mangroves. We demonstrate that, although priority mangrove areas (top 20%) for each service can be managed at relatively low opportunity costs (ranging from 4.5 to 11.3% of overall opportunity costs), prioritising for a single service yields relatively low co-benefits due to limited geographical overlap with priority areas for other services. None-the-less, prioritisation of mangrove areas provides greater overlap of benefits than if sites were selected randomly for most ecosystem services. We discuss deficiencies in the mapping of ecosystems services in data poor regions and how this may impact upon the equity of managing mangroves for particular services across the urban-rural divide in developing countries. Finally we discuss how our maps may aid decision-makers to direct funding for mangrove management from various sources to localities that best meet funding objectives, as well as how this knowledge can aid in creating a national mangrove zoning scheme.     

Putting bryophyte communities in the map: A case study on prioritizing monitoring of human pressure in riverscapes

Freshwater ecosystems support biological communities with high species richness and conservation interest. However, these ecosystems are highly altered by human intervention and threatened worldwide, making them a priority in conservation planning and biodiversity monitoring. Bryophytes, including several conservation-interest taxa, are recognized indicators of ecological status in freshwaters. We aimed to develop a framework for designing monitoring networks to detect trends in aquatic and semi-aquatic bryophyte communities, prioritizing high-conservation interest communities in different contexts of human pressure (specifically, resulting from the intersection of two criteria: (i) protection status and (ii) presence of a potential impact area).The framework consists of three steps: (1) Spatial modelling of biodiversity; (2) Spatial conservation prioritization; and (3) Model-assisted monitoring network design. Community-level modelling was used to model the distribution of the main bryophyte assemblages in the study area. A conservation prioritization software was utilized to identify areas with high conservation value. The monitoring network was designed using stratified random sampling and unequal-probability sampling techniques to target high conservation value sites distributed across different contexts of human pressure.We have identified four distinct community types, each characterized both by a small group of common and dominant species, and by small group of rarer, conservation-interest species. This typification of four species assemblages occurring in the study area, also highlighted those with potentially higher conservation-interest. The most valuable areas for the conservation of aquatic and semi-aquatic bryophyte communities coincide with specific environmental zones: mountainous areas in Lusitania, large watercourses in the Mediterranean North and some locations in the Mediterranean Mountains. Finally, we obtained a potential monitoring network consisting of 64 monitoring points, unequally distributed across different contexts of human pressure, privileging locations with higher conservation value.The framework presented here illustrates the potential of combining biodiversity modelling, spatial conservation prioritization and monitoring design in the development of monitoring networks. Namely, this framework allowed us to counter data deficiencies, to identify high priority areas to monitor and to design a monitoring network considering different scenarios of human pressure at a regional scale.This framework can also be valuable for conservation efforts as an approach to monitoring conservation-interest biodiversity features in anthropogenically modified riverscapes, which present different degrees of human pressure and the cumulative effects of these different impact elements. Moreover, this approach allows for the comprehensive monitoring of biodiversity values important for management at the national and regional levels. In addition, this framework is one of the first efforts in the development of monitoring networks that target aquatic and semi-aquatic bryophyte communities, a long-neglected plant group of high ecological and conservation importance in freshwater ecosystems.