Restricted-Range Fishes and the Conservation of Brazilian Freshwaters

Background

Freshwaters are the most threatened ecosystems on earth. Although recent assessments provide data on global priority regions for freshwater conservation, local scale priorities remain unknown. Refining the scale of global biodiversity assessments (both at terrestrial and freshwater realms) and translating these into conservation priorities on the ground remains a major challenge to biodiversity science, and depends directly on species occurrence data of high taxonomic and geographic resolution. Brazil harbors the richest freshwater ichthyofauna in the world, but knowledge on endemic areas and conservation in Brazilian rivers is still scarce.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Using data on environmental threats and revised species distribution data we detect and delineate 540 small watershed areas harboring 819 restricted-range fishes in Brazil. Many of these areas are already highly threatened, as 159 (29%) watersheds have lost more than 70% of their original vegetation cover, and only 141 (26%) show significant overlap with formally protected areas or indigenous lands. We detected 220 (40%) critical watersheds overlapping hydroelectric dams or showing both poor formal protection and widespread habitat loss; these sites harbor 344 endemic fish species that may face extinction if no conservation action is in place in the near future.

Conclusions/Significance

We provide the first analysis of site-scale conservation priorities in the richest freshwater ecosystems of the globe. Our results corroborate the hypothesis that freshwater biodiversity has been neglected in former conservation assessments. The study provides a simple and straightforward method for detecting freshwater priority areas based on endemism and threat, and represents a starting point for integrating freshwater and terrestrial conservation in representative and biogeographically consistent site-scale conservation strategies, that may be scaled-up following naturally linked drainage systems. Proper management (e. g. forestry code enforcement, landscape planning) and conservation (e. g. formal protection) of the 540 watersheds detected herein will be decisive in avoiding species extinction in the richest aquatic ecosystems on the planet.     

Global assessment of marine biodiversity potentially threatened by offshore hydrocarbon activities

Increasing global energy demands have led to the ongoing intensification of hydrocarbon extraction from marine areas. Hydrocarbon extractive activities pose threats to native marine biodiversity, such as noise, light, and chemical pollution, physical changes to the sea floor, invasive species, and greenhouse gas emissions. Here, we assessed at a global scale the spatial overlap between offshore hydrocarbon activities and marine biodiversity (>25,000 species, nine major ecosystems, and marine protected areas), and quantify the changes over time. We discovered that two‐thirds of global offshore hydrocarbon activities occur in areas within the top 10% for species richness, range rarity, and proportional range rarity values globally. Thus, while hydrocarbon activities are undertaken in less than one percent of the ocean's area, they overlap with approximately 85% of all assessed species. Of conservation concern, 4% of species with the largest proportion of their range overlapping hydrocarbon activities are range restricted, potentially increasing their vulnerability to localized threats such as oil spills. While hydrocarbon activities have extended to greater depths since the mid‐1990s, we found that the largest overlap is with coastal ecosystems, particularly estuaries, saltmarshes and mangroves. Furthermore, in most countries where offshore hydrocarbon exploration licensing blocks have been delineated, they do not overlap with marine protected areas (MPAs). Although this is positive in principle, many countries have far more licensing block areas than protected areas, and in some instances, MPA coverage is minimal. These findings suggest the need for marine spatial prioritization to help limit future spatial overlap between marine conservation priorities and hydrocarbon activities. Such prioritization can be informed by the spatial and quantitative baseline information provided here. In increasingly shared seascapes, prioritizing management actions that set both conservation and development targets could help minimize further declines of biodiversity and environmental changes at a global scale.     

Future hotspots of terrestrial mammal loss

Current levels of endangerment and historical trends of species and habitats are the main criteria used to direct conservation efforts globally. Estimates of future declines, which might indicate different priorities than past declines, have been limited by the lack of appropriate data and models. Given that much of conservation is about anticipating and responding to future threats, our inability to look forward at a global scale has been a major constraint on effective action. Here, we assess the geography and extent of projected future changes in suitable habitat for terrestrial mammals within their present ranges. We used a global earth-system model, IMAGE, coupled with fine-scale habitat suitability models and parametrized according to four global scenarios of human development. We identified the most affected countries by 2050 for each scenario, assuming that no additional conservation actions other than those described in the scenarios take place. We found that, with some exceptions, most of the countries with the largest predicted losses of suitable habitat for mammals are in Africa and the Americas. African and North American countries were also predicted to host the most species with large proportional global declines. Most of the countries we identified as future hotspots of terrestrial mammal loss have little or no overlap with the present global conservation priorities, thus confirming the need for forward-looking analyses in conservation priority setting. The expected growth in human populations and consumption in hotspots of future mammal loss mean that local conservation actions such as protected areas might not be sufficient to mitigate losses. Other policies, directed towards the root causes of biodiversity loss, are required, both in Africa and other parts of the world.     

Promoting ecological restoration in France: issues and solutions

Ecological restoration has developed greatly over recent decades. Promoting harmonious relationships between scientists and practitioners, between restoration ecology and ecological restoration, is essential to improving restoration projects. These relationships are difficult to achieve at a global scale, although international action remains essential. Therefore, regional and national networks are attempting to take up the challenge. With several European countries planning to create their own network in the coming years, insights from current practice are helpful. Here, we (1) describe the context in which ecological restoration is developing in France and (2) present the French restoration network, Réseau d'Echanges et de Valorisation en Ecologie de la Restauration (REVER). Most public policies related to restoration in France are derived from European Union (EU) directives, such as those on water, ecological networks, biodiversity, and protected species and natural habitat. Restoration can also be undertaken through Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or subsequent to damage. Following the model of the International Society for Ecological Restoration, the French network for ecological restoration (REVER) aims at accompanying and promoting restoration by facilitating relationships between the various stakeholders: practitioners, scientists, site managers, etc. To encourage exchange of knowledge and experience, REVER manages a website, organizes workshops, and provides links with SER‐Europe and Society for Ecological Restoration International (SERI). This article provides information that will be of interest to other countries trying to meet the Aichi targets of the convention on biological diversity: the restoration of 15% of degraded ecosystems by 2020.     

Mapping the actual and original distribution of the ecosystems and the chorological types for conservation planning in Colombia

A key requirement for systematic conservation planning is the availability of good quality and comparable data about the biodiversity. However, for many highly diverse countries, this information is not available. Here we present the methodology and the results of the three‐part construction of a conservation planning database in Colombia: (1) the actual distribution of the ecosystems; (2) their original‐potential distribution, which is important to calculate fixed targets for conservation; and (3) the chorological types, which are groups of spatial related ecosystems that account for biodiversity process that operate at larger scales. The procedure consists of integrating the results of the interpretation of satellite images, and the construction of ecological diagrams and biogeographical regions. The limits of the original‐potential ecosystems in the transformed landscapes can either still be seen on the images or are reconstructed on the base of the information from the ecological diagrams. The chorological types are constructed by clustering of ecosystems on the base of the shared boundary length. The implementation for Colombia resulted in maps of 337 ecosystems and 63 chorological types. This database was successfully used for the identification of the priorities for conservation.     

Priorities for biodiversity monitoring in Europe: A review of supranational policies and a novel scheme for integrative prioritization

Trends and status of species and habitats need to be measured to assess whether global biodiversity policy targets have been achieved. However, it is impossible to monitor all species and habitats with a justifiable effort. Therefore, it is critical to prioritize the monitoring of specific biodiversity components. Priorities must be linked to key nature conservation policies to ensure that monitoring efforts are relevant to policy needs, achieve maximum impact, and obtain governmental support. Here we discuss priority setting in biodiversity monitoring in view of monitoring obligations and priorities in supranational biodiversity legislation and policies in Europe and assess overlaps in priorities among policies. While most supranational biodiversity regulations require monitoring of biodiversity, obligations are legally enforceable only for the Nature Directives, the Water Framework Directive, and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive of the European Union. Of the assessed international conventions and other relevant policy instruments about 50% explicitly designate priority species and most focus on vertebrates. Lower emphasis is given to habitats and geographical priorities are even less pronounced. Also, an overarching system for monitoring prioritization is still missing. Our prioritization system is based on three main criteria: (1) legal requirement for reporting, (2) wording used to define priority or importance, and (3) inclusion in lists that indicate importance of monitoring due to e.g. threats or relevance of a region for a species. Our system contains five main priority levels, within which an additional division differentiates priorities according to national/European responsibility criteria. Based on this system, we provide recommendations for allocating species and habitats enlisted by the reviewed policy tools to explicit non-overlapping priority levels. Our approach will facilitate synergies between monitoring activities for different policy needs, and contribute to alleviate the notorious resource shortage for biodiversity monitoring.     

Overlooked Mountain Rock Pools in Deserts Are Critical Local Hotspots of Biodiversity

BackgroundThe world is undergoing exceptional biodiversity loss. Most conservation efforts target biodiversity hotspots at large scales. Such approach overlooks small-sized local hotspots, which may be rich in endemic and highly threatened species. We explore the importance of mountain rock pools (gueltas) as local biodiversity hotspots in the Sahara-Sahel. Specifically, we considered how many vertebrates (total and endemics) use gueltas, what factors predict species richness, and which gueltas are of most priority for conservation. We expected to provide management recommendations, improve local biodiversity conservation, and simultaneously contribute with a framework for future enhancement of local communities’ economy. The identification of local hotspots of biodiversity is important for revaluating global conservation priorities.Conclusion/SignificanceGueltas are crucial for local biodiversity conservation and human activities. They require urgent management plans in Mauritania’s mountains. They could provide refugia under climate change being important for long-term conservation of Sahara-Sahel biodiversity. Given their disproportional importance in relation to their size, they are local hotspots of biodiversity deserving global attention.     

On the suitability of input–output analysis for calculating product-specific biodiversity footprints

Recently it has been estimated that one third of biodiversity threats are driven by consumer demand from outside the country in which the threat occurs. This occurs when the production of export goods exerts pressure on vulnerable populations. While population biologists have in cases been able to establish links between species threats and the causative industry(s), little has been done to trace this biodiversity footprint from the directly implicated industry out to final consumers, a step that would open a wider variety of policy responses. Here we investigate the suitability of multi-region input–output (MRIO) analysis for tracing out links between particular species threats, directly implicated industries, and the countries and consumer goods sectors ultimately driving these industries. Environmentally extended MRIO models are understood to provide reliable results at a macroeconomic level but uncertainty increases as the models are used to investigate individual sectors, companies, and products. In this study we examine several case studies (nickel mining in New Caledonia, coltan from the Democratic Republic of Congo, cut flowers from Kenya, and forestry in Papua New Guinea) in order to understand how and when MRIO techniques can be useful for studying biodiversity implicated supply chains. The study was conducted using the Eora global input–output database that documents >5 billion global supply chains. Calculating the biodiversity footprint at this level of detail, between specific threats, supply chains, and consumer goods, has not been done before. These case studies provide interesting insights in their own right and also serve to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of using input–output analysis techniques to calculate detailed biodiversity footprints. We conclude that MRIO analysis, while no panacea, can be useful for outlining supply chains and identifying which consumption sectors and trade and transformation steps can be subjected to closer analysis in order to enable remedial action.     

A collaborative GIS method for integrating local and technical knowledge in establishing biodiversity conservation priorities

Methods for establishing biodiversity conservation priorities are urgently required, as the number of species and habitats that are threatened increases relative to the material resources available for their conservation. The identification of priority areas demands the integration of biophysical data on ecosystems together with social data on human pressures and planning opportunities. But comprehensive and reliable data are rarely available to demarcate where the need for action is most urgent and where the benefits of conservation strategies can be maximized. Strategic conservation initiatives cannot wait for the creation of comprehensive databases. In order to fill the missing data gaps, the combined knowledge of local and technical experts can be used. This study presents a collaborative geographic information system (GIS) method for integrating the knowledge of local and technical experts with existing spatial environmental data to establish priority areas for biodiversity conservation. Procedures for structuring and framing the discussions, establishing assessment criteria, integrating knowledge with data, and building consensus are incorporated into the method. The method provides a novel cooperative mechanism to aid spatial knowledge management and inclusive biodiversity planning.     

海岛陆地生态系统固碳估算方法

陆地生态系统在调节全球碳平衡和减缓全球气候变化中起着重要作用。海岛作为一种特殊的生态系统,生物群落和环境与大陆基本相似。虽然海岛生态结构相对简单,物种的丰富程度比大陆低,但对全球碳循环也有一定的影响。在海岛陆地生态系统中,森林和灌草的种属相对较少,且不同纬度的海岛森林植被种属差异明显,可采用典型样地清查和生物量模型估算相结合的方法估算乔木层和灌草层的碳储量。采用模型估算固碳潜力时,根据海岛生态环境的特殊性,综合考虑岛陆面积、季节、风向、坡度、坡向、海拔、平均温度、降雨量、土壤理化性质等参数对其碳储量估算的影响。海岛植被生物多样性影响其土壤碳储存的生态服务功能,利用多元统计分析方法,建立岛陆植物物种丰度与土壤碳储量的空间回归模型,明确植物多样性的改变对岛陆土壤固碳能力的影响。此外,从土壤固碳的角度而言,海岛土壤-植物-微生物间相互作用是其重要的研究方向。利用现代分子生物学技术,研究海岛陆地生态系统的土壤-植物-微生物相互作用关系,有利于海岛土壤固碳潜力估算精度的提高。     

Determining climate change impacts on ecosystems: the role of palaeontology

Climate change is projected to change the ecosystems on land and in the sea at rates that are unprecedented for millions of years. The most commonly used approach to derive projections of how ecosystems will look in the future are experiments on living organisms. By their nature, experiments are unlike the real world and cannot capture the ability of organisms to migrate, select and evolve. They are often limited to a select few species and drivers of environmental change and hence cannot represent the complexity of interactions in ‘real’ ecosystems. The fossil record is an archive of responses to climate change at a global ecosystem scale. If, and only if, fossil assemblage variation is combined with independent information of environmental changes, sensitives of species or higher taxa to a specific magnitude of change of an environmental driver can be determined and used to inform future vulnerabilities of this species to the same driver. While records are often fragmented, there are time intervals which, when thoroughly analysed with quantitative data, can provide valuable insights into the future of biodiversity on this planet. This review provides an overview of projected impacts on marine ecosystems including: (1) the range of neontological methods, observations and their challenges; and (2) the complementary information that palaeontologists can contribution to this global challenge. I advocate that, in collaborations with other disciplines, we should aim for a strong visibility of our field and the knowledge it can provide for policy relevant assessments of the future.     

Research priorities for natural ecosystems in a changing global climate

Climate change poses significant emerging risks to biodiversity, ecosystem function and associated socioecological systems. Adaptation responses must be initiated in parallel with mitigation efforts, but resources are limited. As climate risks are not distributed equally across taxa, ecosystems and processes, strategic prioritization of research that addresses stakeholder‐relevant knowledge gaps will accelerate effective uptake into adaptation policy and management action. After a decade of climate change adaptation research within the Australian National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, we synthesize the National Adaptation Research Plans for marine, terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. We identify the key, globally relevant priorities for ongoing research relevant to informing adaptation policy and environmental management aimed at maximizing the resilience of natural ecosystems to climate change. Informed by both global literature and an extensive stakeholder consultation across all ecosystems, sectors and regions in Australia, involving thousands of participants, we suggest 18 priority research topics based on their significance, urgency, technical and economic feasibility, existing knowledge gaps and potential for cobenefits across multiple sectors. These research priorities provide a unified guide for policymakers, funding organizations and researchers to strategically direct resources, maximize stakeholder uptake of resulting knowledge and minimize the impacts of climate change on natural ecosystems. Given the pace of climate change, it is imperative that we inform and accelerate adaptation progress in all regions around the world.     

Quantifying levels of biological invasion: towards the objective classification of invaded and invasible ecosystems

Biological invasions are a global phenomenon that threatens biodiversity, and few, if any, ecosystems are free from alien species. The outcome of human‐mediated introductions is affected by the invasiveness of species and invasibility of ecosystems, but research has primarily focused on defining, characterizing and identifying invasive species; ecosystem invasibility has received much less attention. A prerequisite for characterizing invasibility is the ability to compare levels of invasion across ecosystems. In this paper, we aim to identify the best way to quantify the level of invasion by nonnative animals and plants by reviewing the advantages and disadvantages of different metrics. We explore how interpretation and choice of these measures can depend on the objective of a study or management intervention. Based on our review, we recommend two invasion indices and illustrate their use by applying them to two case studies. Relative alien species richness and relative alien species abundance indicate the contribution that alien species make to a community. They are easy to measure, can be applied to various taxa, are independent of scale and are comparable across regions and ecosystems, and historical data are often available. The relationship between relative alien richness and abundance can indicate the presence of dominant alien species and the trajectory of invasion over time, and can highlight ecosystems and sites that are heavily invaded or especially susceptible to invasion. Splitting species into functional groups and examining invasion patterns of transformer species may be particularly instructive for gauging effects of alien invasion on ecosystem structure and function. Establishing standard, transparent ways to define and quantify invasion level will facilitate meaningful comparisons among studies, ecosystem types and regions. It is essential for progress in ecology and will help guide ecosystem restoration and management.     

An enlarged European Union challenges priority settings in conservation

Biodiversity is declining worldwide under increasing human pressure. Since the location of and the threats are unevenly distributed and the resources available for conservation are limited, prioritization is essential to reduce the losses. Most conservation efforts until now proved to be ineffective in stopping the present worldwide decline of threatened species. We focus on the European Union (EU) after the repeated enlargements in the last decade, from 15 to 27 countries, by considering the present conservation priorities that have shifted towards a continental scale approach. The situation in the EU indicates that despite the differences in wealth across countries, there are no significant differences in the number and surface of protected areas between them, so re-evaluating conservation priorities at a continental scale and a reallocation of funds is required. A major limitation in priority settings for conservation is data availability. We recommend including in the decision process data provided by phylogeographic studies. This will prevent the decline of populations and species with evolutionary potential from centres of speciation and climate refugia. Recent EU members from central and eastern Europe still retain high biodiversity with a rather good conservation status. A large number of areas with high evolutionary potential identified by phylogeographic studies are located there and should be considered priorities within the context of global changes, as a proactive approach. We recommend a periodic re-evaluation of the status of species and habitats based on current research results, harmonization between the priority species listed in the conventions, directives and Red Lists at both EU and national levels.     

Investing in biodiversity: an economic perspective on global priority setting

Biodiversity investment priorities are a major concern for funding agencies and parties to the Convention on Biodiversity. We present a cost-effectiveness index designed to rank global biodiversity investments addressing weaknesses identified in several existing procedures. First, we explicitly address the issue of cost. Biodiversity conservation can be expensive -- ensuring that money is efficiently spent is important if conserving maximum biodiversity is an objective. Second, a high degree of threat to biodiversity is commonly accepted as constituting the principal reason for intervention and a basis for prioritization. The possibility that a high degree of threat might constitute a reason for non-intervention is rarely considered. The index presented in this study seeks to address these shortcomings by incorporating biodiversity ‘cost’, as measured by investment, and biodiversity ‘benefit’, as measured by a representative biodiversity indicator, species, richness. These elements form the basis of the cost -- benefit ratio needed for cost-effectiveness analysis. Investment in biodiversity is affected by issues of vulnerability (threat) and viability (success). A successful investment intervention will, however, depend on the probability or likelihood of success and the degree of threat prevalent in a particular country. These are integrated into the index as probabilities which will influence the amount of biodiversity ‘saved’ by an intervention. We apply the index using data for the Asia – Pacific region, to provide a cost-effective priority investment index (CEPII) ranking by country. Acute data limitations at the global level particularly in applying complementarity, necessitate caution in the interpretation of the index which, like other methods, requires some subjective choice of success and threat surrogates. The index continues the task of combining scientific and socioeconomic criteria relevant to global priorities. This revised version was published online in November 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Linking aboveground and belowground diversity

Aboveground and belowground species interactions drive ecosystem properties at the local scale, but it is unclear how these relationships scale-up to regional and global scales. Here, we discuss our current knowledge of aboveground and belowground diversity links from a global to a local scale. Global diversity peaks towards the Equator for large, aboveground organisms, but not for small (mainly belowground) organisms, suggesting that there are size-related biodiversity gradients in global aboveground-belowground linkages. The generalization of aboveground-belowground diversity relationships, and their role in ecosystem functioning, requires surveys at scales that are relevant to the organisms and ecosystem properties. Habitat sizes and diversity gradients can differ significantly between aboveground and belowground organisms and between ecosystems. These gradients in biodiversity and plant community trait perception need to be acknowledged when studying aboveground-belowground biodiversity linkages.     

The urgency of building global capacity for biodiversity science

The biodiversity sciences represent the disciplines of whole-organism biology, including systematics, ecology, population biology, behaviour and the fields of comparative biology. The biodiversity sciences are critically important to society because it is knowledge of whole-organisms that is essential for managing and conserving the world's species. Because of an acceleration in environmental degradation and global biodiversity loss in recent decades, the need for the biodiversity sciences has never been more urgent. Yet, biodiversity science is not well supported relative to other fields of science, and thus the need for knowledge about organisms and their environment is far outstripping biologists' ability to provide it. National and international capacity for biodiversity science must therefore be increased substantially. Each nation should establish a national biodiversity research programme coordinated across all government agencies. An international biodiversity research programme should also be established, perhaps with an organizational structure that parallels the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme. Biodiversity scientists must assume a leadership role in educating the public and bringing about policy changes that will enhance our understanding of the world's species and their ecosystems.     

Renewal ecology: conservation for the Anthropocene

The global scale and rapidity of environmental change is challenging ecologists to reimagine their theoretical principles and management practices. Increasingly, historical ecological conditions are inadequate targets for restoration ecology, geographically circumscribed nature reserves are incapable of protecting all biodiversity, and the precautionary principle applied to management interventions no longer ensures avoidance of ecological harm. In addition, human responses to global environmental changes, such as migration, building of protective infrastructures, and land use change, are having their own negative environmental impacts. We use examples from wildlands, urban, and degraded environments, as well as marine and freshwater ecosystems, to show that human adaptation responses to rapid ecological change can be explicitly designed to benefit biodiversity. This approach, which we call “renewal ecology,” is based on acceptance that environmental change will have transformative effects on coupled human and natural systems and recognizes the need to harmonize biodiversity with human infrastructure, for the benefit of both.     

Model of the assessment of the critical risk of extinction and the priorities of protection of endangered aquatic species at the national level

In the period 1995–2006, the biodiversity of the aquatic habitats in the area of Serbia was explored, with the aim to identify the endangered species of macroalgae, macroinvertebratae and fishes. During the work a data base was formed (Aquatic Ecosystems Diversity in Serbia, AEDSer), containing the data from exploring the biodiversity of the aquatic ecosystems of Serbia since 1860. Based on the data base, classification of the aquatic species was made into categories of endangerment based on IUCN criteria. The following was noted: (1) the global IUCN category assigned to the species often is not identical with the national status of endangerment; and (2) the species that are given a category of endangerment at the national level do not have the same realistic risk of extinction in all their habitats. This remark imposed the need for a model for assessing the critical risk of extinction of the endangered species and determining the priorities of their protection at the national level. Two categories of characters were used to develop the model: the characters that determine the degree of ecological specialisation of the species based on the circumstances of habitat; and the characters suggesting the risk factors from the system: “HIPPO” in the spatial and time dimension. The possibility to apply the model was tested on 10 aquatic species belonging to different categories of endangerment at the national level (macroalgae 2, macroinvertebrates 7, and fishes 1 species). The model based on points determined the level of extinction risk and, that way, the species needing urgent conservation from the same or different categories of endangerment were isolated. The model suggested can contribute to a more efficient defining the conservation priorities.     

Grasshopper （Orthoptera： Acrididae） biodiversity and grassland ecosystems

Interesting results may arise by combining studies on the structure and function of ecosystems with that of biodiversity for certain species. Grasshopper biodiversity is the result of the evolution of grassland ecosystems; however, it also impacts on the structure and the function of those ecosystems. We consider there to be a close relationship between the health of grassland ecosystems and grasshopper biodiversity. The main problems involved in this relationship are likely to include： （i） grasshopper biodiversity and its spatial pattern; （ii） the effect of grasshopper biodiversity on the ecological processes of grassland ecosystems; （iii） the biodiversity threshold of grasshopper population explosions; （iv） the relationship between grasshopper biodiversity and the natural and human factors that affect grassland ecosystems; and （v） grasshopper biodiversity and the health of grassland ecosystems. The solutions to these problems may provide sound bases for controlling disasters caused by grasshoppers and managing grassland ecosystems in the west of China. In this paper, we introduced two concepts for grasshopper biodiversity, that is, ＂spatial pattern＂ and ＂biodiversity threshold＂. It is helpful to understand the action of the spatial pattern of grasshopper biodiversity on the ecological processes of grassland ecosystems and the effect of this spatial pattern on the health of those ecosystems, owing to the fact that, in the west of China, grasslands are vast and grasshoppers are widely distributed. Moreover, we inferred that the change in the level of component richness at each type of grasshopper biodiversity can make an impact on grassland ecosystems, and therefore, there is likely to be a threshold to grasshopper biodiversity for the stability and the sustainability of those ecosystems.