Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:22:23.642Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Minimizing conservation conflict for endemic primate species in Atlantic forest and uncovering knowledge bias

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2011

MÍRIAM PLAZA PINTO  and
CARLOS EDUARDO VIVEIROS GRELLE
MÍRIAM PLAZA PINTO*
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia, Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, CxP 68020, CEP 21941-590 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
CARLOS EDUARDO VIVEIROS GRELLE
Affiliation:
Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, CxP 68020, CEP 21941-590 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
*
*Correspondence: Dr Míriam Plaza Pinto e-mail: miriamplazapinto@yahoo.com.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Human population is a predictor of mammal extinction risk, an indicator of conservation conflict and habitat conversion, and is thus associated with the threats to primate species. Priority areas that represent endemic primates in Atlantic Forest were identified where all counties had the same cost or where the costs of counties varied according to human population size (HPS); networks for both approaches consisted of nine counties. In the networks without human constraint, the average HPS was not higher than expected by chance alone. In the approach with human population constraint, HPS was not lower than the average of the null distribution. Although it is possible to minimize human conservation conflict, available occurrence data of endemic primates seems to be related to highly populated areas. The sum of HPS is greater in counties with some occurrence data than expected by chance. Conservation conflicts in the Atlantic Forest will continue to exist once this is the Brazilian most populous region, and data availability is directly related to counties' HPS. Field surveys are necessary to minimize Wallacean shortfall and efforts must be made to maintain the few natural areas remaining in this biome to promote the conservation of endemic primates and other biodiversity elements.

Keywords

Atlantic forestcomplementarityconservation conflictsendemic primateshuman population sizeknowledge biasrandomization testreserve selectionsimulated annealingWallacean shortfall
Type
Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 30 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbitt, R.J.F., Scott, J.M. & Wilcove, D.S. (2000) The geography of vulnerability: incorporating species geography and human development patterns into conservation planning. Biological Conservation 96: 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andelman, S., Ball, I., Davis, F. & Stoms, D. (1999) SITES v. 1.0: an analytical toolbox for designing ecoregional conservation portfolios. Technical report. The Nature Conservancy, Australia.Google Scholar
Ando, A., Camm, J., Polasky, S. & Solow, A. (1998) Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation. Science 279: 2126–2128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Araújo, M.B., Williams, P.H. & Turner, A. (2002) A sequential approach to minimise threats within selected conservation areas. Biodiversity and Conservation 11: 1011–1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arzamendia, V. & Giraudo, A.R. (2004) Using biodiversity patterns for assessment and design protected areas: snakes of Santa Fe province (Argentina) as example. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 77: 335–348.Google Scholar
Ball, I.R. & Possingham, H.P. (2000) MARXAN (v1.8.2): Marine reserve design using spatially explicit annealing. A manual prepared for The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority: 69 pp. [www document]. URL http://www.uq.edu.au/marxan/docs/marxan_manual_1_8_2.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ball, I.R., Possingham, H.P. & Watts, M. (2009) Marxan and relatives: Software for spatial conservation prioritisation. In: Spatial conservation prioritization: quantitative methods and computational tools, ed. Moilanen, A., Wilson, K.A. & Possingham, H.P., pp. 185–195. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balmford, A., Moore, J.L., Brooks, T., Burgess, N., Hansen, L.A., Williams, P. & Rahbek, C. (2001) Conservation conflicts across Africa. Science 291: 2616–2619.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brito, D. & Grelle, C.E.V. (2004) Effectiveness of a reserve network for the conservation of an endemic marsupial in Atlantic forest. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: 2519–2536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brito, D. & Grelle, C.E.V. (2006) Estimating minimum area of suitable habitat and viable population size for the northern muriqui (Brachyteles hypoxanthus). Biodiversity and Conservation 15: 4197–4210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardillo, M., Mace, G.M., Jones, K.E., Bielby, J., Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., Sechrest, W., Orme, C.D.L. & Purvis, A. (2005) Multiple causes of high extinction risk in large mammal species. Science 309: 1239–1241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavieres, L.A., Arroyo, M.T.K., Posadas, P., Marticorena, C., Matthei, O., Rodríguez, R., Squeo, F.A. & Arancio, G. (2002) Identification of priority areas for conservation in an arid zone: application of parsimony analysis of endemicity in the vascular flora of the Antofagasta region, northern Chile. Biodiversity and Conservation 11: 1301–1311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chown, S.L., van Rensburg, B.J., Gaston, K.J., Rodrigues, A.S.L. & van Jaarsveld, A.S. (2003) Energy, species richness, and human population size: conservation implications at a national scale. Ecological Applications 13: 1233–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cincotta, R.P., Wisnewski, J. & Engelman, R. (2000) Human population in biodiversity hotspots. Nature 404: 990–992.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennis, R.L.H. & Thomas, C.D. (2000) Bias in butterfly distribution maps: the influence of hot spots and recorder's home range. Journal of Insect Conservation 4: 73–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, R.L.H., Sparks, T.H. & Hardy, P.B. (1999) Bias in butterfly distribution maps: the effects of sampling effort. Journal of Insect Conservation 3: 33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Bini, L.M. & Hawkins, B.A. (2003) Spatial autocorrelation and red herrings in geographical ecology. Global Ecology and Biogeography 12: 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Bini, L.M., Vieira, C.M., Souza, M.C., Bastos, R.P., Brandão, D. & Oliveira, L.G. (2004) Spatial patterns in species richness and priority areas for conservation of anurans in the Cerrado region, Central Brazil. Amphibia- Reptilia 25: 63–75.Google Scholar
Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Bini, L.M., Pinto, M.P., Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Carvalho, P. & Bastos, R.P. (2006) Anuran species richness, complementarity and conservation conflicts in Brazilian Cerrado. Acta Oecologica 29: 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Bini, L.M., Pinto, M.P., Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Carvalho, P., Vieira, S.L. & Bastos, R.P. (2007) Conservation biogeography of anurans in Brazilian Cerrado. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 997–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutilleul, P. (1993) Modifying the t test for assessing the correlation between two spatial processes. Biometrics 49: 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrier, S., Pressey, R.L. & Barrett, T.W. (2000) A new predictor of irreplaceability of areas for achieving a conservation goal, its application to real-world planning, and a research agenda for further refinement. Biological Conservation 93: 303–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fjeldså, J. (2000) The relevance of systematics in choosing priority areas for global conservation. Environmental Conservation 27: 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica (2009) Atlas dos remanescentes florestais da Mata Atlântica. Período 2005–2008. São Paulo, Brazil: Fundação SOS Mata Atântica: 156 pp. [www document]. URL http://mapas.sosma.org.br/site_media/download/atlas%20mata%20atlantica-relatorio2005-2008.pdfGoogle Scholar
Galván, D.V. & Vázquez, L.-B. (2008) Prioritizing áreas for conservation of Mexican carnivores considering natural protected áreas and human population density. Animal Conservation 11: 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Game, E.T. & Grantham, H.S. (2008) Marxan user manual: for Marxan version 1.8.10. University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia, and Pacific Marine Analysis and Research Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [www document]. URL http://www.uq.edu.au/marxan/docs/Marxan_User_Manual_2008.pdfGoogle Scholar
Grelle, C.E.V., Paglia, A.P. & Silva, H.S. (2006) Análise dos fatores de ameaça de extinção estudo de caso com mamíferos brasileiros. In: Biologia da conservação essências, ed. Rocha, C.F.D., Bergallo, H.G., Alves, M.A.S. & Van Sluys, M., pp. 361–374. São Carlos, Brazil: RiMa.Google Scholar
Hunter, M.L. Jr & Hutchinson, A. (1994) The virtues and shortcomings of parochialism: conserving species that are locally rare, but globally common. Conservation Biology 8: 1163–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IUCN (2010) IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.2 [www document]. URL www.iucnredlist.orgGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, T.R. (2003) Populating the environment: human growth, density and migration in the Atlantic Forest. In: The Atlantic Forest of South America: Biodiversity Status, Threats, and Outlook, ed. Galindo-Leal, C. & Câmara, I.G., pp. 426–435. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press.Google Scholar
Kadmon, R., Farber, O. & Danin, A. (2004) Effect of roadside bias on the accuracy of predictive maps produced by bioclimatic models. Ecological Applications 14: 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurance, W.F. (2006) Have we overstated the tropical biodiversity crisis? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 22: 65–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laurance, W.F. (2009) Conserving the hottest of the hotspots. Biological Conservation 14: 1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurance, W.F., Albernaz, A.K.M., Schroth, G., Fearnside, P.M., Bergen, S., Venticinque, E.M. & Costa, C. (2002) Predictors of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Journal of Biogeography 29: 737–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legendre, P., Dale, M.R.T., Fortin, M.J., Gurevitch, J., Hohn, M. & Myers, D. (2002) The consequences of spatial structure for the design and analysis of ecological field surveys. Ecography 25: 601–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lomolino, M.V. (2004) Conservation biogeography. In: Frontiers of Biogeography: New Directions in the Geography of Nature, ed. Lomolino, M.V. & Heaney, L.R., pp. 293–296. Sunderland, USA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Loyola, R.D., Becker, C.G., Kubota, U., Haddad, C.F.B., Fonseca, C.A. & Lewinsohn, T.M. (2008 a) Hung out to dry: choice for priority ecoregions for conserving threatened Neotropical anurans depends on life-history traits. PLoS ONE 3: e2120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loyola, R.D., Oliveira, G., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F. & Lewinsohn, T.M. (2008 b) Conservation of Neotropical carnivores under different prioritization scenarios: mapping species traits to minimize conservation conflicts. Diversity and Distributions 14: 949–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loyola, R.D., Kubota, U., Fonseca, G.A.B. & Lewinsohn, T.M. (2009) Key Neotropical ecoregions for conservation of terrestrial vertebrates. Biodiversity and Conservation 18: 2017–2031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luck, G.W. (2007) A review of the relationships between human population density and biodiversity. Biological Reviews 82: 607–645.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luck, G.W., Ricketts, T.H., Daily, G.C. & Imhoff, M. (2004) Alleviating spatial conflict between people and biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101:182–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luck, G.W., Smallbone, L., McDonald, S. & Duffy, D. (2010) What drives the positive correlation between human population density and bird species richness in Australia? Global Ecology and Biogeography 19: 673–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machado, A.B., Drummond, G.M. & Paglia, A.P. (2008) Livro Vermelho da Fauna Brasileira Ameaçada de Extinção. Brasília, DF, Brazil: Ministério do Meio Ambiente: 1420 pp.Google Scholar
Margules, C. & Sarkar, S. (2007) Systematic conservation planning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meir, E., Andelman, S. & Possingham, H.P. (2004) Does conservation planning matter in a dynamic and uncertain world? Ecology Letters 7: 615–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., Fonseca, G.A.B. & Kent, J. (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Dea, N., Araújo, M.B. & Whittaker, R.J. (2006) How well do important bird areas represent species and minimize conservation conflict in the tropical Andes? Diversity and Distributions 12: 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, L.C., Hankerson, S.J., Dietz, J.M. & Raboy, B.E. (2010) Key tree species for the golden-headed lion tamarin and implications for shade-cocoa management in southern Bahia, Brazil. Animal Conservation 13: 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinto, M.P. & Grelle, C.E.V. (2009) Reserve selection and persistence: complementing the existing Atlantic Forest reserve system. Biodiversity and Conservation 18: 957–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinto, M.P., Mathias, P.V.C., Blamires, D., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F. & Bini, L.M. (2007) Selecting priority areas to conserve Psittacines in the Brazilian cerrado: minimizing human-conservation conflicts. Bird Conservation International 17: 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinto, M.P., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Bini, L.M., Blamires, D. & Rangel, T.F.L.V.B. (2008) Biodiversity surrogate groups and conservation priority areas: birds of the Brazilian Cerrado. Diversity and Distributions 14: 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Possingham, H., Ball, I. & Andelman, S. (2000) Mathematical methods for identifying representative reserve networks. In: Quantitative Methods for Conservation Biology, ed. Ferson, S. & Burgman, M., pp. 291–305. New York, NY, USA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Possingham, H.P., Wilson, K.A. & Andelman, S.J. (2006) Protected areas: goals, limitations, and design. In: Principles of Conservation Biology, ed. Groom, M.J., Meffe, G.K. & Carroll, C.R., pp. 509–533. Sunderland, UK: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Bini, L.M. & Diniz-Filho, J.A.F. (2006) Towards an integrated computational tool for spatial analysis in macroecology and biogeography. Global Ecology and Biogeography 15: 321–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Bini, L.M. & Diniz-Filho, J.A.F. (2010) SAM: a comprehensive application for spatial analysis in macroecology. Ecography 33: 46–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Bini, L.M., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Pinto, M.P., Carvalho, P. & Bastos, R.P. (2007) Human development and biodiversity conservation in Brazilian Cerrado. Applied Geography 27: 14–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Pinto, M.P., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F. & Bini, L.M. (2004) Avaliação da eficiência de unidades de conservação através de teste de aleatorização. In: Anais IV Congresso Brasileiro de Unidades de Conservação, pp. 161–168. Curitiba, BR, Brazil: Fundação O Boticário de Proteção à Natureza, Rede Nacional Pró Unidades de Conservação.Google Scholar
Reyers, B. (2004) Incorporating anthropogenic threats into evaluations of regional biodiversity and prioritisation of conservation areas in the Limpopo Province, South Africa. Biological Conservation 118: 521–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rondinini, C., Wilson, K.S., Boitani, L., Grantham, H. & Possingham, H.P. (2006) Tradeoffs of different types of species occurrence data for use in systematic conservation planning. Ecology Letters 9: 1136–1145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tabarelli, M., Pinto, L.P., Silva, J.M.C., Hirota, M. & Bedê, L. (2005) Challenges and opportunities for biodiversity conservation in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Conservation Biology 19: 695–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiollay, J.-M. (2002) Bird diversity and selection of protected areas in a large Neotropical forest tract. Biodiversity and Conservation 11: 1377–1395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tognelli, M.F. (2005) Assessing the utility of indicator groups for the conservation of South American terrestrial mammals. Biological Conservation 121: 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tognelli, M.F., Arellano, P.I.R. & Marquet, P.A. (2008) How well do the existing and proposed reserve networks represent vertebrate species in Chile? Diversity and Distributions 14: 148–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vázquez, L.-B. & Gaston, K.J. (2006) People and mammals in Mexico: conservation conflicts at a national scale. Biodiversity and Conservation 15: 2397–2414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wege, D.C. & Long, A.J. (1995). Key Areas for Threatened Birds in the Neotropics. BirdLife Conservation Series No. 5. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R.J., Araújo, M.B., Paul, J., Ladle, R.J., Watson, J.E.M. & Willis, K.J. 2005. Conservation biogeography: assessment and prospect. Diversity and Distributions 11: 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar