Conservation Biology最新文献

The combined effects of anthropogenic disturbances, such as logging and climate change, remain poorly understood; yet, they are the main threats to tropical biodiversity. Most tropical African countries lack long-term climate data, so climate impacts on biodiversity cannot be assessed. However, individuals experience weather, rather than climate, such that climate effects could be seen as the cumulative effects of weather over time. We used morphometric data collected in 1996-2000 and 2017-2021 on understory birds in the Budongo Forest, Uganda, to assess how logging history and short-term weather variations affected the body condition (body condition index [BCI]) of birds. Birds were captured in mist nets in logged and unlogged sites. We analyzed data with Bayesian mixed-effects models. The BCI values were lower in logged forests and decreased as maximum temperatures increased, irrespective of the sensitivity of the birds to logging. Birds responded quickly to increasing temperatures and precipitation (within 1 week), and the longer a hot period was, the worse the effect on birds in heavily logged forests, suggesting reduced thermal buffering. Contrary to our expectations, BCI values for 2017-2021 were higher than values for 1996-2000, indicating possible forest recovery. Our findings underscore the importance of short-term weather data to predict climate change impacts. Such predictions can inform tropical forest management and restoration measures.

Conservation (or safe) havens are protected areas where barriers (e.g., fences) separate biodiversity from threatening processes and are being increasingly used to support conservation. Differences between selection pressures inside and outside havens can be anticipated; however, understanding of the evolutionary consequences of these differences is limited, and many changes may be going unnoticed. This hampers assessments of the extent to which haven populations will continue to represent natural populations and wild-type traits and their potential as a source of robust individuals suitable for restoration projects outside havens. Although many haven populations are essentially wild, they have similarities to ex situ conservation populations and even domestic and cultivated species that can shed light on potential changes in selection pressures and their consequences. By assessing how features of havens can alter selection pressures, one can begin to make predictions about the likelihood of genetic change and develop monitoring strategies to further inform risks that phenotypic changes in protected populations will be maladaptive outside havens. Havens could also provide opportunities as outdoor laboratories to improve understanding of selection and evolutionary processes. Research, combined with effective monitoring and adaptive management in havens, is essential to ensure the continued effectiveness of havens as a conservation tool and their ability to supply robust individuals for future in situ conservation.

Headstarting is a translocation technique involving the hatching or rearing of wild eggs or young in captivity and the release of those individuals back to the wild at or before independence. It has been trialed as a conservation intervention for shorebirds over recent decades to improve the population trend of target populations by increasing survival during the vulnerable early-life stages. We used a population modeling approach to frame an exploration of the circumstances in which headstarting can be a valuable tool and why. Our models demonstrate that headstarting can result in order-of-magnitude increases in per capita productivity of shorebirds, which could lead to substantial increases in population productivity and, in turn, improvements in population trend. However, headstarting shorebirds can be challenging and expensive, and therefore, it is not a conservation panacea. We used recent examples of shorebird headstarting projects to illustrate 3 main scenarios in which headstarting can be an appropriate intervention: when there is a need to buy time while conservation measures are identified and take effect; recovery of very small populations must be accelerated; and colonization of new or improved habitat requires assistance. Headstarting does not directly address the drivers of shorebird decline and thus is not a long-term solution, although this is similarly true of other conservation interventions, which also have risk and cost considerations that should be weighed in estimations of potential gain. Headstarting is a valuable conservation tool for shorebirds that should be embedded in general recovery plans that deliver more sustainable solutions.

Invasive rats threaten island biodiversity, disrupting ecosystems and endangering native species. Although rat eradication has succeeded on many islands, tropical islands present unique management challenges. Strict regulations and financial constraints on some tropical islands further limit proven eradication methods, complicating rodent management. We applied a real-time active adaptive management approach that provided a cautious, cost-efficient, and scientifically grounded pathway to rat eradication, while adhering to strict environmental regulations, on Ilha do Meio, Brazil. The cost was US$3300 per hectare, and the management actions were grounded in close interdisciplinary collaboration. We applied rodenticide (brodifacoum), monitored the rat population, and made iterative management adjustments. The rat overpopulation was eradicated within 5 months, and population increases were observed early on in the threatened masked booby (Sula dactylatra), and the endemic Noronha elaenia (Elaenia ridleyana) and Noronha skink (Trachylepis atlantica). Despite logistical constraints, our approach proved effective and cost-efficient, marking its first application in a biological system. Our findings highlight the value of innovation, close interdisciplinary collaboration, and adaptive decision-making when the application of best-practice methods is constrained.

Current plant conservation efforts are hindered by, for example, poor seed germination, low viability, and insufficient propagation and preservation technologies. To address these problems, we devised an approach to plant conservation that integrates conservation, preservation, and restoration (CPR), which uses advanced in vitro techniques. We applied our method to the endangered plant species, Mingan thistle (Cirsium minganense Vict). We used micropropagation, embryo rescue, and cryopreservation, which together allowed germplasm banking, habitat restoration, and species recovery. Overcoming the natural dormancy and low viability of C. minganense seeds, embryo rescue achieved a remarkable 100% germination rate, highlighting its potential to bypass germination barriers. Optimal micropropagation protocols enhanced shoot proliferation and rooting and yielded vigorous plantlets with a nearly 100% survival during acclimatization. Cryopreservation protocols for in-vitro-grown shoot tips and seeds successfully preserved genetic diversity, which furthered immediate restoration efforts and long-term germplasm storage. Reintroductions of micropropagated and cryopreserved plants in the Mingan Archipelago National Park Reserve, Quebec, Canada, had high survival rates (average 90% after 2 years of transplant) and prolific flowering. Our results emphasize the importance of combining seed-based and in vitro propagation techniques to create genetically diverse and resilient plant populations and the value of cryobanking for ensuring germplasm availability under changing environmental conditions. The CPR strategy offers a scalable framework for conserving endangered plant species, safeguarding genetic diversity, and restoring ecosystems to support long-term biodiversity resilience.

Non-native plant invasions are a cross-boundary conservation challenge, requiring coordinated management and policy responses underpinned by science. Global change is expected to exacerbate this challenge by changing abiotic and biotic drivers of invasive plant distribution, abundance, and impact. Current approaches may no longer be effective, and management must adapt to new threats and conditions. Collaborative personal and institutional partnerships are crucial to link research to practice and policy in order to better manage the complex drivers of invasions and mitigate their impacts under ongoing global change. We used examples from local to global scales to demonstrate how reciprocal knowledge exchange and project codesign among researchers, practitioners, and policy makers can improve conservation outcomes and benefits from invasive species management. Researchers provide expertise needed to apply concepts to new contexts, practitioners hold essential local knowledge, and policy makers balance competing priorities. Combining these strengths leads to more effective and resilient management of plant invasions. This highlights the central importance of collaboration among people, including Indigenous peoples and other local communities, in decision-making and management. Best practices for developing partnerships between individual researchers and local and Indigenous communities, practitioners, and policy makers include engaging respectfully across knowledge and value systems, testing assumptions with data, considering ecological significance, and connecting across spatial scales. Structural solutions to overcome institutional and implementation barriers and develop effective partnerships include funding knowledge brokers and liaisons, collaboratively reviewing policies and practices, incentivizing long-term relationships and goals, and codeveloping data collection and storage. The resulting intentional, long-term partnerships will enable direct application of ecological knowledge to plant invasions and their management, support sustainable and locally backed solutions, and overcome lags in applying science to practice.

Impact evaluation of conservation actions is a crucial step in global efforts to curb the biodiversity crisis. Through robust impact evaluation, practitioners can assess the effectiveness of conservation strategies and optimize the use of limited resources. Despite a proliferation of methods and tools for evaluating conservation impact, no standardized method exists to assess and compare the impact, and global contribution, of species recovery programs. To address this gap, we devised an evaluation framework, based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Green Status of Species (GSS), a global standard for measuring species recovery. We sought to provide a way for conservation program delivery partners to evaluate the effectiveness of their programs in contributing to global species recovery. We adapted 2 scenarios used in GSS assessments to estimate the impact of worldwide conservation actions on a species (the counterfactual current scenario and the future without conservation scenario), in order to propose a new assessment: the program GSS, a method allowing conservation practitioners to estimate the past and potential future impacts of a conservation program relative to the global impact. To identify the strengths and limitations of applying the GSS method at the program level and to gather proof of concept for our adaptation, we tested the proposed method on 16 species recovery programs. The program GSS approach identified past or future impacts of program actions on species status in 9 of the programs assessed. The detectability of program impact and the relative impact of the program compared with global impact were influenced by time since program establishment and program scope (i.e., proportion of a species' population or distribution included in the program). Our framework for program GSS assessments can provide practitioners with a standard, straightforward, and cost-effective way to communicate conservation successes and expected future impacts. Results from our program GSS framework can be compared with the global recovery of a species (conservation legacy and conservation impact) and thus indicate a program's contribution to the recovery of the entire species.

The Natura 2000 (N2K) network combines biodiversity protection and socioeconomic targets. Human activities, such as agricultural practices, can affect biodiversity in N2K sites in diverse ways. Limiting activities with negative impacts while enforcing land management that supports biodiversity is crucial for effective conservation. Yet, site-level information on how this is addressed in N2K sites is lacking. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a European Union-wide survey among N2K site managers. We aimed to assess the implemented conservation measures, their funding sources, and the extent to which different threats are addressed. Of the 341 responses, 61.8% reported the implementation of conservation measures linked to agricultural practices, such as adapting mowing and grazing at levels suitable for the conservation of grassland habitats and species. Sites with management tied to agricultural practices relied more on EU funding, such as the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), whereas other sites depended more on national funding. Threats not addressed by conservation measures were reported by 63.8% of respondents, suggesting that overall management funding may be insufficient or ineffectively allocated. Most of these unaddressed threats resulted from intensive agricultural practices, such as the use of agrochemicals (reported as a threat in 13% of sites). These findings provide insight into how traditional agricultural practices, mostly related to low-intensity grazing and mowing, are frequently used as conservation tools, whereas intensive agriculture is a prominent source of unmitigated threats. Thus, achieving N2K conservation goals requires avoiding intensive agricultural practices and strengthening effective conservation measures in protected areas.

Strengthening research capacity is essential to address the global biodiversity crisis. Yet, parachute science often undermines this goal, and its prevalence, costs, and benefits are unclear. We analyzed 13,502 publications on primate research that we extracted from Scopus (1960-2022) to evaluate the effects of parachute science on local research capacity across primate-range countries. We categorized these publications as local (LRP), collaborative (CRP), or parachute science (PSRP) research publications and categorized countries where the research took place as low- to middle-income countries or high- to upper-middle-income countries. We used generalized linear mixed-effects models to assess how parachute science influenced local research capacity. For 69% of PSRPs, the research was conducted in 59 low- to middle-income countries. For 20% of LRPs, research was led by people from these 59 countries. The disparity in LRPs among country groups was large. Local research publications in high- to upper-middle-income countries were at least 3.6 times higher than those in low- to middle-income countries. Before 2013, parachute science contributed to an increase in LRPs; this trend reversed after 2013, mainly resulting in a decline in LRPs across all countries and both income categories. Strengthening the capacity to share research in low- to middle-income countries is urgent if international conservation commitments are to be met. We recommend establishing true collaborative and interdisciplinary research teams, expanding local research opportunities, and supporting long-term research projects as key strategies for sustainable research capacity strengthening in low-income countries.