物种保护中的系统发育多样性:简史、批判性综述和进展的挑战

M. Cardillo
{"title":"物种保护中的系统发育多样性:简史、批判性综述和进展的挑战","authors":"M. Cardillo","doi":"10.1017/ext.2023.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Species that are evolutionarily distinct have long been valued for their unique and irreplaceable contribution to biodiversity. About 30 years ago, this idea was extended to the concept of phylogenetic diversity (PD): a quantitative, continuous-scale index of conservation value for a set of species, calculated by summing the phylogenetic branch lengths that connect them. This way of capturing evolutionary history has opened new opportunities for analysis, and has therefore generated a huge academic literature, but to date has had only limited impact on conservation practice or policy. In this review, I present a brief historical overview of PD research. I then examine the empirical evidence for the primary rationale of PD that it is the best proxy for “ feature diversity, ” which includes both known and unknown phenotypic characters, contributing to utilitarian value, ecosystem function, future resilience, and evolutionary potential. Surprisingly, it is only relatively recently that this rationale has been subject to systematic empirical scrutiny, and to date, there are mixed results on the connection between PD and phenotypic diversity. Finally, I examine the least well-studied, but potentially greatest challenge for PD: its dependence on the reliability of phylogenetic inference itself. The very few studies that have investigated this so far show that the ranking ofspecies assemblages by their PD values can vary substantially under alternative, routine, phylogenetic methods and assumptions. If PD is to become more widely adopted into conservation decision-making, it will be important to better understand the conditions under which it performs well, and those under which it performs poorly.","PeriodicalId":142838,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Prisms: Extinction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Phylogenetic diversity in conservation: a brief history, critical overview, and challenges to progress\",\"authors\":\"M. Cardillo\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ext.2023.8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Species that are evolutionarily distinct have long been valued for their unique and irreplaceable contribution to biodiversity. About 30 years ago, this idea was extended to the concept of phylogenetic diversity (PD): a quantitative, continuous-scale index of conservation value for a set of species, calculated by summing the phylogenetic branch lengths that connect them. This way of capturing evolutionary history has opened new opportunities for analysis, and has therefore generated a huge academic literature, but to date has had only limited impact on conservation practice or policy. In this review, I present a brief historical overview of PD research. I then examine the empirical evidence for the primary rationale of PD that it is the best proxy for “ feature diversity, ” which includes both known and unknown phenotypic characters, contributing to utilitarian value, ecosystem function, future resilience, and evolutionary potential. Surprisingly, it is only relatively recently that this rationale has been subject to systematic empirical scrutiny, and to date, there are mixed results on the connection between PD and phenotypic diversity. Finally, I examine the least well-studied, but potentially greatest challenge for PD: its dependence on the reliability of phylogenetic inference itself. The very few studies that have investigated this so far show that the ranking ofspecies assemblages by their PD values can vary substantially under alternative, routine, phylogenetic methods and assumptions. If PD is to become more widely adopted into conservation decision-making, it will be important to better understand the conditions under which it performs well, and those under which it performs poorly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":142838,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cambridge Prisms: Extinction\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cambridge Prisms: Extinction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ext.2023.8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Prisms: Extinction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ext.2023.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

进化上独特的物种长期以来因其对生物多样性的独特和不可替代的贡献而受到重视。大约30年前,这一想法被扩展到系统发育多样性(PD)的概念:一组物种保护价值的定量、连续尺度指数,通过将连接它们的系统发育分支长度相加来计算。这种捕捉进化史的方法为分析开辟了新的机会,因此产生了大量的学术文献,但迄今为止,对保护实践或政策的影响有限。在这篇综述中,我简要介绍了PD研究的历史概况。然后,我检查了PD的主要理论基础的经验证据,即它是“特征多样性”的最佳代理,其中包括已知和未知的表型特征,有助于实用价值,生态系统功能,未来弹性和进化潜力。令人惊讶的是,直到最近,这一理论才受到系统的实证审查,到目前为止,关于帕金森病和表型多样性之间的关系,结果好坏参半。最后,我检查了研究最少,但对PD的潜在最大挑战:它依赖于系统发育推断本身的可靠性。迄今为止,很少有研究表明,在替代的、常规的、系统发育的方法和假设下,物种组合的PD值排序可能会有很大差异。如果PD要被更广泛地采用到保护决策中,那么更好地了解它在哪些条件下表现良好,哪些条件下表现不佳将是很重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Phylogenetic diversity in conservation: a brief history, critical overview, and challenges to progress
Species that are evolutionarily distinct have long been valued for their unique and irreplaceable contribution to biodiversity. About 30 years ago, this idea was extended to the concept of phylogenetic diversity (PD): a quantitative, continuous-scale index of conservation value for a set of species, calculated by summing the phylogenetic branch lengths that connect them. This way of capturing evolutionary history has opened new opportunities for analysis, and has therefore generated a huge academic literature, but to date has had only limited impact on conservation practice or policy. In this review, I present a brief historical overview of PD research. I then examine the empirical evidence for the primary rationale of PD that it is the best proxy for “ feature diversity, ” which includes both known and unknown phenotypic characters, contributing to utilitarian value, ecosystem function, future resilience, and evolutionary potential. Surprisingly, it is only relatively recently that this rationale has been subject to systematic empirical scrutiny, and to date, there are mixed results on the connection between PD and phenotypic diversity. Finally, I examine the least well-studied, but potentially greatest challenge for PD: its dependence on the reliability of phylogenetic inference itself. The very few studies that have investigated this so far show that the ranking ofspecies assemblages by their PD values can vary substantially under alternative, routine, phylogenetic methods and assumptions. If PD is to become more widely adopted into conservation decision-making, it will be important to better understand the conditions under which it performs well, and those under which it performs poorly.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Regional extinction(s) but continental persistence in European Acheulean culture The extinct marine megafauna of the Phanerozoic Snake words in Estonia: Language, nature and extinction in Andrus Kivirähk’s The Man Who Spoke Snakish – ERRATUM What passes through the extinction filter? Historical and contemporary patterns of vulnerability of the most extinction-prone bird family (Aves: Rallidae) Thermal and nutrient stress drove Permian-Triassic shallow marine extinctions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1