Rachel E Pausch, Jessica R Hale, Peter Kiffney, Beth Sanderson, Sara Azat, Katie Barnas, W Bryant Chesney, Natalie Cosentino-Manning, Stephanie Ehinger, Dayv Lowry, Steve Marx
{"title":"评估温带近岸沉水植被的生态估值和等值分析方法综述。","authors":"Rachel E Pausch, Jessica R Hale, Peter Kiffney, Beth Sanderson, Sara Azat, Katie Barnas, W Bryant Chesney, Natalie Cosentino-Manning, Stephanie Ehinger, Dayv Lowry, Steve Marx","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nearshore seagrass, kelp, and other macroalgae beds (submerged aquatic vegetation [SAV]) are productive and important ecosystems. Mitigating anthropogenic impacts on these habitats requires tools to quantify their ecological value and the debits and credits of impact and mitigation. To summarize and clarify the state of SAV habitat quantification and available tools, we searched peer-reviewed literature and other agency documents for methods that either assigned ecological value to or calculated equivalencies between impact and mitigation in SAV. Out of 47 tools, there were 11 equivalency methods, 7 of which included a valuation component. The remaining valuation methods were most commonly designed for seagrasses and rocky intertidal macroalgae rather than canopy-forming kelps. Tools were often designed to address specific resource policies and associated habitat evaluation. Frequent categories of tools and methods included those associated with habitat equivalency analyses and those that scored habitats relative to reference or ideal conditions, including models designed for habitat suitability indices and the European Union's Water and Marine Framework Directives. Over 29 tool input metrics spanned 3 spatial scales of SAV: individual shoots or stipes, bed or site, and landscape or region. The most common metric used for both seagrasses and macroalgae was cover. Seagrass tools also often employed density measures, and some categories used measures of tissue content (e.g., carbon, nitrogen). Macroalgal tools for rocky intertidal habitats frequently included species richness or incorporated indicator species to assess habitat. We provide a flowchart for decision-makers to identify representative tools that may apply to their specific management needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14380"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of ecological valuation and equivalency analysis methods for assessing temperate nearshore submerged aquatic vegetation.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel E Pausch, Jessica R Hale, Peter Kiffney, Beth Sanderson, Sara Azat, Katie Barnas, W Bryant Chesney, Natalie Cosentino-Manning, Stephanie Ehinger, Dayv Lowry, Steve Marx\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cobi.14380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Nearshore seagrass, kelp, and other macroalgae beds (submerged aquatic vegetation [SAV]) are productive and important ecosystems. Mitigating anthropogenic impacts on these habitats requires tools to quantify their ecological value and the debits and credits of impact and mitigation. To summarize and clarify the state of SAV habitat quantification and available tools, we searched peer-reviewed literature and other agency documents for methods that either assigned ecological value to or calculated equivalencies between impact and mitigation in SAV. Out of 47 tools, there were 11 equivalency methods, 7 of which included a valuation component. The remaining valuation methods were most commonly designed for seagrasses and rocky intertidal macroalgae rather than canopy-forming kelps. Tools were often designed to address specific resource policies and associated habitat evaluation. Frequent categories of tools and methods included those associated with habitat equivalency analyses and those that scored habitats relative to reference or ideal conditions, including models designed for habitat suitability indices and the European Union's Water and Marine Framework Directives. Over 29 tool input metrics spanned 3 spatial scales of SAV: individual shoots or stipes, bed or site, and landscape or region. The most common metric used for both seagrasses and macroalgae was cover. Seagrass tools also often employed density measures, and some categories used measures of tissue content (e.g., carbon, nitrogen). Macroalgal tools for rocky intertidal habitats frequently included species richness or incorporated indicator species to assess habitat. We provide a flowchart for decision-makers to identify representative tools that may apply to their specific management needs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e14380\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14380\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14380","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
近岸海草、海带和其他大型藻类(水下植被 [SAV])是富饶而重要的生态系统。要减轻人类活动对这些栖息地的影响,就需要有工具来量化它们的生态价值以及影响和减轻影响的得失。为了总结和澄清 SAV 生境量化和可用工具的现状,我们搜索了同行评议文献和其他机构文件,以寻找赋予 SAV 生态价值或计算影响与减缓之间等值的方法。在 47 种工具中,有 11 种等价方法,其中 7 种包含估值部分。其余估值方法最常见的设计对象是海草和潮间带岩石大型藻类,而非冠层形成海带。工具通常是针对具体的资源政策和相关的生境评估而设计的。经常使用的工具和方法类别包括与生境等效性分析相关的工具和方法,以及根据参考或理想条件对生境进行评分的工具和方法,包括为生境适宜性指数和欧盟水与海洋框架指令设计的模型。超过 29 种工具输入指标涵盖了 SAV 的 3 种空间尺度:单个嫩枝或叶柄、海床或地点以及景观或区域。海草和大型藻类最常用的指标是覆盖率。海草工具也经常使用密度度量,有些类别使用组织含量(如碳、氮)度量。潮间带岩石栖息地的大型藻类工具通常包括物种丰富度或纳入指标物种来评估栖息地。我们提供了一个流程图,供决策者识别可能适用于其特定管理需求的代表性工具。
Review of ecological valuation and equivalency analysis methods for assessing temperate nearshore submerged aquatic vegetation.
Nearshore seagrass, kelp, and other macroalgae beds (submerged aquatic vegetation [SAV]) are productive and important ecosystems. Mitigating anthropogenic impacts on these habitats requires tools to quantify their ecological value and the debits and credits of impact and mitigation. To summarize and clarify the state of SAV habitat quantification and available tools, we searched peer-reviewed literature and other agency documents for methods that either assigned ecological value to or calculated equivalencies between impact and mitigation in SAV. Out of 47 tools, there were 11 equivalency methods, 7 of which included a valuation component. The remaining valuation methods were most commonly designed for seagrasses and rocky intertidal macroalgae rather than canopy-forming kelps. Tools were often designed to address specific resource policies and associated habitat evaluation. Frequent categories of tools and methods included those associated with habitat equivalency analyses and those that scored habitats relative to reference or ideal conditions, including models designed for habitat suitability indices and the European Union's Water and Marine Framework Directives. Over 29 tool input metrics spanned 3 spatial scales of SAV: individual shoots or stipes, bed or site, and landscape or region. The most common metric used for both seagrasses and macroalgae was cover. Seagrass tools also often employed density measures, and some categories used measures of tissue content (e.g., carbon, nitrogen). Macroalgal tools for rocky intertidal habitats frequently included species richness or incorporated indicator species to assess habitat. We provide a flowchart for decision-makers to identify representative tools that may apply to their specific management needs.
期刊介绍:
Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.