July 23, 2018 by Mary-Ann
Muffoletto, Utah State University
Conservation biologists recognize
a sobering reality.
"We're losing species left,
right and center," says Utah State University scientist Will Pearse. 'We
call it the 'Noah's Ark Problem,' and we have to pick species to save. We can't
save them all."
The biblical mariner seemed
capable of building a vessel to accommodate mating pairs of all the world's
creatures. The metaphor, today, however, would portray the harried Noah bailing
water and valiantly trying to prioritize saving animals most beneficial for the
future, as his boat rapidly sank.
Pearse, with colleagues Florent
Mazel, Arne Mooers and Caroline Tucker of Simon Fraser University and the
University of British Columbia, Marc Cadotte of the University of Toronto,
Sandra Diaz of Argentina's National University of Cordoba, Giulio Valentino
Dalla Riva of the University of British Columbia, Richard Grenyer of the
University of Oxford, Fabien Leprieur of the University of Montpellier and
David Mouillot of James Cook University, explore phylogenetic diversity as
a metric of conservation prioritization in the July 23, 2018, issue
of Nature Communications.
"Our paper tests a
fundamental component of conservation
biology we refer to as the 'phylogenetic gambit,'"
says Pearse, assistant professor in USU's Department of Biology and the USU
Ecology Center. "That is, conservation biologists often use species'
evolutionary history – their phylogeny – to identify groups of species to save."
This idea is based on the
assumption that preserving phylogenetic diversity among species preserves more
functional diversity than selecting species to preserve by chance. Functional
diversity is important, Pearse says, because it drives ecosystem health and
productivity.
"Yet measuring the
effectiveness of functional diversity is difficult," he says. "So
using phylogenetic diversity as a surrogate for functional diversity has made
conservation biology much easier and more effective."
In global datasets of mammals, birds
and tropical fishes, the team demonstrates that, for the most part, the
phylogenetic gambit holds. Preserving phylogenetic diversity preserves 18
percent more functional diversitythan
would be expected if species to save were selected at random.
No comments:
Post a Comment
You only need to enter your comment once! Comments will appear once they have been moderated. This is so as to stop the would-be comedian who has been spamming the comments here with inane and often offensive remarks. You know who you are!