Limitations of habitats as biodiversity surrogates for conservation planning in estuaries

Shokri, MR; Gladstone, W

Limitations of habitats as biodiversity surrogates for conservation planning in estuaries

Shokri, MR Gladstone, W

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2013, 185 (4), pp. 3477 - 3492
Issue Date:: 2013-04-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2012001297OK.pdf		598.82 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Shokri, MR	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Gladstone, W https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4517-4605	en_US
dc.date.available	2012-07-23	en_US
dc.date.issued	2013-04-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2013, 185 (4), pp. 3477 - 3492	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0167-6369	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/26276
dc.description.abstract	Increasing pressures on global biodiversity and lack of data on the number and abundance of species have motivated conservation planners and researchers to use more readily available information as proxies or surrogates for biodiversity. "Habitat" is one of the most frequently used surrogates but its assumed value in marine conservation planning is not often tested. The present study developed and tested three alternative habitat classification schemes of increasing complexity for a large estuary in south-east Australia and tested their effectiveness in predicting spatial variation in macroinvertebrate biodiversity and selecting estuarine protected areas to represent species. The three habitat classification schemes were: (1) broad-scale habitats (e.g.; mangroves and seagrass), (2) subdivision of each broad-scale habitat by a suite of environmental variables that varied significantly throughout the estuary, and (3) subdivision of each broad-scale habitat by the subset of environmental variables that best explained spatial variation in macroinvertebrate biodiversity. Macroinvertebrate assemblages differed significantly among the habitats in each classification scheme. For each classification scheme, habitat richness was significantly correlated with species richness, total density of macroinvertebrates, assemblage dissimilarity, and summed irreplaceability. However, in a reserve selection process designed to represent examples of each habitat, no habitat classification scheme represented species significantly better than a random selection of sites. Habitat classification schemes may represent variation in estuarine biodiversity; however, the results of this study suggest they are inefficient in designing representative networks of estuarine protected areas. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Environmental Monitoring and Assessment	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/s10661-012-2804-9	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Environmental Sciences	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Conservation of Natural Resources	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Ecosystem	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Biodiversity	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Environmental Monitoring	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Models, Biological	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	South Australia	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Estuaries	en_US
dc.title	Limitations of habitats as biodiversity surrogates for conservation planning in estuaries	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	185	en_US
utslib.for	0502 Environmental Science and Management	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science/School of Life Sciences
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	4	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	185	en_US

Abstract:

Increasing pressures on global biodiversity and lack of data on the number and abundance of species have motivated conservation planners and researchers to use more readily available information as proxies or surrogates for biodiversity. "Habitat" is one of the most frequently used surrogates but its assumed value in marine conservation planning is not often tested. The present study developed and tested three alternative habitat classification schemes of increasing complexity for a large estuary in south-east Australia and tested their effectiveness in predicting spatial variation in macroinvertebrate biodiversity and selecting estuarine protected areas to represent species. The three habitat classification schemes were: (1) broad-scale habitats (e.g.; mangroves and seagrass), (2) subdivision of each broad-scale habitat by a suite of environmental variables that varied significantly throughout the estuary, and (3) subdivision of each broad-scale habitat by the subset of environmental variables that best explained spatial variation in macroinvertebrate biodiversity. Macroinvertebrate assemblages differed significantly among the habitats in each classification scheme. For each classification scheme, habitat richness was significantly correlated with species richness, total density of macroinvertebrates, assemblage dissimilarity, and summed irreplaceability. However, in a reserve selection process designed to represent examples of each habitat, no habitat classification scheme represented species significantly better than a random selection of sites. Habitat classification schemes may represent variation in estuarine biodiversity; however, the results of this study suggest they are inefficient in designing representative networks of estuarine protected areas. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/26276