Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Science 27 March 1998:
Vol. 279. no. 5359, pp. 2106 - 2108
DOI: 10.1126/science.279.5359.2106
Prev | Table of Contents | Next

Reports

Biodiversity Assessment and Conservation Strategies

Albert S. van Jaarsveld, * Stefanie Freitag, Steven L. Chown, Caron Muller, Stephanie Koch, Heath Hull, Chuck Bellamy, Martin Krüger, Sebastian Endrödy-Younga, Mervyn W. Mansell, Clarke H. Scholtz

The efficient representation of all species in conservation planning is problematic. Often, species distribution is assessed by dividing the land into a grid; complementary sets of grids, in which each taxon is represented at least once, are then sought. To determine if this approach provides useful surrogate information, species and higher taxon data for South African plants and animals were analyzed. Complementary species sets did not coincide and overlapped little with higher taxon sets. Survey extent and taxonomic knowledge did not affect this overlap. Thus, the assumptions of surrogacy, on which so much conservation planning is based, are not supported.

A. S. van Jaarsveld, S. Freitag, S. L. Chown, C. Muller, S. Kock, H. Hull, C. H. Scholtz, Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa.
C. Bellamy, M. Krüger, S. Endrödy-Younga, Transvaal Museum, Post Office Box 413, Pretoria 0001, South Africa.
M. W. Mansell, Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Council, Private Bag X134, Pretoria 0001, South Africa.
*   To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: albert{at}scientia.up.ac.za.

Read the Full Text


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES:
The promise and pitfalls of systematic conservation planning.
R. I. McDonald (2009)
PNAS 106, 15101-15102
   Full Text »    PDF »
Cost-effective global conservation spending is robust to taxonomic group.
M. Bode, K. A. Wilson, T. M. Brooks, W. R. Turner, R. A. Mittermeier, M. F. McBride, E. C. Underwood, and H. P. Possingham (2008)
PNAS 105, 6498-6501
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Aligning Conservation Priorities Across Taxa in Madagascar with High-Resolution Planning Tools.
C. Kremen, A. Cameron, A. Moilanen, S. J. Phillips, C. D. Thomas, H. Beentje, J. Dransfield, B. L. Fisher, F. Glaw, T. C. Good, et al. (2008)
Science 320, 222-226
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Biodiversity: higher taxon richness.
K. J. Gaston (2000)
Progress in Physical Geography 24, 117-127
   PDF »
Umbrellas and flagships: Efficient conservation surrogates or expensive mistakes?.
S. J. Andelman and W. F. Fagan (2000)
PNAS 97, 5954-5959
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »


To Advertise     Find Products

Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)