What are the main reasons for the selection of subcatchments?

Additional subcatchments in the Cantabric region (northern Spain) were also selected to enhance the connectivity between already existing protected areas and the Atlantic Ocean.

What is the main reason for the lack of protection of freshwater ecosystems?

it is common to find poor spatial overlap between protected areas and hydrological units such as subcatchments, which are more appropriate management units for freshwater ecosystems than rivers themselves (Hermoso et al., 2011).

How much area would be needed to address all these goals?

Addressing all these goals would need an increase in area between 7-46%, depending on the conservation target used and strength of connectivity required.

How many times did the authors run the optimisation algorithm?

The authors ran the optimisation algorithm 100 times (2 million iterations each) and retained the best solution within all runs for subsequent analyses.

How many species would be adequately represented in the new plan?

Despite the significant increase in the number of protected subcatchments, only 35-60% of species would be adequately represented depending on the target level (Fig. 3a-b).

How many species of fish, amphibians and aquatic reptiles are protected?

This situation is especially worrying in freshwater ecosystems, with Hermoso et al. (2015) reporting that only a small percentage of fish, amphibians and aquatic reptile species (15% of 91 species) have at least 25% of their distributionprotected or even less for higher targets.

How many subcatchments would be needed to meet the current target level?

3. ResultsHabitats Directive, an additional 800-4,300 subcatchments would be needed (extremes for lowest and highest connectivity and target levels respectively).

Open AccessJournal Article10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2015.07.023

Filling gaps in a large reserve network to address freshwater conservation needs.

Virgilio Hermoso, +3 more

- 15 Sep 2015

- Journal of Environmental Management

- Vol. 161, pp 358-365

TL;DR: This study uses a systematic planning approach to identify a minimum set of additional areas that would help adequately represent all freshwater fish, amphibians and aquatic reptiles at three different target levels, and provide a framework to address deficiencies in reserve networks for adequately protecting freshwater biodiversity elsewhere.

About: This article is published in Journal of Environmental Management. The article was published on 15 Sep 2015. and is currently open access. The article focuses on the topics: Natura 2000 & Marxan.

AI Agents for this Paper

Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps

Most frequently asked questions

1. How do the authors use subcatchments as planning units?

The authors use subcatchments as planning units, include connectivity between these units to improve the spatial design of priority areas, and account for land use intensity within subcatchments to avoid highly disturbed areas where the cost-effectiveness of conservation could be compromised.

2. What is the effect of increasing CSM on species distributions?

Increasing CSM increases connectivity among subcatchments, but this is achieved at expenses of selecting a larger number subcatchments (Hermoso et al., 2011).

3. What is the largest network of protected areas in Europe?

The European Natura 2000 is the world’s largest network of protected areas, encompassing over 25,500 sites, with a joint area of nearly 800,000 km2, across 28 countries (European Commission 2013, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/).

4. What is the purpose of the analyses using the reduced set of species listed in the Habitats?

The analyses using the reduced set of species listed in Habitats Directive aims to explore the minimum set of subcatchments required to at least fulfil the immediate exigencies of the Directive.

Figure 5. Summary of threat intensity in subcatchments selected for three conservation targets and five connectivity levels. Bars show the average (±SD) threat intensity within selected subcatchments (black), upstream selected subcatchments (up to 150 km; grey), and in unselected subcatchments (white). Dotted and solid lines represent the average threat intensity in subcatchments within and upstream of Natura 2000, respectively. Threat intensity is measured as the percentage of subcatchments under intensive land uses (see Table in Appendix A3 for details).

Figure 2. Gap analysis of Natura 2000 for freshwater fish, amphibians and semi-aquatic reptiles, considering either the species listed in the Habitats Directive (a-c) or all the 91 species (e-f), for three representation targets (100, 250, and 500 subcatchments). Colour intensity represents the range from low (light yellow) to high (red) connectivity levels (CSM) used to get the solution. Natura 2000 is represented in grey.

Figure 4. Efficiency (measured as 1- proportion of total subcatchments selected) at achieving connectivity for three conservation planning scenarios (not locking any reserves, locking pre-Natura 2000, and locking Natura 2000) and target levels (black=100, grey=250 and white=500 subcatchments), in relation to the target connectivity level.

Figure 3. Summary of the surrogacy value of species listed in the Habitats Directive (N=30) at representing either all species studied (a-b; N=91) or the unlisted species (c-d; N=61), in relation to the five connectivity levels tested (a, c; CSM), and five IUCN threat categories (c, d) for the intermediate CSM value (dotted box in panels a-b). Surrogacy was measured as the proportion of species that would achieve the different target levels in solutions identified using just the species listed in the Habitats Directive.

Table 1. Parameters configuration for the different planning scenarios tested in this study. The four parameters modified for planning scenarios were: a) conservation features (two different sets of species data), b) targets to be achieved (three targets considered), c) connectivity strength (CSM; five different strengths considered) and d) protected area considerations. Our assessment of surrogacy resulted in 30 scenarios tested, and was based on all possible

Figure 1. Extent of planning solutions measured as the proportion of all subcatchments included for each conservation scenario (15 scenarios, comparing 3 target levels and 5 CSM values). Bars represent values for solutions accounting for all species (N=91). Dotted lines represent the proportion of subcatchments including only species listed in the Annexes II and IV of the Habitats Directive. The solid grey line shows the proportion of subcatchments already protected by Natura 2000.

Citations

Journal Article•10.1016/J.BIOCON.2016.06.015

Gaps in ecological research on the world's largest internationally coordinated network of protected areas: A review of Natura 2000

Ewa H. Orlikowska, +4 more

- 01 Aug 2016

- Biological Conservation

TL;DR: In this article, the authors reviewed 510 peer-reviewed publications (period 1998-2014) focusing on ecological aspects of N2k, with the aims of identifying key research gaps and proposing future research priorities for improved conservation success.

...read moreread less

121

•Journal Article•10.1002/FEE.1823

Basin-scale effects of small hydropower on biodiversity dynamics

Katharina Lange, +8 more

- 01 Sep 2018

- Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment

TL;DR: In this article, the authors synthesize the available information about reach-scale and basin-scale impacts of small hydro-power plants on biodiversity and ecosystem function, and interactions with other anthropogenic stressors.

...read moreread less

Journal Article•10.1007/S10750-021-04622-W

Major shortfalls impairing knowledge and conservation of freshwater molluscs

Manuel Lopes-Lima, +7 more

- 01 Jul 2021

- Hydrobiologia

TL;DR: In this paper, a review of current knowledge on the biodiversity and conservation of freshwater molluscs using the concept of knowledge shortfalls is presented, focusing on seven previously proposed key shortfalls to review and analyse existing knowledge gaps relating to taxonomy, distribution, Wallacean Shortfall, abundance and population dynamics, the Prestonian Shortfall: (4) evolution, the Darwinian Shortfall; (5) abiotic tolerances, the Hutchinsonian Shortfalls; (6) traits, the Raunkiaeran shortfall; and (7) biotic interactions

...read moreread less

Journal Article•10.1080/03632415.2016.1182513

International Perspectives on the Effects of Climate Change on Inland Fisheries

Ian J. Winfield, +18 more

- 29 Jun 2016

- Fisheries

TL;DR: A range of perspectives from the International Fisheries Section of the American Fisheries Society on climate change effects on inland fisheries from standing and flowing waters in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and Latin America is presented in this paper.

...read moreread less

Journal Article•10.1002/AQC.2971

Assessing conservation priorities of endemic freshwater fishes in the Tropical Andes region

Marcelo F. Tognelli, +20 more

- 01 Jul 2019

- Aquatic Conservation-marine and Freshwat...

...read moreread less

...

Expand

References

Journal Article•10.1111/J.1523-1739.2007.00827.X

The Effectiveness of Iberian Protected Areas in Conserving Terrestrial Biodiversity

Miguel B. Araújo, +2 more

- 01 Dec 2007

- Conservation Biology

TL;DR: The results support the view that current SCI can be used for prioritization of areas for conservation, but a systematic reevaluation of conservation priorities in Spain and Portugal would be necessary to ensure that effective conservation of one of European's most important biodiversity regions is achieved.

...read moreread less

226

Journal Article•10.1002/AQC.1010

Progress and challenges in freshwater conservation planning

Jeanne L. Nel, +7 more

- 01 Jun 2009

- Aquatic Conservation-marine and Freshwat...

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors proposed a systematic conservation planning framework for freshwater ecosystems and their associated biota in the terrestrial and marine realms, incorporating uncertainty and dynamic threats into freshwater conservation planning; collection and collation of scale-appropriate primary data; and building an evidence base to support improved implementation of freshwater conservation plans.

...read moreread less

204

Journal Article•10.1016/J.TREE.2013.10.013

What is the future of conservation

Daniel F. Doak, +3 more

- 01 Feb 2014

- Trends in Ecology and Evolution

TL;DR: Despite claims that NCS approaches are supported by biological and social science, NCS has limited support from either and the shift in motivations and goals appear to arise largely from a belief system holding that the needs and wants of humans should be prioritized over any intrinsic or inherent rights and values of nature.

...read moreread less

196

Journal Article•10.1111/J.1466-822X.2004.00086.X

Questioning the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 Special Areas of Conservation strategy: the case of Crete

Panayiotis G. Dimitrakopoulos, +2 more

- 01 May 2004

- Global Ecology and Biogeography

TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the effectiveness of the selected 'network' of Natura 2000 Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) at a regional scale in Greece, in terms of its representativeness of plant biodiversity.

...read moreread less

161

•Journal Article•10.1111/J.1472-4642.2011.00879.X

Integrating multidirectional connectivity requirements in systematic conservation planning for freshwater systems

Virgilio Hermoso, +2 more

- 01 May 2012

- Diversity and Distributions

TL;DR: In this paper, a new component of connectivity, namely lateral connectivity, is proposed to improve the adequacy of freshwater ecosystems by enhancing movements of biodiversity within priority areas, such as lakes and wetlands.

...read moreread less

121

...

Expand

Filling gaps in a large reserve network to address freshwater conservation needs.

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

Most frequently asked questions

1. How do the authors use subcatchments as planning units?

2. What is the effect of increasing CSM on species distributions?

3. What is the largest network of protected areas in Europe?

4. What is the purpose of the analyses using the reduced set of species listed in the Habitats?

5. What are the main reasons for the selection of subcatchments?

6. What is the main reason for the lack of protection of freshwater ecosystems?

7. How much area would be needed to address all these goals?

8. How many times did the authors run the optimisation algorithm?

9. How many species would be adequately represented in the new plan?

10. How many species of fish, amphibians and aquatic reptiles are protected?

11. How many subcatchments would be needed to meet the current target level?

Figures

Citations

Gaps in ecological research on the world's largest internationally coordinated network of protected areas: A review of Natura 2000

Basin-scale effects of small hydropower on biodiversity dynamics

Major shortfalls impairing knowledge and conservation of freshwater molluscs

International Perspectives on the Effects of Climate Change on Inland Fisheries

Assessing conservation priorities of endemic freshwater fishes in the Tropical Andes region

References

The Effectiveness of Iberian Protected Areas in Conserving Terrestrial Biodiversity

Progress and challenges in freshwater conservation planning

What is the future of conservation

Questioning the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 Special Areas of Conservation strategy: the case of Crete

Integrating multidirectional connectivity requirements in systematic conservation planning for freshwater systems

Related Papers (5)

Unlocking the potential of protected areas for freshwaters

Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges

Progress and challenges in freshwater conservation planning

Freshwater Protected Areas: Strategies for Conservation

Half of the world's tree biodiversity is unprotected and is increasingly threatened by human activities