Advertisement

Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 391–401 | Cite as

Tracking the long-term dynamics of plant diversity in Northeast Spain with a network of volunteers and rangers

  • Maria Begoña GarcíaEmail author
  • Jose Luis Silva
  • Pablo Tejero
  • Iker Pardo
  • Daniel Gómez
Original Article

Abstract

Scientific projects can greatly benefit from the participation of non-professionals in identifying environmental changes at a variety of spatial and temporal scales. In 2010, we launched a long-term project in Northeast Spain (MONITO) that has recruited more than 200 volunteers and rangers. Participants monitor regional-species distribution and local-population abundance for a wide variety of plant species: threatened, rare, and indicators of climatic change or habitats of interest. At the local abundance level (the novel “Adopt-a-plant” program), they carry out annual censuses of population abundance for 10 years at least, to eventually estimate standard trends and future vulnerability. In order to show the functional structure of the network and facilitate implementation elsewhere, we evaluate the key aspects of MONITO, which currently involves 183 single-species or multi-species monitoring sites. We use the participant database, an anonymous survey, and the analyses of time invested in fieldwork training, participant turnover, and scientific assessment of monitoring quality. No significant differences were found between volunteers and rangers regarding time invested per monitoring site, quality of data collected, or primary motivation (“participating in a real scientific experience”). Volunteers fit better the local abundance level and reach higher satisfaction and learning. Rangers contribute more to the distribution level and present a higher turnover throughout the monitoring period. MONITO represents a successful way of tracking real biodiversity changes and connecting scientific research to public outreach. Mentoring is a key element of this project, together with a socially integrative (participants with and without experience) and methodologically complementary approach.

Keywords

Citizen science Population trends Data quality LTER Vulnerable plant species Species and habitats of community interest 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to all participants for believing in this LTER project and “adopting” plants. Their enthusiasm in this adventure is our inspiration to keep going. We thank P. Errea for assistance with herbarium databases, P. Bravo and P. Sánchez for field assistance, M. Pizarro for making our life easier with the network database, and B. Valero and L. Hoppe for linguistic corrections. We are very grateful to the staff of the Regional Government of Aragón (M. Alcántara, J. Fauré, D. Guzmán, M. Montes, V. Sanz, E Villagrasa), numerous range coordinators for facilitating the participation of rangers, as well as C. Fabregat, D. Goñi, J. Guerrero, S. López, J. Puente, and G. Sanz, for helping with the location of some populations. Two anonymous reviewers, T. Dirnböck and C. Reyer provided many suggestions to improve the manuscript.

Funding information

The study was funded by RESECOM (European project LIFE12 NAT/ES/000180) and also DYNBIO (OAPN Project, Ref. 1656) and PERDIVER (BBVA Foundation).

References

  1. Aceves-Bueno E, Adeleye AS, Bradley D, Brandt WT, Callery P, Feraud M, Garner KL, Gentry R, Huang Y, McCullough I, Pearlman I, Sutherland SA, Wilkinson W, Yang Y, Zink T, Anderson SE, Tague C (2015) Citizen science as an approach for overcoming insufficient monitoring and inadequate stakeholder buy-in in adaptive management: criteria and evidence. Ecosystems 18:493–506.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-015-9842-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahrends A, Rahbek C, Bulling MT, Burgess ND, Platts PJ, Lovett JC, Kindemba VW, Owen N, Sallu AN, Marshall AR (2011) Conservation and the botanist effect. Biol Conserv 144:131–140.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.08.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnosky AD, Matzke N, Tomiya S, Wogan GOU, Swartz B, Quental TB, Marshall C, McGuire JL, Lindsey EL, Maguire KC, Mersey B, Ferrer EA (2011) Has the Earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived? Nature 471:51–57.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09678
  4. Bela G, Peltola T, Young JC, Balázs B, Arpin I, Pataki G, Hauck J, Kelemen E, Kopperoinen L, Van Herzele A, Keune H, Hecker S, Suškevičs M, Roy HE, Itkonen P, Külvik M, László M, Basnou C, Pino J, Bonn A (2016) Learning and the transformative potential of citizen science. Conserv Biol 30:990–999.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12762 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell S, Marzano M, Cent J, Kobierska H, Podjed D, Vandzinskaite D, Reinert H, Armaitiene A, Grodzińska-Jurczak M, Muršič R (2008) What counts? Volunteers and their organisations in the recording and monitoring of biodiversity. Biodivers Conserv 17:3443–3454.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9357-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bird TJ, Bates AE, Lefcheck JS, Hill NA, Thomson RJ, Edgar GJ, Stuart-Smith RD, Wotherspoon S, Krkosek M, Stuart-Smith JF, Pecl GT, Barrett N, Frusher S (2014) Statistical solutions for error and bias in global citizen science datasets. Biol Conserv 173:144–154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.07.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonney R, Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Kelling S, Phillips T, Rosenberg KV, Shirk J (2009) Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. Bioscience 59:977–984.  https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonney R, Phillips TB, Ballard HL, Enck JW (2015) Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Underst Sci 25:2–16.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515607406 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chandler M, See L, Copas K, Bonde AMZ, López BC, Danielsen F, Legind JK, Masinde S, Miller-Rushing AJ, Newman G, Rosemartin A, Turak E (2017) Contribution of citizen science towards international biodiversity monitoring. Biol Conserv 213:280–294.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chapin FS, Zavaleta ES, Eviner VT, Naylor RL, Vitousek PM, Reynolds HL, Hooper DU, Lavorel S, Sala OE, Hobbie SE, Mack MC, Diáz S (2000) Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405:234–242.  https://doi.org/10.1038/35012241 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Comber A, Mooney P, Purves RS, Rocchini D, Walz A (2016) Crowdsourcing: it matters who the crowd are the impacts of between group variations in recording land cover. PLoS ONE 11:e0158329.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158329 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crall AW, Newman GJ, Stohlgren TJ, Holfelder KA, Graham J, Waller DM (2011) Assessing citizen science data quality: an invasive species case study. Conserv Lett 4:433–442.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00196.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Devictor V, Whittaker RJ, Beltrame C (2010) Beyond scarcity: citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography. Divers Distrib 16:354–362.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2009.00615.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dickinson JL, Zuckerberg B, Bonter DN (2010) Citizen science as an ecological research tool: challenges and benefits. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Sci 41:149–172.  https://doi.org/10.2307/27896218?ref=search-gateway:a6c6e803d14c171cb575c92793765567 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dickinson JL, Shirk J, Bonter D, Bonney R, Crain RL, Martin J, Phillips T, Purcell K (2012) The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Front Ecol Environ 10:291–297.  https://doi.org/10.1890/110236 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Drew LW (2011) Are we losing the science of taxonomy? Bioscience 61:942–946.  https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.12.4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Engler R, Randin CF, Thuiller W, Dullinger S, Zimmermann NE, Araújo MB, Pearman PB, Le Lay G, Piedallu C, Albert CH, Choler P, Coldea G, De Lamo X, Dirnböck T, Gégout J-C, Gómez-García D, Grytnes J-A, Heegaard E, Høistad F, Nogués-Bravo D, Normand S, Puşcaş M, Sebastià M-T, Stanisci A, Theurillat J-P, Trivedi MR, Vittoz P, Guisan A (2011) 21st century climate change threatens mountain flora unequally across Europe. Glob Chang Biol 17:2330–2341.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02393.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. European Environment Agency (2009) Progress towards the European 2010 biodiversity targets. EEA Report, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  19. García MB, Goñi D, Guzmán D (2010) Living at the edge: local versus positional factors in the long-term population dynamics of an endangered orchid. Conserv Biol 24:1219–1229.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01466.x
  20. Haase P, Tonkin JD, Stoll S, Burkhard B, Frenzel M, Geijzendorffer IR, Häuser C, Klotz S, Kühn I, McDowell WH, Mirtl M, Müller F, Musche M, Penner J, Zacharias S, Schmeller DS (2018) The next generation of site-based long-term ecological monitoring: linking essential biodiversity variables and ecosystem integrity. Sci Total Environ 613-614:1376–1384.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Havens K, Vitt P, Masi S (2012) Citizen science on a local scale: the Plants of Concern program. Front Ecol Environ 10:321–323.  https://doi.org/10.1890/110258 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Isaac NJB, van Strien AJ, August TA, de Zeeuw MP, Roy DB (2014) Statistics for citizen science: extracting signals of change from noisy ecological data. Methods Ecol Evol 5:1052–1060.  https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12254 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Isaac NJB, Pocock MJO (2015) Bias and information in biological records. Biol J Linn Soc 115:522–531.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12532 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jordan RC, Gray SA, Howe DV, Brooks WR, Ehrenfeld JG (2011) Knowledge gain and behavioral change in citizen-science programs. Conserv Biol: J Soc Conserv Biol 25:1148–1154.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01745.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kissling WD, Ahumada JA, Bowser A, Fernandez M, Fernández N, García EA, Guralnick RP, Isaac NJB, Kelling S, Los W, McRae L, Mihoub J-B, Obst M, Santamaria M, Skidmore AK, Williams KJ, Agosti D, Amariles D, Arvanitidis C, Bastin L, De Leo F, Egloff W, Elith J, Hobern D, Martin D, Pereira HM, Pesole G, Peterseil J, Saarenmaa H, Schigel D, Schmeller DS, Segata N, Turak E, Uhlir PF, Wee B, Hardisty AR (2017) Building essential biodiversity variables (EBVs) of species distribution and abundance at a global scale. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 8, e73707:600–625.  https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12359 Google Scholar
  26. Kühn E, Feldmann R, Harpke A, Hirneisen N, Musche M, Leopold P, Settele J (2013) Getting the public involved in butterfly conservation: lessons learned from a new monitoring scheme in Germany. Isr J Ecol Evol 54:89–103.  https://doi.org/10.1560/IJEE.54.1.89 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levrel H, Fontaine B, Henry P-Y, Jiguet F, Julliard R, Kerbiriou C, Couvet D (2010) Balancing state and volunteer investment in biodiversity monitoring for the implementation of CBD indicators: a French example. Ecol Econ 69:1580–1586.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lewandowski E, Specht H (2015) Influence of volunteer and project characteristics on data quality of biological surveys. Conserv Biol 29:713–723.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12481 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lindenmayer DB, Likens G (2009) Improving ecological monitoring. Trends Ecol Evol 25:200–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Magurran AE, Baillie SR, Buckland ST, Dick JM, Elston DA, Scott EM, Smith RI, Somerfield PJ, Watt AD (2010) Long-term datasets in biodiversity research and monitoring: assessing change in ecological communities through time. Trends Ecol Evol 25:574–582.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2010.06.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Newbold T, Hudson LN, Hill SLL, Contu S, Lysenko I, Senior RA, Börger L, Bennett DJ, Choimes A, Collen B, Day J, De Palma A, Díaz S, Echeverria-Londoño S, Edgar MJ, Feldman A, Garon M, Harrison MLK, Alhusseini T, Ingram DJ, Itescu Y, Kattge J, Kemp V, Kirkpatrick L, Kleyer M, Correia DLP, Martin CD, Meiri S, Novosolov M, Pan Y, Phillips HRP, PURVES DW, Robinson A, Simpson J, Tuck SL, Weiher E, White HJ, Ewers RM, Mace GM, Scharlemann JPW, Purvis A (2015) Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520:45–50.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nichols JD, Williams BK (2006) Monitoring for conservation. Trends Ecolo Evol 21:668–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pereira HM, Ferrier S, Walters M, Geller GN, Jongman RHG, Scholes RJ, Bruford MW, Brummitt N, Butchart SHM, Cardoso AC, Coops NC, Dulloo E, Faith DP, Freyhof J, Gregory RD, Heip C, Hoft R, Hurtt G, Jetz W, Karp DS, McGeoch MA, Obura D, ONODA Y, Pettorelli N, Reyers B, Sayre R, Scharlemann JPW, Stuart SN, Turak E, Walpole M, Wegmann M (2013) Essential biodiversity variables. Science 339:277–278.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229931 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pescott OL, Walker KJ, Pocock MJO, Jitlal M, Outhwaite CL, Cheffings CM, Harris F, Roy DB (2015) Ecological monitoring with citizen science: the design and implementation of schemes for recording plants in Britain and Ireland. Biol J Linn Soc 115:505–521.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12581 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pocock MJO, Roy HE, Preston CD, Roy DB (2015) The Biological Records Centre: a pioneer of citizen science. Biol J Linn Soc 115:475–493.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12548 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmeller DS, Henry P-Y, Julliard R, Gruber B, Clobert J, Dziock F, Lengyel S, Nowicki P, Déri E, Budrys E, Kull T, Tali K, Bauch B, Settele J, Van Swaay C, Kobler A, Babij V, Papastergiadou E, Henle K (2009) Advantages of volunteer-based biodiversity monitoring in Europe. Conserv Biol 23:307–316.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01125.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schmeller DS, Julliard R, Bellingham PJ, Böhm M, Brummitt N, Chiarucci A, Couvet D, Elmendorf S, Forsyth DM, Moreno JG, Gregory RD, Magnusson WE, Martin LJ, Mcgeoch MA, Mihoub J-B, Pereira HM, Proença V, van Swaay CAM, Yahara T, Belnap J (2015) Towards a global terrestrial species monitoring program. J Nat Cons 25:51–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2015.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Silvertown J, Cook L, Cameron R, Dodd M (2011) Citizen science reveals unexpected continental-scale evolutionary change in a model organism. PLoS One 6:e18927.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018927.t003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Theobald EJ, Ettinger AK, Burgess HK, DeBey LB, Schmidt NR, Froehlich HE, Wagner C, HilleRisLambers J, Tewksbury J, Harsch MA, Parrish JK (2015) Global change and local solutions: tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. Biol Conserv 181:236–244.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tittensor DP, Walpole M, Hill SLL, Boyce DG, Britten GL, Burgess ND, Butchart SHM, Leadley PW, Regan EC, Alkemade R, Baumung R, Bellard C, Bouwman L, Bowles-Newark NJ, Chenery AM, Cheung WWL, Christensen V, Cooper HD, Crowther AR, Dixon MJR, Galli A, Gaveau V, Gregory RD, Gutierrez NL, Hirsch TL, Höft R, Januchowski-Hartley SR, Karmann M, Krug CB, Leverington FJ, Loh J, Lojenga RK, Malsch K, Marques A, Morgan DHW, Mumby PJ, Newbold T, Noonan-Mooney K, Pagad SN, Parks BC, Pereira HM, Robertson T, Rondinini C, Santini L, Scharlemann JPW, Schindler S, Sumaila UR, Teh LSL, van Kolck J, Visconti P, Ye Y (2014) A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science 346:241–244.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1257484 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DA (1964–1980) Flora Europaea. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pyrenean Institute of Ecology (CSIC)ZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations