Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reserve selection and persistence: complementing the existing Atlantic Forest reserve system

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study is an exercise to check the efficiency of the existing reserve system, and to show how systematic conservation planning—using information available and the complementarity concept—can improve the basis for decisions and minimize costs. We verified the performance, in number of cells and primate species representation, of the existing Atlantic Forest (Brazil) reserve network with a quarter-degree resolution grid, with 1,884 cells. We used occurrence data of 20 endemic primate species, and the maps of 237 existing reserves. Reserve networks were selected to represent primate species first considering no pre-existing reserves in Atlantic Forest, and then, considering the existing reserve system, taking into account the minimum area for viable population of the larger species (Northern muriqui Brachyteles hypoxanthus). Reserve selection was carried out using the complementarity concept implemented by a simulated annealing algorithm. Primate species representation (at least one occurrence in the network) could be achieved with 8% of the existing reserve system (nine cells in relation to the 120 in the existing reserve system). We found that today’s reserve system represents 89% of endemic primate species, excluding the species Coimbra Filho’s titi monkey (Callicebus coimbrai) and Marcgraf’s capuchin (Cebus flavius). The networks selected without considering existing reserves contained nine cells. The networks selected considering existing reserves (120 cells), had two new cells necessary to represent all the primates. This does not mean that a viable alternative is to start from zero (i.e., nonexistent reserves). Identifying critical supplementary areas using biodiversity information to fill the gaps and then starting “conservation in practice” in these areas should be priorities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andelman S, Ball I, Davis F, et al. (1999) SITES v. 1.0: an analytical toolbox for designing ecoregional conservation portfolios. Technical report, The Nature Conservancy, Australia. Available via http://www.biogeog.ucsb.edu/projects/tnc/toolbox.html

  • Araújo MB, Williams PH, Cabeza M et al (2004) Would climate change drive species out of reserves? An assessment of existing reserve-selection methods. Glob Change Biol 10:1618–1626. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00828.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Araújo MB, Lobo JM, Moreno JC (2007) The effectiveness of Iberian protected areas in conserving terrestrial biodiversity. Conserv Biol 21:1423–1432

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bode M, Wilson KA, Brooks TM et al (2008) Cost-effective global conservation spending is robust to taxonomic group. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:6498–6501. doi:10.1073/pnas.0710705105

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brito D, Grelle CE (2006) Estimating minimum area of suitable habitat and viable population size for the northern muriqui (Brachyteles hypoxanthus). Biodivers Conserv 15:4197–4210. doi:10.1007/s10531-005-3575-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks TM, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG et al (2002) Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conserv Biol 16:909–923. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00530.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabeza M, Moilanen A (2001) Design of reserve networks and the persistence of biodiversity. Trends Ecol Evol 16:242–248. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02125-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carwardine J, Rochester WA, Richardson KS et al (2007) Conservation planning with irreplaceability: does the method matter? Biodivers Conserv 16:245–258. doi:10.1007/s10531-006-9055-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceballos G (2007) Conservation priorities for mammals in megadiverse Mexico: the efficiency of reserve networks. Ecol Appl 17:569–578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cincotta RP, Wisnewski J, Engelman R (2000) Human population in biodiversity hotspots. Nature 404:990–992. doi:10.1038/35010105

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Diniz-Filho JAF, Bini LM, Pinto MP et al (2007) Conservation biogeography of anurans in Brazilian Cerrado. Biodivers Conserv 16:997–1008. doi:10.1007/s10531-006-9010-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrier S, Pressey RL, Barret TW (2000) A new predictor of irreplaceability of areas for achieving conservation goals, its application to real-world planning, and a research agenda for further refinement. Biol Conserv 93:303–325. doi:10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00149-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Pressey RL, Margules CR (2002) Persistence and vulnerability: retaining biodiversity in the landscape and in protected areas. J Biosci 27(suppl 2):361–384. doi:10.1007/BF02704966

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grelle CEV (2000) Aerografia de primatas endêmicos da Mata Atlântica Tese de Doutoramento Museu Nacional, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro

    Google Scholar 

  • Grelle CEV, Fonseca GAB, Fonseca MT et al (1999) The question of scale in threat analysis: a case study with Brazilian mammals. Anim Conserv 2:149–152. doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.1999.tb00060.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grelle CEV, Alves MAS, Bergallo HG et al (2005) Prediction of threatened tetrapods based on the species-area relationship in Atlantic forest. J Zool (Lond) 265:359–364. doi:10.1017/S0952836905006461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grelle CEV, Paglia AP, Silva HS (2006) Análise dos fatores de ameaça à extinção estudo de caso com mamíferos brasileiros. In: Rocha CFD, Bergallo HG, van Sluys M et al (eds) Biologia da conservação essências. RiMa, São Carlos

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2007)The World Conservation Union. 2007 IUCN red list of threatened Species. http://www.iucnredlist.org. Cited on 02 October 2008

  • Kobayashi S (1995) A plylogenetic study of titi monkeys, genus Callicebus, based on cranial measurements: i phyletic groups of Callicebus. Primates 36:101–120. doi:10.1007/BF02381918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurance WF (2007) Have we overstated the tropical biodiversity crisis? Trends Ecol Evol 22:65–70. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.09.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler JJ, White D, Master LL (2003) Integrating representation and vulnerability: two approaches for prioritizing areas for conservation. Ecol Appl 13:1762–1772. doi:10.1890/02-5337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253. doi:10.1038/35012251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Margules CR, Nicholls AO, Pressey RL (1988) Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity. Biol Conserv 43:63–76. doi:10.1016/0006-3207(88)90078-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinho-Filho J, Veríssimo EW (1997) The rediscovery of Callicebus personatus barbarabrownae in northeastern Brazil with a new western limit for its distribution. Primates 38:429–433. doi:10.1007/BF02381883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meir E, Andelman S, Possingham HP (2004) Does conservation planning matter in a dynamic and uncertain world? Ecol Lett 7:615–622. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00624.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG et al (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858. doi:10.1038/35002501

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dea N, Araújo MB, Whittaker RJ (2006) How well do Important Bird Areas represent species and minimize conservation conflict in the Tropical Andes? Divers Distrib 12:205–214. doi:10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00235.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira MM, Langguth A (2006) Rediscovery of marcgrave’s capuchin monkey and designation of a neotype for Simia flavia Schreber, 1774 (Primates, Cebidae). Bol Museu Nac 523:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto LP, Bedê L, Paese A (2006) Mata Atlântica brasileira: os desafios para conservação da biodiversidade de um hotspot mundia. In: Rocha CFD, Bergallo HG, van Sluys M (eds) Biologia da conservação: essências. RiMa, São Carlos

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto MP, Mathias PVC, Blamires D et al (2007) Selecting priority areas to conserve Psittacines in the Brazilian cerrado: minimizing human-conservation conflicts. Bird Conserv Int 17:13–22. doi:10.1017/S0959270906000578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Possingham H, Ball I, Andelman S (2000) Mathematical methods for identifying representative reserve networks. In: Ferson S, Burgman M (eds) Quantitative methods for conservation biology. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Possingham HP, Wilson KA, Andelman SJ (2006) Protected areas: goals, limitations, and design. In: Groom MJ, Meffe GK, Carroll CR et al (eds) Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL (1994) Ad hoc reservations: foward or backward steps in developing representative reserves systems? Conserv Biol 8:662–668. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1994.08030662.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL, Cowling RM (2001) Reserve selection algorithms and the real world. Conserv Biol 15:275–277. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.99541.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL, Humphries CJ, Margules CR et al (1993) Beyond opportunism: key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends Ecol Evol 8:124–128. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(93)90023-I

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL, Johnson IR, Wilson PD (1994) Shades of irreplaceability: towards a measure of the contribution of sites to a reservation goal. Biol Conserv 3:242–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL, Cabeza M, Watts ME et al (2007) Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends Ecol Evol 22:583–592

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues ASL, Andelman SJ, Bakarr ML et al (2004) Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428:640–643. doi:10.1038/nature02422

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rondinini C, Wilson KS, Boitani L et al (2006) Tradeoffs of different types of species occurrence data for use in systematic conservation planning. Ecol Lett 9:1136–1145. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00970.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rylands AB, Fonseca GAB, Leite YL (1996) Primates of the Atlantic Forest: origin, distribution, endemism and communities. In: Norconk M, Rosenberger A, Garber P et al (eds) Adaptive radiations of neotropical primates. Plenum Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva JMC, Casteleti CHM (2003) Status of biodiversity of the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. In: Galindo-Leal C, Câmara IG (eds) The Atlantic Forest of South America: biodiversity status, threat, and outlook. Island Press, Washigton

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva Junior JS (2001) Especiação nos macacos-prego e caiararas, gênero Cebus Erxleben, 1777 (Primates, Cebidae) Tese de Doutoramento . Universidade Federal do , Rio de Janeiro

    Google Scholar 

  • Tognelli MF (2007) How well do protected areas represent the terrestrial mammal fauna of South America? In: Kelt DA, Lessa EP, Salazar-Bravo J (eds) The quintessential naturalist: honoring the life and legacy of Oliver P. Pearson. University of California Publications in Zoology, California, p 134

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood EC, Shaw MR, Wilson KA et al (2008) Protecting biodiversity when money matters: maximizing return on investment. PLoS On 3:e1515. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001515

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker RJ, Araújo MB, Jepson P et al (2005) Conservation biogeography: assessment and prospect. Divers Distrib 11:3–23. doi:10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00143.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams PH, Moore JL, Toham AK et al (2003) Integrating biodiversity priorities with conflicting socio-economic values in the Guinean-Congolian forest region. Biodivers Conserv 12:1297–1320. doi:10.1023/A:1023092100942

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the anonymous reviewer for many comments that improved the manuscript. We are very grateful to M.V. Vieira and D.S.D. Araújo for valuable comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. L.P. Pinto and M. Fonseca from CI-Brazil for the most of shapefiles of reserves. M.P·P. is supported by a scholarship of FAPERJ. Also, we thank M. Figueiredo for useful help in mapping.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia, Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Cx. P. 68020, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 21941-590, Brazil

    Míriam Plaza Pinto

  2. Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

    Carlos Eduardo Viveiros Grelle

Authors
  1. Míriam Plaza Pinto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carlos Eduardo Viveiros Grelle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Míriam Plaza Pinto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pinto, M.P., Grelle, C.E.V. Reserve selection and persistence: complementing the existing Atlantic Forest reserve system. Biodivers Conserv 18, 957–968 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9513-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9513-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation