Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 19, Issue 9, pp 2715–2740 | Cite as

New approaches for establishing conservation priorities for socio-economically important plant species

  • Joana Magos Brehm
  • Nigel Maxted
  • Maria Amélia Martins-Loução
  • Brian V. Ford-Lloyd
Original paper

Abstract

The establishment of priorities among species is a crucial step in any conservation strategy since financial resources are generally limited. Traditionally, priorities for conservation of plant species have been focused on endemicity, rarity and particularly on their threatened status. Crop wild relatives (CWR) and wild harvested plants (WHP) are important elements of biodiversity with actual or potential socio-economic value. In this study, eight prioritisation criteria were used along with different prioritisation systems and applied to the Portuguese CWR and WHP. The top 50 species obtained by each of these methods were identified. The final top CWR were those that occurred as a priority in most methods. Twenty CWR were identified as the highest priorities for conservation in Portugal and they include wild relatives of the crop genera Allium, Daucus, Dianthus, Epilobium, Festuca, Herniaria, Narcissus, Quercus, Plantago, Trifolium, and Vicia. Eighteen WHP were recognised as priorities for conservation and include several Narcissus and Thymus species, among others. The advantages, limitations and level of subjectivity of each of the methods used in this exercise are discussed.

Keywords

Conservation planning Crop wild relatives Prioritisation criteria Ranking systems Scoring systems Wild harvested plants 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Joana Magos Brehm was financed by the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT, Portugal) with the grant number SFRH/BD/16508/2004.

References

  1. Almeida JD (2005) Flora exótica subespontânea de Portugal Continental (plantas vasculares). Catálogo das plantas vasculares exóticas que ocorrem subespontâneas em Portugal Continental e compilação de informações sobre estas plantas, 3rd edn. Universidade de Coimbra, CoimbraGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernal M, Laínz M, Muñoz Garmendia F (1990) Dianthus. In: Castroviejo S, Laínz M, López González G, Monserrat P, Muñoz Garmendia F, Paiva J, Villar L (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol II. Plantanaceae–Plumbaginaceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 426–462Google Scholar
  3. Bishop RC (1978) Endangered species and uncertainty: the economics of the safe minimum standard. Am J Agric Econ 60:10–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Briggs J, Leigh J (1988) Rare and threatened Australian plants. Australian Natural Parks and Wild. Serv Spec Publs 14Google Scholar
  5. CALM (1994) Setting priorities for the conservation of Western Australia’s threatened flora and fauna. Policy statement 50. Department of Conservation and Land Management, CALM, PerthGoogle Scholar
  6. Camejo-Rodrigues J, Ascensão L, Àngels Bonet M, Vallès J (2003) An ethnobotanical study of medicinal and aromatic plants in the Natural Park of “Serra de São Mamede” (Portugal). J Ethnopharmacol 89:199–209CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Carter MF, Barker K (1993) An interactive database for setting conservation priorities for western Neotropical migrants. In: Finch DM, Stangel PW (eds) Status and management of Neotropical migratory birds; 1992 September 21–25, Estes Park, Colorado. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-229. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, pp 120–127Google Scholar
  8. Carter MF, Hunter WC, Pashley DN, Rosenberg KV (2000) Setting conservation priorities for landbirds in the United States: the partners in flight approach. Auk 117(2):541–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Castroviejo S, Talavera S, Aedo C, Romero Zarco C, Sáez L, Salgueiro FJ, Velayos M (eds) (1986–2003) Flora Iberica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vols I–VIII, X, XIV, XXI. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, MadridGoogle Scholar
  10. CBD (2002) Global strategy for plant conservation. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  11. Chaudhri MN (1990) Herniaria. In: Castroviejo S, Laínz M, López González G, Monserrat P, Muñoz Garmendia F, Paiva J, Villar L (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol II, Plantanaceae–Plumbaginaceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 118–134Google Scholar
  12. Coates DJ, Atkins KA (2001) Priority setting and the conservation of Western Australia’s diverse and highly endemic flora. Biol Conserv 97:251–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cook FEM (1995) Economic botany—data collection standard. Prepared for the international working group on taxonomic databases for plant sciences (TDWG). Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, UKGoogle Scholar
  14. Cosson E (1883–1887) Flore des États Barbaresques, Algérie, Tunisie et Maroc, vol 2. Imprimerie Nationale, ParisGoogle Scholar
  15. Council Decision 82/72/EEC of 3 December 1981, concerning the conclusion of the convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats (Bern convention). OJ L 38, 10.2.1982:3Google Scholar
  16. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. OJ L 206, 22.7.1992:7–50Google Scholar
  17. Council of Europe (1977) List of rare, threatened and endemic plants in Europe. Nature and environment series 14. Council of Europe Publishing, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  18. Council of Europe (1983) List of rare, threatened and endemic plants in Europe. Nature and environment series 27. Council of Europe Publishing, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  19. Cubas P (1999) Ulex. In: Talavera S, Aedo C, Castroviejo S, Romero Zarco C, Saez L, Salgueiro FJ, Velayos M (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol VII (I). Leguminosae (partim). Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 212–239Google Scholar
  20. Department of the Environment (1996) Towards methodology for costing biodiversity targets in UK. Department of the Environment, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. DGPC (Direcção Geral da Protecção das Culturas) (2003) Catálogo nacional de variedades. Ministério da Agricultura, Desenvolvimento Rural e PescasGoogle Scholar
  22. Dhar U, Rawal RS, Upreti J (2000) Setting priorities for conservation of medicinal plants—a case study in the Indian Himalaya. Biol Conserv 95:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dias SR (2002) Ecogeographic distribution of Lupinus germplasm and strategy gap filling collecting—study of the Lupinus germplasm collection held by the Genebank-Genetics, EAN/INIA, Portugal. A thesis presented to the Faculty of Science of the University of Birmingham in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Conservation and Utilisation of Plant Genetic ResourcesGoogle Scholar
  24. Direcção Geral do Ambiente (2000) Relatório do estado do Ambiente—1999. Ministério do Ambiente e do Ordenamento do TerritórioGoogle Scholar
  25. Dray AM (1985) Plantas a proteger em Portugal Continental. Serviço Nacional de Parques, Reservas e Conservação da Natureza, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  26. EU (European Union) (2003a) Common catalogue of varieties of vegetable species. 22nd complete edition (2003/C 308 A/01). Official Journal of the European Union 18.12.2003Google Scholar
  27. EU (European Union) (2003b) Common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species. 22nd complete edition (2003/C 91 A/01). Official Journal of the European Union 16.04.2003Google Scholar
  28. Euro+Med PlantBase (2005) The information resource for Euro-Mediterranean plant diversity. http://www.euromed.org.uk. Accessed January 2005
  29. Europa Planta (2008) A sustainable future for Europe, the European strategy for plant conservation 2008–2014. Plantlife International and the Council of Europe, SalisburyGoogle Scholar
  30. Faith DP (1992) Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biol Conserv 61:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (1996) Global plan of action for the conservation and sustainable utilization of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture and the Leipzig declaration. Adopted by the international technical conference on plant genetic resources, Leipzig, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  32. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (1998) The state of the world’s plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Annex 1–4. State of the art: legal and economic methods relevant to PGRFA. FAO, Rome, pp 393–442Google Scholar
  33. FAOSTAT (2005) FAO statistical databases. http://faostat.fao.org/. Accessed February 2005
  34. Fink AH, Brücher T, Krüger A, Leckebusch GC, Pinto JG, Ulbrich U (2004) The 2003 European summer heatwaves and drought—synoptic diagnosis and impact. Weather 59:209–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fitter R, Fitter M (1987) The road to extinction. IUCN/UNEP, IUCN, Gland/CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Flor A, Bettencourt E, Arriegas PI, Dias SR (2004) Indicators for the CWR species’ list prioritisation (European Crop Wild Relative criteria for conservation). Paper presented at the workshop 5—genetic erosion and pollution assessment. European Crop Wild Relative Diversity assessment and Conservation Forum (briefing document), Terceira Island, Azores, Portugal, 8–11 September 2004. http://www.pgrforum.org/Documents/WP_5_Documents/WS5_Briefing_Document.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2006
  37. Ford-Lloyd B, Kell SP, Maxted N (2008) Establishing conservation priorities for crop wild relatives. In: Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Kell SP, Iriondo JM, Dullo E, Turok J (eds) Crop wild relative conservation and use. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 110–119Google Scholar
  38. Franco JA (1971) Nova Flora de Portugal (continente e Açores), vol I, Lycopodiaceae–Umbelliferae. Sociedade Astória Lda, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  39. Franco JA (1990) Quercus. In: Castroviejo S, Laínz M, López González G, Monserrat P, Muñoz Garmendia F, Paiva J, Villar L (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol I, Lycopodiaceae–Papaveraceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 15–36Google Scholar
  40. GBIF Data Portal (nd) www.gbif.net. Accessed 31 March 2008
  41. Given DR, Norton DA (1993) A multivariate approach to assessing threat and for priority setting in threatened species conservation. Biol Conserv 64:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Guijt I (1998) Valuing wild plants with economics and participatory methods: an overview of the hidden harvest methodology. In: Prendergast HDV, Etkin NL, Harris DR, Houghton PJ (eds) Plants for food and medicine. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, pp 223–235Google Scholar
  43. Harlan JR, de Wet JMJ (1971) Towards a rational classification of cultivated plants. Taxon 20:09–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Heywood VH (1999) Use and potential of wild plants in farm households. Farm systems management series 15. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  45. Heywood VH (2008) Challenges of in situ conservation of crop wild relatives. Turk J Bot 32:421–432Google Scholar
  46. Heywood VH, Casas A, Ford-Lloyd B, Kell S, Maxted N (2007) Conservation and sustainable use of crop wild relatives. Agric Ecosyst Environ 121:245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hoffmann MH, Welk E (1999) A method for the estimation of the global population sizes of plant species—the area-abundance-index. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 8:39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hunter WC, Carter MF, Pashley DN, Barker K (1993) The partners in flight species prioritization scheme. In: Finch DM, Stangel PW (eds) Status and management of neotropical migratory birds; September 21–25 1992, Estes Park, Colorado. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-229. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, pp 109–119Google Scholar
  49. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística) (2001) Estatísticas agrícolas 2000. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  50. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística) (2002a) Estatísticas agrícolas 2001. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  51. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística) (2002b) Estatísticas regionais da produção vegetal e animal 1990–2000. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  52. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística) (2003a) Estatísticas agrícolas 2002. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  53. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística) (2003b) Contas económicas da Agricultura 2002. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  54. INE (Instituto Nacional de Estatística) (2004) Estatísticas agrícolas 2003. Instituto Nacional de Estatística, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  55. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. In: Parry M, Canziani O, Palutikof J, van der Linden P, Hanson C (eds) Contribution of working group II to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. http://www.ipcc-wg2.org/index.html. Accessed 19 July 2006
  56. IPK (Institut für pflanzengenetik und kulturpflanzenforschung Gatersleben) (2003) Mansfeld’s world database of agricultural and horticultural crops. Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research. http://mansfeld.ipk-gatersleben.de/pls/htmldb_pgrc/f?p=185:3:950745470569513::NO. Accessed February 2005
  57. IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) (2001) IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland. http://www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/redlists/redlistcatsenglish.pdf. Accessed 5 January 2005
  58. Jain SK (1975) Genetic reserves. In: Frankel OH, Hawkes JG (eds) Crop genetic resources for today and tomorrow. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 379–396Google Scholar
  59. Kala CP, Farooquee NA, Dhar U (2004) Prioritization of medicinal plants on the basis of available knowledge, existing practices and use value status in Uttaranchal, India. Biodivers Conserv 13:453–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kell SP, Knüpffer H, Jury SL, Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV (2005) Catalogue of crop wild relatives for Europe and the Mediterranean. Available online via the Crop Wild Relative Information System (CWRIS—http://cwris.ecpgr.org/) and on CD-ROM. University of Birmingham, UK
  61. Kornas J (1990) Plant invasions in Central Europe: historical and ecological aspects. In: Di Castri F, Hansen AJ, Debussche M (eds) Biological invasions in Europe and the Mediterranean Basin. Monogr Biol 65:19–36Google Scholar
  62. Legume Web (nd) International legume database and information service. www.ildis.org/LegumeWeb. Accessed 26 July 2004
  63. Lidén M (1986) Fumaria. In: Castroviejo S, Laínz M, López González G, Monserrat P, Muñoz Garmendia F, Paiva J, Villar L (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol I, Lycopodiaceae–Papaveraceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 447–467Google Scholar
  64. Linder HP (1995) Setting conservation priorities: the importance of endemism and phylogeny in the Southern African orchid genus Herschelia. Conserv Biol 9:585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lunney D, Curtin A, Ayers D, Cogger HG, Dickman CR (1996) An ecological approach to identifying the endangered fauna of New South Wales. Pac Conserv Biol 2:212–231Google Scholar
  66. Magos Brehm J (2004) Conservation of wild legumes in Portugal. A thesis presented to the Faculty of Science of the University of Birmingham in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Conservation and Utilisation of Plant Genetic Resources. School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, UKGoogle Scholar
  67. Magos Brehm J (2009) Conservation of wild plant genetic resources in Portugal. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, UKGoogle Scholar
  68. Magos Brehm J, Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Martins-Loução MA (2008a) National inventories of crop wild relatives and wild harvested plants: case-study for Portugal. Genet Resour Crop Evol 55:779–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Magos Brehm J, Mitchell M, Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Martins-Loução MA (2008b) IUCN Red Listing of crop wild relatives: is a national approach as difficult as some think? In: Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Kell SP, Iriondo JM, Dullo E, Turok J (eds) Crop wild relative conservation and use. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 211–242Google Scholar
  70. Maire R (1952–1987) Flore de l’Afrique du Nord (Maroc, Algérie, Tunisie, Tripolitaine, Cyrénaique et Sahara), vols I–XVI. Paul Lechevalier, ParisGoogle Scholar
  71. Master LL (1991) Assessing threats and setting priorities for conservation. Conserv Biol 5:559–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Maxted N, Kell SP (2009) Establishment of a global network for the in situ conservation of crop wild relatives: status and needs. FAO Consultancy Report. Rome, FAO, pp 1–265Google Scholar
  73. Maxted N, Hawkes JG, Guarino L, Sawkins M (1997) Towards the selection of taxa for plant genetic conservation. Genet Resour Crop Evol 44:337–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Jury S, Kell SP, Scholten MA (2006) Towards a definition of a crop wild relative. Biodivers Conserv 15(8):2673–2685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Kell SP (2008) Crop wild relatives: establishing the context. In: Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Kell SP, Iriondo J, Dulloo E, Turok J (eds) Crop wild relative conservation and use. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 3–30Google Scholar
  76. Millsap BA, Gore JA, Runde DE, Cerulean SI (1990) Setting priorities for the conservation of fish and wildlife in Florida. Wildl Monogr 111:1–57Google Scholar
  77. Ministério da Agricultura, do Desenvolvimento Rural e das Pescas (1997) Decreto Lei no 11/97, de 14 de Julho. Aprova a protecção dos montados de sobro e azinho. Diário da República, Série I, Parte A, no 11Google Scholar
  78. Ministério da Agricultura, do Desenvolvimento Rural e das Pescas (2003) Anuário 2003 Vegetal. Gabinete de Planeamento e Política Agro-Alimentar. Ministério da Agricultura, Desenvolvimento Rural e Pescas, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  79. Ministério da Agricultura, do Desenvolvimento Rural e das Pescas (2005a) Produtos tradicionais. Instituto de Desenvolvimento Rural e Hidraulica. http://www.idrha.min-agricultura.pt/produtos_tradicionais/. Accessed 8 April 2005
  80. Ministério da Agricultura, do Desenvolvimento Rural e das Pescas (2005b) Nomes qualificados—resumo geral da situação. Instituto de Desenvolvimento Rural e Hidráulica. http://www.idrha.min-agricultura.pt/produtos_tradicionais/Nomes_qualificados/index.htm. Accessed 8 April 2005
  81. Ministério do Ambiente (1981) Decreto-Lei no 95/81, de 23 de Julho. Convenção de Berna Relativa à Protecção da Vida Selvagem e do Ambiente Natural na Europa de 19-09-1979. Diário da República, Série I, no 167, pp 1835–1857Google Scholar
  82. Ministério do Ambiente (1999a) Decreto-Lei no 565/99 de 21 de Dezembro. Diário da República, Série I, Parte A, no 295, pp 12–21Google Scholar
  83. Ministério do Ambiente (1999b) Decreto-Lei no 140/99 de 24 de Abril. Diário da República, Série I, Parte A, no 96, pp 2183–2212Google Scholar
  84. Ministério do Planeamento e Administração do Território (1989) Decreto-Lei n. 423/89 de 4 de Dezembro. Diário da Republica, Série I, no 278, p 5291Google Scholar
  85. Miranda P, Coelho FES, Tomé AR, Valente MA (2002) 20th century Portuguese climate and climate scenarios. In: Santos FD, Forbes K, Moita R (eds) Climate change in Portugal. Scenarios, impacts and adaptation measures—SIAM project. Gradiva, Lisboa, pp 23–83Google Scholar
  86. Mitteau M, Soupizet F (2000) Preparation of a preliminary list of priority target species for in situ conservation in Europe. In: Laliberté B, Maggioni L, Maxted N, Negri V (compilers) ECP/GR in situ and on-farm conservation network report of a task force on wild species conservation in genetic reserves and a task force on on-farm conservation and management joint meeting, Isola Polvese, Italy, 18–20 May 2000Google Scholar
  87. Morales R (1993) Jonopsidum. In: Castroviejo S, Aedo C, Gómez Campo C, Laínz M, Monserrat P, Morales R, Muñoz Garmendia F, Nieto Feliner G, Rico E, Talavera S, Villar L (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol IV, Cruciferae–Monotropaceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 250–252Google Scholar
  88. Morse LE (1993) Standard and alternative taxonomic data in the multi-institutional Natural Heritage Data Centre Network. In: Bisby FA, Russell GF, Pankhurst RJ (eds) Designs for a global plant species information system. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 69–79Google Scholar
  89. Munby (1847) Flore de l’Algérie ou Catalogue des Plantes Indigènes du Royaume d’Álger. J.-B. Baillière, ParisGoogle Scholar
  90. Muñoz Rodríguez A, Devesa JA, Talavera S (2000) Trifolium. In: Talavera S, Aedo C, Castroviejo S, Herrero A, Romero Zarco C, Salgueiro FJ, Velayos M (eds) Flora Iberica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol VII (II). Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 647–719Google Scholar
  91. Nieto Feliner G (1997) Epilobium. In: Castroviejo S, Aedo C, Benedí C, Laínz M, Muñoz Garmendia F, Nieto Feliner G, Paiva J (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol VIII, Halogaraceae–Euphrobiaceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 101–131Google Scholar
  92. Nogueira I, Muñoz Garmendia F, Navarro C (1993) Halimium. In: Castroviejo S, Aedo C, Cirujano S, Laínz M, Montserrat P, Morales R, Muñoz Garmendia F, Navarro C, Paiva J, Soriano C (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol III, Plumbaginaceae (Partim)-Capparaceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 338–351Google Scholar
  93. Norton BG (1994) On what we should save: the role of culture in determining conservation targets. In: Forey FL, Humphries CJ, Vane-Wright RI (eds) Systematics and conservation evaluation. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 23–40Google Scholar
  94. Orlove BS, Brush SB (1996) Anthropology and the conservation of biodiversity. Annu Rev Anthropol 25:329–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Parker PF (1981) The endemic plants of metropolitan Portugal, a survey. Boletim da Sociedade Broteriana, Série 2, 53(2):943–994Google Scholar
  96. Perring FH, Farrell L (1983) Vascular plants. British red data book, vol I, 2nd edn. Royal Society for Nature Conservation, NettlehamGoogle Scholar
  97. Pujadas Salvà AJ (2003) Daucus. In: Castroviejo S, Nieto Feliner G, Jury SL, Herrero A (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol X, Araliaceae–Umbelliferae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 97–125Google Scholar
  98. Rabinowitz D (1981) Seven forms of rarity. In: Synge H (ed) The biological aspects of rare plant conservation. Wiley, Chichester, pp 205–217Google Scholar
  99. Rabinowitz D, Cairns S, Dillon T (1986) Seven forms of rarity and their frequency in the flora of British Isles. In: Soule ME (ed) Conservation biology: science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer Associate, Sunderland, pp 182–204Google Scholar
  100. Ratnayake RSS, Kariyawasam CS (2008) Conservation and use of wild-harvested medicinal plants in Sri Lanka. In: Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Kell SP, Iriondo JM, Dullo E, Turok J (eds) Crop wild relative conservation and use. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 625–631Google Scholar
  101. Rawat N, Tiwari VK, Singh N, Randhawa GS, Singh K, Chhuneja P, Dhaliwal HS (2008) Evaluation and utilization of Aegilops and wild Triticum species for enhancing iron and zinc content in wheat. Genet Resour Crop Evol 56(1):53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Ray JC, Hunter L, Zigouris J (2005) Setting conservation and research priorities for larger African carnivores. WCS working paper 24. Wildlife Conservation Society, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  103. Romero Zarco C (1999) Vicia. In: Talavera S, Aedo C, Castroviejo S, Romero Zarco C, Saez L, Salgueiro FJ, Velayos M (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol VII(I), Leguminosae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 360–417Google Scholar
  104. Rosenberg KV, Wells JV (2005) Conservation priorities for terrestrial birds in the North-eastern United States. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-191. http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr191/Asilomar/pdfs/236-253.pdf. Accessed 12 July 2006
  105. Santos FD, Miranda P (2006) Alterações climáticas em Portugal, cenários, impactos e medidas de adaptação, Projecto SIAM II, 1st edn. Gradiva Publicações Ltd, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  106. Sapir Y, Shmida A, Fragman O (2003) Constructing Red Numbers for setting conservation priorities of endangered plant species: Israeli flora as a test case. J Nat Conserv 11:91–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Schneider A, Molnár I, Molnár-Láng M (2008) Utilisation of Aegilops (goatgrass) species to widen the genetic diversity of cultivated wheat. Euphytica 163:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Schoen DJ, Brown AHD (1993) Conservation of allelic richness in wild crop relatives is aided by assessment of genetic markers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90(22):10623–10627CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. Schousboe P-K-A (1874) Observations sur le règne végétal au Maroc, ParisGoogle Scholar
  110. Stein BA (1993) Towards common goals: collections information in conservation databases. Assoc Syst Collect Newsl 21(1):1–6Google Scholar
  111. Tambutii M, Aldama A, Sánchez O, Medeellin R, Soberón J (2001) La determinación del riesgo de extincion de especies silvestres en Mexico. Gac Ecol 61:11–21Google Scholar
  112. Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, Moore DM, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DA (2001) Flora Europaea on CD ROM. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  113. UNECE/FAO (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe/Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2000) Database on temperate and boreal forest resources assessment, version 3.1 (TBFRA-2000). Timber Section UNECE/FAO. http://www.unece.org/trade/timber/fra/welcome.htm. Accessed March 2005
  114. UNEP (United National Environment Programme) (1992) Convention on biological diversity: text and annexes. United Nations Environment Programme, NairobiGoogle Scholar
  115. UNEP (United National Environment Programme) (1995) In: Heywood V (ed) Global biodiversity assessment. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  116. Unknown author and date. Flore d’Algérie, deuxème partie, Phanérogamie. GramineaeGoogle Scholar
  117. Valdés B, Talavera S, Fernández-Galiano E (1987) Flora vascular de Andalucía Occidental, vols 1–3. Ketres Editora SA, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  118. Vane-Wright RI, Humphries CJ, Williams CH (1991) What to protect? Systematics and the agony of choice. Biol Conserv 55:235–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Villar L (1993) Rhododendron. In: Castroviejo S, Aedo C, Gómez Campo C, Laínz M, Monserrat P, Morales R, Muñoz Garmendia F, Nieto Feliner G, Rico E, Talavera S, Villar L (eds) Flora Ibérica, plantas vasculares de la Península Ibérica e Islas Baleares, vol IV, Cruciferae–Monotropaceae. Real Jardín Botánico, CSIC, Madrid, pp 508–510Google Scholar
  120. Whitten AJ (1990) Recovery: a proposed programme for Britain’s protected species. Nature Conservancy Council, CSD Report, 1089Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joana Magos Brehm
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nigel Maxted
    • 1
  • Maria Amélia Martins-Loução
    • 2
    • 3
  • Brian V. Ford-Lloyd
    • 1
  1. 1.School of BiosciencesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  2. 2.Jardim Botânico, Museu Nacional de História NaturalUniversidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  3. 3.Centro de Biologia Ambiental, Faculdade de CiênciasUniversidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations