Abstract
PD or “phylogenetic diversity” was proposed by Faith (Biol Conserv 61:1–10, 1992) as a measure of biodiversity “option value”, justifying its importance as a target of biodiversity conservation. The threats to phylogenetic diversity can be quantified by integrating PD with IUCN Red List categories and corresponding inferred extinction probabilities, to estimate amounts of threatened or imperilled PD. Practical conservation applications face decisions about which summaries of imperilled PD best provide priority setting among species and about how to use limited available data to estimate imperilled PD. Extensions of Weitzman’s phylogenetic “expected distinctiveness” provide a unifying foundation for many useful expected PD calculations. This reinforces the utility of expected PD calculations compared to methods in the EDGE programme. However, simplistic use of expected PD also has weaknesses. A resulting priority set of species may neglect other species that also could deserve conservation action. Improved priority setting might utilise conservative estimates of the reduction in extinction probability from conservation action. The priority ordering of a species has been equated with its order of selection in priority sets, but should instead reflect the lost opportunity in averting PD loss if there is no conservation action on that species. Species priorities can be estimated, under simple assumptions, even with the simple “evolutionary distinctiveness” (ED) information that is available for many species from the EDGE programme. This provides a simple approach to priority setting in which threatened species are simply ranked by their ED score, as an estimate of their averted PD loss if the species is conserved. The approximations also provide a tabulation of current total expected PD loss for a given taxonomic group. For biodiversity assessments by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, this approach indicated fractional imperilled PD varying from a low 8% for squamates to a high 65% for corals among the assessments for six major taxonomic groups.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Barker GM (2002) Phylogenetic diversity: a quantitative framework for measurement of priority and achievement in biodiversity conservation. Biol J Linn Soc 76:165–194
Brooks TM, Akçakaya HR, Burgess ND, Butchart SHM, Hilton-Taylor C, Hoffmann M, Juffe-Bignoli D, Kingston N, MacSharry B, Parr M, Perianin L, Regan EC, Rodrigues ASL, Rondinini C, Shennan-Farpon Y, BE Y (2016a) Analysing biodiversity and conservation knowledge products to support regional environmental assessments. Sci Data 3:160007 https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.7
Brooks TM, Akçakaya HR, Burgess ND, Butchart SHM, Hilton-Taylor C, Hoffmann M, Juffe-Bignoli D, Kingston N, MacSharry B, Parr M, Perianin L, Regan EC, Rodrigues ASL, Rondinini C, Shennan-Farpon Y, Young BE (2016b) Data from: Analysing biodiversity and conservation knowledge products to support regional environmental assessments. Dryad Digital Repository. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.6gb90.2
Chassagnon IR, McCarthy CA, China YK-Y, Pinedaa SS, Keramidasd A, Moblie M, Phamb V, Michael De Silvab T, Lynchd JW, Widdop RE, Rasha LD, King GF (2017) Potent neuroprotection after stroke afforded by a double-knot spider-venom peptide that inhibits acid-sensing ion channel 1a. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114(14):3750–3755. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1614728114
Chaudhary A, Pourfaraj V, Mooers AO (2017) Projecting global land use-driven evolutionary history loss. Divers Distrib 24(2):158–167
Daru BH, Yessoufou K, Mankga LT, Davies TJ (2013) A global trend towards the loss of evolutionarily unique species in mangrove ecosystems. PLoS One 8:e66686
Dıaz S et al (2015) The IPBES conceptual framework—connecting nature and people. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 14:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002
EDGE of Existence (n.d.) https://www.edgeofexistence.org/ ZSL, London
Faith DP (1992) Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biol Conserv 61:1–10
Faith DP (2007) Probabilistic PD. Edge of existence. Available from http://www.edgeofexistence.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13andPID=136#136 (Accessed December 2007)
Faith DP (2008) Threatened species and the potential loss of phylogenetic diversity: conservation scenarios based on estimated extinction probabilities and phylogenetic risk analysis. Conserv Biol 22:1461–1470. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01068.x)
Faith DP (2013) Biodiversity and evolutionary history: useful extensions of the PD phylogenetic diversity assessment framework. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1289:69–89
Faith DP (2015) Phylogenetic diversity and extinction: avoiding tipping points and worst-case losses from the tree of life. Philos Trans R Soc B 370:20140011
Faith DP (2017) A general model for biodiversity and its value. In: Garson J, Plutynski A, Sarkar S (eds) The Routledge handbook of philosophy of biodiversity https://www.routledge.com/products/9781138827738
Faith DP, Walker PA (1996a) Integrating conservation and development: incorporating vulnerability into biodiversity-assessment of areas. Biodivers Conserv 5:417–429
Faith DP, Walker PA (1996b) DIVERSITY – XD. In: Faith DP, Nicholls AO (eds) BioRap, rapid assessment of biodiversity. Volume three, tools for assessing biodiversity priority areas, pp 51–62
Forest F, Crandal KAl, Chase MW, Faith DP (2015) Phylogeny, extinction and conservation: embracing uncertainties in a time of urgency. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 370 (1662):20140002-20140002
Faith DP, Magallón S, Hendry AP, Conti E, Yahara T, Donoghue MJ (2010) Evosystem services: an evolutionary perspective on the links between biodiversity and human Well-being. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2:66–74
Hartmann K, Steel M (2006) Maximizing phylogenetic diversity in biodiversity conservation: greedy solutions to the Noah’s ark problem. Syst Biol 55:644–651
Haskins C (1974) Scientists talk of the need for conservation and an ethic of biotic diversity to slow species extinction. Science 184:646–647
Isaac NJB, Turvey ST, Collen B, Waterman C, Baillie JEM (2007) Mammals on the EDGE: conservation priorities based on threat and phylogeny. PLoS One 2:e296
IUCN (1980) World Conservation Strategy: living resource conservation for sustainable development. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), Gland, Switzerland
Jensen EL et al (2016) I-HEDGE: determining the optimum complementary sets of taxa for conservation using evolutionary isolation. PeerJ 4:e2350. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2350
Mooers AO, Faith DP, Maddison WP (2008) Converting endangered species categories to probabilities of extinction for phylogenetic conservation prioritization. PLoS One 3:e3700
Nunes LA, Turvey ST, Rosindell J (2015) The price of conserving avian phylogenetic diversity: a global prioritization approach. Philos Trans R Soc B 370:20140004. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0004
Pascual U et al (2017) Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 26:7
Davies K, Rajvanshi A, Yeo-Chang Y, et al. in press. Chapter 2. Nature’s contributions to people and quality of life. In M. Karki et al., ed. IPBES Regional and subregional assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem services for Asia and the Pacific. Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany.
Redding DW, Mooers AO (2006) Incorporating evolutionary measures into conservation prioritization. Conserv Biol 20:1670–1678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00555.x
Rosindell J, Harmon LJ (2012) OneZoom: a fractal explorer for the tree of life. PLoS Biol 10(10):e1001406
Safi K, Armour-Marshall K, Baillie JEM, Isaac NJB (2013) Global patterns of evolutionary distinct and globally endangered amphibians and mammals. PLoS One 8(5):e63582
Steel M, Mimoto A, Mooers AO (2007) Hedging one’s bets: quantifying a taxon’s expected contribution to future phylogenetic diversity. Evol Bioinformatics Online 3:237–244
Thuiller W, Maiorano L, Mazel F, Guilhaumon F, Ficetola GF, Lavergne S, Renaud J, Roquet C, Mouillot D (2015) Conserving the functional and phylogenetic trees of life of European tetrapods. Philos Trans R Soc B 370:20140005
Tonini JFR, Beard KH, Ferreira RB, Jetz W, Pyron RA (2016) Fully-sampled phylogenies of squamates reveal evolutionary patterns in threat status. Biol Conserv 204:23–31
Volkmann L, Martyn I, Moulton V, Spillner A, Mooers AO (2014) Prioritizing populations for conservation using phylogenetic networks. PLoS One 9:e88945
Weitzman ML (1992) On diversity. Q J Econ 107:363–405
Weitzman ML (1998) The Noah’s ark problem. Econometrica 66:1279–1298
Witting L, Loeschcke V (1995) The optimization of biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 71:205–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(94)00041-N
Yessoufou K, Daru BH, Tafirei R, Elansary HO, Rampedi I (2017) Integrating biogeography, threat and evolutionary data to explore extinction crisis in the taxonomic group of cycads. Ecol Evol 7:2735–2746
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Faith, D.P., Veron, S., Pavoine, S., Pellens, R. (2018). Indicators for the Expected Loss of Phylogenetic Diversity. In: Scherson, R., Faith, D. (eds) Phylogenetic Diversity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93145-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93145-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93144-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93145-6
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)