Common plants as indicators of habitat suitability for rare plants; quantifying the strength of the association between threatened plants and their neighbours

Abstract

This version available http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/512156/ NERC has developed NORA to enable users to access research outputs wholly or partially funded by NERC. Copyright and other rights for material on this site are retained by the rights owners. Users should read the terms and conditions of use of this material at http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/policies.html#access This document is the author's final manuscript version of the journal article, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer review process. Some differences between this and the publisher's version remain. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from this article.The definitive version is available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com Contact CEH NORA team at noraceh@ceh.ac.ukThe NERC and CEH trademarks and logos ('the Trademarks') are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner. was then used to calculate the probability that the rare species would occur given the presence of an 28 associated species that occurred at least once with the rare species in the TPP quadrats. These 29 values can be interpreted as indicators of habitat conditions rather than expectations of species 30 presence. Probability values for each neighbour species are calculated separately and are therefore 31 unaffected by biased recording of other species. The method can still be applied if only a subset of 32 species are recorded, for example where weaker botanists record a pre-selected subset of more 33 easily identifiable neighbour species. Disadvantages are that the method is constrained by the 34 2 availability of quadrats currently targeted on rare species and results are influenced by any recording 1 biases associated with existing quadrat data. 2

Eriocaulaceae in the Brazilian Amazon and the use of Species Distribution Modelling in its conservation

“…Of these, 22.3% are known only from a single locality. This arrangement of species as differentiated distribution patterns appears to be common in different areas, as much in the Tropics as in temperate regions (Henrys et al 2015;Smart et al 2015).…”

Applying the dark diversity concept to nature conservation

“…Estimating dark diversity, while not straightforward, is nonetheless achievable (Smart et al. ; Lewis et al. ).…”

“…Estimating dark diversity, while not straightforward, is nonetheless achievable (Smart et al 2015;Lewis et al 2016). Modeling species distributions, which has origins Regional richness ( diversity)…”

Conservation of endangered and rare plants requires strategies additional to deer‐proof fencing for conservation of sub‐alpine plant diversity

“…The principal idea of the coarse‐filter approach is that by conserving a representative array of biological communities and ecosystems that occur within a region, it will also conserve the majority of species (Groves et al, 2002; Hunter, 2005). Endangered and rare species, on the other hand, which do not always co‐occur with certain communities or ecosystems (but see Smart et al, 2015), can be candidates for the fine‐filter conservation approach, especially outside the protected areas (Molina et al, 2006; Crous et al, 2013; Hunter et al, 2017). Deer fencing is a coarse‐filter conservation strategy, and therefore, it is necessary to verify whether it can contribute to the conservation of non‐target endangered and rare species sparsely distributed in areas targeted for biodiversity conservation.…”