Geographical and taxonomic biases in research on biodiversity in human‐modified landscapes

Trimble, Morgan Jayne; Aarde, Rudi J. van

doi:10.1890/es12-00299.1

Cited by 95 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The geographical and ecosystem distributions we observed are consistent with other similar assessments [31,32]. Other than the compelling evidence of the attraction of insects to artificial structures, only three studies have demonstrated a trap in freshwater ecosystems, and none in marine environments.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ecological traps: current evidence and future directions

Hale¹,

Swearer²

2016

Proc. R. Soc. B.

234

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological traps, which occur when animals mistakenly prefer habitats where their fitness is lower than in other available habitats following rapid environmental change, have important conservation and management implications. Empirical research has focused largely on assessing the behavioural effects of traps, by studying a small number of geographically close habitat patches. Traps, however, have also been defined in terms of their population-level effects (i.e. as preferred habitats of sufficiently low quality to cause population declines), and this is the scale most relevant for management. We systematically review the ecological traps literature to (i) describe the geographical and taxonomic distribution of efforts to study traps, (ii) examine how different traps vary in the strength of their effects on preference and fitness, (iii) evaluate the robustness of methods being used to identify traps, and (iv) determine whether the information required to assess the population-level consequences of traps has been considered. We use our results to discuss key knowledge gaps, propose improved methods to study traps, and highlight fruitful avenues for future research.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…While conservation research in human modified landscapes is likely to be most important in areas where human pressure is greatest, these areas are also the least studied [32]. There has been much interest in understanding the biodiversity impacts of land-use change in the tropics (e.g.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological traps: current evidence and future directions

Hale¹,

Swearer²

2016

Proc. R. Soc. B.

234

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the bright side, scientific interest in the topic is increasing (Trimble and van Aarde 2012), and as research accumulates, it will allow for systematic reviews useful for policy decisions. Additionally, many issues associated with human-wildlife coexistence are primarily 33 related to large mammals and efforts to solve these problems should continue.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1), particularly rich in biodiversity. Research on biodiversity in human-modified landscapes is biased towards tropical forests (Trimble and van Aarde 2012). Nonetheless, biodiversity in human-modified tropical forest landscapes in Africa has received much less scientific attention than in other regions, especially South and Central America (Gardner et al 2010).…”

Section: Tropical Forestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As others have pointed out, understanding the value of human-modified landscapes for biodiversity, especially in Africa, is hampered by data constraints (Norris et al 2010;Pettorelli et al 2010;Waltert et al 2011;Trimble and van Aarde 2012). Many studies are limited in temporal and spatial scale, and poor study design may result in insufficient sampling of habitats.…”

Section: The Science Of Biodiversity In Human-modified Landscapesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Supporting conservation with biodiversity research in sub-Saharan Africa’s human-modified landscapes

Trimble

Aarde

2014

Biodivers Conserv

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected areas cover 12% of terrestrial sub-Saharan Africa. However, given the inherent inadequacies of these protected areas to cater for all species in conjunction with the effects of climate change and human pressures on protected areas, the future of biodiversity depends heavily on the 88% of land that is unprotected. The study of biodiversity patterns and the processes that maintain them in human-modified landscapes can provide a valuable evidence base to support science-based policy-making that seeks to make land outside of protected areas as amenable as possible for biodiversity persistence. We discuss the literature on biodiversity in 2 sub-Saharan Africa"s human-modified landscapes as it relates to four broad ecosystem categorizations (i.e. rangelands, tropical forest, the Cape Floristic Region, and the urban and rural built environment) within which we expect similar patterns of biodiversity persistence in relation to specific human land uses and land management actions. Available research demonstrates the potential contribution of biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes within all four ecosystem types and goes some way towards providing general conclusions that could support policy-making. Nonetheless, conservation success in humanmodified landscapes is hampered by constraints requiring further scientific investment, e.g. deficiencies in the available research, uncertainties regarding implementation strategies, and difficulties of coexisting with biodiversity. However, information currently available can and should support efforts at individual, community, provincial, national, and international levels to support biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes.

show abstract

Is the methodology used in reviews of restoration outcomes reliable? A systematic map protocol

Romanelli

Boschi

Almeida

et al. 2020

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Over the past decades, evidence-based research has become increasingly important in restoration ecology. Evidence synthesis can be a powerful tool to identify the most effective strategies to conserve and restore ecosystems. However, reviews in the environmental sector have been described as non-systematic and exhibit a diverse range of approaches. While it is known that environmental syntheses can substantially improve in quality, the reliability of restoration reviews (i.e. the level of confidence an end-user may place in their methodology) remains poorly known. 2. Given the importance of literature reviews of restoration practice and outcomes for informing management and policy, as well as research, this systematic map protocol aims to scrutinize the peer-reviewed literature for an assessment of the methodological reliability and reproducibility of restoration reviews. We will use bibliographic databases and search engines to collect studies published in peer-reviewed journals dealing with the ecological restoration of terrestrial ecosystems. 3. Through a scoping exercise, a search string was developed which was based on a previously prepared test list. The search string was then tested for validity with one independent reference list. After searching, the screening process will be done on the title, abstract and full-text level and consistency checking will be done on a random subsample by a second assessor, with decisions being compared using the kappa test of agreement. After retrieving studies and checking for relevance to the synthesis, we will appraise the methodological reliability of restoration reviews by applying the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Assessment Tool-CEESAT. Lastly, we will collect bibliometric information to qualitatively describe the retrieved body of literature, and then key trends in data will be synthesized according to a range of generic questions. 4. To conduct the resulting review, we will follow the procedures specified in this protocol, considering guidelines from the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence and ROSES form. The resulting review will yield a useful overview of applying systematic reviews principles for various end users. At the same time, it will help restoration This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Geographical and taxonomic biases in research on biodiversity in human‐modified landscapes

Cited by 95 publications

References 58 publications

Ecological traps: current evidence and future directions

Ecological traps: current evidence and future directions

Supporting conservation with biodiversity research in sub-Saharan Africa’s human-modified landscapes

Is the methodology used in reviews of restoration outcomes reliable? A systematic map protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About