Rapid Botanic Survey, Bioquality and improving botanical inventory in the tropics by integrating across spatial scales

Abstract

We review the Rapid Botanic Survey method (RBS), in the context of botanical recording to date. The concept of bioquality, a biodiversity value respecting global rarity, is summarised. Bioquality assessment involves the Star system for categorising species by global rarity; and a Genetic Heat Index (GHI) which aggregates Stars into community scores. All vascular plant species in tropical Africa have Stars, and >3.1 million botanical records have been databased across the continent (Marshall et al., 2016). Presented here are updated bioquality scores from continental tropical Africa, and especially coastal East Africa, and calculated for sample units of various shapes and sizes: East African Flora regions, one degree squares, forest reserves, to fine scale (sample-level) hotspots along the East African coast. GHI is globally standardised and has been calculated for survey data outside Africa, though seldom in tropical Asia. RBS data can also be used to distinguish vegetation types and can include ethnobotanical data. It is recommended as a way to standardise biodiversity or environmental Impact assessment nationally and globally, and for integrating such survey results in databases that will be increasingly useful as the tension between conservation and deforestation increases, and the climate changes.

New species of Ipomoea (Convolvulaceae) from South America

“…Barcodes have been added where known. Most species in this paper are too poorly known for a realistic conservation assessment following IUCN guidelines (2012) but it is likely that many are Black Star species according to the system elaborated by William Hawthorne (Hawthorne and Marshall 2016), which is in many ways more satisfactory at categorizing rare, poorly-known species such as those described in this present paper.…”

“…It should probably be treated as a “black star” species within the classification of Hawthorne and Marshall (2016) and be classified as Endangered (EN) within IUCN (2012) guidelines because of an area of occupancy of < 12, 000 km², based on an analysis using GEOCAT. However, these classifications should be treated as provisional until a full field evaluation is carried out.…”

“…It would be treated as a “black star” species within the classification of Hawthorne and Marshall (2016), but again this must be considered a provisional classification as no systematic search has been made for the species at the type locality or in other similar habitats. Given the highly dispersed distribution of other inselberg species, it might be expected to occur in other isolated locations.…”

“…Field notes do not indicate the plant’s frequency and in the absence of other collections or any information about threats to its habitat, it can only be classified as Data Deficient (DD) within IUCN (2012) guidelines. It would be treated as a “black star” species within the classification of Hawthorne and Marshall (2016), but again this must be considered a provisional classification as no systematic search has been made for the species at the type locality or in other suitable habitats, although it must be presumed to be rare. Both recorded locations lie within the Chapada dos Veadeiros National Park and enjoy legal protection.…”

“…No information is available to indicate the plant’s frequency but field notes accompanying the type collection indicate that its forest habitat is threatened. It would be treated as a “black star” species in both Brazil and Peru within the classification of Hawthorne and Marshall (2016), but within IUCN (2012) guidelines it can only be classified as Data Deficient (DD). However, this must be considered only a provisional classification until the populations can be assessed.…”