| 1. |
- Ranc, Nathan, et al.
(författare)
-
Performance tradeoffs in target-group bias correction for species distribution models
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Ecography. - : Wiley. - 0906-7590 .- 1600-0587. ; 40:9, s. 1076-1087
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Species distribution models (SDMs) are often calibrated using presence-only datasets plagued with environmental sampling bias, which leads to a decrease of model accuracy. In order to compensate for this bias, it has been suggested that background data (or pseudoabsences) should represent the area that has been sampled. However, spatially-explicit knowledge of sampling effort is rarely available. In multi-species studies, sampling effort has been inferred following the target-group (TG) approach, where aggregated occurrence of TG species informs the selection of background data. However, little is known about the species-specific response to this type of bias correction. The present study aims at evaluating the impacts of sampling bias and bias correction on SDM performance. To this end, we designed a realistic system of sampling bias and virtual species based on 92 terrestrial mammal species occurring in the Mediterranean basin. We manipulated presence and background data selection to calibrate four SDM types. Unbiased (unbiased presence data) and biased (biased presence data) SDMs were calibrated using randomly distributed background data. We used real and TG-estimated sampling efforts in background selection to correct for sampling bias in presence data. Overall, environmental sampling bias had a deleterious effect on SDM performance. In addition, bias correction improved model accuracy, and especially when based on spatially-explicit knowledge of sampling effort. However, our results highlight important species-specific variations in susceptibility to sampling bias, which were largely explained by range size: widely-distributed species were most vulnerable to sampling bias and bias correction was even detrimental for narrow-ranging species. Furthermore, spatial discrepancies in SDM predictions suggest that bias correction effectively replaces an underestimation bias with an overestimation bias, particularly in areas of low sampling intensity. Thus, our results call for a better estimation of sampling effort in multispecies system, and cautions the uninformed and automatic application of TG bias correction.
|
|
| 2. |
- Redpath, Steve M., et al.
(författare)
-
Don't forget to look down – collaborative approaches to predator conservation
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Biological Reviews. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1464-7931 .- 1469-185X. ; 92:4, s. 2157-2163
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Finding effective ways of conserving large carnivores is widely recognised as a priority in conservation. However, there is disagreement about the most effective way to do this, with some favouring top-down ‘command and control’ approaches and others favouring collaboration. Arguments for coercive top-down approaches have been presented elsewhere; here we present arguments for collaboration. In many parts of the developed world, flexibility of approach is built into the legislation, so that conservation objectives are balanced with other legitimate goals. In the developing world, limited resources, poverty and weak governance mean that collaborative approaches are likely to play a particularly important part in carnivore conservation. In general, coercive policies may lead to the deterioration of political legitimacy and potentially to non-compliance issues such as illegal killing, whereas collaborative approaches may lead to psychological ownership, enhanced trust, learning, and better social outcomes. Sustainable hunting/trapping plays a crucial part in the conservation and management of many large carnivores. There are many different models for how to conserve carnivores effectively across the world, research is now required to reduce uncertainty and examine the effectiveness of these approaches in different contexts.
|
|
| 3. |
- Trouwborst, Arie, et al.
(författare)
-
International Wildlife Law : Understanding and Enhancing Its Role in Conservation
- 2017
-
Ingår i: BioScience. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0006-3568 .- 1525-3244. ; 37:9, s. 784-790
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Many conservation professionals are familiar with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Ramsar Convention, and the World Heritage Convention. Regional instruments, such as those focusing on Africa, Antarctica, or Europe, are also conspicuous features of the conservation arena. Other international wildlife agreements focus on particular species, such as polar bears or albatrosses, or particular transboundary protected areas, such as the huge Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (see table 1). These agreements are collectively known as international wildlife law (Bowman et al. 2010). The binding agreements themselves are typically accompanied and informed by an evolving set of nonbinding instruments, such as Conference of the Parties (COP) decisions and action plans.
|
|
