Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Souza, Maysa F. V. R.
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Alvarenga, Denizar A., Silva, Marconi Souza, Ferreira, Rodrigo L.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFLA
Texto Completo: http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/49573
Resumo: In the last decade, the scientific community brought to the debate gaps that slow down the advance of knowledge regarding global biodiversity. More recently, this discussion has reached subterranean environments, where these gaps are even more dramatic due to the relict and vulnerable nature of their species. In this context, we tested ecological metrics related to some of these gaps, checking if the biological relevance of the caves would change depending on ecological attributes related to each metric. The study was carried out in caves from southeastern Brazil, located in a region presenting a high richness of troglobitic species restricted to a narrow geographical extent. Thus, we verified: (a) the cave invertebrate communities’ vulnerability with the Vulnerability Index and the Importance Value for Cave Conservation; (b) the distribution and endemicity of the troglobitic species with the Endemicity Index; (c) the phylogenetic diversity of the troglobitic species considering the average taxonomic distinction (∆+), their richness and evenness. We observed a considerable change in the ordering of the caves’ biological relevance according to each tested attribute (index). We discussed how each of these metrics and their attributes indirectly relate to: (a) the preservation and maintenance of the phylogenetic diversity of subterranean communities; (b) the spatial restrictions of different groups, where the greater their restrictions, the greater their vulnerability; (c) the preservation of caves with high biological relevance considering these different attributes together. Thus, we recommend the use of different metrics so that different ecological attributes can be considered, supporting actions that aim to preserve caves in highly altered regions. Finally, we find that the most biologically important cave in the region is not protected (Gruta da Morena cave). We warn that this cave needs to be contemplated by a conservation unit in the region urgently.
id UFLA_7c91e626879b9b8e430022ed92110a7f
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:1/49573
network_acronym_str UFLA
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UFLA
repository_id_str
spelling Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern BrazilEcological metricsCave ecologyNature conservationSubterranean biologyKnowledge shortfallsIn the last decade, the scientific community brought to the debate gaps that slow down the advance of knowledge regarding global biodiversity. More recently, this discussion has reached subterranean environments, where these gaps are even more dramatic due to the relict and vulnerable nature of their species. In this context, we tested ecological metrics related to some of these gaps, checking if the biological relevance of the caves would change depending on ecological attributes related to each metric. The study was carried out in caves from southeastern Brazil, located in a region presenting a high richness of troglobitic species restricted to a narrow geographical extent. Thus, we verified: (a) the cave invertebrate communities’ vulnerability with the Vulnerability Index and the Importance Value for Cave Conservation; (b) the distribution and endemicity of the troglobitic species with the Endemicity Index; (c) the phylogenetic diversity of the troglobitic species considering the average taxonomic distinction (∆+), their richness and evenness. We observed a considerable change in the ordering of the caves’ biological relevance according to each tested attribute (index). We discussed how each of these metrics and their attributes indirectly relate to: (a) the preservation and maintenance of the phylogenetic diversity of subterranean communities; (b) the spatial restrictions of different groups, where the greater their restrictions, the greater their vulnerability; (c) the preservation of caves with high biological relevance considering these different attributes together. Thus, we recommend the use of different metrics so that different ecological attributes can be considered, supporting actions that aim to preserve caves in highly altered regions. Finally, we find that the most biologically important cave in the region is not protected (Gruta da Morena cave). We warn that this cave needs to be contemplated by a conservation unit in the region urgently.University of South Florida (USF)2022-03-25T16:17:23Z2022-03-25T16:17:23Z2021-09info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfSOUZA, M. F. V. R. et al. Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil. International Journal of Speleology, Tampa, v. 50, n. 3, p. 223-238, Sept. 2021. DOI: 10.5038/1827-806X.50.3.2350.http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/49573International Journal of Speleology (IJS)reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFLAinstname:Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)instacron:UFLAAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSouza, Maysa F. V. R.Alvarenga, Denizar A.Silva, Marconi SouzaFerreira, Rodrigo L.eng2022-03-25T16:17:24Zoai:localhost:1/49573Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.ufla.br/oai/requestnivaldo@ufla.br || repositorio.biblioteca@ufla.bropendoar:2022-03-25T16:17:24Repositório Institucional da UFLA - Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
title Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
spellingShingle Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
Souza, Maysa F. V. R.
Ecological metrics
Cave ecology
Nature conservation
Subterranean biology
Knowledge shortfalls
title_short Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
title_full Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
title_fullStr Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
title_full_unstemmed Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
title_sort Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
author Souza, Maysa F. V. R.
author_facet Souza, Maysa F. V. R.
Alvarenga, Denizar A.
Silva, Marconi Souza
Ferreira, Rodrigo L.
author_role author
author2 Alvarenga, Denizar A.
Silva, Marconi Souza
Ferreira, Rodrigo L.
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Souza, Maysa F. V. R.
Alvarenga, Denizar A.
Silva, Marconi Souza
Ferreira, Rodrigo L.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Ecological metrics
Cave ecology
Nature conservation
Subterranean biology
Knowledge shortfalls
topic Ecological metrics
Cave ecology
Nature conservation
Subterranean biology
Knowledge shortfalls
description In the last decade, the scientific community brought to the debate gaps that slow down the advance of knowledge regarding global biodiversity. More recently, this discussion has reached subterranean environments, where these gaps are even more dramatic due to the relict and vulnerable nature of their species. In this context, we tested ecological metrics related to some of these gaps, checking if the biological relevance of the caves would change depending on ecological attributes related to each metric. The study was carried out in caves from southeastern Brazil, located in a region presenting a high richness of troglobitic species restricted to a narrow geographical extent. Thus, we verified: (a) the cave invertebrate communities’ vulnerability with the Vulnerability Index and the Importance Value for Cave Conservation; (b) the distribution and endemicity of the troglobitic species with the Endemicity Index; (c) the phylogenetic diversity of the troglobitic species considering the average taxonomic distinction (∆+), their richness and evenness. We observed a considerable change in the ordering of the caves’ biological relevance according to each tested attribute (index). We discussed how each of these metrics and their attributes indirectly relate to: (a) the preservation and maintenance of the phylogenetic diversity of subterranean communities; (b) the spatial restrictions of different groups, where the greater their restrictions, the greater their vulnerability; (c) the preservation of caves with high biological relevance considering these different attributes together. Thus, we recommend the use of different metrics so that different ecological attributes can be considered, supporting actions that aim to preserve caves in highly altered regions. Finally, we find that the most biologically important cave in the region is not protected (Gruta da Morena cave). We warn that this cave needs to be contemplated by a conservation unit in the region urgently.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-09
2022-03-25T16:17:23Z
2022-03-25T16:17:23Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv SOUZA, M. F. V. R. et al. Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil. International Journal of Speleology, Tampa, v. 50, n. 3, p. 223-238, Sept. 2021. DOI: 10.5038/1827-806X.50.3.2350.
http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/49573
identifier_str_mv SOUZA, M. F. V. R. et al. Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil. International Journal of Speleology, Tampa, v. 50, n. 3, p. 223-238, Sept. 2021. DOI: 10.5038/1827-806X.50.3.2350.
url http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/49573
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv University of South Florida (USF)
publisher.none.fl_str_mv University of South Florida (USF)
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv International Journal of Speleology (IJS)
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFLA
instname:Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)
instacron:UFLA
instname_str Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)
instacron_str UFLA
institution UFLA
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UFLA
collection Repositório Institucional da UFLA
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UFLA - Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv nivaldo@ufla.br || repositorio.biblioteca@ufla.br
_version_ 1815439115376656384