Do different relevance attributes indicate the same conservation priorities? A case study in caves of southeastern Brazil
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
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 |