Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.05.001 http://hdl.handle.net/1843/52203 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4877-5414 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9504-5441 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7887-2461 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4146-8198 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3628-6405 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5122-0247 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6491-806X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-946X https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9957-5506 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1511-5324 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4539-4336 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4561-5634 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4640-0942 |
Resumo: | Fonseca and Venticinque (2018) (hereafter FV) present a critical assessment of a paper in which we attempt to estimate the biodiversity coverage of the Brazilian conservation units (Oliveira et al., 2017). We appreciate their contribution to this important debate. We have no doubts that conservation planning should be based on a variety of information sources, including not only the coverage of species’ ranges but also the contribution of each area to the preservation of ecosystem services, landscape features and socioeconomic and cultural aspects. This systematic and integrative conservation planning is certainly a complex process, which requires the contribution of experts from different fields. However, we have shown, in this reply, that our paper (Oliveira et al., 2017) aims to quantify the knowledge and protection gaps of biodiversity in protected areas, not to propose priority areas or to test whether the current proposal of priority areas is efficient. Objectives and the conclusions of our paper. We hope this short response can clarify this debate. |
id |
UFMG_f953595a8e0ef4528068e9679260face |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ufmg.br:1843/52203 |
network_acronym_str |
UFMG |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planningBiodiveristyBrazilConservation strategiesEcologiaBiodiversidade - ConservaçãoBrasilFonseca and Venticinque (2018) (hereafter FV) present a critical assessment of a paper in which we attempt to estimate the biodiversity coverage of the Brazilian conservation units (Oliveira et al., 2017). We appreciate their contribution to this important debate. We have no doubts that conservation planning should be based on a variety of information sources, including not only the coverage of species’ ranges but also the contribution of each area to the preservation of ecosystem services, landscape features and socioeconomic and cultural aspects. This systematic and integrative conservation planning is certainly a complex process, which requires the contribution of experts from different fields. However, we have shown, in this reply, that our paper (Oliveira et al., 2017) aims to quantify the knowledge and protection gaps of biodiversity in protected areas, not to propose priority areas or to test whether the current proposal of priority areas is efficient. Objectives and the conclusions of our paper. We hope this short response can clarify this debate.Universidade Federal de Minas GeraisBrasilICB - DEPARTAMENTO DE BOTÂNICAICB - DEPARTAMENTO DE ZOOLOGIAIGC - DEPARTAMENTO DE CARTOGRAFIAUFMG2023-04-18T21:30:25Z2023-04-18T21:30:25Z2018info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlepdfapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.05.0012530-0644http://hdl.handle.net/1843/52203https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4877-5414https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9504-5441https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7887-2461https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4146-8198https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3628-6405https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5122-0247https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6491-806Xhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-946Xhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9957-5506https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1511-5324https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4539-4336https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4561-5634https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4640-0942engPerspectives in Ecology and ConservationUbirajara OliveiraJoão Paulo Peixoto Pena BarbosaJoão Renato StehmannJohn S. AscherMarcelo Ferreira de VasconcelosPaulo de MarcoPeter Löwenberg-netoViviane Gianluppi FerroAdalberto J. SantosBritaldo Silveira Soares FilhoAdriano Pereira PagliaAntonio D. BrescovitClaudio J. B. de CarvalhoDaniel Paiva SilvaDaniella T. RezendeFelipe Sá Fortes LeiteJoão Aguiar Nogueira Batistainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFMGinstname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)instacron:UFMG2023-04-18T21:30:25Zoai:repositorio.ufmg.br:1843/52203Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://repositorio.ufmg.br/oairepositorio@ufmg.bropendoar:2023-04-18T21:30:25Repositório Institucional da UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning |
title |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning |
spellingShingle |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning Ubirajara Oliveira Biodiveristy Brazil Conservation strategies Ecologia Biodiversidade - Conservação Brasil |
title_short |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning |
title_full |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning |
title_fullStr |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning |
title_full_unstemmed |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning |
title_sort |
Reply to biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: a role for systematic conservation planning |
author |
Ubirajara Oliveira |
author_facet |
Ubirajara Oliveira João Paulo Peixoto Pena Barbosa João Renato Stehmann John S. Ascher Marcelo Ferreira de Vasconcelos Paulo de Marco Peter Löwenberg-neto Viviane Gianluppi Ferro Adalberto J. Santos Britaldo Silveira Soares Filho Adriano Pereira Paglia Antonio D. Brescovit Claudio J. B. de Carvalho Daniel Paiva Silva Daniella T. Rezende Felipe Sá Fortes Leite João Aguiar Nogueira Batista |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
João Paulo Peixoto Pena Barbosa João Renato Stehmann John S. Ascher Marcelo Ferreira de Vasconcelos Paulo de Marco Peter Löwenberg-neto Viviane Gianluppi Ferro Adalberto J. Santos Britaldo Silveira Soares Filho Adriano Pereira Paglia Antonio D. Brescovit Claudio J. B. de Carvalho Daniel Paiva Silva Daniella T. Rezende Felipe Sá Fortes Leite João Aguiar Nogueira Batista |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ubirajara Oliveira João Paulo Peixoto Pena Barbosa João Renato Stehmann John S. Ascher Marcelo Ferreira de Vasconcelos Paulo de Marco Peter Löwenberg-neto Viviane Gianluppi Ferro Adalberto J. Santos Britaldo Silveira Soares Filho Adriano Pereira Paglia Antonio D. Brescovit Claudio J. B. de Carvalho Daniel Paiva Silva Daniella T. Rezende Felipe Sá Fortes Leite João Aguiar Nogueira Batista |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Biodiveristy Brazil Conservation strategies Ecologia Biodiversidade - Conservação Brasil |
topic |
Biodiveristy Brazil Conservation strategies Ecologia Biodiversidade - Conservação Brasil |
description |
Fonseca and Venticinque (2018) (hereafter FV) present a critical assessment of a paper in which we attempt to estimate the biodiversity coverage of the Brazilian conservation units (Oliveira et al., 2017). We appreciate their contribution to this important debate. We have no doubts that conservation planning should be based on a variety of information sources, including not only the coverage of species’ ranges but also the contribution of each area to the preservation of ecosystem services, landscape features and socioeconomic and cultural aspects. This systematic and integrative conservation planning is certainly a complex process, which requires the contribution of experts from different fields. However, we have shown, in this reply, that our paper (Oliveira et al., 2017) aims to quantify the knowledge and protection gaps of biodiversity in protected areas, not to propose priority areas or to test whether the current proposal of priority areas is efficient. Objectives and the conclusions of our paper. We hope this short response can clarify this debate. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018 2023-04-18T21:30:25Z 2023-04-18T21:30:25Z |
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 |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.05.001 2530-0644 http://hdl.handle.net/1843/52203 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4877-5414 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9504-5441 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7887-2461 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4146-8198 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3628-6405 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5122-0247 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6491-806X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-946X https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9957-5506 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1511-5324 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4539-4336 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4561-5634 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4640-0942 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.05.001 http://hdl.handle.net/1843/52203 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4877-5414 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9504-5441 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7887-2461 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4146-8198 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3628-6405 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5122-0247 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6491-806X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-946X https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9957-5506 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1511-5324 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4539-4336 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4561-5634 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4640-0942 |
identifier_str_mv |
2530-0644 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais Brasil ICB - DEPARTAMENTO DE BOTÂNICA ICB - DEPARTAMENTO DE ZOOLOGIA IGC - DEPARTAMENTO DE CARTOGRAFIA UFMG |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais Brasil ICB - DEPARTAMENTO DE BOTÂNICA ICB - DEPARTAMENTO DE ZOOLOGIA IGC - DEPARTAMENTO DE CARTOGRAFIA UFMG |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFMG instname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) instacron:UFMG |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) |
instacron_str |
UFMG |
institution |
UFMG |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositorio@ufmg.br |
_version_ |
1823248263798587392 |