Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Solar, Ricardo Ribeiro de Castro
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Barlow, Jos, Lennox, Gareth D., Ferreira, Joice, Berenguer, Erika, Lees, Alexander C., Nally, Ralph Mac, Thomson, James R., Ferraz, Silvio Frosini de Barros, Louzada, Julio, Oliveira, Victor Hugo Fonseca, Parry, Luke, Vieira, Ima C. G., Aragão, Luiz E. O. C., Begotti, Rodrigo Anzolin, Braga, Rodrigo F., Cardoso, Thiago Moreira, et al.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18326
http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/23696
Resumo: Concerted political attention has focused on reducing deforestation1,2,3, and this remains the cornerstone of most biodiversity conservation strategies4,5,6. However, maintaining forest cover may not reduce anthropogenic forest disturbances, which are rarely considered in conservation programmes6. These disturbances occur both within forests, including selective logging and wildfires7,8, and at the landscape level, through edge, area and isolation effects9. Until now, the combined effect of anthropogenic disturbance on the conservation value of remnant primary forests has remained unknown, making it impossible to assess the relative importance of forest disturbance and forest loss. Here we address these knowledge gaps using a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Pará. Catchments retaining more than 69–80% forest cover lost more conservation value from disturbance than from forest loss. For example, a 20% loss of primary forest, the maximum level of deforestation allowed on Amazonian properties under Brazil’s Forest Code5, resulted in a 39–54% loss of conservation value: 96–171% more than expected without considering disturbance effects. We extrapolated the disturbance-mediated loss of conservation value throughout Pará, which covers 25% of the Brazilian Amazon. Although disturbed forests retained considerable conservation value compared with deforested areas, the toll of disturbance outside Pará’s strictly protected areas is equivalent to the loss of 92,000–139,000 km2 of primary forest. Even this lowest estimate is greater than the area deforested across the entire Brazilian Amazon between 2006 and 2015 (ref. 10). Species distribution models showed that both landscape and within-forest disturbances contributed to biodiversity loss, with the greatest negative effects on species of high conservation and functional value. These results demonstrate an urgent need for policy interventions that go beyond the maintenance of forest cover to safeguard the hyper-diversity of tropical forest ecosystems.
id UFV_8e24bde135fcd75e37610c89f5ad9ecf
oai_identifier_str oai:locus.ufv.br:123456789/23696
network_acronym_str UFV
network_name_str LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
repository_id_str 2145
spelling Solar, Ricardo Ribeiro de CastroBarlow, JosLennox, Gareth D.Ferreira, JoiceBerenguer, ErikaLees, Alexander C.Nally, Ralph MacThomson, James R.Ferraz, Silvio Frosini de BarrosLouzada, JulioOliveira, Victor Hugo FonsecaParry, LukeVieira, Ima C. G.Aragão, Luiz E. O. C.Begotti, Rodrigo AnzolinBraga, Rodrigo F.Cardoso, Thiago Moreiraet al.2019-02-25T13:55:00Z2019-02-25T13:55:00Z2016-07-071476-4687https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18326http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/23696Concerted political attention has focused on reducing deforestation1,2,3, and this remains the cornerstone of most biodiversity conservation strategies4,5,6. However, maintaining forest cover may not reduce anthropogenic forest disturbances, which are rarely considered in conservation programmes6. These disturbances occur both within forests, including selective logging and wildfires7,8, and at the landscape level, through edge, area and isolation effects9. Until now, the combined effect of anthropogenic disturbance on the conservation value of remnant primary forests has remained unknown, making it impossible to assess the relative importance of forest disturbance and forest loss. Here we address these knowledge gaps using a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Pará. Catchments retaining more than 69–80% forest cover lost more conservation value from disturbance than from forest loss. For example, a 20% loss of primary forest, the maximum level of deforestation allowed on Amazonian properties under Brazil’s Forest Code5, resulted in a 39–54% loss of conservation value: 96–171% more than expected without considering disturbance effects. We extrapolated the disturbance-mediated loss of conservation value throughout Pará, which covers 25% of the Brazilian Amazon. Although disturbed forests retained considerable conservation value compared with deforested areas, the toll of disturbance outside Pará’s strictly protected areas is equivalent to the loss of 92,000–139,000 km2 of primary forest. Even this lowest estimate is greater than the area deforested across the entire Brazilian Amazon between 2006 and 2015 (ref. 10). Species distribution models showed that both landscape and within-forest disturbances contributed to biodiversity loss, with the greatest negative effects on species of high conservation and functional value. These results demonstrate an urgent need for policy interventions that go beyond the maintenance of forest cover to safeguard the hyper-diversity of tropical forest ecosystems.engNatureVolume 535, Pages 144– 147, July 20162019 Springer Nature Publishing AGinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAnthropogenicDisturbanceBiodiversityAnthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfreponame:LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFVinstname:Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)instacron:UFVORIGINALartigo.pdfartigo.pdfTexto completoapplication/pdf3757605https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/23696/1/artigo.pdf3dc358c26b324827bd9c70bb63190f41MD51LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-81748https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/23696/2/license.txt8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33MD52123456789/236962019-02-25 11:31:16.246oai:locus.ufv.br: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Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://www.locus.ufv.br/oai/requestfabiojreis@ufv.bropendoar:21452019-02-25T14:31:16LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV - Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)false
dc.title.en.fl_str_mv Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
title Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
spellingShingle Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
Solar, Ricardo Ribeiro de Castro
Anthropogenic
Disturbance
Biodiversity
title_short Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
title_full Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
title_fullStr Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
title_full_unstemmed Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
title_sort Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation
author Solar, Ricardo Ribeiro de Castro
author_facet Solar, Ricardo Ribeiro de Castro
Barlow, Jos
Lennox, Gareth D.
Ferreira, Joice
Berenguer, Erika
Lees, Alexander C.
Nally, Ralph Mac
Thomson, James R.
Ferraz, Silvio Frosini de Barros
Louzada, Julio
Oliveira, Victor Hugo Fonseca
Parry, Luke
Vieira, Ima C. G.
Aragão, Luiz E. O. C.
Begotti, Rodrigo Anzolin
Braga, Rodrigo F.
Cardoso, Thiago Moreira
et al.
author_role author
author2 Barlow, Jos
Lennox, Gareth D.
Ferreira, Joice
Berenguer, Erika
Lees, Alexander C.
Nally, Ralph Mac
Thomson, James R.
Ferraz, Silvio Frosini de Barros
Louzada, Julio
Oliveira, Victor Hugo Fonseca
Parry, Luke
Vieira, Ima C. G.
Aragão, Luiz E. O. C.
Begotti, Rodrigo Anzolin
Braga, Rodrigo F.
Cardoso, Thiago Moreira
et al.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Solar, Ricardo Ribeiro de Castro
Barlow, Jos
Lennox, Gareth D.
Ferreira, Joice
Berenguer, Erika
Lees, Alexander C.
Nally, Ralph Mac
Thomson, James R.
Ferraz, Silvio Frosini de Barros
Louzada, Julio
Oliveira, Victor Hugo Fonseca
Parry, Luke
Vieira, Ima C. G.
Aragão, Luiz E. O. C.
Begotti, Rodrigo Anzolin
Braga, Rodrigo F.
Cardoso, Thiago Moreira
et al.
dc.subject.pt-BR.fl_str_mv Anthropogenic
Disturbance
Biodiversity
topic Anthropogenic
Disturbance
Biodiversity
description Concerted political attention has focused on reducing deforestation1,2,3, and this remains the cornerstone of most biodiversity conservation strategies4,5,6. However, maintaining forest cover may not reduce anthropogenic forest disturbances, which are rarely considered in conservation programmes6. These disturbances occur both within forests, including selective logging and wildfires7,8, and at the landscape level, through edge, area and isolation effects9. Until now, the combined effect of anthropogenic disturbance on the conservation value of remnant primary forests has remained unknown, making it impossible to assess the relative importance of forest disturbance and forest loss. Here we address these knowledge gaps using a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Pará. Catchments retaining more than 69–80% forest cover lost more conservation value from disturbance than from forest loss. For example, a 20% loss of primary forest, the maximum level of deforestation allowed on Amazonian properties under Brazil’s Forest Code5, resulted in a 39–54% loss of conservation value: 96–171% more than expected without considering disturbance effects. We extrapolated the disturbance-mediated loss of conservation value throughout Pará, which covers 25% of the Brazilian Amazon. Although disturbed forests retained considerable conservation value compared with deforested areas, the toll of disturbance outside Pará’s strictly protected areas is equivalent to the loss of 92,000–139,000 km2 of primary forest. Even this lowest estimate is greater than the area deforested across the entire Brazilian Amazon between 2006 and 2015 (ref. 10). Species distribution models showed that both landscape and within-forest disturbances contributed to biodiversity loss, with the greatest negative effects on species of high conservation and functional value. These results demonstrate an urgent need for policy interventions that go beyond the maintenance of forest cover to safeguard the hyper-diversity of tropical forest ecosystems.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2016-07-07
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2019-02-25T13:55:00Z
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2019-02-25T13:55:00Z
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/10.1038/nature18326
http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/23696
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv 1476-4687
identifier_str_mv 1476-4687
url https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18326
http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/23696
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartofseries.pt-BR.fl_str_mv Volume 535, Pages 144– 147, July 2016
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv 2019 Springer Nature Publishing AG
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv 2019 Springer Nature Publishing AG
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Nature
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Nature
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
instname:Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)
instacron:UFV
instname_str Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)
instacron_str UFV
institution UFV
reponame_str LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
collection LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/23696/1/artigo.pdf
https://locus.ufv.br//bitstream/123456789/23696/2/license.txt
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv 3dc358c26b324827bd9c70bb63190f41
8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV - Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv fabiojreis@ufv.br
_version_ 1798053326306148352