Prioritizing global marine mammal habitats using density maps in place of range maps. Issue 3 (24th September 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Williams, Rob; Grand, Joanna; Hooker, Sascha K.; Buckland, Stephen T.; Reeves, Randall R.; Rojas‐Bracho, Lorenzo; Sandilands, Doug; Kaschner, Kristin
• Is Part Of: Ecography. Volume 37:Issue 3(2014:Mar.)
• Page Start: 212
• Page End: 220
• Publication Date: 2013-09-24
• Subjects: Ecology -- Periodicals; Biodiversity -- Periodicals; 574.5
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.00479.x
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0906-7590

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" xml:lang="en"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <p>Despite lessons from terrestrial systems, conservation efforts in marine systems continue to focus on identifying priority sites for protection based on high species richness inferred from range maps. Range maps oversimplify spatial variability in animal distributions by assuming uniform distribution within range and de facto giving equal weight to critical and marginal habitats. We used Marxan ver. 2.43 to compare species richness‐based systematic reserve network solutions using information about marine mammal range and relative abundance. At a global scale, reserve network solutions were strongly sensitive to model inputs and assumptions. Solutions based on different input data overlapped by a third at most, with agreement as low as 10% in some cases. At a regional scale, species richness was inversely related to density, such that species richness hotspots excluded highest‐density areas for all species. Based on these findings, we caution that species‐richness estimates derived from range maps and used as input in conservation planning exercises may inadvertently lead to protection of largely marginal habitat.</p> </abstract>