Skip to main content
Log in

Relative occupancy, endemism, taxonomic distinctiveness and vulnerability: prioritizing regional conservation actions

  • Published:
Biodiversity & Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A method is presented whereby regional species are scored and ranked in order of regional conservation importance according to a number of different but complementary 'rarity' criteria. Approaches for determining regional occupancy (RO), relative taxonomic distinctiveness (RTD), relative endemism (RE) and relative vulnerability (RV) rankings for regional faunas are proposed. The continuous variable approach and resultant positively skewed 'rarity' scores suggest easy identification of regional priority species. These methods are collectively applied to a regional mammalian fauna in order to prioritize species for conservation action using a regional priority score (RPS). The proposed method is a comparative relational approach aimed at determining which species require the establishment of viable populations within a regional context. The two species afforded highest RPSs for the Transvaal region, South Africa, are Gunning's golden mole Amblysomus gunningi and Juliana's golden mole A. julianae. These two species are true endemics, with geographic ranges completely restricted to the region. Also of high regional conservation importance are the four-toed elephant shrew Petrodromus tetradactylus, pangolin Manis temminckii and aardvark Orycteropus afer. Although these species have low RE scores, they have high RTD and RV scores. The equal weightings given to the four components of 'rarity' ensures that species achieving a high score in any of these categories will be considered for regional priority listing. This approach is simple, explicit and repeatable, circumventing problems of scale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brown, J.H. (1984) On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. Am. Nat. 124, 255–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe, M.J. and Skinner, J.D. (1993) Connections, disjunctions and endemism in the eastern and southern African mammal faunas. Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Afr. 48, 233–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cousins, S.H. (1994) Taxonomy and functional biotic measurement, or, will the Ark work? In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 397–419. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, R.H. (1992) Genetic diversity and the agony of choice. Biol. Conserv. 61, 11–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, R.J.R., Hedge, M., Joshi, N.V. and Gadgil, M. (1991) Assigning conservation value: a case study from India. Cons. Biol. 5, 464–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faith, D.P. (1994) Phylogenetic diversity: a general framework for the prediction of feature diversity. In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 251–68. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrar, A.A. (1989) The role of Red Data Books in conserving biodiversity. In Biotic Diversity in Southern Africa: Concepts and Conservation. (B.J. Huntley, ed.) pp. 136–47. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freitag, S., Nicholls, A.O. and Van Jaarsveld, A.S. (1996) Nature reserve selection in the Transvaal, South Africa: what data should we be using? Biodiv. Conserv. 5, 685–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freitag, S. and Van Jaarsveld, A.S. (1995) Towards conserving regional mammalian species diversity: a case study and data critique. S. Afr. J. Zool. 30, 136–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston, K.J. (1991) How large is a species' geographic range? OIKOS 61, 434–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaston, K.J. (1994) Rarity. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, A.H. (1992) Tropical forest biodiversity: distributional patterns and their conservation significance. OIKOS 63, 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gimenez-Dixon, M. and Stuart, S. (1993) Action plans for species conservation, an evaluation of their effectiveness. Species 20, 6–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Given, D.R. and Norton, D.A. (1993) A multivariate approach to assessing threat and for priority setting in threatened species conservation. Biol. Conserv. 64, 57–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M.L. and Hutchinson, A.H. (1994) The virtues and shortcomings of parochialism: conserving species that are locally rare, but globally common. Cons. Biol. 8, 1163–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (1994) IUCN Red List categories. Prepared by the IUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland, Switzerland. 21 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacey, R.C. (1993) VORTEX: a computer simulation model for population viability analysis. Wildl. Res. 20, 45–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace, G. and Stuart, S. (1994) Draft IUCN red list categories, Version 2.2. Species 21–22, 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C.R., Cresswell, I.D. and Nicholls, A.O. (1994) A scientific basis for establishing networks of protected areas. In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 327–50. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehlman, D.W. (1994) Rarity in North American passerine birds. Cons. Biol. 8, 1141–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A.O., Viljoen, P.C., Knight, M.H. and Van Jaarsveld, A.S. (1996) Evaluating population persistence of censused and unmanaged herbivore populations from the Kruger National Park, South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 76, 57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prendergast, J.R., Quinn, R.M., Lawton, J.H., Eversham, B.C. and Gibbons, D.W. (1993) Rare species, the coincidence of diversity hotspots and conservation strategies. Nature 365, 335–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L. (1994a) Ad hoc reservations: forward or backward steps in developing representative reserve systems? Cons. Biol. 8, 662–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L. (1994b) Land classifications are necessary for conservation planning but what do they tell us about fauna? In The Future of The Fauna of Western New South Wales. (D. Lunney, S. Hand, P. Reed and D. Butcher, eds). pp. 31–41. Sydney: Royal Zoological Society of NSW.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L. (1995) Conservation reserves in NSW: crown jewels or leftovers? Search 26, 47–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L., Cohn, J.S. and Porter, J.L. (1990) Vascular plants with restricted distributions in the Western Division of New South Wales. Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. 112, 213–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L., Humphries, C.J., Margules, C.R., Vane-Wright, R.I. and Williams, P.H. (1993) Beyond opportunism: key principles for systematic reserve selection. TREE 8, 124–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L. and Tulley, S.L. (1994) The cost of ad hoc reservation: A case study in western New South Wales. Austr. J. Ecol. 19, 375–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R.L., Possingham, H.P. and Margules, C.R. (in press) Optimality in reserve selection algorithms: when does it matter and how much? Biol. Conserv.

  • Pulliam, H.R. (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am. Nat 132, 652–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz, D. (1981) Seven forms of rarity. In The Biological Aspects of Rare Plant Conservation. (H. Synge, ed.). pp. 205–32. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz, D., Cairns, S. and Dillon, T. (1986) Seven forms of rarity and their frequency in the flora of the British Isles. In Conservation Biology: the Science of Scarcity and Diversity. (M. E. Soule, ed.). pp. 187–204. Sunderland: Sinauer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebelo, A.G. (1994) Using the Proteaceae to design a nature reserve network and determine conservation priorities for the Cape Floristic Region. In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 375–96. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebelo, A.G. and Siegfried, W.R. (1992) Where should nature reserves be located in the Cape floristic region, South Africa? Models for the spatial configuration of a reserve network aimed at maximizing the protection of floral diversity. Cons. Biol. 6, 243–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadlier, R.A. and Pressey, R.L. (1994) Reptiles and amphibians of particular conservation concern in the Western Division of New South Wales: a preliminary review. Biol. Conserv. 69, 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegfried, W.R. and Brown, C.A. (1992) The distribution and protection of mammals endemic to southern Africa. S. Afr. J. Wildl. Res. 22, 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, J.D. and Smithers, R.H.N. (1990) The Mammals of the Southern African Subregion (2nd Edition). Pretoria: Pretoria University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smithers. R.H.N. (1986) South African Red Data Book — Terrestrial mammals. South African National Scientific Programmes Report 125.

  • Terborgh, J. and Winter, B. (1983) A method for siting parks and reserves with special reference to Colombia and Ecuador. Biol. Conserv. 27, 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright, R.I., Humphries, C.J. and Williams, P.H. (1991) What to protect? — Systematics and the agony of choice. Biol. Conserv. 55, 235–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane-Wright, R.I., Smith, C.R. and Kitching, I.J. (1994) Systematic assessment of taxic diversity by summation. In Systematics and Conservation Evaluation. Systematics Association Special Volume 50. (P.L. Forey, C.J. Humphries and R.I. Vane-Wright, eds) pp. 309–26. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Jaarsveld, A.S. (1995) Where to with reserve selection and conservation planning? S. Afr. J. Zool. 30, 164–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, B.D. (1988) Species richness, species rarity and conservation evaluation of rich-fen vegetation in lowland England and Wales. J. Appl. Ecol. 25, 331–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P.H., Gaston, K.J. and Humphries, C.J. (1994) Do conservationists and molecular biologists value differences between organisms in the same way? Biodiv. Lett. 2, 67–78.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Freitag, S., Jaarsveld, A.S.V. Relative occupancy, endemism, taxonomic distinctiveness and vulnerability: prioritizing regional conservation actions. Biodiversity and Conservation 6, 211–232 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018392019594

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018392019594

Navigation