滇西北县域生物多样性本底调查与评估

中国是世界上生物多样性最丰富的国家之一, 同时也是生物多样性受威胁最严重的国家之一。为了有效保护生物多样性, 2010年国务院批准实施了《中国生物多样性保护战略与行动计划(2010-2030年)》, 划定了32个陆地生物多样性保护优先区, 并设定了开展优先区生物多样性本底调查的战略目标、优先领域与优先行动。为此, 2010-2011年, 环境保护部联合中国科学院和高校的科研人员, 在滇西北开展了18个县的以县域为单元的生物多样性本底示范调查与研究。调查内容包括生态系统(植被类型)和物种两个层次。生态系统主要调查县域内植被类型的多样性, 完成了以群系为单位的植被类型编目; 物种层次主要调查县域内高等植物、脊椎动物、大型真菌的物种多样性组成、数量和用途等, 分析了特有物种和珍稀濒危物种数量等, 完成了县域物种编目。本文基于调查结果, 比较研究了不同县域间的生物多样性组成, 发现植被类型(108个群系)和物种(高等植物4,481种、脊椎动物625种、大型真菌222种)最丰富的县均为玉龙县。同时, 与历史记录对比研究发现, 滇西北的生物多样性分布数据十分欠缺, 严重影响了生物多样性保护的客观有效决策。生物多样性本底调查是生物多样性保护的一项基础工作, 本研究为中国未来开展大规模的生物多样性本底调查与评估提供了案例。     

中国生物多样性保护优先区域生物多样性调查和评估方法

我国高度重视生物多样性保护,而开展本底调查是生物多样性保护的基础。但以往研究对苔藓、生物多样性相关传统知识等关注不够,而且调查大部分集中在生物多样性丰富区域。随着我国社会经济的快速发展,全国土地利用格局和生态环境发生了巨大变化,已有的部分调查成果数据与实际情况不符,难以满足我国生物多样性保护管理需求,因此亟待组织开展全国生物多样性调查与评估工作。在整理历史和现有生物多样性调查技术的基础上,推荐采用网格法开展全国生物多样性调查,按照10 km×10 km分辨率,将全国划分为97109个调查网格;制定了陆生高等植物、植被、陆生哺乳动物、鸟类、两栖类和爬行类、昆虫、大型真菌、内陆鱼类、内陆浮游生物、内陆大型底栖无脊椎动物、内陆周丛藻类以及生物多样性相关传统知识12个类群县域生物多样性调查评估技术规定;建立了全国统一、动态更新、信息共享的生物多样性数据库和信息化管理平台。从调查内容规范、评估指标体系和技术要求等方面探讨了陆域生态系统与物种调查、重点河流水生生物调查、重点物种调查、生物多样性相关传统知识调查技术方法,并构建生物多样性综合评估指标体系,规范了生物多样性保护优先区域生物多样性调查和评估。技术方法在横断山南、武陵山、太行山、西双版纳等生物多样性保护优先区域得到应用,同时北京、江苏、浙江和湖北等省份和祁连山、武夷山等区域也采用该技术体系开展调查,网格法得到逐步推广,并获得大量的生物多样性基础数据,为我国生物多样性保护和可持续利用、生物多样性公约履约等提供了基础数据。     

生物多样性重要区域识别——国外案例、国内研究进展

生物多样性丧失已经成为全球重大环境问题之一,重要区域或重要物种的识别是制定和实施保护计划的首要步骤,生物多样性保护的优先性研究成为保护生物学研究的焦点之一。优先保护的概念很早就被提出,保护国际(Conservation International,CI)一直倡导的热点地区途径受到国际社会的重视,生物多样性重要区域(KBAs)可以是综合的,也可以是单一类群的重要区域,如不同的国家已经开展了鸟类重要区域(important bird areas,IBAs)、植物重要区域(important plants areas,IPAs)、蝴蝶重要区域(prime butterfly areas,PBAs)和两栖爬行动物重要区域(important amphibians and reptiles areas,IARAs)等的识别研究工作。集中力量优先保护一些重要的地区是目前生物多样性保护较为现实和高效的途径。以佛得角群岛(the Cape Verde Islands)、意大利(Italy)、荷兰(the Netherlands)分别依据动物、植物单一类群或多个类群组合进行生物多样性重要区域识别为例,介绍了几个国家的生物多样性重要区域识别经验,概述国内在生物多样性重要区域识别领域的研究现状,详细介绍了海南岛生物多样性保护优先区识别案例,同时以国务院2010年批准实施的《中国生物多样性保护战略与行动计划(2011—2030年)》划定的32个陆地生物多样性保护优先区为例,提出中国未来应全面开展生物多样性本底调查,在充分获取生物多样性分布数据的基础上,依据植被类型和物种多样性以及受威胁因素等,在32个陆地生物多样性保护优先区内进一步客观准确地识别生物多样性重要区域(热点中的热点或重要区域中的重要区域),为中国未来的保护地规划、生物多样性监测、政策制定等提供科学支撑。     

辽宁省生物多样性保护优先区识别

生物多样性保护优先区是我国为加强生物多样性保护划定的重要区域,辽宁省境内目前并无此类优先区,弥补相关缺失具有重要意义。本研究通过对生态系统保护、人类影响和生物多样性保护区划3个准则层7个指标进行计算,依次获得辽宁省生物多样性保护优先区指标值、准则层值和优先区识别综合值,结合辽宁省县(市)行政边界和自然保护区边界数据,确定了辽宁西部和东部生物多样性保护优先区的建议地域范围。其中,辽宁西部生物多样性保护优先区面积为12951 km²,森林覆盖率为53.6%,包括9个省级以上自然保护区,以水土保持作为区域重要生态功能;辽宁东部生物多样性保护优先区面积为20057 km²,森林覆盖率为78.9%,包括8个省级以上自然保护区,以水源涵养作为区域重要生态功能。上述优先区是国家和省级保护物种的集中分布区,也是辽宁省重要生态系统的分布区,亟待开展生物多样性保护工作。     

保护才能发展、绿色就是财富 保护区管理心得之一

严格控制自然保护区范围和功能分区的调整,严格限制涉及自然保护区的开发建设活动,加强国家级自然保护区规范化建设。加大生物多样性保护优先区域的保护力度,完成8至10个优先区域生物多样性本底调查与评估。开展生物多样性监测试点以及生物多样性保护示范区、恢复示范区等建设。到2015年,90%的国家重点保护物种和典型生态系统得到保护。摘编自《国家环境保护"十二五"规划》自然保护区的首要目标就是资源保护,保护区工作者应在不影响保护的前提下,把科学研究、经济发展、宣传教育、社区共建等活动有机地结合起来,使保护区的生态、社会和经济效益都得到充分体现。为什么保护。从大概念来讲,就是为了保护国家     

长江上游生物多样性保护重要性评价──以县域为评价单元

长江上游是我国生物多样性最丰富的地区之一,也是全球生物多样性热点地区之一.准确可靠地掌握生物多样性信息是生物多样性保护科学决策的基础,大尺度的生物多样性保护重要性评估已成为生物多样性研究及其保育管理和决策最紧迫的问题之一.设计了由植被景观多样性指数、自然保护区多样性指数、基于生态系统类型的物种多样性指数、国家保护植物多样性指数和国家保护动物多样性指数5大指标构成的区域生物多样性综合评价指标体系及其计算公式,并以县域为评价单元,开展了长江上游生物多样性综合评价.结果表明,长江上游生物多样性保护重要性评价结果为极重要的县域共18个,占总县数的4.95%;评价结果为重要的县域共41个,占11.26%;评价结果为次重要的县域共76个,占20.88%;评价结果为中等水平的县域共106个,占29.12%;评价结果为中下水平的县域共68个,占18.68%;评价结果为不重要的县域共55个,占15 11%.长江上游生物多样性保护重要性评价结果为极重要、较重要和重要的县域主要分布于横断山区、秦巴山区、华西雨屏区、长江源区和川渝鄂黔交界处山地.     

集成生态系统服务与生物多样性的系统保护规划

生物多样性和生态系统服务的保护与可持续管理是当今世界面临的重大挑战之一,但如何判识与优化集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护对象的保护优先区网络,相关研究还很有限。针对“三江并流”区,选取珍稀濒危与特有动植物物种和自然植被类型作为生物多样性保护对象,以调节服务(碳存储、固碳和土壤保持)、文化服务(自然游憩)和供给服务(水源供给)为生态系统服务保护对象。应用系统保护规划方法,首先判识出单一生物多样性和生态系统服务保护优先区;然后,分析这些保护优先区间的相关关系,并选择与生物多样性正相关的生态系统服务类型,判识集成生态系统服务与生物多样性的保护优先区;最后,评估了集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护优先区在六类已建保护地中的保护状况。结果表明：(1)“三江并流”区多情景规划得到的生物多样性与生态系统服务保护优先区之间均呈正相关关系;(2)与分别针对生态系统服务和生物多样性的规划情景相比,集成生态系统服务与生物多样性保护优先区能够同时对两类保护对象提供最高的保护覆盖率;(3)集成生态系统服务和生物多样性保护优先区占研究区总面积的48.9%,其已建保护地覆盖率为32.5%,说明现有保护地体系仍存在保护...     

生物多样性保护优先区对重庆苔藓植物多样性保护的重要性

生物多样性保护优先区的生物多样性十分丰富, 对于生物多样性保护具有重要意义。本文基于野外调查数据和文献资料, 整合大巴山和武陵山两个中国生物多样性保护优先区重庆境内的苔藓植物名录, 通过分析物种丰富度、中国特有种和受威胁物种, 比较了这两个地区的苔藓植物组成特点和相似性。结果显示, 两个保护优先区重庆境内共有苔藓植物77科221属722种, 其物种数分别占重庆市和中国苔藓植物总种数的76.0%和23.9%。两个区域分布有中国特有苔藓植物56种, 占中国苔藓植物总种数的1.9%; 分布有极危苔藓植物1种、濒危4种和易危3种。科、属、种的Jaccard相似性系数分别为0.7、0.6和0.3, 表明两个区域物种组成差异较大。大巴山和武陵山两个中国生物多样性保护优先区都具有较高的苔藓植物物种多样性, 其种类组成具有一定代表性, 对重庆市和中国苔藓植物多样性保护具有重要价值。     

滇西北地区优先保护的植物群落类型

确定优先保护的地区和群落类型对生物多样性保护尤为重要.为评价滇西北地区优先保护的植物群落类型,针对植物群落在维持栖息地稳定及生物多样性保护方面的功能,依据科学性、层次性及可操作性等原则,构建了由3个层次6个指标构成的评价指标体系.6个与群落相关的指标分别是:物种多样性、珍稀濒危植物物种种数、保护植物级别、群落稀有性、特有植物物种种数和群落特有性.通过对滇西北地区现有资料的收集整理,共选出有样地数据的群落61个,归入13个植被亚型.根据数据的分布特征,利用等级赋值的方法制定了各个指标的评分标准.运用层次分析法与专家咨询法相结合确定权重,采用综合指数法对各群落及植被亚型进行评价,再进行重分类,划分出一级、二级、三级和一般保护类型.利用ArcGIS9.3软件制作不同保护级别的植被亚型的分布图,划分出优先保护的区域.综合评价划分出一级保护群落4类,二级31类,三级23类,一般3类;一级保护植被亚型1类,二级6类,三级6类.这些优先保护类型中,一级保护类型少量,分布在贡山县西南部和泸水县西南部的高黎贡山;二级保护类型较为集中地分布在研究区西北部高海拔地区各大山系及东南部高山地区;三级保护类型主要分布在研究区东南部海拔较低的区域以及独龙江、怒江、澜沧江和金沙江流域的河谷地段.     

海洋生物多样性保护优先区域的确定

为了有效利用资源和资金,合理保护海洋生物多样性,海洋生物多样性保护优先区域的确定成为目前保护生物学领域的热点之一.本文首先探讨了生物多样性保护优先区域的定义和内涵,认为海洋生物多样性保护优先区域是指生物多样性丰富、物种特有化程度高、珍稀濒危物种分布集中、具有重要生态功能和过程的海洋区域.其次对保护优先区域确定的内容和方法进行了总结,主要包括单元区划、指标体系的构建及保护优先区域评估3个方面.继而根据我国海洋生物多样性现状提出保护优先区域确定的基本思路,即在海洋生物地理分区的基础上,根据物种和生境的生物多样性指标确定保护优先区域.最后针对存在问题提出建议,包括运用生物地理学方法进行单元区划、基于物种和生态系统的方法构建生物学指标以及信息网络数据库的构建等.     

贵州省国家重点保护野生植物物种丰富度分布特征及保护优先区分析

该研究以国家重点保护野生植物为指示物种,结合贵州各县(市、区)的国家重点保护野生植物调查统计信息,基于GIS技术,分析了贵州省国家重点保护野生植物物种丰富度分布特征;应用Dobson算法筛选识别贵州国家重点保护野生植物的保护优先区,并利用全省已建自然保护区信息评价分析所筛选的保护优先区的保护现状。结果表明:(1)在贵州国家重点保护野生植物的物种丰富度分布上,总体来说全省南部地区高于北部地区,环省界区域往内陆延伸的物种丰富度明显呈现减少趋势。(2)在75%和100%的国家重点保护野生植物物种保护水平上,筛选识别出了荔波县等4个和17个县域为保护优先区,其中分别有1个和9个国家重点保护野生植物保护优先区内涵盖的自然保护区面积低于5%,且涉及的自然保护区中68.26%的面积是市/县级。(3)贵州国家重点保护野生植物物种较丰富的区域和全省生物多样性热点区域与所筛选识别的保护优先区有较好的空间对应关系。(4)贵州国家重点保护野生植物的就地保护应以国家重点保护野生植物地理分布丰富的区域结合本研究筛选的保护优先区为重点,进行优先保护。     

Maximizing species conservation in continental Ecuador: a case of systematic conservation planning for biodiverse regions

Ecuador has the largest number of species by area worldwide, but also a low representation of species within its protected areas. Here, we applied systematic conservation planning to identify potential areas for conservation in continental Ecuador, with the aim of increasing the representation of terrestrial species diversity in the protected area network. We selected 809 terrestrial species (amphibians, birds, mammals, and plants), for which distributions were estimated via species distribution models (SDMs), using Maxent. For each species we established conservation goals based on conservation priorities, and estimated new potential protected areas using Marxan conservation planning software. For each selected area, we determined their conservation priority and feasibility of establishment, two important aspects in the decision-making processes. We found that according to our conservation goals, the current protected area network contains large conservation gaps. Potential areas for conservation almost double the surface area of currently protected areas. Most of the newly proposed areas are located in the Coast, a region with large conservation gaps and irreversible changes in land use. The most feasible areas for conservation were found in the Amazon and Andes regions, which encompass more undisturbed habitats, and already harbor most of the current reserves. Our study allows defining a viable strategy for preserving Ecuador''s biodiversity, by combining SDMs, GIS-based decision-support software, and priority and feasibility assessments of the selected areas. This approach is useful for complementing protected area networks in countries with great biodiversity, insufficient biological information, and limited resources for conservation.     

基于随机森林模型的国家重点保护陆生脊椎动物物种优先保护区的识别

准确可靠地识别国家重点保护陆生脊椎动物物种的优先保护区,是生物多样性保护的热点问题之一。采用随机森林(random forests)模型,基于12个环境变量,对中国263种国家重点保护陆生脊椎动物建模,并预测各个物种在背景点的适生概率,迭加计算得到国家重点保护陆生脊椎动物物种的生境适宜性指数。此外,基于对生境适宜性指数的空间自相关分析,识别和确定国家重点保护陆生脊椎动物物种优先保护区,并对优先保护区目前的被保护情况进行分析。结果表明,国家重点保护陆生脊椎动物物种的优先保护区的面积为103.16万km~2,约占我国国土面积的10.90%。优先保护区主要分布在我国的西部地区,包括西南地区的秦岭-大巴山山区、云南省与印度及缅甸的交界地区、武陵山山区、喜马拉雅山-横断山脉山区、阿尔泰山脉山区、天山山脉山区、昆仑山山脉山区;东北的大、小兴安岭、东北-华南沿海地区及长江中下游地区有少量分布。优先保护区中被保护的面积为50.40万km~2,占优先保护区总面积的48.86%,保护率偏低,未被充分保护。利用系统聚类分析,将未被保护的优先保护区划分成3种优先保护顺序,以期为相关部门的决策提供科学依据,更好地保护生物多样性。     

Biodiversity hotspots are not congruent with conservation areas in the Gulf of California

As marine systems are threatened by increasing human impacts, mechanisms to maintain biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services are needed. Protecting areas of conservation importance may serve as a proxy for maintaining these functions, while also facilitating efficient use and management of limited resources. Biodiversity hotspots have been used as surrogates for spatial conservation importance; however, as many protected areas have been established opportunistically and under differing criteria, it is unclear how well they actually protect hotspots. We evaluated how well the current protected area network and priority areas selected through previous systematic conservation planning exercises preserve biodiversity hotspots in the Gulf of California, Mexico. We also determined spatial congruence between biodiversity hotspots based on different criteria, which may determine their ability to be used as surrogates for each other. We focus on the Gulf of California because it is a megadiverse system where limited information regarding species diversity and distribution has constrained development of strategies for conservation and management. We developed a species occurrence database and identified biodiversity hotspots using four different criteria: species richness, rarity, endemism, and threatened species. We interpolated species occurrence, while accounting for heterogeneous sampling efforts. We then assessed overlap of hotspots with existing protected areas and priority areas, and between hotspots derived by distinct criteria. We gathered 286,533 occurrence records belonging to 12,105 unique species, including 6388 species identified as rare, 642 as endemic, and 386 as threatened. We found that biodiversity hotspots showed little spatial overlap with areas currently under protection and previously identified priority areas. Our results highlight the importance of distinct spatial areas of biodiversity and suggest that different ecological mechanisms sustain different aspects of diversity and multiple criteria should be used when defining conservation areas.     

How well do the existing and proposed reserve networks represent vertebrate species in Chile?

Increasingly, biogeographical knowledge and analysis are playing a fundamental role in assessing the representativeness of biodiversity in protected areas, and in identifying critical areas for conservation. With almost 20% of the country assigned to protected areas, Chile is well above the conservation target (i.e. 10–12%) proposed by many international conservation organizations. Moreover, the Chilean government has recently proposed new conservation priority sites to improve the current protected area network. Here, we used all 653 terrestrial vertebrate species present in continental Chile to assess the performance of the existing and proposed reserve networks. Using geographical information systems, we overlaid maps of species distribution, current protected areas, and proposed conservation priority sites to assess how well each species is represented within these networks. Additionally, we performed a systematic reserve selection procedure to identify alternative conservation areas for expanding the current reserve system. Our results show that over 13% of the species are not covered by any existing protected area, and that 73% of Chilean vertebrate species can be considered partial gaps, with only a small fraction of their geographical ranges currently under protection. The coverage is also deficient for endemic (species confined to Chile) and threatened species. While the proposed priority sites do increase coverage, we found that there are still several gaps and these are not the most efficient choices. Both the gap analysis and the reserve selection analysis identified important areas to be added to the existing reserve system, mostly in northern and central Chile. This study underscores the need for a systematic conservation planning approach to redefine the conservation priority sites in order to maximize the representation of species, particularly endemic and threatened species.     

Representing biodiversity: Data and procedures for identifying priority areas for conservation

Biodiversity priority areas together should represent the biodiversity of the region they are situated in. To achieve this, biodiversity has to be measured, biodiversity goals have to be set and methods for implementing those goals have to be applied. Each of these steps is discussed. Because it is impossible to measure all of biodiversity, biodiversity surrogates have to be used. Examples are taxa sub-sets, species assemblages and environmental domains. Each of these has different strengths and weaknesses, which are described and evaluated. In real-world priority setting, some combination of these is usually employed. While a desirable goal might be to sample all of biodiversity from genotypes to ecosystems, an achievable goal is to represent, at some agreed level, each of the biodiversity features chosen as surrogates. Explicit systematic procedures for implementing such a goal are described. These procedures use complementarity, a measure of the contribution each area in a region makes to the conservation goal, to estimate irreplaceability and flexibility, measures of the extent to which areas can be substituted for one another in order to take competing land uses into account. Persistence and vulnerability, which also play an important role in the priority setting process, are discussed briefly.     

Strengthening the Natural and National Park system of Iberia to conserve vascular plants

The diversity of the Iberian vascular flora has been investigated using WORLDMAP versions 3.08 and 3.18. Two data sets scoring plant distributions as presences within the Iberian Peninsula were compiled; one for 2133 species at 50 × 50 km grid and the other for 801 species at 10 × 10 km map grids. Patterns of biodiversity were determined using the diversity measures of species richness, range-size rarity and character richness diversity. Using the diversity measures, combined with an area selection method, maps of priority areas were calculated using iterative procedures. Near minimum sets (NMSs) for both scales were calculated. Comparison of the NMS for the 10 × 10 km grid with the near minimum set for existing reserves (NMSER) showed that at least 2% more of the land surface would be required above and beyond the existing protected area network, currently comprising 6% of the area, to ensure representation of all species at least once as listed within the present data-base. It is demonstrated that reserve systems selected on a variety of different criteria are suboptimal when compared to particular groups of target organisms with a definite goal of representation for conservation. Calculating efficiency of existing reserve systems and accounting for all taxa identifies precisely the extra required areas for the protected area system to satisfy particular goals of representation.     

Developing products for conservation decision-making: lessons from a spatial biodiversity assessment for South Africa

South Africa's first national assessment of spatial priorities for biodiversity conservation, released in 2005, aimed to identify conservation priority areas for mainstreaming into all sectors at national and provincial scales. This National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (NSBA) was based on a planning for implementation approach in order to deliver defensible products useful to decision-makers. The NSBA aimed to produce a map of broad-scale priority areas for future finer-scale assessment and conservation action. This map summarized information on species, ecosystems, ecological processes, and the pressures they face from human activities. Owing to the complexity of the priority area map, two additional user-friendly products — maps of ecosystem status and protection levels — were developed. These products represented the habitat loss and protected area coverage of South Africa's ecosystems relative to their conservation targets. A year after release, we reflect on the NSBA process, products and uptake by implementing agencies (with a specific focus on the terrestrial biodiversity assessment) in order to contribute to the growing body of documented best practice in conservation planning. The ecosystem status product has been widely used at national and provincial scales due in large to its clear and compelling message. The protection level and overall priority map have also witnessed uptake, the former in guiding the expansion of protected areas and the latter as an integrated map of national biodiversity status. The strong collaboration of local planners and implementers with in-depth experience of biodiversity assessment, using a systematic approach and focusing on communicating a few high level messages, appears to have contributed to the initial, successful uptake of the NSBA. We conclude with a call to address data and monitoring shortcomings before the next NSBA in 2010.