<p>Animal movement data have transformed our understanding of ecological systems and shaped conservation practice, but have limited influence on tracking progress towards international biodiversity goals. Existing biodiversity indicators adopted in frameworks such as the Kunming–Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework — the primary multilateral conservation agreement that aims to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 — are typically not responsive enough to detect biodiversity change in time to guide action, nor sufficiently biologically informative to explain or predict changes. In this Perspective, we provide seven reasons why movement data can help to&#xa0;tackle these limitations by adding biological realism, mechanistic understanding, and early-warning capacity to current and future indicators. Movement data already inform conservation efforts, from local management to global treaties for migratory species, and are increasingly helpful to uncover sources of environmental change, while enhancing monitoring capability and policy relevance. We recommend that the scientific community ground existing connectivity metrics in empirical movement data, develop new indicators that flag rapid change, and invest in modelling and attribution studies that use movement data to identify drivers of biodiversity loss and recovery.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

A call to integrate animal movement into biodiversity indicators

  • Ruth Y. Oliver,
  • Katherine Hébert,
  • Lacey F. Hughey,
  • Luca Börger,
  • Francesca Cagnacci,
  • Nathan W. Cooper,
  • Sarah C. Davidson,
  • Andrew Gonzalez,
  • Autumn-Lynn Harrison,
  • Jessica M. Kendall-Bar,
  • Katie L. Millette,
  • Joanna Mills Flemming,
  • Thomas Mueller,
  • Will Rogers,
  • Talia Speaker,
  • Jared A. Stabach,
  • Marlee A. Tucker,
  • Wenjing Xu,
  • Scott W. Yanco,
  • Briana Abrahms,
  • Sara Beery,
  • Roxanne S. Beltran,
  • Lily K. Bentley,
  • Larissa T. Beumer,
  • Mary E. Bowers,
  • Steven W. J. Canty,
  • Ying-Chi Chan,
  • Juliet Cohen,
  • Grant M. Connette,
  • Eduardo Cuevas,
  • Tammy E. Davies,
  • Daniel C. Dunn,
  • Diego Ellis-Soto,
  • Antonio Ferraz,
  • John Fieberg,
  • Kimberly R. Hall,
  • Neil Hammerschlag,
  • Anne G. Hertel,
  • Dongmin Kim,
  • Samara Manzin,
  • Clive R. McMahon,
  • Robin Naidoo,
  • Aidin Niamir,
  • A. Justin Nowakowski,
  • Matthew B. Ogburn,
  • Jonathan D. Pye,
  • José Manuel Reyes-González,
  • Nicholas J. Russo,
  • Christian Rutz,
  • Amy L. Scarpignato,
  • Stella F. Uiterwaal,
  • Raqib Valli,
  • Alessandra Vidal Meza,
  • George Wittemyer,
  • Laura J. Pollock

摘要

Animal movement data have transformed our understanding of ecological systems and shaped conservation practice, but have limited influence on tracking progress towards international biodiversity goals. Existing biodiversity indicators adopted in frameworks such as the Kunming–Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework — the primary multilateral conservation agreement that aims to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 — are typically not responsive enough to detect biodiversity change in time to guide action, nor sufficiently biologically informative to explain or predict changes. In this Perspective, we provide seven reasons why movement data can help to tackle these limitations by adding biological realism, mechanistic understanding, and early-warning capacity to current and future indicators. Movement data already inform conservation efforts, from local management to global treaties for migratory species, and are increasingly helpful to uncover sources of environmental change, while enhancing monitoring capability and policy relevance. We recommend that the scientific community ground existing connectivity metrics in empirical movement data, develop new indicators that flag rapid change, and invest in modelling and attribution studies that use movement data to identify drivers of biodiversity loss and recovery.