The 2nd DIVERSITAS Open Science Conference (DIVERSITAS OSC2), , 14 October 2009, DIVERSITAS, Cape Town Quantitative projection of plant species loss for 1697 taxa of Japanese vascular plants and its implication for achieving the 2010 biodiversity target Matsuda H (Yokohama Nat’l U), Yahara T (Kyushu U. COE), Fujita T (Nature Conservation Society of Japan) Acknowledgment: Threatened Species Committee of Japanese Society of Plant Taxonomists EIA for Japan World Exposition 2005 1 Build Process of Red List Select ca. 2,100 species to investigate by the committee Investigate by >530 amateur investigators in ‘90s & ‘00s Calculate the extinct risk & Compile the tentative list Discuss by the committee & considering with all raw data Expert judgment by taxonomists Decide & publish the list of threatened species 2 Threatened plant database in Japan Database contents • Candidate taxa: 1,972 taxa • Field investigations in 1994-1995 and 2003-2004 • Unit of investigation: 10×10km2 map grids • Area: 3,781 map grids covered 84.8 % in Japan • Participant: over 530 amateurs and botanists • Records: 34,662 raw data Recorded species per grid No data 0 1-4 5-8 9 - 21 22 - 28 29 - 36 37 - 46 47 - 62 63 - 84 85 - 108 3 Questionnaire items Species name ヒメフトモモ フトモモ 父島 Name of map grid Syzygium cleyerifolium 父島 10~49 Population size 52,23,11 父島東平 2004.5.10 藤田卓 MAK 2004 5 Categorical data 10 藤田卓 ヤギの食害が著しい、 また、公園造成のために ２個体群が絶滅した Decline rate during last decade Factors driving population declines 52, 23, 11 Date & Name of investigators etc. 1/10~1/2 4 Database of each species ex) Bupleurum scorzoneraefolium var. stenophyllum セリ科ミシマサイコ Transition during two surveys Distribution EOO*：present 5500km2 Population size: ca. 10,000 Decline rate: 35% per 10 years * EOO = Extent of Occurrence 5 Definition of decline rate using the same population in twice investigations 6 Extinction risk assumed by Monte Carlo simulation for each species Present Distribution of population size 100 101 102 103 Randomly select following distribution of decline rate Distribution of decline rates over the last 10 years Next 10 years 100 101 102 103 Extinct Next 20 yeas 100 101 102 103 7 Projected individuals for 10000 independent iterations Population size ex) Bupleurum scorzoneraefolium var. stenophyllum Year after the present 8 The cumulative extinction risk & criterion E of Redlist Category of IUCN Cumulative extinction probability ex) Bupleurum scorzoneraefolium var. stenophyllum CR 28% after 100 years EN VU Vulnerable on Criteria E Year after the present 9 Criteria & Categories We generally followed by IUCN’s Redlist Criteria ver.3.1 except for 1) Criterion B is not applied in Japan Endemic species in small islands are abundant. 2) Criteria priority E > A, C, D for species with adequate data (The criteria priority is not used by IUCN) Criterion E is essential risk assessment For example,,,,, Bupleurum scorzoneraefolium var. stenophyllum (VU) Habitat area EOO VU(B1) Euonymus boninensis (VU) of AOO* *AOO = Area of occupation (grid of 1km2) 10 IUCN基準と環境省植物RDB Reduction rate per decade IUCN criteria and Japanese plant RDB SBT Bellflower Current Population size現存個体数 11 IUCN's credibility critically endangered. • Mrosovsky N (1997) Nature 389:436 • IUCN’s recommendations are based on sound and open science. Recent events suggest that this is not always the case. 12 R. A. Myers & B. Worm (2003) Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities Boris late Ransom Myers Worm …We conclude that declines of large predators that initially occurred in coastal regions, have extended throughout the global ocean, with potentially large consequences on ecosystems. Nature 423:280-283 (2003) 13 Current Exploitation Rate Rebuilding Global Fisheries (Worm et al. 2009) Current Biomass Trends of biomass (B) & exploitation rate (u) for 166 individual stocks. Boris Worm Current exploitation rate versus biomass for 166 individual stocks. 14 Improve Credibility & Datasets of Japanese Vascular Plant Redlist Number of species adopted each criteria in Japan. Criteria A B C RDB2000 3 0 114 636 571 341 0 66 506 941 406 RL2007* D E ACD By expert judgment of plant taxonomists By Monte Carlo Simulation 15 Number of Japanese Vascular Plants in each Red List Category Category RDB2000 RL2007 Extinct (EX) 20 33 Extinct in the wild (EW) 5 14 Critically Endangered (CR) 564 523 Endangered (EN) 480 491 Vulnerable (VU) 621 676 Near Threatened (NT) 145 255 Data Deficient (DD) 52 32 Total of threatened taxa 1665 1690 Candidate taxa for RL ca.2000 2072 Native Vascular Plants in Japan ca.7000 ca.7000 16 Challenges for the future • Necessary and Importance of cooperation of amateur investigators. training of investigators and botanists. • Improving the simulation method to assess more accurately. (including generation time and …) 17 Crisis of Japanese vascular flora demonstrated by quantifying extinction risks for 1696 plant taxa Introduction Risk assessment → Estimating Future Extinction + Hotspot analysis → Setting priority for conservation 18 Transition during two surveys • More populations and taxa decline than increase (sign test, p<0.001) 19 Past & Future Extinction in Japan 7000 ほぼ絶滅 CR(PE*) EX or野生絶滅 EW 絶滅・ Number of indigenous flora in Japan 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Future 19 20 19 30 19 40 19 50 19 60 19 70 19 80 19 90 20 00 不 明 No of extinction 種数 Past 6800 6600 6400 6200 Endemic species loss Non-endemic species loss 6000 Year Extinction rates (per decade) 553 Extinct 7.9% Year 8.6 species 55.3 species 6.3-times larger *PE = Probably extinct (no report of extant grids) 20 Hotspots of future extinction in the next 100 years Expectation of Extinction Next 100 years E135゜ 0-1 1-5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 21 - 25 26 - 30 31 - 35 36 - 40 • Extinction is observed over the country • Remote Islands could be Hotspot of threat N35゜ N27゜ E142゜ How many reserves should be required for conservation of all threatened plants? 21 How to choose hotspot based on the idea of Complimentarity Choose fewest number of hotspots that include all threatened species （Margules ＆ Pressey 2000） Step 1: Count the number of threatened species in each grid Step 2: Choose a grid that include the largest number of threatened species as hotspot Step 3: Count the number of threatened species that do not exist in the hotspots Step 4: Iterate step 2 and 3 until the all threatened species are included. Grid species Example 1 2 3 x x x B x x C x A D # spp. 4 x 1 3 2 1) Choose grid 2 2) Choose grid 4 Grids 2 & 4 include all species A-D. 1 1 22 How many reserves should be required for conservation? -Complementarity analysis (Margules,C.R & Pressey,R.L., 2000)- Number of extinctions in next 100 years Maximizing the number of species conserved with the minimum land 100 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 251 (5.6%) 50 0 0 20 50 100 150 200 (0.4%)Number of conserved grids 250 300 Japan includes 4457grids ・ half of the taxa : 20 grids（0.4% in Japan） were required ・ All threatened taxa: 251 grids （5.4% in Japan） were required 23 http://www.pref.kagoshima.jp/sangyo-rodo/rinsui/shinrin/syuryo/shuryokaikin.html Shooting-ban area <5% <5% National Forest <5% Strict W.P.A. <1% 0% <1% <10% <1% <70% <50% >70% <50% <50% <20% <50% >70% <10% <10% 0% <10% <70% <20% <50% 0% <10% 0% Wildlife Protected Area World Natural Heritage Site Wilderness 24 Area How many reserves should be required for conservation? -Complementarity analysis (Margules,C.R & Pressey,R.L., 2000)- 100 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 251 (5.6%) 50 0 0 20 50 100 150 200 (0.4%)Number of conserved grids 250 Ratio of Conservation Area ％ (National park etc..) Number of extinctions in next 100 years Maximizing the number of species conserved with the minimum land 300 Japan includes 4457grids ・ half of the taxa : 20 grids（0.4% in Japan） were required ・ All threatened taxa: 251 grids （5.4% in Japan） were required 25 Thank you for invitation! Plant Red Data Book I like to try real time case studies with field ecologists! Pelagic fish management EXPO2005 at Aichi, Revision of RDB Mainichi Shimbun Bear management Shiretoko World Heritage FSNRI Deer management N. Ishii 2004/1/29 2006/5/22 Windfirm birdstrikes Mongoose eradication program at Amami Island H.M. at Shiretoko 26 26 26
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc
