More Like this
-
more » « less
In addition to changes associated with climate and land use, parrots are threatened by hunting and capture for the pet trade, making them one of the most at risk orders of birds for which conservation action is especially important. Species richness is often used to identify high priority areas for conserving biodiversity. By definition, richness considers all species to be equally different from one another. However, ongoing research emphasizes the importance of incorporating ecological functions (functional diversity) or evolutionary relationships (phylogenetic diversity) to more fully understand patterns of biodiversity, because (1) areas of high species richness do not always represent areas of high functional or phylogenetic diversity, and (2) functional or phylogenetic diversity may better predict ecosystem function and evolutionary potential, which are essential for effective long–term conservation policy and management. We created a framework for identifying areas of high species richness, functional diversity, and phylogenetic diversity within the global distribution of parrots. We combined species richness, functional diversity, and phylogenetic diversity into an Integrated Biodiversity Index (IBI) to identify global biodiversity hotspots for parrots. We found important spatial mismatches between dimensions, demonstrating species richness is not always an effective proxy for other dimensions of parrot biodiversity. The IBI is an integrative and flexible index that can incorporate multiple dimensions of biodiversity, resulting in an intuitive and direct way of assessing comprehensive goals in conservation planning.
-
Douglas Kriner (Ed.)more » « less
Abstract Transparency is essential for public awareness of government activity and in holding officials accountable for their behavior and decisions. However, executives understandably have a desire to maintain autonomy over the flow of information outside of the executive branch, which can sometimes lead to a clash between government openness and executive control over information. This article investigates executive branch transparency along two specific dimensions: threats to the preservation of government information, and the judicial monitoring of executive branch transparency. Federal law directs executive branch actors to preserve government information. Statutes and regulations detail governing policies as well as guidelines that apply to every presidential administration. However, we consider each rule and recommendation through the lens of the Trump administration to gain greater clarity and precision. The Trump administration proves a useful focus for our empirical analysis because of its recency as well as multiple reports of its improper handling and preservation of records. We lay out and develop a typology of threats to record preservation. Preservation conflicts have emerged across multiple presidential administrations and have become increasingly common and visible. Judicial monitoring of executive branch transparency has become a crucial tool to address the withholding of records. We show that federal judges can play a vital role in defining the boundaries of government transparency through their decisions in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation. The U.S. Department of Justice oversees and often leads the government's defense against FOIA actions. We find that federal judges are most likely to require executive branch responsiveness and disclosure when the judges' underlying policy preferences are most distant from that of the administration. Our findings should inform reforms to protect government transparency.
-
more » « less
Abstract Aim We may be able to buffer biodiversity against the effects of ongoing climate change by prioritizing the protection of habitat with diverse physical features (high geodiversity) associated with ecological and evolutionary mechanisms that maintain high biodiversity. Nonetheless, the relationships between biodiversity and habitat vary with spatial and biological context. In this study, we compare how well habitat geodiversity (spatial variation in abiotic processes and features) and climate explain biodiversity patterns of birds and trees. We also evaluate the consistency of biodiversity–geodiversity relationships across ecoregions.
Location Contiguous USA.
Time period 2007–2016.
Taxa studied Birds and trees.
Methods We quantified geodiversity with remotely sensed data and generated biodiversity maps from the Forest Inventory and Analysis and Breeding Bird Survey datasets. We fitted multivariate regressions to alpha, beta and gamma diversity, accounting for spatial autocorrelation among Nature Conservancy ecoregions and relationships among taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional biodiversity. We fitted models including climate alone (temperature and precipitation), geodiversity alone (topography, soil and geology) and climate plus geodiversity.
Results A combination of geodiversity and climate predictor variables fitted most forms of bird and tree biodiversity with < 10% relative error. Models using geodiversity and climate performed better for local (alpha) and regional (gamma) diversity than for turnover‐based (beta) diversity. Among geodiversity predictors, variability of elevation fitted biodiversity best; interestingly, topographically diverse places tended to have higher tree diversity but lower bird diversity.
Main conclusions Although climatic predictors tended to have larger individual effects than geodiversity, adding geodiversity improved climate‐only models of biodiversity. Geodiversity was correlated with biodiversity more consistently than with climate across ecoregions, but models tended to have a poor fit in ecoregions held out of the training dataset. Patterns of geodiversity could help to prioritize conservation efforts within ecoregions. However, we need to understand the underlying mechanisms more fully before we can build models transferable across ecoregions.
