Show simple item record

Authordc.contributor.authorDuarte, Milén 
Authordc.contributor.authorGuerrero, Pablo C. es_CL
Authordc.contributor.authorCarvallo, Gastón es_CL
Authordc.contributor.authorBustamante Araya, Ramiro es_CL
Admission datedc.date.accessioned2014-12-17T01:27:07Z
Available datedc.date.available2014-12-17T01:27:07Z
Publication datedc.date.issued2014
Cita de ítemdc.identifier.citationBiological Conservation 176 (2014) 236–242en_US
Identifierdc.identifier.otherDOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.05.028
Identifierdc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/119836
General notedc.descriptionArtículo de publicación ISIen_US
Abstractdc.description.abstractThe utility of spatial conservation prioritization (SCP), could be limited by the biases produced by taxonomic uncertainty and by the lack of an accepted taxonomic checklist for a diverse group of species. Using information on the endemic cacti of the Atacama Desert and Mediterranean Chile, we assessed the implications for SCP of the existence of two contrasting taxonomies. Biological and socioeconomic criteria were combined to design conservation networks for two widely used taxonomic checklists of endemic Chilean cacti. We analyzed the spatial distribution of these conservation networks to assess the congruence of the taxonomic checklists and evaluated whether our models match the geographic distribution of the National System of Protected Areas. The conservation networks had low similarity. However, consensus scenarios revealed several coincident priority sites. Gap analyses indicated that one-third of the species were completely unprotected but that all species were satisfactorily protected in the consensus scenario. Consensus scenarios based on different checklists can improve SCP because this approach is less affected by taxonomic uncertainty. It is more conservative (without a priori taxonomic decisions) and robust (priority sites are supported by more than one scenario). Given the narrow distribution of cacti, effective conservation actions demand environmental actions in a geographically explicit framework.en_US
Patrocinadordc.description.sponsorshipFONDECYT (3130399). P.C.G. research, outreach and conservation activities are supported by FONDECYT (3130456), CONICYT (PFB–23).en_US
Lenguagedc.language.isoenen_US
Publisherdc.publisherElsevieren_US
Type of licensedc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Chile*
Link to Licensedc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/cl/*
Keywordsdc.subjectSpatial conservation prioritizationen_US
Títulodc.titleConservation network design for endemic cacti under taxonomic uncertaintyen_US
Document typedc.typeArtículo de revista


Files in this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Chile
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Chile