Abstract

Endemism is often misinterpreted as referring to narrow distributions (range restriction). In fact, a taxon is said to be endemic to an area if it lives there and nowhere else. The expression “endemic area” is used to identify the geographical area to which a taxon is native, whereas “area of endemism” indicates an area characterized by the overlapping distributions of two or more taxa. Among the methods used to identify areas of endemism, the optimality criterion seems to be more efficient than Parsimony Analysis of Endemism (PAE), although PAE may be useful to disclose hierarchical relationships among areas of endemism. PAE remains the best explored method and may represent a useful benchmark for testing other approaches. Recently proposed approaches, such as the analysis of nested areas of endemism, networks and neighborjoining, are promising, but need to be more widely tested. All these methods attempt to identify biogeographically homogeneous sets of areas characterized by shared species, without any attempt to evaluate their relative importance for conservation purposes. Analyses based on weighted endemism methods identify areas of endemism according to specie distributional rarity and phylogenetic position, being thus appropriate for conservation purposes. The proportion of endemic species to the total number of species living a given area is the most frequently used measure to rank areas according to their relative endemism. However, proportions obscure differences in raw numbers that can be important in conservation biology. Because the number of (endemic) species tends to increase with area, some authors proposed to model the endemics-area relationship and to consider the areas displaced above the fitting curve (i.e. those having a positive residual) as hotspots. However, the use of residuals may lead to areas being identified as hotspots for almost every size class of richness. Thus, it is important to evaluate the ability of the hotspots recovered by these procedures to really conserve total (endemic) species diversity.

Highlights

  • Among the methods used to identify areas of endemism, the optimality criterion seems to be more efficient than the Parsimony Analysis of Endemism (PAE), PAE may be useful to disclose hierarchical relationships

  • PAE remains the best explored method and may represent a useful benchmark for testing other methods. Proposed approaches, such as the analysis of nested areas of endemism, networks and neighborjoining, are promising, but need to be more widely tested. All these methods attempt to identify biogeographically homogeneous sets of areas characterized by shared species, without any attempt to evaluate their relative importance for conservation purposes

  • Analyses based on weighted endemism methods identify areas of endemism according to specie distributional rarity and phylogenetic position, being appropriate for conservation purposes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Used concepts typically receive multiple (and generally contrasting) definitions. The species concept, which is fundamental in biology, has been applied in a number of different ways and both biologists and philosophers disagree on the proper definition of the term “species” and its ontological status (e.g., Mayden 2007, Schulz et al 2008). Endemism is one of the most important concepts in biogeography and has a central role in conservation biology. The large variety of definitions and the lack of consistence in their applications make it a source of continuous misunderstanding and conflicting results. I present a review of: (1) the history of the concept of endemism; (2) the associate terminology; (3) some methods currently used to identify areas of endemism; and (4) the use of endemism in conservation biology

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call