Abstract

AbstractInvertebrates are commonly ignored in conservation planning due to their vast diversity, difficulties with species identification, a poor understanding of their spatial patterns, and the impracticability of carrying out comprehensive sampling. Conservation planning for fauna is therefore often based on patterns of diversity and distribution of vertebrates, under the assumption that these are representative of animal diversity more generally. Here, we evaluate how well vertebrates act as umbrellas for invertebrate diversity and distribution in a highly diverse tropical savanna landscape, and we investigate the effect of vertebrate sampling intensity (i.e., number of surveys) on congruence results. We assessed congruence between each of the four classes of terrestrial vertebrates (amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) and twelve invertebrate families (representing four dominant invertebrate taxa: ants, beetles, flies, and spiders) by applying a range of modeling approaches to analyze patterns of cross‐taxon congruence in species richness and composition across sampling sites. To investigate drivers of congruence, we applied generalized and distance‐based linear models to identify environmental associations of richness and composition for each taxon, then examined variation in environmental associations across taxa. Vertebrate and invertebrate richness was weakly (<30%) associated, and ~60% of the significant associations were negative. Correlations in species composition between vertebrate and invertebrate taxa were also weak, with a maximum of 13% congruence. In most cases, pairwise correlation scores using data from single surveys of vertebrates were only marginally lower than those from multiple surveys. Poor among‐site congruence between vertebrates and invertebrates was reflected by marked variation among taxa in their environmental associations. Our findings show that vertebrates are poor umbrellas for invertebrates in the tropical savannas of northern Australia in terms of geographic patterns of diversity and distribution and that this is not just an artifact of low vertebrate sampling intensity. Our study is one of the most comprehensive regional analyses of the congruence of vertebrate and invertebrate diversity, and it significantly adds to the growing evidence that empirical data on invertebrate diversity and distribution are required for conservation planning that effectively protects all faunal diversity.

Highlights

  • Invertebrates dominate faunal diversity in almost every terrestrial, freshwater, and marine habitat

  • Faunal surveys typically focus on vertebrates, with the implicit assumption that patterns of vertebrate diversity and distribution represent those of faunal diversity more generally (Murphy and Wilcox 1986, Landres et al 1988, Oliver et al 1998)

  • We evaluate the effectiveness of vertebrates as umbrellas for the diversity and distribution of terrestrial invertebrates across 78 sites in the tropical savannas of northern Australia

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Invertebrates dominate faunal diversity in almost every terrestrial, freshwater, and marine habitat. The need to improve our understanding of invertebrate diversity and distribution and its key drivers is becoming increasingly urgent as species loss accelerates under the current global extinction crisis, much of which involves unknown invertebrates (Dunn 2005, Regnier et al 2015, Leather 2018, Eisenhauer et al 2019) Despite their importance, invertebrates are often overlooked in faunal surveys for informing conservation planning, owing in a large part to their extreme taxonomic and biological diversity that makes comprehensive surveys impracticable (New 1999, Cardoso et al 2011, Braby and Williams 2016, Braby 2017). Studies that have assessed the use of vertebrates as umbrellas for invertebrates have demonstrated either limited (Murphy and Wilcox 1986, Martikainen et al 1998, Fleishman et al 2001) or no (Kerr 1997, French 1999, Rubinoff 2001, Schuldt and Assmann 2010, Jenkins et al 2013) support for this assumption

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.