Back

Blind spots in traditional approaches to conservation prioritization in a climate change context

Bondi, L.; Prado-Monteiro, B.; de Paula, L. F. A.; Rosado, B. H. P.; Porembski, S.

2025-10-03 ecology
10.1101/2025.10.01.679788 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Climate change affects biodiversity faster than conservation assessments can be conducted. This issue calls for approaches that support decisions on conservation prioritization, such as species phylogenetic relationships or diversity and endemism metrics. However, these traditional approaches often neglect some important aspects, limiting their effectiveness. We used desiccation-tolerant vascular plants (DT plants) to investigate the effectiveness of such approaches to prioritize species and areas for conservation. We used climate data and modeled the distribution of all DT plants recognized to date to evaluate if species phylogenetic relationships can depict similarities in species sensitivity and exposure to climate change, and to evaluate if centers of diversity and endemism for DT plants can indicate regions prone to climate change. We found that the species phylogenetic relationships weakly explains species sensitivity to climate change, although it can, to some extent, describe trends in species exposure to climate change. We also found that centers of diversity and endemism for DT plants are not necessarily the most prone ones to climate change. We suggest a limited effectiveness of phylogenetic relationships and of diversity and endemism metrics for conservation prioritization, once these approaches might overlook vulnerable species and regions exposed to climate change. We discuss that a better understanding of the mechanisms of diversity would help to identify situations in which closely related species show lower ecological differences than distantly related species, when phylogenetic relationships is a more relevant approach in a conservation context. We also suggest that more efficient conservation strategies in centers of diversity and endemism of DT plants should focus on species sensitivity and adaptive capacity to climate change, rather than the magnitude of climate change.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.3%
2
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.2%
3
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.7%
4
Conservation Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.7%
5
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.7%
6
Conservation Science and Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
7
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.9%
8
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.9%
9
Ecological Informatics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
11
Ecological Indicators
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
12
Diversity and Distributions
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
13
Conservation Letters
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
14
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.8%
15
Biodiversity and Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.0%
16
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
17
Forest Ecology and Management
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
18
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.6%
19
Global Ecology and Biogeography
41 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.6%
20
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
21
Animal Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
22
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.3%
23
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
24
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
25
Biotropica
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
26
Landscape Ecology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
27
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
28
Journal of Biogeography
37 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
29
Ecological Modelling
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
30
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%