nach oben

Biodiversity and Conservation

15.04.2024 | Original Research

Use of secondary diversity data to improve diversity estimates at multiple geographic scales

verfasst von: Alfredo Esparza-Orozco, Andrés Lira-Noriega

Erschienen in: Biodiversity and Conservation

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Studying the patterns and properties of biological diversity at multiple geographic scales is essential to answering biogeographical and macroecological questions. Here, we tested the hypothesis that diversity estimates derived from stacked species distribution models (stacked SDMs) would be robust and positively correlated when compared to estimates from well-surveyed areas with species checklists, but potentially more ambiguous when compared to estimates based on species’ occurrences. We used these three diversity sources to evaluate alpha and beta diversity, per-site range size, total nestedness and completeness at five geographic scales (1/2°, 1/4°, 1/8°, 1/16°, and 1/32°). Estimates from the species’ occurrences dataset and stacked SDMs showed poor positive correlation with alpha diversity in well-surveyed areas (except for stacked SDMs at coarse scales). However, beta diversity in well-surveyed areas exhibited a strong correlation with both the species’ occurrence dataset and stacked SDMs at finer scales. The nestedness pattern from stacked SDMs remained relatively constant across all geographic scales; in contrast, nestedness in occurrence datasets was influenced by finer scales, thereby affecting community traits such as incidence and composition of species. Our study demonstrates that stacked SDMs was reliable for inferring effective diversities across multiple geographic scales, whereas occurrence datasets are not and may fail to accurately infer diversity patterns. Even well-surveyed areas with species checklists showed low completeness, sharing similarities with occurrence datasets at 1/4° and 1/16°. We recommend conducting complementary analysis of completeness properties of sample coverage to ensure the reliability of diversity assessments.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Almeida-Neto M, Guimaraes P, Guimaraes PR et al (2008) A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement. Oikos 117:1227–1239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2008.0030-1299.16644.xCrossRef

Almeida-Neto M, Frensel DMB, Ulrich W (2012) Rethinking the relationship between nestedness and beta diversity: a comment on Baselga (2010). Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:772–777. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00709.xCrossRef

AmphibiaWeb (2021) https://amphibiaweb.org. University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA. Accessed January 2021

Arita HT, Christen JA, Rodríguez P, Soberón J (2008) Species diversity and distribution in presence-absence matrices: Mathematical relationships and biological implications. Am Nat 172:519–532. https://doi.org/10.1086/590954CrossRefPubMed

Arita HT, Christen A, Rodríguez P, Soberón J (2012) The presence-absence matrix reloaded: the use and interpretation of range-diversity plots. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:282–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00662.xCrossRef

Báez-Montes O (2018) Anfibios Y Reptiles De las Áreas naturales protegidas del estado de Guanajuato. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Ordenamiento Territorial, México

Barve N, Barve V, Jiménez-Valverde A et al (2011) The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modeling and species distribution modeling. Ecol Modell 222:1810–1819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.02.011CrossRef

Baselga A (2010a) Multiplicative partition of true diversity yields independent alpha and beta components; additive partition does not. Ecology 91:1974–1981. https://doi.org/10.1890/09-0320.1CrossRefPubMed

Baselga A (2010) Partitioning the turnover and nestedness components of beta diversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:134–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009.00490.xCrossRef

Baselga A (2012) The relationship between species replacement, dissimilarity derived from nestedness, and nestedness. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:1223–1232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00756.xCrossRef

Baselga A, Orme CDL (2012) Betapart: an R package for the study of beta diversity. Methods Ecol Evol 3:808–812. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2012.00224.xCrossRef

Bivand RS, Wong DWS (2018) Comparing implementations of global and local indicators of spatial association. Test 27:716–748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11749-018-0599-xCrossRef

Campos-Rodríguez JI, Elizalde-Arellano C, López-Vidal JC et al (2009) Nuevos registros de anfibios y reptiles para Guanajuato, procedentes de la reserva de la Biosfera Sierra Gorda De Guanajuato Y zonas adyacentes. Acta Zoológica Mex 25:269–282CrossRef

Cantú-Salazar L, Gaston KJ (2013) Species richness and representation in protected areas of the western hemisphere: discrepancies between checklists and range maps. Divers Distrib 19:782–793. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12034CrossRef

Caramillo RJL, Casas AG (2001) Anfibios Y reptiles del Parque Nacional El Chico, Hidalgo, México. An Del Inst Biol Univ Nac Autónoma México (UNAM). Ser Zool 72:105–123

Carvalho JC, Cardoso P, Borges PAV et al (2013) Measuring fractions of beta diversity and their relationships to nestedness: a theoretical and empirical comparison of novel approaches. Oikos 122:825–834. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20980.xCrossRef

Chao A, Jost L (2012) Coverage-based rarefaction and extrapolation: standardizing samples by completeness rather than size. Ecology 93:2533–2547. https://doi.org/10.1890/11-1952.1CrossRefPubMed

Chao A, Jost L (2015) Estimating diversity and entropy profiles via discovery rates of new species. Methods Ecol Evol 6:873–882. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12349CrossRef

Chao A, Shen T-J (2003) Nonparametric estimation of Shannon’s index of diversity when there are unseen species in sample. Environ Ecol Stat 10:429–443. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026096204727CrossRef

Chao A, Gotelli NJ, Hsieh TC et al (2014) Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies. Ecol Monogr 84:45–67. https://doi.org/10.1890/13-0133.1CrossRef

Chao A, Kubota Y, Zelený D et al (2020) Quantifying sample completeness and comparing diversities among assemblages. Ecol Res 35:292–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1703.12102CrossRef

CONANP (2021) Áreas Naturales Protegidas Federales De México, Comisión Nacional De Áreas Naturales Protegidas. Ciudad de México

Cooper JC, Soberón J (2018) Creating individual accessible area hypotheses improves stacked species distribution model performance. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 27:156–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12678CrossRef

Core R (2023) T R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.2.3). R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL: https://www.R-project.org/

Cruz-Elizalde R, Ramírez-Bautista A, Hernández-Ibarra X, Wilson LD (2016) Species diversity of amphibians from arid and semiarid environments of the Real De Guadalcázar State Reserve, San Luis Potosí, Mexico. Nat Areas J 36:302–309. https://doi.org/10.3375/043.036.0310CrossRef

da Silva FR, Provete DB, Hawkins BA (2016) Range maps and checklists provide similar estimates of taxonomic and phylogenetic alpha diversity, but less so for beta diversity, of Brazilian Atlantic Forest anurans. Nat e Conserv 14:99–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ncon.2016.07.001CrossRef

De Amado AA, Lomáscolo SB, Chacoff NP (2023) Effects of urbanization on the structure of plant-flower visitor network at the local and landscape levels in the northern Argentinian Yungas forest. Front Sustain Cities 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2023.1086076

Dutilleul P, Clifford P, Richardson S, Hemon D (1993) Modifying the t test for assessing the correlation between two spatial processes. Biometrics 49:305–314. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532625CrossRef

Engemann K, Enquist BJ, Sandel B et al (2015) Limited sampling hampers big data estimation of species richness in a tropical biodiversity hotspot. Ecol Evol 5:807–820. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1405CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Engemann K, Sandel B, Enquist BJ et al (2016) Patterns and drivers of plant functional group dominance across the Western Hemisphere: a macroecological re-assessment based on a massive botanical dataset. Bot J Linn Soc 180:141–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/boj.12362CrossRef

Evans JS, Murphy MA (2023) spatialEco. R package version 2.0–2. https://github.com/jeffreyevans/spatialEco

Ficetola GF, Rondinini C, Bonardi A et al (2014) An evaluation of the robustness of global amphibian range maps. J Biogeogr 41:211–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.12206CrossRef

Fick SE, Hijmans RJ (2017) WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 37. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5086

Fitzpatrick MC, Lachmuth S, Haydt NT (2021) The ODMAP protocol: a new tool for standardized reporting that could revolutionize species distribution modeling. Ecography (Cop) 44:1067–1070. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.05700CrossRef

Freeman JE, Kobziar LN, Leone EH, Williges K (2019) Drivers of plant functional group richness and beta diversity in fire-dependent pine savannas. Divers Distrib 25:1024–1044. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12926CrossRef

Frost DR (2024) Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.2. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. https://amphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org/index.php. Accessed January 2021. https://doi.org/10.5531/db.vz.0001

Gaston KJ, Chown SL, Evans KL (2008) Ecogeographical rules: elements of a synthesis. J Biogeogr 35:483–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2007.01772.xCrossRef

Graham CH, Hijmans RJ (2006) A comparison of methods for mapping species ranges and species richness. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 15:578–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-822x.2006.00257.xCrossRef

Guerin GR, Andersen AN, Rossetto M et al (2018) When macroecological transitions are a fiction of sampling: comparing herbarium records to plot-based species inventory data. Ecography 41:1864–1875. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.03607CrossRef

Hawkins BA, Rueda M, Rodríguez MÁ (2008) What do range maps and surveys tell us about diversity patterns? Folia Geobot 43:345–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12224-008-9007-8CrossRef

Higino GT, Banville F, Dansereau G et al (2023) Mismatch between IUCN range maps and species interactions data illustrated using the Serengeti food web. PeerJ 11:1–19. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14620CrossRef

Hill MO (1973) Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54:427–432. https://doi.org/10.2307/1934352CrossRef

Hortal J, De Bello F, Diniz-Filho JAF et al (2015) Seven shortfalls that Beset large-scale knowledge of Biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 46:523–549. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-112414-054400CrossRef

Hurlbert AH, Jetz W (2007) Species richness, hotspots, and the scale dependence of range maps in ecology and conservation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:13384–13389. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0704469104CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hurlbert AH, White EP (2005) Disparity between range map- and survey-based analyses of species richness: patterns, processes and implications. Ecol Lett 8:319–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00726.xCrossRef

Koleff P, Soberón J, Arita HT et al (2008) Patrones de diversidad espacial en grupos selectos de especies. Capital natural de México, vol I. Conocimiento actual de la biodiversidad. CONABIO, México, pp 323–364

Kreft H, Sommer JH, Barthlott W (2006) The significance of geographic range size for spatial diversity patterns in neotropical palms. Ecography (Cop) 29:21–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2005.0906-7590.04203.xCrossRef

Leibold MA, Holyoak M, Mouquet N et al (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7:601–613. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00608.xCrossRef

Levin SA (1992) The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology: the Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture Ecol 73:1943–1967. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941447CrossRef

Lira-Noriega A, Soberón J, Navarro-Sigüenza AG et al (2007) Scale dependency of diversity components estimated from primary biodiversity data and distribution maps. Divers Distrib 13:185–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2006.00304.xCrossRef

Lourenço-de-Moraes R, Malagoli LR, Guerra V et al (2018) Nesting patterns among neotropical species assemblages: can reserves in urban areas be failing to protect anurans? Urban Ecosyst 21:933–942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-018-0767-5CrossRef

Louzada J, Gardner T, Peres C, Barlow J (2010) A multi-taxa assessment of nestedness patterns across a multiple-use amazonian forest landscape. Biol Conserv 143:1102–1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.003CrossRef

Meyer C, Weigelt P, Kreft H (2016) Multidimensional biases, gaps and uncertainties in global plant occurrence information. Ecol Lett 19:992–1006. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12624CrossRefPubMed

Moonlight PW, Silva de Miranda PL, Cardoso D et al (2020) The strengths and weaknesses of species distribution models in biome delimitation. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 29:1770–1784. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13149CrossRef

Naimi B, Hamm NAS, Groen TA et al (2014) Where is positional uncertainty a problem for species distribution modelling? Ecography (Cop) 37:191–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.00205.xCrossRef

Nizamani MM, Papeş M, Wang HF, Harris AJ (2023) How does spatial extent and environmental limits affect the accuracy of species richness estimates from ecological niche models? A case study with north American Pinaceae and Cactaceae. Ecol Evol 13:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.10007CrossRef

Ochoa-Ochoa LM, Rodríguez P, Mora F et al (2012) Climate change and amphibian diversity patterns in Mexico. Biol Conserv 150:94–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.03.010CrossRef

Ochoa-Ochoa LM, Munguía M, Lira-Noriega A et al (2014) Spatial scale and β-diversity of terrestrial vertebrates in Mexico. Rev Mex Biodivers 85:918–930. https://doi.org/10.7550/rmb.38737CrossRef

Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M et al (2019) vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.5-6

Orme CDL, Davies RG, Olson VA et al (2006) Global patterns of geographic range size in birds. PLoS Biol 4:1276–1283. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040208CrossRef

Osorio-Olvera L, Lira-Noriega A, Soberón J et al (2020) Ntbox: an r package with graphical user interface for modelling and evaluating multidimensional ecological niches. Methods Ecol Evol 11:1199–1206. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13452CrossRef

Owens H, Barve V, Chamberlain S (2023) spocc: Interface to Species Occurrence Data Sources. R package version 1.2.2, <https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=spocc

Peterson AT (2001) Predicting species’ geographic distributions based on ecological niche modeling. Condor 103:599–605. https://doi.org/10.1650/0010-5422(2001)103[0599:PSGDBO]2.0.CO;2CrossRef

Peterson AT, Papeş M, Soberón J (2008) Rethinking receiver operating characteristic analysis applications in ecological niche modeling. Ecol Modell 213:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.11.008CrossRef

Peterson AT, Soberón J, Pearson R et al (2011) Ecological niches and geographic distributions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USACrossRef

Pincheira-Ulbrich J, Hernández CE, Saldaña A (2018) Consequences of swamp forest fragmentation on assemblages of vascular epiphytes and climbing plants: evaluation of the metacommunity structure. Ecol Evol 8:11785–11798. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4635CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Pineda E, Lobo JM (2012) The performance of range maps and species distribution models representing the geographic variation of species richness at different resolutions. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:935–944. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00741.xCrossRef

QGIS.org (2024) QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. http://qgis.org

Rapoport EH (1975) Areografía. Estrategias geográficas De las especies. Fondo de Cultura Económica, México

Robertson MP, Visser V, Hui C (2016) Biogeo: an R package for assessing and improving data quality of occurrence record datasets. Ecography 39:394–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.02118CrossRef

Rodríguez P, Ochoa-Ochoa LM, Munguía M et al (2019) Environmental heterogeneity explains coarse-scale β-diversity of terrestrial vertebrates in Mexico. PLoS ONE 14:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210890CrossRef

Rodríguez S, Galán P, Martínez-Abraín A (2023) Nestedness patterns of Amphibian assemblages in Northwestern Iberia along an Altitudinal gradient: implications for conservation. Herpetologica 79:79–90. https://doi.org/10.1655/HERPETOLOGICA-D-22-00031CrossRef

Roig-Juñent S, Crisci JV, Posadas P et al (2002) Áreas de distribución y endemismo en zonas continentales. In: Costa C, Vanin SA, Lobo JM, Melic A (eds) Red Iberoamericana De Biogeografía Y Entomología Sistemática. Sociedad Entomológica Aragonesa, Spain, pp 247–266

Roth-Monzón AJ, Mendoza-Hernández AA, Flores-Villela O (2017) Amphibian and reptile biodiversity in the semi-arid region of the municipality of Nopala De Villagrán. Hidalgo Mexico PeerJ 6:1–21. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4202CrossRef

Rzedowski J (2006) Vegetación de México. In: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, México, 1st digital edition. 504. https://doi.org/10.2307/1219727

Scattolini MC, Lira-Noriega A, Cigliano MM (2020) Species richness, range size, and wing development in South American melanopline grasshoppers (Orthoptera, Acrididae). Ecol Entomol 45:840–853. https://doi.org/10.1111/een.12859CrossRef

Schukman JM, Lira-Noriega A, Peterson TA (2011) Multiscalar ecological characterization of Say’s and eastern phoebes and their zone of contact in the great plains. Condor 113:372–384. https://doi.org/10.1525/cond.2011.100073CrossRef

Signorelli L, Bastos RP, De Marco P, With KA (2016) Landscape context affects site occupancy of pond-breeding anurans across a disturbance gradient in the Brazilian Cerrado. Landsc Ecol 31:1997–2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0376-8CrossRef

Simoes M, Romero-Alvarez D, Nuñez-Penichet C et al (2020) General Theory and Good practices in Ecological Niche modeling: a Basic Guide. Biodivers Inf 15:67–68. https://doi.org/10.17161/bi.v15i2.13376CrossRef

SNIB.Mx (2020) Sistema Nacional de Información sobre Biodiversidad de México. https://www.snib.mx/. Accessed November 2023

Soberón J, Llorente BJ (1993) The Use of species Accumulation functions for the prediction of Species Richness. Conserv Biol 7:480–488CrossRef

Soberón J, Peterson AT (2004) Biodiversity informatics: managing and applying primary biodiversity data. Philos Trans R Soc B 359:689–698. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1439CrossRef

Soberón J, Peterson AT (2005) Interpretation of models of fundamental ecological niches and species’ distributional areas. Biodivers Inf 2:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhm022CrossRef

Sosa V, Loera I (2017) Influence of current climate, historical climate stability and topography on species richness and endemism in mesoamerican geophyte plants. PeerJ: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3932

Storch D, Gaston KJ (2004) Untangling ecological complexity on different scales of space and time. Basic Appl Ecol 5:389–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2004.08.001CrossRef

Theobald DM, Harrison-Atlas D, Monahan WB, Albano CM (2015) Ecologically-relevant maps of landforms and physiographic diversity for climate adaptation planning. PLoS ONE 10:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143619CrossRef

Title P (2017) speciesRaster: Generation of SpeciesRaster Object and Calculation of Morphological and Phylogenetic Metrics. R package version 1.0

Tripathi P, Dev Behera M, Roy PS (2017) Optimized grid representation of plant species richness in India-Utility of an existing national database in integrated ecological analysis. PLoS ONE 12:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173774CrossRef

Van Aelst S, Rousseeuw P (2009) Minimum volume ellipsoid. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Comput Stat 1:71–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.019CrossRef

Velazco SJE, Rose MB, de Andrade AFA et al (2022) Flexsdm: an r package for supporting a comprehensive and flexible species distribution modelling workflow. Methods Ecol Evol 13:1661–1669. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13874CrossRef

Vellend M (2016) How ecologists Study communities. Princeton University Press, OxfordCrossRef

Villalobos F, Lira-Noriega A, Soberón J, Arita HT (2013) Range-diversity plots for conservation assessments: using richness and rarity in priority setting. Biol Conserv 158:313–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.10.002CrossRef

Villalobos F, Lira-Noriega A, Rodríguez P (2018) Is species geographic overlap constant across latitude? A homage to E. H. Rapoport. Oecologia 22:144–155. https://doi.org/10.4257/oeco.2018.2202.04CrossRef

Willis KJ, Whittaker RJ (2002) Species diversity-scale matters. Science 295:1245–1248. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1067335CrossRefPubMed

Wright DH, Patterson BD, Mikkelson GM et al (1998) A comparative analysis of nested subset patterns of species composition. Oecologia 113:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050348CrossRef

Zurell D, Franklin J, König C et al (2020) A standard protocol for reporting species distribution models. Ecography 43:1261–1277. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.04960CrossRef

Titel: Use of secondary diversity data to improve diversity estimates at multiple geographic scales
verfasst von: Alfredo Esparza-Orozco
Andrés Lira-Noriega
Publikationsdatum: 15.04.2024
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Biodiversity and Conservation
Print ISSN: 0960-3115
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-9710
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-024-02844-7