To corridor or not to corridor

Exhibit A

The fact that distribution change occurs predominantly through spatially restricted, local population processes suggests that the development of ecological networks may be an effective conservation strategy for plant species in the UK (Lawton et al. 2010). An ecological network comprises sites which collectively contain the diversity and area of habitat needed to support species and which have ecological connections between them. The UK is largely made up of semi-natural habitats shaped by human land use, and so consequently, much of the UK’s wildlife is restricted to small fragmented areas of high habitat quality. These can rarely be restored to large unbroken areas of natural habitat. However, making connections between them through wildlife corridors and smaller ‘stepping stone’ sites is a much more feasible option, which would improve species ability to track environmental change through short-range colonisation (Hilty, Lidicker & Merenlender 2006).

Exhibit B

…constraints imposed by climatic variability, limited dispersal and low persistence may mean that even habitat corridors through high-quality habitat may not in themselves make range shifts possible. Additionally, corridors for species that show high uncertainty between climate paths under different GCMs are less likely to be effective.

These are from papers in Journal of Ecology and Ecology Letters published within days of each other, though admittedly one dealing with plant species in Britain the other with amphibians in the USA. So what’s a poor boy to do? Stop thinking there’s one solution for everything, I suppose. And get everything into ex situ just in case.

Building a plant conservation toolkit

70 per cent of the genetic diversity of crops including their wild relatives and other socio-economically valuable plant species conserved, while respecting, preserving and maintaining associated indigenous and local knowledge.

That would be Target 9 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation, and we are all fully behind it, and all the others, of course. How to do it, though? Well, the new Plants 2020 website is planning to provide a toolkit in due course. ((Not a clearing-house, I am advised.)) When? Well:

Please check back regularly for updates and new information.

Ugh. Yep. No RSS feed. Look, I know I’m nay-saying again, and that it’s really boring. But no RSS feed these days is just not on. I hope they’ll fix that soon because this will be an important resource, and I want to keep up to date without having to check back regularly.

Crawling the web for agrobiodiversity threats

We have often mused here — mainly idly, it must be said — about the possibility of an automated, internet-based system for monitoring the threat of genetic erosion. While we muse, it seems, others roll their sleeves up and, well, do stuff. Welcome to the Threat News Explorer, news of which has reached us via Resilience Science. We’re talking here about “multiple interacting threats (wildfire, insects, disease, invasive species, climate change, land use change)” to “wildlands,” rather than agricultural biodiversity, and so far it looks like mainly in the US. But still, it’s a start. And perhaps of interest to our friends working on the crop wild relatives of the US.

LATER: If you were doing agrobiodiversity threats, you might look at new disease records, for example…

Nibbles: Baobab, Plant cuttings & carnivalia, Apples, Fodder, Range management, PNG blog, Cattle breeding, Food security questions