…25% by 2020, at $2,800 per species. Not sure I understand the bit at the end about “molecular and genetic markers for the viability of seeds,” but there’s more on the website. And thanks for the plug for Svalbard.
Will climate change make protected areas useless?
Not for birds in Africa, apparently — and surprisingly, at least to me. ((It’s been a week for surprises. A meta-analysis also just out suggested that “recovery is possible and can be rapid for many ecosystems, giving much hope for humankind to transition to sustainable management of global ecosystems.” But that’s another story.)) A recent paper looked at likely turnover of species in Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Africa under a range of climate change scenarios. The results showed that although there would be significant shifts in the species composition of individual IBAs, overall about 90% of 815 endangered species “are projected to retain suitable habitat by 2085 in at least one IBA where they occur currently.” And some IBAs will become newly suitable for some species. Only a few endangered species will lose all suitable habitat from the IBA network.
Nevertheless, the authors acknowledge the importance of the shifts in species distribution and suggest a number of recommendations. In particular, the results highlight the need for regionally focused management approaches. For example, increasing the number and size of protected areas, providing ‘stepping stones’ between habitats and protected areas and restoring critical types of habitat, as well as ensuring that the current IBA network is adequately protected into the future.
Sensible recommendations, which would apply all the more strongly to any similar network for crops wild relatives, say, which don’t by and large have the mobility of birds. ((Ok, maybe the ones which are bird-dispersed do! And the ones which don’t move around so well could be helped out, of course, although the most recent paper on such “assisted migration” is definitely in the “no” camp.)) We need to carry out a similar resilience study for CWRs in protected areas, I would suggest. But also, do we know how good the IBAs are at capturing CWR diversity? I suspect when people look at CWR distributions in protected areas, it is mainly national parks and the like that they consider, rather than such specialized things as IBAs, but I could be wrong. ((And Nigel and Shelagh will quickly tell me if I am, no doubt.)) Here’s the distribution of IBAs in Africa. I seem to be having a thing about maps of Africa lately.
Crop wild relatives in the spotlight
The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture will be holding the 3rd session of its Governing Body in Tunis next week. If you’re going, let us have your impressions, please.
And watch out for the side event on “Securing Crop Wild Relative Conservation: Lessons Learned from Global Partnership,” organised by Bioversity International and the Food and Agriculture Organization, which will take place in the Salle Carthage 3 of the Hotel Barcelo Carthage Thalasso on 3 June at 18:00. Soft drinks and snacks will be served, I’m reliably informed by our friend Danny, who will be there making sure that order and decorum is maintained.
The side event will highlight the critical importance of crop wild relatives to global food security and the urgency of taking action to ensure their conservation, especially in the context of climate change. The experiences and outputs of the UNEP/GEF supported project, aimed at enhancing conservation and utilization of crop wild relatives, will be described, including the development of national and global information systems and national in situ conservation strategies.
Berry genebank the pride of Oregon
There’s a lengthy article in Portland Monthly on the National Clonal Germplasm Repository at Corvallis, a unit within the United States Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service (USDA/ARS). It focuses on a couple of the people working there in particular, for example strawberry expert Kim Hummer:
Inside one of these greenhouses, diffused winter light streams through the glass ceiling, illuminating horticulturalist Kim Hummer and her colleagues as they hover over a small potted strawberry plant that, considering its history-steeped neighbors, appears undeserving of so much attention. Devoid of fruit, the plant’s heart-shaped leaves are edged brown, its runner pale red. It doesn’t look much different than any one of the other hundreds of strawberry plants crowding dozens of long tables. Yet Hummer’s voice brims with excitement. “This is a wild decaploid,” she says. “It’s very special.”
Want to know the species, which comes from the side of a volcano on Russia’s Iturup Island? Read the whole thing. There’s a lot, lot more.
The call of the wild
Not sure how long they’ve been available, but I’ve just learned that the new versions of the Last of the Wild maps are out. The first version is a few years old now.
The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) at Columbia University have joined together to systematically map and measure the human influence on the Earth’s land surface today. The Last of The Wild, Version Two depicts human influence on terrestrial ecosystems using data sets compiled on or around 2000.
These are Europe’s most untouched areas:
Not much left. There are also global and continental maps of human footprint and human influence index, although I must say I haven’t fully digested the difference between the two. And you can download the data and play around with it yourself, of course. Let the mashing begin!