Geology topics

Monika Böhm

Publications and source records attributed to Monika Böhm.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2021

Conservation status of the world’s skinks (Scincidae): Taxonomic and geographic patterns in extinction risk

Our knowledge of the conservation status of reptiles, the most diverse group of terrestrial vertebrates, has improved dramatically over the past decade, but still lags behind that of the other tetrapod groups. Here, we conduct the first comprehensive assessment (~92% of the world’s ~1,714 described species) of the conservation status of skinks (Scincidae), the most speciose reptile family worldwide. Using IUCN criteria, we found that ~20% of species are threatened with extinction, and nine species are Extinct or Extinct in the Wild. The highest levels of threat are evident in Madagascar, and the Neotropics, and in the subfamilies Mabuyinae, Eugongylinae and Scincinae. The vast majority of threatened skink species were listed based primarily on their small geographic ranges (Criterion B, 83%; Criterion D2, 13%). Although the population trend of 42% of species were stable, 14% were found to have declining populations. The key threats to skinks are habitat loss due to agriculture, invasive species, and biological resource use. Distributions of 61% of species did not overlap with protected areas. Despite our improved knowledge of the conservation status of the world’s skinks, 8% of species remain to be assessed and 221 species (14%) are listed as Data Deficient. The conservation status of almost a quarter of the world’s skink species thus remains unknown. We use our updated knowledge of the conservation status of the group to develop and outline the priorities for the conservation assessment and management of the world’s skink species.

Biological Conservation↗

USGS2017

Building capacity in biodiversity monitoring at the global scale

Human-driven global change is causing ongoing declines in biodiversity worldwide. In order to address these declines, decision-makers need accurate assessments of the status of and pressures on biodiversity. However, these are heavily constrained by incomplete and uneven spatial, temporal and taxonomic coverage. For instance, data from regions such as Europe and North America are currently used overwhelmingly for large-scale biodiversity assessments due to lesser availability of suitable data from other, more biodiversity-rich, regions. These data-poor regions are often those experiencing the strongest threats to biodiversity, however. There is therefore an urgent need to fill the existing gaps in global biodiversity monitoring. Here, we review current knowledge on best practice in capacity building for biodiversity monitoring and provide an overview of existing means to improve biodiversity data collection considering the different types of biodiversity monitoring data. Our review comprises insights from work in Africa, South America, Polar Regions and Europe; in government-funded, volunteer and citizen-based monitoring in terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems. The key steps to effectively building capacity in biodiversity monitoring are: identifying monitoring questions and aims; identifying the key components, functions, and processes to monitor; identifying the most suitable monitoring methods for these elements, carrying out monitoring activities; managing the resultant data; and interpreting monitoring data. Additionally, biodiversity monitoring should use multiple approaches including extensive and intensive monitoring through volunteers and professional scientists but also harnessing new technologies. Finally, we call on the scientific community to share biodiversity monitoring data, knowledge and tools to ensure the accessibility, interoperability, and reporting of biodiversity data at a global scale.

Biodiversity and Conservation↗

USGS2016

Global biodiversity monitoring: from data sources to essential biodiversity variables

Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) consolidate information from varied biodiversity observation sources. Here we demonstrate the links between data sources, EBVs and indicators and discuss how different sources of biodiversity observations can be harnessed to inform EBVs. We classify sources of primary observations into four types: extensive and intensive monitoring schemes, ecological field studies and satellite remote sensing. We characterize their geographic, taxonomic and temporal coverage. Ecological field studies and intensive monitoring schemes inform a wide range of EBVs, but the former tend to deliver short-term data, while the geographic coverage of the latter is limited. In contrast, extensive monitoring schemes mostly inform the population abundance EBV, but deliver long-term data across an extensive network of sites. Satellite remote sensing is particularly suited to providing information on ecosystem function and structure EBVs. Biases behind data sources may affect the representativeness of global biodiversity datasets. To improve them, researchers must assess data sources and then develop strategies to compensate for identified gaps. We draw on the population abundance dataset informing the Living Planet Index (LPI) to illustrate the effects of data sources on EBV representativeness. We find that long-term monitoring schemes informing the LPI are still scarce outside of Europe and North America and that ecological field studies play a key role in covering that gap. Achieving representative EBV datasets will depend both on the ability to integrate available data, through data harmonization and modeling efforts, and on the establishment of new monitoring programs to address critical data gaps.

Biological Conservation↗

USGS2015

Towards a global terrestrial species monitoring program

Introduction: The Convention for Biological Diversity’s (CBD) Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 envisions that “By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.” Although 193 parties have adopted these goals, there is little infrastructure in place to monitor global biodiversity trends. Recent international conservation policy requires such data to be up-to-date, reliable, comparable among sites, relevant, and understandable; as is becoming obvious from the work plan adopted by the Intergovernmental Panel for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES: www.ipbes.net/; http://tinyurl.com/ohdnknq). In order to meet the five strategic goals of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and its 20 accompanying Aichi Targets for 2020 (www.cbd.int/sp/targets/), advances need to be made in coordinating large-scale biodiversity monitoring and linking these with environmental data to develop a comprehensive Global Observation Network, as is the main idea behind GEOSS the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (Christian 2005)...Here we identify ten requirements important for the successful implementation of a global biodiversity monitoring network under the flag of GEO BON and especially a global terrestrial species monitoring program.

Journal for Nature Conservation↗

USGS2013

The conservation status of the world’s reptiles

Effective and targeted conservation action requires detailed information about species, their distribution, systematics and ecology as well as the distribution of threat processes which affect them. Knowledge of reptilian diversity remains surprisingly disparate, and innovative means of gaining rapid insight into the status of reptiles are needed in order to highlight urgent conservation cases and inform environmental policy with appropriate biodiversity information in a timely manner. We present the first ever global analysis of extinction risk in reptiles, based on a random representative sample of 1500 species (16% of all currently known species). To our knowledge, our results provide the first analysis of the global conservation status and distribution patterns of reptiles and the threats affecting them, highlighting conservation priorities and knowledge gaps which need to be addressed urgently to ensure the continued survival of the world’s reptiles. Nearly one in five reptilian species are threatened with extinction, with another one in five species classed as Data Deficient. The proportion of threatened reptile species is highest in freshwater environments, tropical regions and on oceanic islands, while data deficiency was highest in tropical areas, such as Central Africa and Southeast Asia, and among fossorial reptiles. Our results emphasise the need for research attention to be focussed on tropical areas which are experiencing the most dramatic rates of habitat loss, on fossorial reptiles for which there is a chronic lack of data, and on certain taxa such as snakes for which extinction risk may currently be underestimated due to lack of population information. Conservation actions specifically need to mitigate the effects of human-induced habitat loss and harvesting, which are the predominant threats to reptiles.

Biological Conservation↗