Roots, relevance, aims and values
7
historical – biogeographical theory concerned with the
distribution and explanation of geographical patterns
in diversity. We see such coarser scale work on the
geography of nature as being unambiguously within
the heartland of biogeography (cf. Lomolino et al .,
2004 ). Despite its undoubted importance within conservation science, we argue that it is here, in particular,
that something of a ‘ Cinderella ’ tag applies to conservation biogeography; likewise, it is here where there is
greatest need for critical attention to our science and
for greater interaction between those involved in
theory and application (see e.g. Lourie & Vincent,
2004 ).
Conservation biogeography, the application of biogeography in conservation, is thus separable from the
application of other areas of biology (i.e. community,
population and behavioural ecology, macroecology,
and genetics), most clearly at coarser scales of analysis.
While the use of zoogeographic regions, areas of endemism, geographic patterns in species richness, or phylogeographic structure for conservation prioritization
purposes are readily identifi able as conservation
biogeography, applications at increasingly fi ne spatial
scales, for example focused on habitat corridors or
metapopulation dynamics, can be seen as simultaneously drawing from traditions in both ecology and
biogeography.
Similarly, macroecological analyses (referring to the
analysis of the emergent statistical properties of ecological data sets (Brown, 1995 )) may also be based on
both ‘ ecological ’ traits (e.g. growth rates, propagule
size, breeding system, body size) and ‘ biogeographical ’
traits (e.g. range size, region of origin). In illustration,
efforts to develop explanatory and predictive models of
invasiveness of non - native species have been made
that use both sets of traits, frequently fi nding a biogeographical signal in the resulting models (Dehnen -
Schmutz, 2004 ; Py š ek et al ., 2004 ), which indicates
that such analyses draw from both ecological and biogeographical traditions within conservation science to
varying degrees. For further exploration of key scale
and diversity concepts relevant to conservation biogeography, see Box 1.2 .
1.3.1 To w hat e nds?
While our goal in this book is to provide students with
a guide to the scientifi c underpinnings of conservation
decision - making, it is important to recognize that such
of the recent and huge technological advances in biogeographical data collection, storage and analysis,
which have enabled rapid progress in many areas of
the fi eld, both pure and applied; and, in part, it refl ects
theoretical and conceptual advances (e.g. Williams
et al ., 2000 ; Lomolino & Heaney, 2004 ).
Yet we must also recognize that the underlying
species distributional and other data often remain
highly problematic, protocols for analysis are still in the
early stages of development, and we have only recently
begun the task of systematically analysing the sensitivity of our analyses to the starting assumptions and
scale effects. There is an enormous degree of uncertainty in our science when it comes to predicting future
distributions of taxa, diversity and biogeography (see
Chapter 7 ). Accordingly, we argue that there is a need
for more biogeographers to engage with the problems
of conservation science, and for the injection of more
biogeography into training for conservation scientists
and practitioners.
1.3 THE SCOPE OF CONSERVATION
BIOGEOGRAPHY
As we have indicated above, conservation biology is a
large and all - embracing fi eld. However, if it is subdivided by scale of application, we might recognize the
following subdivisions of relevant theory (Figure 1.1 ):
1 Population scale: the development and evaluation
of biological theory spanning population biological
and genetic process. This is concerned with deterministic processes of population decline, population viability, genetic erosion from small populations, competitive
infl uence of invasive species, behavioural ecology and
so forth, i.e. concerned with processes in which biogeography is generally not prominent (e.g. see Caughley,
1994 ; Primack, 2002 ).
2 Landscape scale: theory concerning processes at the
local – landscape scale, including the foundational
infl uence of R.H. MacArthur and E.O. Wilson ’ s equilibrium theory of island biogeography, the derivative
Single Large or Several Small reserves (SLOSS) debate,
habitat corridors and matrix effects, metapopulation
theory and nestedness (reviewed by Whittaker and
Fernand é z - Palacios, 2007 ), i.e. issues clearly bridging
ecology and biogeography.
3 Geographical scale: applications on a yet coarser
scale in part are concerned with mapping and modelling biogeographical patterns, and they in part invoke
7
historical – biogeographical theory concerned with the
distribution and explanation of geographical patterns
in diversity. We see such coarser scale work on the
geography of nature as being unambiguously within
the heartland of biogeography (cf. Lomolino et al .,
2004 ). Despite its undoubted importance within conservation science, we argue that it is here, in particular,
that something of a ‘ Cinderella ’ tag applies to conservation biogeography; likewise, it is here where there is
greatest need for critical attention to our science and
for greater interaction between those involved in
theory and application (see e.g. Lourie & Vincent,
2004 ).
Conservation biogeography, the application of biogeography in conservation, is thus separable from the
application of other areas of biology (i.e. community,
population and behavioural ecology, macroecology,
and genetics), most clearly at coarser scales of analysis.
While the use of zoogeographic regions, areas of endemism, geographic patterns in species richness, or phylogeographic structure for conservation prioritization
purposes are readily identifi able as conservation
biogeography, applications at increasingly fi ne spatial
scales, for example focused on habitat corridors or
metapopulation dynamics, can be seen as simultaneously drawing from traditions in both ecology and
biogeography.
Similarly, macroecological analyses (referring to the
analysis of the emergent statistical properties of ecological data sets (Brown, 1995 )) may also be based on
both ‘ ecological ’ traits (e.g. growth rates, propagule
size, breeding system, body size) and ‘ biogeographical ’
traits (e.g. range size, region of origin). In illustration,
efforts to develop explanatory and predictive models of
invasiveness of non - native species have been made
that use both sets of traits, frequently fi nding a biogeographical signal in the resulting models (Dehnen -
Schmutz, 2004 ; Py š ek et al ., 2004 ), which indicates
that such analyses draw from both ecological and biogeographical traditions within conservation science to
varying degrees. For further exploration of key scale
and diversity concepts relevant to conservation biogeography, see Box 1.2 .
1.3.1 To w hat e nds?
While our goal in this book is to provide students with
a guide to the scientifi c underpinnings of conservation
decision - making, it is important to recognize that such
of the recent and huge technological advances in biogeographical data collection, storage and analysis,
which have enabled rapid progress in many areas of
the fi eld, both pure and applied; and, in part, it refl ects
theoretical and conceptual advances (e.g. Williams
et al ., 2000 ; Lomolino & Heaney, 2004 ).
Yet we must also recognize that the underlying
species distributional and other data often remain
highly problematic, protocols for analysis are still in the
early stages of development, and we have only recently
begun the task of systematically analysing the sensitivity of our analyses to the starting assumptions and
scale effects. There is an enormous degree of uncertainty in our science when it comes to predicting future
distributions of taxa, diversity and biogeography (see
Chapter 7 ). Accordingly, we argue that there is a need
for more biogeographers to engage with the problems
of conservation science, and for the injection of more
biogeography into training for conservation scientists
and practitioners.
1.3 THE SCOPE OF CONSERVATION
BIOGEOGRAPHY
As we have indicated above, conservation biology is a
large and all - embracing fi eld. However, if it is subdivided by scale of application, we might recognize the
following subdivisions of relevant theory (Figure 1.1 ):
1 Population scale: the development and evaluation
of biological theory spanning population biological
and genetic process. This is concerned with deterministic processes of population decline, population viability, genetic erosion from small populations, competitive
infl uence of invasive species, behavioural ecology and
so forth, i.e. concerned with processes in which biogeography is generally not prominent (e.g. see Caughley,
1994 ; Primack, 2002 ).
2 Landscape scale: theory concerning processes at the
local – landscape scale, including the foundational
infl uence of R.H. MacArthur and E.O. Wilson ’ s equilibrium theory of island biogeography, the derivative
Single Large or Several Small reserves (SLOSS) debate,
habitat corridors and matrix effects, metapopulation
theory and nestedness (reviewed by Whittaker and
Fernand é z - Palacios, 2007 ), i.e. issues clearly bridging
ecology and biogeography.
3 Geographical scale: applications on a yet coarser
scale in part are concerned with mapping and modelling biogeographical patterns, and they in part invoke