Species–area relationships always overestimate extinction rates from habitat loss : comment

View/ Open
Date
2013-03Author
Axelsen, Jacob Bock
Concept link
Roll, Uri
Concept link
Stone, Lewi
Concept link
Solow, Andrew R.
Concept link
Metadata
Show full item recordCitable URI
https://hdl.handle.net/1912/5899As published
https://doi.org/10.1890/12-0047.1DOI
10.1890/12-0047.1Abstract
The species–area relationship summarizes the relationship
between the average number of species in a
region and its area. This relationship provides a basis for
predicting the loss of species associated with loss of
habitat (e.g., Pimm and Raven 2000). The approach
involves two steps. First, as discussed in more detail
below, the species–area relationship is used to predict the
number of species that are endemic to the habitat at risk
based on its area. Second, these endemic species are
assumed to become extinct should this habitat be lost. In
a controversial paper, He and Hubbell (2011) argued
that the way in which the species–area relationship is
used to predict the number of endemic species is incorrect
when individual organisms are aggregated in space and
argued that this explains a discrepancy between predicted
and observed extinction rates associated with habitat
loss. The controversy surrounding the paper focused
primarily on the second part of their argument (Brooks
2011, Evans et al. 2011, He and Hubbell 2012, Pereira et
al. 2012, Thomas and Williamson 2012). Here, we focus
on the details underlying the first part.
Description
Author Posting. © Ecological Society of America, 2013. This article is posted here by permission of Ecological Society of America for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Ecology 94 (2013): 761–763, doi:10.1890/12-0047.1.