The EDGE2 protocol: Advancing the prioritisation of Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered species for practical conservation action.

The conservation of evolutionary history has been linked to increased benefits for humanity and can be captured by phylogenetic diversity (PD). The Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered (EDGE) metric has, since 2007, been used to prioritise threatened species for practical conservation that embody large amounts of evolutionary history. While there have been important research advances since 2007, they have not been adopted in practice because of a lack of consensus in the conservation community. Here, building from an interdisciplinary workshop to update the existing EDGE approach, we present an "EDGE2" protocol that draws on a decade of research and innovation to develop an improved, consistent methodology for prioritising species conservation efforts. Key advances include methods for dealing with uncertainty and accounting for the extinction risk of closely related species. We describe EDGE2 in terms of distinct components to facilitate future revisions to its constituent parts without needing to reconsider the whole. We illustrate EDGE2 by applying it to the world's mammals. As we approach a crossroads for global biodiversity policy, this Consensus View shows how collaboration between academic and applied conservation biologists can guide effective and practical priority-setting to conserve biodiversity.

Trait-density relationships explain performance in cladoceran zooplankton.

Traits have been used extensively to predict and understand performance in response to the abiotic environment, but their role for understanding competitive interactions is less understood, especially in nonplant systems. In this study, we evaluate how traits interact with intraspecific density to modulate performance (per capita birth rate) and whether the traits associated with intraspecific competitive ability are similar across multiple species. We used an experimental system of four cladoceran zooplankton species, experimentally manipulated the density of conspecifics, and measured a range of morphological and life history characteristics (body mass, body length, second antenna length, eye diameter, relative growth rate, age at first reproduction, and birth rate). With causal modeling, we identified significant trait-density relationships for three out of four species, although the specific traits that predicted birth rate varied from species to species. In general, individuals at higher densities displayed smaller morphological traits and shifts towards slower relative growth rates and delayed onset of reproduction. We also asked more generally if there are consistent trait-mediated impacts of density across multiple species. The interspecific model identified significant trait-density relationships for body length, age at first reproduction, and relative growth rate. Unexpectedly, we found little evidence for trait-based competition due to mechanisms such as limiting similarity or hierarchical competition, and rather noted the potential for trait plasticity and constraints on plasticity affecting performance in response to the competitive environment.

Assessing the utility of conserving evolutionary history.

It is often claimed that conserving evolutionary history is more efficient than species-based approaches for capturing the attributes of biodiversity that benefit people. This claim underpins academic analyses and recommendations about the distribution and prioritization of species and areas for conservation, but evolutionary history is rarely considered in practical conservation activities. One impediment to implementation is that arguments related to the human-centric benefits of evolutionary history are often vague and the underlying mechanisms poorly explored. Herein we identify the arguments linking the prioritization of evolutionary history with benefits to people, and for each we explicate the purported mechanism, and evaluate its theoretical and empirical support. We find that, even after 25 years of academic research, the strength of evidence linking evolutionary history to human benefits is still fragile. Most - but not all - arguments rely on the assumption that evolutionary history is a useful surrogate for phenotypic diversity. This surrogacy relationship in turn underlies additional arguments, particularly that, by capturing more phenotypic diversity, evolutionary history will preserve greater ecosystem functioning, capture more of the natural variety that humans prefer, and allow the maintenance of future benefits to humans. A surrogate relationship between evolutionary history and phenotypic diversity appears reasonable given theoretical and empirical results, but the strength of this relationship varies greatly. To the extent that evolutionary history captures unmeasured phenotypic diversity, maximizing the representation of evolutionary history should capture variation in species characteristics that are otherwise unknown, supporting some of the existing arguments. However, there is great variation in the strength and availability of evidence for benefits associated with protecting phenotypic diversity. There are many studies finding positive biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships, but little work exists on the maintenance of future benefits or the degree to which humans prefer sets of species with high phenotypic diversity or evolutionary history. Although several arguments link the protection of evolutionary history directly with the reduction of extinction rates, and with the production of relatively greater future biodiversity via increased adaptation or diversification, there are few direct tests. Several of these putative benefits have mismatches between the relevant spatial scales for conservation actions and the spatial scales at which benefits to humans are realized. It will be important for future work to fill in some of these gaps through direct tests of the arguments we define here.

Author Correction: Prioritizing phylogenetic diversity captures functional diversity unreliably.

The original version of this Article contained a plotting error in Fig. 3g. The Serranidae and Siganidae families were misplaced in the plotted phylogeny. This error has now been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of the Article. For comparison, the original, incorrect version of Fig. 3g is presented below as Fig. 1. The authors thank P. Cowman for identifying the plotting error.

Prioritizing phylogenetic diversity captures functional diversity unreliably.

In the face of the biodiversity crisis, it is argued that we should prioritize species in order to capture high functional diversity (FD). Because species traits often reflect shared evolutionary history, many researchers have assumed that maximizing phylogenetic diversity (PD) should indirectly capture FD, a hypothesis that we name the "phylogenetic gambit". Here, we empirically test this gambit using data on ecologically relevant traits from >15,000 vertebrate species. Specifically, we estimate a measure of surrogacy of PD for FD. We find that maximizing PD results in an average gain of 18% of FD relative to random choice. However, this average gain obscures the fact that in over one-third of the comparisons, maximum PD sets contain less FD than randomly chosen sets of species. These results suggest that, while maximizing PD protection can help to protect FD, it represents a risky conservation strategy.

On the relationship between phylogenetic diversity and trait diversity.

Niche differences are key to understanding the distribution and structure of biodiversity. To examine niche differences, we must first characterize how species occupy niche space, and two approaches are commonly used in the ecological literature. The first uses species traits to estimate multivariate trait space (so-called functional trait diversity, FD); the second quantifies the amount of time or evolutionary history captured by a group of species (phylogenetic diversity, PD). It is often-but controversially-assumed that these putative measures of niche space are at a minimum correlated and perhaps redundant, since more evolutionary time allows for greater accumulation of trait changes. This theoretical expectation remains surprisingly poorly evaluated, particularly in the context of multivariate measures of trait diversity. We evaluated the relationship between phylogenetic diversity and trait diversity using analytical and simulation-based methods across common models of trait evolution. We show that PD correlates with FD increasingly strongly as more traits are included in the FD measure. Our results indicate that phylogenetic diversity can be a useful surrogate for high-dimensional trait diversity, but we also show that the correlation weakens when the underlying process of trait evolution includes variation in rate and optima.

Should Environmental Filtering be Abandoned?

Environmental filtering, where the environment selects against certain species, is thought to be a major mechanism structuring communities. However, recent criticisms cast doubt on our ability to accurately infer filtering because competition can give rise to patterns identical to those caused by environmental filtering. While experiments can distinguish mechanisms, observational patterns are especially problematic. The environment determines community composition not only directly via survival, but also by influencing competition. If species population growth rates covary with environmental gradients, then outcomes of competitive exclusion will also vary with the environment. Here, we argue that observational studies remain valuable, but inferences about the importance of the environment cannot rely on compositional data alone, and that species abundances, population growth, or traits must be correlated with the environment.

A guide to phylogenetic metrics for conservation, community ecology and macroecology.

The use of phylogenies in ecology is increasingly common and has broadened our understanding of biological diversity. Ecological sub-disciplines, particularly conservation, community ecology and macroecology, all recognize the value of evolutionary relationships but the resulting development of phylogenetic approaches has led to a proliferation of phylogenetic diversity metrics. The use of many metrics across the sub-disciplines hampers potential meta-analyses, syntheses, and generalizations of existing results. Further, there is no guide for selecting the appropriate metric for a given question, and different metrics are frequently used to address similar questions. To improve the choice, application, and interpretation of phylo-diversity metrics, we organize existing metrics by expanding on a unifying framework for phylogenetic information. Generally, questions about phylogenetic relationships within or between assemblages tend to ask three types of question: how much; how different; or how regular? We show that these questions reflect three dimensions of a phylogenetic tree: richness, divergence, and regularity. We classify 70 existing phylo-diversity metrics based on their mathematical form within these three dimensions and identify 'anchor' representatives: for α-diversity metrics these are PD (Faith's phylogenetic diversity), MPD (mean pairwise distance), and VPD (variation of pairwise distances). By analysing mathematical formulae and using simulations, we use this framework to identify metrics that mix dimensions, and we provide a guide to choosing and using the most appropriate metrics. We show that metric choice requires connecting the research question with the correct dimension of the framework and that there are logical approaches to selecting and interpreting metrics. The guide outlined herein will help researchers navigate the current jungle of indices.

pez: phylogenetics for the environmental sciences.

UNLABELLED: pez is an R package that permits measurement, modelling and simulation of phylogenetic structure in ecological data. pez contains the first implementation of many methods in R, and aggregates existing data structures and methods into a single, coherent package. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: pez is released under the GPL v3 open-source license, available on the Internet from CRAN (http://cran.r-project.org). The package is under active development, and the authors welcome contributions (see http://github.com/willpearse/pez). CONTACT: will.pearse@gmail.com.

Environmental variability counteracts priority effects to facilitate species coexistence: evidence from nectar microbes.

The order of species arrival during community assembly can greatly affect species coexistence, but the strength of these effects, known as priority effects, appears highly variable across species and ecosystems. Furthermore, the causes of this variation remain unclear despite their fundamental importance in understanding species coexistence. Here, we show that one potential cause is environmental variability. In laboratory experiments using nectar-inhabiting microorganisms as a model system, we manipulated spatial and temporal variability of temperature, and examined consequences for priority effects. If species arrived sequentially, multiple species coexisted under variable temperature, but not under constant temperature. Temperature variability prevented extinction of late-arriving species that would have been excluded owing to priority effects if temperature had been constant. By contrast, if species arrived simultaneously, species coexisted under both variable and constant temperatures. We propose possible mechanisms underlying these results using a mathematical model that incorporates contrasting effects of microbial species on nectar pH and amino acids. Overall, our findings suggest that understanding consequences of priority effects for species coexistence requires explicit consideration of environmental variability.

Evolution of the storage effect.

The storage effect, a mechanism that promotes species coexistence in temporally variable environments, poses a dilemma to evolutionary ecologists. Ecological studies have demonstrated its importance in natural communities, but evolutionary models have predicted that selection either impedes coexistence or diminishes the storage effect if there is coexistence. Here, we develop a lottery model of competition in which two species experience a trade-off in competitive ability between two types of years. We use an adaptive evolution framework to determine conditions favoring the evolution of the storage effect. Storage evolves via divergence of relative performance in the two environments under a wide range of biologically realistic conditions. It evolves between two initially identical species (or lineages) when the trade-off in performance is strong enough. It evolves for species having different initial trade-offs for both weak and strong trade-offs. Our simple 2-species-2-environment scenario can be extended to multiple species and environmental conditions. Results indicate that the storage effect should evolve in a broad range of situations that involve a trade-off in competitive ability among years, and are consistent with empirical observations. The findings show that storage can evolve in a manner and under conditions similar to other types of resource partitioning.

Incorporating geographical and evolutionary rarity into conservation prioritization.

Key goals of conservation are to protect both species and the functional and genetic diversity they represent. A strictly species-based approach may underrepresent rare, threatened, or genetically distinct species and overrepresent widespread species. Although reserves are created for a number of reasons, including economic, cultural, and ecological reasons, their efficacy has been measured primarily in terms of how well species richness is protected, and it is useful to compare how well they protect other measures of diversity. We used Proteaceae species-occurrence data in the Cape Floristic Region of South Africa to illustrate differences in the spatial distribution of species and evolutionary diversity estimated from a new maximum-likelihood molecular phylogeny. We calculated species richness, phylogenetic diversity (i.e., summed phylogenetic branch lengths in a site), and a site-aggregated measure of biogeographically weighted evolutionary distinctiveness (i.e., an abundance weighted measure that captures the unique proportion of the phylogenetic tree a species represents) for sites throughout the Cape Floristic Region. Species richness and phylogenetic diversity values were highly correlated for sites in the region, but species richness was concentrated at a few sites that underrepresented the much more spatially extensive distribution of phylogenetic diversity. Biogeographically weighted evolutionary diversity produced a scheme of prioritization distinct from the other 2 metrics and highlighted southern sites as conservation priorities. In these sites, the high values of biogeographically weighted evolutionary distinctiveness were the result of a nonrandom relation between evolutionary distinctiveness and geographical rarity, where rare species also tended to have high levels of evolutionary distinctiveness. Such distinct and rare species are of particular concern, but are not captured by conservation schemes that focus on species richness or phylogenetic diversity alone.