The positive impact of conservation action.

Governments recently adopted new global targets to halt and reverse the loss of biodiversity. It is therefore crucial to understand the outcomes of conservation actions. We conducted a global meta-analysis of 186 studies (including 665 trials) that measured biodiversity over time and compared outcomes under conservation action with a suitable counterfactual of no action. We find that in two-thirds of cases, conservation either improved the state of biodiversity or at least slowed declines. Specifically, we find that interventions targeted at species and ecosystems, such as invasive species control, habitat loss reduction and restoration, protected areas, and sustainable management, are highly effective and have large effect sizes. This provides the strongest evidence to date that conservation actions are successful but require transformational scaling up to meet global targets.

Bottom-up global biodiversity metrics needed for businesses to assess and manage their impact.

Ensuring that companies can assess and manage their impacts on biodiversity will be crucial to solving the current biodiversity crisis, and regulatory and public pressure to disclose these impacts is increasing. Top-down intactness metrics (e.g., Mean Species Abundance) can be valuable for generating high-level or first-tier assessments of impact risk but do not provide sufficient precision or guidance for companies, regulators, or third-party assessors. New metrics based on bottom-up assessments of biodiversity (e.g., the Species Threat Abatement and Restoration metric) can accommodate spatial variation of biodiversity and provide more specific guidance for actions to avoid, reduce, remediate, and compensate for impacts and to identify positive opportunities.

Cuantificación vertical de la biodiversidad mundial necesarias para que las empresas evalúen y gestionen su impacto Resumen Para resolver la actual crisis de biodiversidad, es importante asegurar que las empresas puedan evaluar y gestionar su impacto sobre la biodiversidad. Además, cada vez es mayor la presión pública y legislativa para divulgar este impacto. La cuantificación vertical de la integridad (p. ej.: Abundancia Media de Especies) puede ser valiosa para producir evaluaciones de alto nivel o primera categoría del riesgo de impacto, pero no proporcionan suficiente precisión o guía para las empresas, los reguladores o los asesores de terceros. Las nuevas medidas basadas en evaluaciones verticales (p. ej.: la medida de Abatimiento y Restauración de Amenazas de Especies) pueden acomodar la variación espacial de la biodiversidad y proporcionar una guía más específica para las acciones necesarias para evitar, reducir, remediar y compensar los impactos e identificar las oportunidades positivas.

Quantifying and mapping species threat abatement opportunities to support national target setting.

The successful implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity's post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework will rely on effective translation of targets from global to national level and increased engagement across diverse sectors of society. Species conservation targets require policy support measures that can be applied to a diversity of taxonomic groups, that link action targets to outcome goals, and that can be applied to both global and national data sets to account for national context, which the species threat abatement and restoration (STAR) metric does. To test the flexibility of STAR, we applied the metric to vascular plants listed on national red lists of Brazil, Norway, and South Africa. The STAR metric uses data on species' extinction risk, distributions, and threats, which we obtained from national red lists to quantify the contribution that threat abatement and habitat restoration activities could make to reducing species' extinction risk. Across all 3 countries, the greatest opportunity for reducing plant species' extinction risk was from abating threats from agricultural activities, which could reduce species' extinction risk by 54% in Norway, 36% in South Africa, and 29% in Brazil. Species extinction risk could be reduced by a further 21% in South Africa by abating threats from invasive species and by 21% in Brazil by abating threats from urban expansion. Even with different approaches to red-listing among countries, the STAR metric yielded informative results that identified where the greatest conservation gains could be made for species through threat-abatement and restoration activities. Quantifiably linking local taxonomic coverage and data collection to global processes with STAR would allow national target setting to align with global targets and enable state and nonstate actors to measure and report on their potential contributions to species conservation.

Direct and indirect impacts of synthetic biology on biodiversity conservation.

The world's biodiversity is in crisis. Synthetic biology has the potential to transform biodiversity conservation, both directly and indirectly, in ways that are negative and positive. However, applying these biotechnology tools to environmental questions is fraught with uncertainty and could harm cultures, rights, livelihoods, and nature. Decisions about whether or not to use synthetic biology for conservation should be understood alongside the reality of ongoing biodiversity loss. In 2022, the 196 Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity are negotiating the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework that will guide action by governments and other stakeholders for the next decade to conserve the worlds' biodiversity. To date, synthetic biologists, conservationists, and policy makers have operated in isolation. At this critical time, this review brings these diverse perspectives together and emerges out of the need for a balanced and inclusive examination of the potential application of these technologies to biodiversity conservation.

The relative importance of COVID-19 pandemic impacts on biodiversity conservation globally.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an enormous impact on almost all aspects of human society and endeavor; the natural world and its conservation have not been spared. Through a process of expert consultation, we identified and categorized, into 19 themes and 70 subthemes, the ways in which biodiversity and its conservation have been or could be affected by the pandemic globally. Nearly 60% of the effects have been broadly negative. Subsequently, we created a compendium of all themes and subthemes, each with explanatory text, and in August 2020 a diverse group of experienced conservationists with expertise from across sectors and geographies assessed each subtheme for its likely impact on biodiversity conservation globally. The 9 subthemes ranked highest all have a negative impact. These were, in rank order, governments sidelining the environment during their economic recovery, reduced wildlife-based tourism income, increased habitat destruction, reduced government funding, increased plastic and other solid waste pollution, weakening of nature-friendly regulations and their enforcement, increased illegal harvest of wild animals, reduced philanthropy, and threats to survival of conservation organizations. In combination, these impacts present a worrying future of increased threats to biodiversity conservation but reduced capacity to counter them. The highest ranking positive impact, at 10, was the beneficial impact of wildlife-trade restrictions. More optimistically, among impacts ranked 11-20, 6 were positive and 4 were negative. We hope our assessment will draw attention to the impacts of the pandemic and, thus, improve the conservation community's ability to respond to such threats in the future.

La pandemia de COVID-19 ha tenido un impacto enorme sobre casi todos los aspectos de la sociedad humana y sus proyectos; el mundo natural y su conservación no han sido la excepción. Por medio de un proceso de consultas a expertos, identificamos y categorizamos en 19 temas y 70 subtemas las maneras en las que la biodiversidad y su conservación han sido o podrían ser afectadas mundialmente por la pandemia. Casi el 60% de los efectos han sido claramente negativos. Posteriormente, creamos un compendio de todos los temas y subtemas, cada uno con textos explicativos, para que en agosto de 2020 un grupo diverso de conservacionistas experimentados con conocimiento de todos los sectores y geografías evaluara cada subtema de acuerdo con su probabilidad de impactar sobre la conservación de la biodiversidad en todo el mundo. Los nueve subtemas con la clasificación más alta tienen un impacto negativo. Estos temas son, en orden de clasificación: los gobiernos dejando de lado al ambiente durante su recuperación económica, reducción de los ingresos basados en el turismo de fauna, incremento en la destrucción de hábitat, financiamiento reducido del gobierno, aumento de la contaminación por plásticos y otros desechos sólidos, debilitamiento de las regulaciones en pro de la naturaleza y su aplicación, incremento en la captura ilegal de animales, disminución de la filantropía y amenazas para la supervivencia de las organizaciones de conservación. La combinación de estos impactos representa un futuro preocupante lleno de amenazas para la conservación de la biodiversidad y una capacidad reducida para contrarrestarlas. El impacto positivo con la clasificación más alta, el 10, fue el impacto benéfico de las restricciones en el mercado de fauna. De manera más optimista, entre los impactos clasificados de los lugares del 11 al 20, seis fueron positivos y cuatro fueron negativos. Esperamos que nuestra evaluación enfoque la atención hacia los impactos de la pandemia y así mejore la habilidad de la comunidad conservacionista para responder a tales amenazas en el futuro. Importancia Relativa de los Impactos de la Pandemia de COVID-19 sobre la Conservación Mundial de la Biodiversidad.

A metric for spatially explicit contributions to science-based species targets.

The Convention on Biological Diversity's post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework will probably include a goal to stabilize and restore the status of species. Its delivery would be facilitated by making the actions required to halt and reverse species loss spatially explicit. Here, we develop a species threat abatement and restoration (STAR) metric that is scalable across species, threats and geographies. STAR quantifies the contributions that abating threats and restoring habitats in specific places offer towards reducing extinction risk. While every nation can contribute towards halting biodiversity loss, Indonesia, Colombia, Mexico, Madagascar and Brazil combined have stewardship over 31% of total STAR values for terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals. Among actions, sustainable crop production and forestry dominate, contributing 41% of total STAR values for these taxonomic groups. Key Biodiversity Areas cover 9% of the terrestrial surface but capture 47% of STAR values. STAR could support governmental and non-state actors in quantifying their contributions to meeting science-based species targets within the framework.

Access to scientific literature by the conservation community.

Access to the scientific literature is perceived to be a challenge to the biodiversity conservation community, but actual level of literature access relative to needs has never been assessed globally. We examined this question by surveying the constituency of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as a proxy for the conservation community, generating 2,285 responses. Of these respondents, ∼97% need to use the scientific literature in order to support their IUCN-related conservation work, with ∼50% needing to do so at least once per week. The crux of the survey revolved around the question, "How easy is it for you currently to obtain the scientific literature you need to carry out your IUCN-related work?" and revealed that roughly half (49%) of the respondents find it not easy or not at all easy to access scientific literature. We fitted a binary logistic regression model to explore factors predicting ease of literature access. Whether the respondent had institutional literature access (55% do) is the strongest predictor, with region (Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) and sex (male) also significant predictors. Approximately 60% of respondents from Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have institutional access compared to ∼50% in Asia and Latin America, and ∼40% in Eastern Europe and in Africa. Nevertheless, accessing free online material is a popular means of accessing literature for both those with and without institutional access. The four journals most frequently mentioned when asked which journal access would deliver the greatest improvements to the respondent's IUCN-related work were Conservation Biology, Biological Conservation, Nature, and Science. The majority prefer to read journal articles on screen but books in hard copy. Overall, it is apparent that access to the literature is a challenge facing roughly half of the conservation community worldwide.

Diversity of grip in Macaca mulatta.

Much of the research on the neuronal basis of prehension focuses on macaque monkeys. Yet most of the behavioral description of grip types pertains to humans and apes. The purpose of the present study was to provide a catalogue and description of basic grip behavior in macaque monkeys. The observational study explored the diversity of grasping behavior in 157 semi-free ranging rhesus macaques. Video footage of monkeys grasping objects ad libitum was analyzed frame-by-frame, and grips were classified based on the skin surface areas that contacted the object. When monkeys held objects for manipulation, 15 distinct grip categories were observed. When monkeys held support points during climbing, two grip categories were observed. Not all grips were performed with the hand. Some involved the mouth, the foot, or an opposition between the forearm and chest. Grip in macaque monkeys is more diverse than the narrow range of grip that is typically studied.