Open AccessTesting the efficiency of protected areas in the Amazon for conserving freshwater turtles
Author(s) -
Fagundes Camila K.,
Vogt Richard C.,
De Marco Júnior Paulo
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
diversity and distributions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.918
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1472-4642
pISSN - 1366-9516
DOI - 10.1111/ddi.12396
Subject(s) - amazon rainforest , turtle (robot) , range (aeronautics) , ecology , species distribution , environmental niche modelling , deforestation (computer science) , fishery , biology , ecological niche , habitat , materials science , computer science , composite material , programming language
Aim We used chelonian distribution data to (1) predict suitable areas of the occurrence for freshwater turtle species using species distribution models and (2) evaluate whether these species are protected by the current network of protected areas ( PA s). Location The Brazilian Amazon. Methods We generated predictions of suitable areas for chelonian occurrence based on BIOCLIM , SVM , GLM and maximum entropy modelling procedures. We used maximum entropy to run the gap analysis and compared the effectiveness of three kinds of protected areas with different levels of protection: (1) integral protection areas ( IPA ) only; (2) integral protection areas + sustainable use areas ( IPA + SUA ); and (3) integral protection areas + sustainable use areas + indigenous lands ( IPA + SUA + IL ). Results We identified only one full gap species, M esoclemmys nasuta , whose distribution is not included in any PA s. Other chelonian species have at least a portion of their distribution included in PA s. Some protected species and partial gap species occur in areas with high rates of deforestation. Considering PA s with the highest level of protection ( IPA ), only Rhinoclemmys punctularia and Kinosternon scorpioides achieve their conservation targets. In the IPA + SUA scenario, conservation targets of some species with small range sizes are not achieved. When all PA types were considered ( IPA + SUA + IL ), only two species fail to achieve their conservation targets, Acanthochelys macrocephala and M. nasuta . Main conclusions Despite the large number of PA s in the Brazilian Amazon, IPA s alone are not sufficient for capturing suitable areas for freshwater turtles. The inclusion of SUA and IL is crucial for achieving coverage targets for most species. However, chelonians may be overharvested in SUA s and IL s, due to their importance as a food resource. Areas that have high turtle richness next to existing PA s and the needs of traditional cultures should be considered in management planning for freshwater turtles.