Author
Juliana M. Silveira
Other affiliations: Lancaster University
Bio: Juliana M. Silveira is an academic researcher from Universidade Federal de Lavras. The author has contributed to research in topics: Biodiversity & Species richness. The author has an hindex of 12, co-authored 16 publications receiving 1026 citations. Previous affiliations of Juliana M. Silveira include Lancaster University.
Papers
More filters
••
Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi1, Lancaster University2, Universidade Federal de Lavras3, Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária4, Cornell University5, University of Canberra6, Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research7, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz8, Federal University of Pará9, Universidade Federal de Viçosa10, University of Exeter11, National Institute for Space Research12, University of São Paulo13, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso14, Stockholm Environment Institute15, International Institute of Minnesota16
TL;DR: In this article, the authors used a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Para.
Abstract: Concerted political attention has focused on reducing deforestation, and this remains the cornerstone of most biodiversity conservation strategies. However, maintaining forest cover may not reduce anthropogenic forest disturbances, which are rarely considered in conservation programmes. These disturbances occur both within forests, including selective logging and wildfires, and at the landscape level, through edge, area and isolation effects. Until now, the combined effect of anthropogenic disturbance on the conservation value of remnant primary forests has remained unknown, making it impossible to assess the relative importance of forest disturbance and forest loss. Here we address these knowledge gaps using a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Para. Catchments retaining more than 69–80% forest cover lost more conservation value from disturbance than from forest loss. For example, a 20% loss of primary forest, the maximum level of deforestation allowed on Amazonian properties under Brazil’s Forest Code, resulted in a 39–54% loss of conservation value: 96–171% more than expected without considering disturbance effects. We extrapolated the disturbance-mediated loss of conservation value throughout Para, which covers 25% of the Brazilian Amazon. Although disturbed forests retained considerable conservation value compared with deforested areas, the toll of disturbance outside Para’s strictly protected areas is equivalent to the loss of 92,000–139,000 km2 of primary forest. Even this lowest estimate is greater than the area deforested across the entire Brazilian Amazon between 2006 and 2015 (ref. 10). Species distribution models showed that both landscape and within-forest disturbances contributed to biodiversity loss, with the greatest negative effects on species of high conservation and functional value. These results demonstrate an urgent need for policy interventions that go beyond the maintenance of forest cover to safeguard the hyper-diversity of tropical forest ecosystems.
698 citations
••
University of Cambridge1, Lancaster University2, Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária3, Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi4, University of São Paulo5, National Institute of Amazonian Research6, University of Exeter7, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz8, Federal University of Western Pará9, Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement10, Universidade Federal de Lavras11, Universidade Federal de Viçosa12, Federal University of Pará13, State University of Campinas14, Universidade Federal de Goiás15, Institute of Applied Economic Research16, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro17, Stanford University18, The Nature Conservancy19, Oregon State University20, Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso21, United States Environmental Protection Agency22, Monash University23, Federal Fluminense University24, London School of Economics and Political Science25
TL;DR: The Sustainable Amazon Network (Rede Amazônia Sustentável, RAS), a multidisciplinary research initiative involving more than 30 partner organizations working to assess both social and ecological dimensions of land-use sustainability in eastern Brazilian Amazonia, is presented.
Abstract: Science has a critical role to play in guiding more sustainable development trajectories. Here, we present the Sustainable Amazon Network (Rede Amazonia Sustentavel, RAS): a multidisciplinary research initiative involving more than 30 partner organizations working to assess both social and ecological dimensions of land-use sustainability in eastern Brazilian Amazonia. The research approach adopted by RAS offers three advantages for addressing land-use sustainability problems: (i) the collection of synchronized and co-located ecological and socioeconomic data across broad gradients of past and present human use; (ii) a nested sampling design to aid comparison of ecological and socioeconomic conditions associated with different land uses across local, landscape and regional scales; and (iii) a strong engagement with a wide variety of actors and non-research institutions. Here, we elaborate on these key features, and identify the ways in which RAS can help in highlighting those problems in most urgent need of attention, and in guiding improvements in land-use sustainability in Amazonia and elsewhere in the tropics. We also discuss some of the practical lessons, limitations and realities faced during the development of the RAS initiative so far.
158 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compare the SFT substitution with a before-after control-impact approach by assessing dung beetles before and after a logging exploration in the Brazilian Amazon.
Abstract: Human alteration of the global environment is leading to a pervasive loss of biodiversity. Most studies evaluating human impacts on biodiversity occur after the disturbance has taken place using spatially distinct sites to determine the undisturbed reference condition. This approach is known as a space-for-time (SFT) substitution. However, SFT substitution could be underestimating biodiversity loss if spatial controls fail to provide adequate inferences about pre-disturbance conditions. We compare the SFT substitution with a before–after control–impact (BACI) approach by assessing dung beetles before and after a logging exploration in the Brazilian Amazon. We sampled 34 logging management units, of which 29 were selectively logged with different intensities after our first collection. We used dung beetle species richness, species composition and biomass as our biodiversity response metrics and the gradient of selective logging intensity as our explanatory metric. Only the BACI approach consistently demonstrated the negative impacts of logging intensification on all dung beetle community metrics. Moreover, the BACI approach explained significantly more of the variance in all the relationships and it doubled the estimates of species loss along the gradient of logging intensity when compared to SFT. Synthesis and applications. Our results suggest that space-for-time (SFT) substitution may greatly underestimate the consequences on local species diversity and community turnover. These results have important implications for researchers investigating human impacts on biodiversity. Incentivizing before–after control–impact (BACI) approaches will require longer-term funding to gather the data and stronger links between researchers and landowners. However, BACI approaches are accompanied by many logistical constraints, making the continued use of SFT studies inevitable in many cases. We highlight that non-significant results and weak effects should be viewed with caution.
107 citations
••
TL;DR: Comparisons with previous studies suggest that wildfires had much less effect upon forest structure and biodiversity in these south-western Amazonian forests than in central and eastern Amazonia, where most fire research has been undertaken to date.
Abstract: Fire has become an increasingly important disturbance event in south-western Amazonia. We conducted the first assessment of the ecological impacts of these wildfires in 2008, sampling forest structure and biodiversity along twelve 500 m transects in the Chico Mendes Extractive Reserve, Acre, Brazil. Six transects were placed in unburned forests and six were in forests that burned during a series of forest fires that occurred from August to October 2005. Normalized Burn Ratio (NBR) calculations, based on Landsat reflectance data, indicate that all transects were similar prior to the fires. We sampled understorey and canopy vegetation, birds using both mist nets and point counts, coprophagous dung beetles and the leaf-litter ant fauna. Fire had limited influence upon either faunal or floral species richness or community structure responses, and stems <10 cm DBH were the only group to show highly significant (p = 0.001) community turnover in burned forests. Mean aboveground live biomass was statistically indistinguishable in the unburned and burned plots, although there was a significant increase in the total abundance of dead stems in burned plots. Comparisons with previous studies suggest that wildfires had much less effect upon forest structure and biodiversity in these south-western Amazonian forests than in central and eastern Amazonia, where most fire research has been undertaken to date. We discuss potential reasons for the apparent greater resilience of our study plots to wildfire, examining the role of fire intensity, bamboo dominance, background rates of disturbance, landscape and soil conditions.
47 citations
••
TL;DR: The results indicate that seasonality had a stronger effect than trap type, with BPT more effective and robust under low population numbers, and FIT more sensitive to fine scale heterogeneity patterns.
Abstract: Understanding how biodiversity responds to environmental changes is essential to provide the evidence-base that underpins conservation initiatives. The present study provides a standardized comparison between unbaited flight intercept traps (FIT) and baited pitfall traps (BPT) for sampling dung beetles. We examine the effectiveness of the two to assess fire disturbance effects and how trap performance is affected by seasonality. The study was carried out in a transitional forest between Cerrado (Brazilian Savanna) and Amazon Forest. Dung beetles were collected during one wet and one dry sampling season. The two methods sampled different portions of the local beetle assemblage. Both FIT and BPT were sensitive to fire disturbance during the wet season, but only BPT detected community differences during the dry season. Both traps showed similar correlation with environmental factors. Our results indicate that seasonality had a stronger effect than trap type, with BPT more effective and robust under low population numbers, and FIT more sensitive to fine scale heterogeneity patterns. This study shows the strengths and weaknesses of two commonly used methodologies for sampling dung beetles in tropical forests, as well as highlighting the importance of seasonality in shaping the results obtained by both sampling strategies.
44 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
TL;DR: Why COVID-19 is an analogue to the ongoing climate crisis, and why there is a need to question the volume growth tourism model advocated by UNWTO, ICAO, CLIA, WTTC and other tourism organizations are discussed.
Abstract: The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) is challenging the world. With no vaccine and limited medical capacity to treat the disease, nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPI) are the main strategy to contain ...
2,508 citations
01 Apr 2016
TL;DR: The evidence suggests that of the various proposed dates two do appear to conform to the criteria to mark the beginning of the Anthropocene: 1610 and 1964.
Abstract: Time is divided by geologists according to marked shifts in Earth's state. Recent global environmental changes suggest that Earth may have entered a new human-dominated geological epoch, the Anthropocene. Here we review the historical genesis of the idea and assess anthropogenic signatures in the geological record against the formal requirements for the recognition of a new epoch. The evidence suggests that of the various proposed dates two do appear to conform to the criteria to mark the beginning of the Anthropocene: 1610 and 1964. The formal establishment of an Anthropocene Epoch would mark a fundamental change in the relationship between humans and the Earth system.
1,173 citations
••
National Autonomous University of Mexico1, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign2, Conservation International3, German Primate Center4, Yale University5, University of Texas at Austin6, Oxford Brookes University7, Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology8, University of Colorado Boulder9, Durham University10, Emory University11, Naturhistorisches Museum12, Universidade Federal de Sergipe13, Federal University of Bahia14, Rhodes College15, University of Notre Dame16, Saint Louis University17, Northwestern University18, Federal University of Paraná19, University of Amsterdam20, Liverpool John Moores University21, Washington University in St. Louis22, University of Western Australia23, Chinese Academy of Sciences24
TL;DR: Raising global scientific and public awareness of the plight of the world’s primates and the costs of their loss to ecosystem health and human society is imperative.
Abstract: Nonhuman primates, our closest biological relatives, play important roles in the livelihoods, cultures, and religions of many societies and offer unique insights into human evolution, biology, behavior, and the threat of emerging diseases. They are an essential component of tropical biodiversity, contributing to forest regeneration and ecosystem health. Current information shows the existence of 504 species in 79 genera distributed in the Neotropics, mainland Africa, Madagascar, and Asia. Alarmingly, ~60% of primate species are now threatened with extinction and ~75% have declining populations. This situation is the result of escalating anthropogenic pressures on primates and their habitats—mainly global and local market demands, leading to extensive habitat loss through the expansion of industrial agriculture, large-scale cattle ranching, logging, oil and gas drilling, mining, dam building, and the construction of new road networks in primate range regions. Other important drivers are increased bushmeat hunting and the illegal trade of primates as pets and primate body parts, along with emerging threats, such as climate change and anthroponotic diseases. Often, these pressures act in synergy, exacerbating primate population declines. Given that primate range regions overlap extensively with a large, and rapidly growing, human population characterized by high levels of poverty, global attention is needed immediately to reverse the looming risk of primate extinctions and to attend to local human needs in sustainable ways. Raising global scientific and public awareness of the plight of the world’s primates and the costs of their loss to ecosystem health and human society is imperative.
893 citations
••
TL;DR: How beta-diversity is impacted by human activities, including farming, selective logging, urbanization, species invasions, overhunting, and climate change is reviewed.
Abstract: To design robust protected area networks, accurately measure species losses, or understand the processes that maintain species diversity, conservation science must consider the organization of biodiversity in space. Central is beta-diversity--the component of regional diversity that accumulates from compositional differences between local species assemblages. We review how beta-diversity is impacted by human activities, including farming, selective logging, urbanization, species invasions, overhunting, and climate change. Beta-diversity increases, decreases, or remains unchanged by these impacts, depending on the balance of processes that cause species composition to become more different (biotic heterogenization) or more similar (biotic homogenization) between sites. While maintaining high beta-diversity is not always a desirable conservation outcome, understanding beta-diversity is essential for protecting regional diversity and can directly assist conservation planning.
804 citations
••
Lancaster University1, Universidade Federal de Lavras2, Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi3, Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária4, Cornell University5, University of Canberra6, Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research7, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz8, Federal University of Pará9, Universidade Federal de Viçosa10, National Institute for Space Research11, University of Exeter12, University of São Paulo13, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso14, Stockholm Environment Institute15, International Institute of Minnesota16
TL;DR: In this article, the authors used a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Para.
Abstract: Concerted political attention has focused on reducing deforestation, and this remains the cornerstone of most biodiversity conservation strategies. However, maintaining forest cover may not reduce anthropogenic forest disturbances, which are rarely considered in conservation programmes. These disturbances occur both within forests, including selective logging and wildfires, and at the landscape level, through edge, area and isolation effects. Until now, the combined effect of anthropogenic disturbance on the conservation value of remnant primary forests has remained unknown, making it impossible to assess the relative importance of forest disturbance and forest loss. Here we address these knowledge gaps using a large data set of plants, birds and dung beetles (1,538, 460 and 156 species, respectively) sampled in 36 catchments in the Brazilian state of Para. Catchments retaining more than 69–80% forest cover lost more conservation value from disturbance than from forest loss. For example, a 20% loss of primary forest, the maximum level of deforestation allowed on Amazonian properties under Brazil’s Forest Code, resulted in a 39–54% loss of conservation value: 96–171% more than expected without considering disturbance effects. We extrapolated the disturbance-mediated loss of conservation value throughout Para, which covers 25% of the Brazilian Amazon. Although disturbed forests retained considerable conservation value compared with deforested areas, the toll of disturbance outside Para’s strictly protected areas is equivalent to the loss of 92,000–139,000 km2 of primary forest. Even this lowest estimate is greater than the area deforested across the entire Brazilian Amazon between 2006 and 2015 (ref. 10). Species distribution models showed that both landscape and within-forest disturbances contributed to biodiversity loss, with the greatest negative effects on species of high conservation and functional value. These results demonstrate an urgent need for policy interventions that go beyond the maintenance of forest cover to safeguard the hyper-diversity of tropical forest ecosystems.
698 citations