Luca Börger

Bio: Luca Börger is an academic researcher from Swansea University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Biodiversity. The author has an hindex of 29, co-authored 86 publications receiving 6295 citations. Previous affiliations of Luca Börger include University of Alcalá & Centre national de la recherche scientifique.

Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity

Abstract: Human activities, especially conversion and degradation of habitats, are causing global biodiversity declines. How local ecological assemblages are responding is less clear--a concern given their importance for many ecosystem functions and services. We analysed a terrestrial assemblage database of unprecedented geographic and taxonomic coverage to quantify local biodiversity responses to land use and related changes. Here we show that in the worst-affected habitats, these pressures reduce within-sample species richness by an average of 76.5%, total abundance by 39.5% and rarefaction-based richness by 40.3%. We estimate that, globally, these pressures have already slightly reduced average within-sample richness (by 13.6%), total abundance (10.7%) and rarefaction-based richness (8.1%), with changes showing marked spatial variation. Rapid further losses are predicted under a business-as-usual land-use scenario; within-sample richness is projected to fall by a further 3.4% globally by 2100, with losses concentrated in biodiverse but economically poor countries. Strong mitigation can deliver much more positive biodiversity changes (up to a 1.9% average increase) that are less strongly related to countries' socioeconomic status.

Effects of sampling regime on the mean and variance of home range size estimates

Abstract: 1. Although the home range is a fundamental ecological concept, there is considerable debate over how it is best measured. There is a substantial literature concerning the precision and accuracy of all commonly used home range estimation methods; however, there has been considerably less work concerning how estimates vary with sampling regime, and how this affects statistical inferences. 2. We propose a new procedure, based on a variance components analysis using generalized mixed effects models to examine how estimates vary with sampling regime. 3. To demonstrate the method we analyse data from one study of 32 individually marked roe deer and another study of 21 individually marked kestrels. We subsampled these data to simulate increasingly less intense sampling regimes, and compared the performance of two kernel density estimation (KDE) methods, of the minimum convex polygon (MCP) and of the bivariate ellipse methods. 4. Variation between individuals and study areas contributed most to the total variance in home range size. Contrary to recent concerns over reliability, both KDE methods were remarkably efficient, robust and unbiased: 10 fixes per month, if collected over a standardized number of days, were sufficient for accurate estimates of home range size. However, the commonly used 95% isopleth should be avoided; we recommend using isopleths between 90 and 50%. 5. Using the same number of fixes does not guarantee unbiased home range estimates: statistical inferences differ with the number of days sampled, even if using KDE methods. 6. The MCP method was highly inefficient and results were subject to considerable and unpredictable biases. The bivariate ellipse was not the most reliable method at low sample sizes. 7. We conclude that effort should be directed at marking more individuals monitored over long periods at the expense of the sampling rate per individual. Statistical results are reliable only if the whole sampling regime is standardized. We derive practical guidelines for field studies and data analysis.

Are there general mechanisms of animal home range behaviour? A review and prospects for future research

Abstract: Home range behaviour is a common pattern of space use, having fundamental consequences for ecological processes. However, a general mechanistic explanation is still lacking. Research is split into three separate areas of inquiry - movement models based on random walks, individual-based models based on optimal foraging theory, and a statistical modelling approach - which have developed without much productive contact. Here we review recent advances in modelling home range behaviour, focusing particularly on the problem of identifying mechanisms that lead to the emergence of stable home ranges from unbounded movement paths. We discuss the issue of spatiotemporal scale, which is rarely considered in modelling studies, as well as highlighting the need to consider more closely the dynamical nature of home ranges. Recent methodological and theoretical advances may soon lead to a unified approach, however, conceptually unifying our understanding of linkages among home range behaviour and ecological or evolutionary processes.

Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide

Abstract: Protected areas are widely considered essential for biodiversity conservation. However, few global studies have demonstrated that protection benefits a broad range of species. Here, using a new global biodiversity database with unprecedented geographic and taxonomic coverage, we compare four biodiversity measures at sites sampled in multiple land uses inside and outside protected areas. Globally, species richness is 10.6% higher and abundance 14.5% higher in samples taken inside protected areas compared with samples taken outside, but neither rarefaction-based richness nor endemicity differ significantly. Importantly, we show that the positive effects of protection are mostly attributable to differences in land use between protected and unprotected sites. Nonetheless, even within some human-dominated land uses, species richness and abundance are higher in protected sites. Our results reinforce the global importance of protected areas but suggest that protection does not consistently benefit species with small ranges or increase the variety of ecological niches.

A model-driven approach to quantify migration patterns: individual, regional and yearly differences.

Abstract: Summary 1. Animal migration has long intrigued scientists and wildlife managers alike, yet migratory species face increasing challenges because of habitat fragmentation, climate change and over-exploitation. Central to the understanding migratory species is the objective discrimination between migratory and nonmigratory individuals in a given population, quantifying the timing, duration and distance of migration and the ability to predict migratory movements. 2. Here, we propose a uniform statistical framework to (i) separate migration from other movement behaviours, (ii) quantify migration parameters without the need for arbitrary cut-off criteria and (iii) test predictability across individuals, time and space. 3. We first validated our novel approach by simulating data based on established theoretical movement patterns. We then formulated the expected shapes of squared displacement patterns as nonlinear models for a suite of movement behaviours to test the ability of our method to distinguish between migratory movement and other movement types. 4. We then tested our approached empirically using 108 wild Global Positioning System (GPS)collared moose Alces alces in Scandinavia as a study system because they exhibit a wide range of movement behaviours, including resident, migrating and dispersing individuals, within the same population. Applying our approach showed that 87% and 67% of our Swedish and Norwegian subpopulations, respectively, can be classified as migratory. 5. Using nonlinear mixed effects models for all migratory individuals we showed that the distance, timing and duration of migration differed between the sexes and between years, with additional individual differences accounting for a large part of the variation in the distance of migration but not in the timing or duration. Overall, the model explained most of the variation (92%) and also had high predictive power for the same individuals over time (69%) as well as between study populations (74%). 6. The high predictive ability of the approach suggests that it can help increase our understanding of the drivers of migration and could provide key quantitative information for understanding and managing a broad range of migratory species.

Citation classic - optimal foraging - a selective review of theory and tests

Abstract: Beginning with Emlen (1966) and MacArthur and Pianka (1966) and extending through the last ten years, several authors have sought to predict the foraging behavior of animals by means of mathematical models. These models are very similar,in that they all assume that the fitness of a foraging animal is a function of the efficiency of foraging measured in terms of some "currency" (Schoener, 1971) -usually energy- and that natural selection has resulted in animals that forage so as to maximize this fitness. As a result of these similarities, the models have become known as "optimal foraging models"; and the theory that embodies them, "optimal foraging theory." The situations to which optimal foraging theory has been applied, with the exception of a few recent studies, can be divided into the following four categories: (1) choice by an animal of which food types to eat (i.e., optimal diet); (2) choice of which patch type to feed in (i.e., optimal patch choice); (3) optimal allocation of time to different patches; and (4) optimal patterns and speed of movements. In this review we discuss each of these categories separately, dealing with both the theoretical developments and the data that permit tests of the predictions. The review is selective in the sense that we emphasize studies that either develop testable predictions or that attempt to test predictions in a precise quantitative manner. We also discuss what we see to be some of the future developments in the area of optimal foraging theory and how this theory can be related to other areas of biology. Our general conclusion is that the simple models so far formulated are supported are supported reasonably well by available data and that we are optimistic about the value both now and in the future of optimal foraging theory. We argue, however, that these simple models will requre much modification, espicially to deal with situations that either cannot easily be put into one or another of the above four categories or entail currencies more complicated that just energy.

A movement ecology paradigm for unifying organismal movement research

Abstract: Movement of individual organisms is fundamental to life, quilting our planet in a rich tapestry of phenomena with diverse implications for ecosystems and humans. Movement research is both plentiful and insightful, and recent methodological advances facilitate obtaining a detailed view of individual movement. Yet, we lack a general unifying paradigm, derived from first principles, which can place movement studies within a common context and advance the development of a mature scientific discipline. This introductory article to the Movement Ecology Special Feature proposes a paradigm that integrates conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and empirical frameworks for studying movement of all organisms, from microbes to trees to elephants. We introduce a conceptual framework depicting the interplay among four basic mechanistic components of organismal movement: the internal state (why move?), motion (how to move?), and navigation (when and where to move?) capacities of the individual and the external factors affecting movement. We demonstrate how the proposed framework aids the study of various taxa and movement types; promotes the formulation of hypotheses about movement; and complements existing biomechanical, cognitive, random, and optimality paradigms of movement. The proposed framework integrates eclectic research on movement into a structured paradigm and aims at providing a basis for hypothesis generation and a vehicle facilitating the understanding of the causes, mechanisms, and spatiotemporal patterns of movement and their role in various ecological and evolutionary processes. "Now we must consider in general the common reason for moving with any movement whatever." (Aristotle, De Motu Animalium, 4th century B.C.).

The biomass distribution on Earth

Abstract: A census of the biomass on Earth is key for understanding the structure and dynamics of the biosphere. However, a global, quantitative view of how the biomass of different taxa compare with one another is still lacking. Here, we assemble the overall biomass composition of the biosphere, establishing a census of the ≈550 gigatons of carbon (Gt C) of biomass distributed among all of the kingdoms of life. We find that the kingdoms of life concentrate at different locations on the planet; plants (≈450 Gt C, the dominant kingdom) are primarily terrestrial, whereas animals (≈2 Gt C) are mainly marine, and bacteria (≈70 Gt C) and archaea (≈7 Gt C) are predominantly located in deep subsurface environments. We show that terrestrial biomass is about two orders of magnitude higher than marine biomass and estimate a total of ≈6 Gt C of marine biota, doubling the previous estimated quantity. Our analysis reveals that the global marine biomass pyramid contains more consumers than producers, thus increasing the scope of previous observations on inverse food pyramids. Finally, we highlight that the mass of humans is an order of magnitude higher than that of all wild mammals combined and report the historical impact of humanity on the global biomass of prominent taxa, including mammals, fish, and plants.

Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits

Abstract: The food system is a major driver of climate change, changes in land use, depletion of freshwater resources, and pollution of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems through excessive nitrogen and phosphorus inputs. Here we show that between 2010 and 2050, as a result of expected changes in population and income levels, the environmental effects of the food system could increase by 50–90% in the absence of technological changes and dedicated mitigation measures, reaching levels that are beyond the planetary boundaries that define a safe operating space for humanity. We analyse several options for reducing the environmental effects of the food system, including dietary changes towards healthier, more plant-based diets, improvements in technologies and management, and reductions in food loss and waste. We find that no single measure is enough to keep these effects within all planetary boundaries simultaneously, and that a synergistic combination of measures will be needed to sufficiently mitigate the projected increase in environmental pressures.