1
|
James DG. Monarch Butterflies in Western North America: A Holistic Review of Population Trends, Ecology, Stressors, Resilience and Adaptation. INSECTS 2024; 15:40. [PMID: 38249046 PMCID: PMC10817040 DOI: 10.3390/insects15010040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2023] [Revised: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 01/05/2024] [Indexed: 01/23/2024]
Abstract
Monarch butterfly populations in western North America suffered a substantial decline, from millions of butterflies overwintering in California in the 1980s to less than 400,000 at the beginning of the 21st century. The introduction of neonicotinoid insecticides in the mid-1990s and their subsequent widespread use appears to be the most likely major factor behind this sudden decline. Habitat loss and unfavorable climates (high temperatures, aridity, and winter storms) have also played important and ongoing roles. These factors kept overwintering populations stable but below 300,000 during 2001-2017. Late winter storm mortality and consequent poor spring reproduction drove winter populations to less than 30,000 butterflies during 2018-2019. Record high temperatures in California during the fall of 2020 appeared to prematurely terminate monarch migration, resulting in the lowest overwintering population (1899) ever recorded. Many migrants formed winter-breeding populations in urban areas. Normal seasonal temperatures in the autumns of 2021 and 2022 enabled overwintering populations to return to around the 300,000 level, characteristic of the previous two decades. Natural enemies (predators, parasitoids, parasites, and pathogens) may be important regional or local drivers at times but they are a consistent and fundamental part of monarch ecology. Human interference (capture, rearing) likely has the least impact on monarch populations. The rearing of monarch caterpillars, particularly by children, is an important human link to nature that has positive ramifications for insect conservation beyond monarch butterflies and should be encouraged.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David G James
- Department of Entomology, Washington State University, Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, Prosser, WA 99350, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van Rees CB, Hernández-Abrams DD, Shudtz M, Lammers R, Byers J, Bledsoe BP, Bilskie MV, Calabria J, Chambers M, Dolatowski E, Ferreira S, Naslund L, Nelson DR, Nibbelink N, Suedel B, Tritinger A, Woodson CB, McKay SK, Wenger SJ. Reimagining infrastructure for a biodiverse future. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2023; 120:e2214334120. [PMID: 37931104 PMCID: PMC10655554 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2214334120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Civil infrastructure will be essential to face the interlinked existential threats of climate change and rising resource demands while ensuring a livable Anthropocene for all. However, conventional infrastructure planning largely neglects the contributions and maintenance of Earth's ecological life support systems, which provide irreplaceable services supporting human well-being. The stability and performance of these services depend on biodiversity, but conventional infrastructure practices, narrowly focused on controlling natural capital, have inadvertently degraded biodiversity while perpetuating social inequities. Here, we envision a new infrastructure paradigm wherein biodiversity and ecosystem services are a central objective of civil engineering. In particular, we reimagine infrastructure practice such that 1) ecosystem integrity and species conservation are explicit objectives from the outset of project planning; 2) infrastructure practices integrate biodiversity into diverse project portfolios along a spectrum from conventional to nature-based solutions and natural habitats; 3) ecosystem functions reinforce and enhance the performance and lifespan of infrastructure assets; and 4) civil engineering promotes environmental justice by counteracting legacies of social inequity in infrastructure development and nature conservation. This vision calls for a fundamental rethinking of the standards, practices, and mission of infrastructure development agencies and a broadening of scope for conservation science. We critically examine the legal and professional precedents for this paradigm shift, as well as the moral and economic imperatives for manifesting equitable infrastructure planning that mainstreams biodiversity and nature's benefits to people. Finally, we set an applied research agenda for supporting this vision and highlight financial, professional, and policy pathways for achieving it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles B. van Rees
- River Basin Center, Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Darixa D. Hernández-Abrams
- Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS39180
| | - Matthew Shudtz
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Roderick Lammers
- Department of Environmental Engineering, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, MI48858
| | - James Byers
- River Basin Center, Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Brian P. Bledsoe
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- School of Environmental, Civil, Agricultural, and Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Matthew V. Bilskie
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- School of Environmental, Civil, Agricultural, and Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Jon Calabria
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- College of Environment and Design, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Matthew Chambers
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- School of Environmental, Civil, Agricultural, and Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Emily Dolatowski
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- College of Environment and Design, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Susana Ferreira
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- College of Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Laura Naslund
- River Basin Center, Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Donald R. Nelson
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- Department of Anthropology, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Nathan Nibbelink
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - Burton Suedel
- Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS39180
| | - Amanda Tritinger
- Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS39180
| | - C. Brock Woodson
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- School of Environmental, Civil, Agricultural, and Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| | - S. Kyle McKay
- Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS39180
| | - Seth J. Wenger
- River Basin Center, Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
- Institute for Resilient Infrastructure Systems, University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gumbs R, Gray CL, Hoffmann M, Molina-Venegas R, Owen NR, Pollock LJ. Conserving avian evolutionary history can effectively safeguard future benefits for people. SCIENCE ADVANCES 2023; 9:eadh4686. [PMID: 37729417 PMCID: PMC10511189 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adh4686] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/21/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023]
Abstract
Phylogenetic diversity (PD)-the evolutionary history of a set of species-is conceptually linked to the maintenance of yet-to-be-discovered benefits from biodiversity or "option value." We used global phylogenetic and utilization data for birds to test the PD option value link, under the assumption that the performance of sets of PD-maximizing species at capturing known benefits is analogous to selecting the same species at a point in human history before these benefits were realized. PD performed better than random at capturing utilized bird species across 60% of tests, with performance linked to the phylogenetic dispersion and prevalence of each utilization category. Prioritizing threatened species for conservation by the PD they encapsulate performs comparably to prioritizing by their functional distinctiveness. However, species selected by each metric show low overlap, indicating that we should conserve both components of biodiversity to effectively conserve a variety of uses. Our findings provide empirical support for the link between evolutionary history and benefits for future generations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rikki Gumbs
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, London NW1 4RY, UK
- Science and Solutions for a Changing Planet DTP, Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, UK
| | - Claudia L Gray
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, London NW1 4RY, UK
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, UK
| | - Michael Hoffmann
- Conservation and Policy, Zoological Society of London, London NW1 4RY, UK
| | - Rafael Molina-Venegas
- Department of Ecology, Faculty of Science, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Nisha R Owen
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, UK
- On the Edge Conservation, London SW3 2JJ, UK
| | - Laura J Pollock
- IUCN SSC Phylogenetic Diversity Task Force, London, UK
- Department of Biology, McGill University, Montréal, Québec H3A 1B1, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Nolan N, Hayward MW, Klop-Toker K, Mahony M, Lemckert F, Callen A. Complex Organisms Must Deal with Complex Threats: How Does Amphibian Conservation Deal with Biphasic Life Cycles? Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:ani13101634. [PMID: 37238064 DOI: 10.3390/ani13101634] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2023] [Revised: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 05/11/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
The unprecedented rate of global amphibian decline is attributed to The Anthropocene, with human actions triggering the Sixth Mass Extinction Event. Amphibians have suffered some of the most extreme declines, and their lack of response to conservation actions may reflect challenges faced by taxa that exhibit biphasic life histories. There is an urgent need to ensure that conservation measures are cost-effective and yield positive outcomes. Many conservation actions have failed to meet their intended goals of bolstering populations to ensure the persistence of species into the future. We suggest that past conservation efforts have not considered how different threats influence multiple life stages of amphibians, potentially leading to suboptimal outcomes for their conservation. Our review highlights the multitude of threats amphibians face at each life stage and the conservation actions used to mitigate these threats. We also draw attention to the paucity of studies that have employed multiple actions across more than one life stage. Conservation programs for biphasic amphibians, and the research that guides them, lack a multi-pronged approach to deal with multiple threats across the lifecycle. Conservation management programs must recognise the changing threat landscape for biphasic amphibians to reduce their notoriety as the most threatened vertebrate taxa globally.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadine Nolan
- Conservation Science Research Group, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
| | - Matthew W Hayward
- Conservation Science Research Group, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
| | - Kaya Klop-Toker
- Conservation Science Research Group, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
| | - Michael Mahony
- Conservation Science Research Group, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
| | - Frank Lemckert
- Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd., Perth, WA 6000, Australia
| | - Alex Callen
- Conservation Science Research Group, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Franquesa‐Soler M, Jorge Sales L, Silva‐Silva Rivera E. Participatory action research for primate conservation: A critical analysis of a nonformal education program in Southern Mexico. Am J Primatol 2022; 85:e23450. [PMID: 36317585 DOI: 10.1002/ajp.23450] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2022] [Revised: 09/29/2022] [Accepted: 10/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Historically, Mexico has had an important role in primate conservation research, however, studies have rarely included the human dimensions of primatology. Inclusion of these disciplines should be a priority, considering that human activities are responsible for the current socio-ecological crisis. Mexico is habitat for three primate species, and all are threatened. This urgency demands new approaches and broader perspectives. First, we propose three main research frameworks relevant for conducting PCEPs in Latin America: Participatory Action Research, Arts-based education in PCEPs and Knowledge Coproduction. Furthermore, we aimed to (1) describe a case study about primate conservation education in Southern Mexico based on participatory visual methods under the umbrella of Participatory Action Research (PAR), and (2) to conduct a self-reflective, critical, straightforward, and constructive analysis of the experience. We discuss the various challenges faced during the process (e.g., traditional teaching prevalence at schools, teachers that are not school-based, time and academic constraints). Additionally, we highlight some PAR aspects applicable for researchers and practitioners interested to go further than knowledge transmission (e.g., codesign, arts-based education, placed-based education, critical thinking, and capacity building). To collectively progress in primate conservation education in Mexico and other Latin American countries, projects could greatly benefit from context-specific, people-centered approaches, such as PAR. We encourage researchers to share more of their personal research experiences including both their successes and failures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Montserrat Franquesa‐Soler
- Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla (UPAEP) Puebla Mexico
- Miku Conservación AC Xalapa Mexico
| | | | | |
Collapse
|