Skip to main content
Login | Suomeksi | På svenska | In English

Browsing by Subject "SRLI"

Sort by: Order: Results:

  • Seppälä, Sini (2019)
    Not much attention is paid on the conservation of invertebrates despite their importance to the ecosystems in general and their benefits and ecosystem services to us, humans. This study is part of a project aiming to start the Sampled Red List Index (SRLI) for spiders. The IUCN Red List Index (RLI) is used for measuring the overall extinction risk of groups of species and the sampled approach is a way to evaluate the trajectory towards extinction of megadiverse groups without the need to assess every species of the whole group of interest. A random sample of 200 spider species were selected from the global checklist and assessed according to IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Given the availability of data, I was able to calculate the extent of occurrence and area of occupancy for 80 species, of which 70 species had an EOO above 20000 km² and 75 species an AOO above 2000 km², the thresholds below which species can be considered threatened. The trends in EOO and AOO were assumed to be stable for most species (49 species) given the inexistence of monitoring data for any taxon. Evidence of decline was found for only 10 species, usually inferred from habitat loss. Habitat data was collected for 118 species. The most common habitat type was forest (73 species), followed by grasslands (24 species) and artificial habitats (22 species). For 44 species the habitat trend was inferred to be stable, only declining, according to available knowledge, for 14 species and increasing for one species. For the remaining 141 species the habitat trend could not be inferred and was thus assumed to be unknown. The most commonly mentioned threat types were agriculture (11 species), fires (7 species) and logging (6 species). For 39 species there were no known threats and for the rest of the 132 species the threats were unknown. Conservation actions in place were observed for 104 species, most commonly site and area protection (100 species) and resource and habitat protection (88 species). Conservation actions such as education and awareness (8 species), resource and habitat protection (7 species) and site and area management (6 species) were to take into consideration. All the 200 species were estimated to be in need of further basic research especially on threats (143 species and distribution (140 species), but also on life history and ecology (135 species). Due to several knowledge shortfalls, including the Wallacean (distribution of species), Prestonian (population trends) and Hutchinsonian (response to environmental change), no threat category could be reached for the vast majority of the species. The results show that an IUCN category could be reached for only 59 species, of which 55 were assessed as Least Concern and a threatened category was reached for only 4 species (t as Critically Endangered and one as Vulnerable). The baseline SRLI at this first point in time was 0.95 (in a 0-1 scale, where 0 means all species are extinct and 1 for all species are Least Concern). We hypothesize however that among the 141 Data Deficient species there should be a higher proportion of threatened species than among the 59 evaluated. This would be due to two reasons. First, the scarcity of information on many species might in part be due to their rarity. Second, widespread species were often the only for which an assessment could be reached, creating a bias in the dataset towards a large base SRLI value. The strategy currently imposed by IUCN is therefore clearly inadequate for taxa with scarce information, which represent the vast majority of species. I propose the future use of a different, non-random, approach to the selection of species in the SRLI and its adoption for other taxa which represent in fact most extant and threatened species.