Do space-for-time assessments underestimate the impacts of logging on tropical biodiversity? An Amazonian case study using dung beetles



Franca, Filipe, Louzada, Julio, Korasaki, Vanesca, Griffiths, Hannah, Silveira, Juliana M and Barlow, Jos
(2016) Do space-for-time assessments underestimate the impacts of logging on tropical biodiversity? An Amazonian case study using dung beetles. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, 53 (4). pp. 1098-1105.

[thumbnail of Franca et al. 2016 Journal of Applied Ecology.pdf] Text
Franca et al. 2016 Journal of Applied Ecology.pdf - Published version

Download (427kB)

Abstract

<jats:title>Summary</jats:title><jats:p> <jats:list> <jats:list-item><jats:p>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 (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">SFT</jats:styled-content>) substitution. However, SFT substitution could be underestimating biodiversity loss if spatial controls fail to provide adequate inferences about pre‐disturbance conditions.</jats:p></jats:list-item> <jats:list-item><jats:p>We compare the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">SFT</jats:styled-content> substitution with a before–after control–impact (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">BACI</jats:styled-content>) 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.</jats:p></jats:list-item> <jats:list-item><jats:p>Only the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">BACI</jats:styled-content> approach consistently demonstrated the negative impacts of logging intensification on all dung beetle community metrics. Moreover, the <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">BACI</jats:styled-content> 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 <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">SFT</jats:styled-content>.</jats:p></jats:list-item> <jats:list-item><jats:p><jats:italic>Synthesis and applications</jats:italic>. Our results suggest that space‐for‐time (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">SFT</jats:styled-content>) 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 (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">BACI</jats:styled-content>) approaches will require longer‐term funding to gather the data and stronger links between researchers and landowners. However, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">BACI</jats:styled-content> approaches are accompanied by many logistical constraints, making the continued use of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">SFT</jats:styled-content> studies inevitable in many cases. We highlight that non‐significant results and weak effects should be viewed with caution.</jats:p></jats:list-item> </jats:list> </jats:p>

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: before-after control-impact, Brazilian Amazon, Chronosequences, land-use change, rain forest, reduced-impact logging, resampling, selective logging, space-for-time substitution, species diversity
Depositing User: Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited: 04 Jan 2017 09:13
Last Modified: 18 Sep 2023 22:28
DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12657
Related URLs:
URI: https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3005043