If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach

Reed F. Noss
Conservation Biology
Vol. 4, No. 4 (Dec., 1990), pp. 355-364
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2385928
Page Count: 10
  • Download PDF
  • Cite this Item

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach
Preview not available

Abstract

Biodiversity is presently a minor consideration in environmental policy. It has been regarded as too broad and vague a concept to be applied to real-world regulatory and management problems. This problem can be corrected if biodiversity is recognized as an end in itself, and if measurable indicators can be selected to assess the status of biodiversity over time. Biodiversity, as presently understood, encompasses multiple levels of biological organization. In this paper, I expand the three primary attributes of biodiversity recognized by Jerry Franklin--composition, structure, and function--into a nested hierarchy that incorporates elements of each attribute at four levels of organization: regional landscape, community-ecosystem, population-species, and genetic. Indicators of each attribute in terrestrial ecosystems, at the four levels of organization, are identified for environmental monitoring purposes. Projects to monitor biodiversity will benefit from a direct linkage to long-term ecological research and a commitment to test hypotheses relevant to biodiversity conservation. A general guideline is to proceed from the top down, beginning with a coarse-scale inventory of landscape pattern, vegetation, habitat structure, and species distributions, then overlaying data on stress levels to identify biologically significant areas at high risk of impoverishment. Intensive research and monitoring can be directed to high-risk ecosystems and elements of biodiversity, while less intensive monitoring is directed to the total landscape (or samples thereof). In any monitoring program, particular attention should be paid to specifying the questions that monitoring is intended to answer and validating the relationships between indicators and the components of biodiversity they represent.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
355
    355
  • Thumbnail: Page 
356
    356
  • Thumbnail: Page 
357
    357
  • Thumbnail: Page 
358
    358
  • Thumbnail: Page 
359
    359
  • Thumbnail: Page 
360
    360
  • Thumbnail: Page 
361
    361
  • Thumbnail: Page 
362
    362
  • Thumbnail: Page 
363
    363
  • Thumbnail: Page 
364
    364