Human activities have led to an ongoingbiodiversity loss and an accompanying loss ofgenetic diversity. This process is often referred to asHolocene extinction, orsixth mass extinction. For example, it was estimated in 2007 that up to 30% of all species will be extinct by 2050.[4]Destroying habitats for farming is a key reason why biodiversity is decreasing today.Climate change also plays a role.[5][6] This can be seen for example in theeffects of climate change on biomes. This anthropogenic extinction may have started toward the end of thePleistocene, as some studies suggest that themegafaunal extinction event that took place around the end of the last ice age partly resulted from overhunting.[7]
Shown in a museum, various models of species across various taxa and orders visualize the variety of life on earth.
Biologists most often definebiodiversity as the "totality ofgenes,species andecosystems of a region".[8][9] An advantage of this definition is that it presents a unified view of the traditional types of biological variety previously identified:
functional diversity (which is a measure of the number of functionally disparate species within a population (e.g. different feeding mechanism, different motility, predator vs prey, etc.)[12])
Biodiversity is most commonly used to replace the more clearly-defined and long-established terms,species diversity andspecies richness.[13] However, there is no concrete definition for biodiversity, as its definition continues to be reimagined and redefined. To give a couple examples, theFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) defined biodiversity in 2019 as "the variability that exists among living organisms (both within and between species) and the ecosystems of which they are part." TheWorld Health Organization updated their website’s definition of biodiversity to be the “variability among living organisms from all sources.”[14] Both these definitions, although broad, give a current understanding of what is meant by the term biodiversity.
According to estimates by Mora et al. (2011), there are approximately 8.7 million terrestrial species and 2.2 million oceanic species. The authors note that these estimates are strongest for eukaryotic organisms and likely represent the lower bound of prokaryote diversity.[15] Other estimates include:
220,000vascular plants, estimated using the species-area relation method[16]
1.5-3 millionfungi, estimates based on data from the tropics, long-term non-tropical sites and molecular studies that have revealedcryptic speciation.[21] Some 0.075 million species of fungi had been documented by 2001;[22]
The number ofmicrobial species is not reliably known, but theGlobal Ocean Sampling Expedition dramatically increased the estimates of genetic diversity by identifying an enormous number of new genes from near-surfaceplankton samples at various marine locations, initially over the 2004–2006 period.[24] The findings may eventually cause a significant change in the way science definesspecies and other taxonomic categories.[25][26]
Since the rate of extinction has increased, many extant species may become extinct before they are described.[27] Not surprisingly, in theAnimalia the most studied groups arebirds andmammals, whereasfishes andarthropods are the least studied animal groups.[28]
The World Wildlife Fund's Living Planet Report 2024 found that wildlife populations declined by an average 73% since 1970.[29][30][31]
During the last century, decreases in biodiversity have been increasingly observed. It was estimated in 2007 that up to 30% of all species will be extinct by 2050.[4] Of these, about one eighth of known plant species are threatened withextinction.[32] Estimates reach as high as 140,000 species per year (based onSpecies-area theory).[33] This figure indicatesunsustainable ecological practices, because few species emerge each year.[34] The rate of species loss is greater now than at any time in human history, with extinctions occurring at rates hundreds of times higher thanbackground extinction rates.[32][35][36] and expected to still grow in the upcoming years.[36][37][38] As of 2012, some studies suggest that 25% of all mammal species could be extinct in 20 years.[39]
In absolute terms, the planet has lost 58% of its biodiversity since 1970 according to a 2016 study by the World Wildlife Fund.[40] The Living Planet Report 2014 claims that "the number of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish across the globe is, on average, about half the size it was 40 years ago". Of that number, 39% accounts for the terrestrial wildlife gone, 39% for the marine wildlife gone and 76% for the freshwater wildlife gone. Biodiversity took the biggest hit inLatin America, plummeting 83 percent. High-income countries showed a 10% increase in biodiversity, which was canceled out by a loss in low-income countries. This is despite the fact that high-income countries use five times the ecological resources of low-income countries, which was explained as a result of a process whereby wealthy nations are outsourcingresource depletion to poorer nations, which are suffering the greatest ecosystem losses.[41]
A 2017 study published inPLOS One found that the biomass of insect life in Germany had declined by three-quarters in the last 25 years.[42] Dave Goulson ofSussex University stated that their study suggested that humans "appear to be making vast tracts of land inhospitable to most forms of life, and are currently on course for ecological Armageddon. If we lose the insects then everything is going to collapse."[43]
In 2020 theWorld Wildlife Foundation published a report saying that "biodiversity is being destroyed at a rate unprecedented in human history". The report claims that 68% of the population of the examined species were destroyed in the years 1970 – 2016.[44]
Of 70,000 monitored species, around 48% are experiencing population declines from human activity (in 2023), whereas only 3% have increasing populations.[45][46][47]
Summary of major biodiversity-related environmental-change categories expressed as a percentage of human-driven change (in red) relative to baseline (blue)
Since theStone Age, species loss has accelerated above the average basal rate, driven by human activity. Estimates of species losses are at a rate 100–10,000 times as fast as is typical in the fossil record.[59]
Loss of biodiversity results in the loss ofnatural capital that suppliesecosystem goods and services. Species today are being wiped out at a rate 100 to 1,000 times higher than baseline, and the rate of extinctions is increasing. This process destroys the resilience and adaptability of life on Earth.[60]
In 2006, many species were formally classified asrare orendangered orthreatened; moreover, scientists have estimated that millions more species are at risk which have not been formally recognized. About 40 percent of the 40,177 species assessed using theIUCN Red List criteria are now listed as threatened withextinction—a total of 16,119.[61] As of late 2022 9251 species were considered part of the IUCN'scritically endangered.[62]
Some studies have however pointed out that habitat destruction for the expansion of agriculture and theoverexploitation of wildlife are the more significant drivers of contemporary biodiversity loss, notclimate change.[5][6]
Distribution of living terrestrial vertebrate species, highest concentration of diversity shown in red in equatorial regions, declining polewards (towards the blue end of the spectrum)
Biodiversity is not evenly distributed, rather it varies greatly across the globe as well as within regions and seasons. Among other factors, the diversity of all living things (biota) depends ontemperature,precipitation,altitude,soils,geography and the interactions between other species.[70] The study of the spatial distribution oforganisms, species andecosystems, is the science ofbiogeography.[71][72]
There is local biodiversity, which directly impacts daily life, affecting the availability of fresh water, food choices, and fuel sources for humans. Regional biodiversity includes habitats and ecosystems that synergizes and either overlaps or differs on a regional scale. National biodiversity within a country determines the ability for a country to thrive according to its habitats and ecosystems on a national scale. Also, within a country,endangered species are initially supported on a national level then internationally.Ecotourism may be utilized to support the economy and encourages tourists to continue to visit and support species and ecosystems they visit, while they enjoy the available amenities provided. International biodiversity impacts global livelihood, food systems, and health. Problematic pollution, over consumption, and climate change can devastate international biodiversity. Nature-based solutions are a critical tool for a global resolution. Many species are in danger of becoming extinct and need world leaders to be proactive with theKunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.
Terrestrial biodiversity is thought to be up to 25 times greater than ocean biodiversity.[75] Forests harbour most of Earth's terrestrial biodiversity. The conservation of the world's biodiversity is thus utterly dependent on the way in which we interact with and use the world's forests.[76] A new method used in 2011, put the total number of species on Earth at 8.7 million, of which 2.1 million were estimated to live in the ocean.[77] However, this estimate seems to under-represent the diversity of microorganisms.[78] Forests provide habitats for 80 percent of amphibianspecies, 75 percent of bird species and 68 percent of mammal species. About 60 percent of all vascular plants are found in tropical forests. Mangroves provide breeding grounds and nurseries for numerous species of fish and shellfish and help trap sediments that might otherwise adversely affect seagrass beds and coral reefs, which are habitats for many more marine species.[76] Forests span around 4 billion acres (nearly a third of the Earth's land mass) and are home to approximately 80% of the world's biodiversity. About 1 billion hectares are covered by primary forests. Over 700 million hectares of the world's woods are officially protected.[79][80]
The biodiversity of forests varies considerably according to factors such as forest type, geography, climate and soils – in addition to human use.[76] Most forest habitats in temperate regions support relatively few animal and plant species and species that tend to have large geographical distributions, while the montane forests of Africa, South America and Southeast Asia and lowland forests of Australia, coastal Brazil, the Caribbean islands, Central America and insular Southeast Asia have many species with small geographical distributions.[76] Areas with dense human populations and intense agricultural land use, such asEurope, parts of Bangladesh, China, India and North America, are less intact in terms of their biodiversity. Northern Africa, southern Australia, coastal Brazil, Madagascar and South Africa, are also identified as areas with striking losses in biodiversity intactness.[76] European forests in EU and non-EU nations comprise more than 30% of Europe's land mass (around 227 million hectares), representing an almost 10% growth since 1990.[81][82]
Generally, there is an increase in biodiversity from thepoles to thetropics. Thus localities at lowerlatitudes have more species than localities at higherlatitudes. This is often referred to as the latitudinal gradient in species diversity. Several ecological factors may contribute to the gradient, but the ultimate factor behind many of them is the greater mean temperature at the equator compared to that at the poles.[83]
Even though terrestrial biodiversity declines from the equator to the poles,[3] some studies claim that this characteristic is unverified inaquatic ecosystems, especially inmarine ecosystems.[84] The latitudinal distribution of parasites does not appear to follow this rule.[71] Also, in terrestrial ecosystems the soil bacterial diversity has been shown to be highest in temperate climatic zones,[85] and has been attributed to carbon inputs and habitat connectivity.[86]
In 2016, an alternative hypothesis ("thefractal biodiversity") was proposed to explain the biodiversity latitudinal gradient.[87] In this study, thespecies pool size and the fractal nature of ecosystems were combined to clarify some general patterns of this gradient. This hypothesis considerstemperature,moisture, andnet primary production (NPP) as the main variables of an ecosystem niche and as the axis of the ecologicalhypervolume. In this way, it is possible to build fractal hyper volumes, whosefractal dimension rises to three moving towards theequator.[88]
Brazil'sAtlantic Forest is considered one such hotspot, containing roughly 20,000 plant species, 1,350 vertebrates and millions of insects, about half of which occur nowhere else.[95][96] The island ofMadagascar andIndia are also particularly notable.Colombia is characterized by high biodiversity, with the highest rate of species by area unit worldwide and it has the largest number of endemics (species that are not found naturally anywhere else) of any country. About 10% of the species of the Earth can be found in Colombia, including over 1,900 species of bird, more than in Europe and North America combined, Colombia has 10% of the world's mammals species, 14% of the amphibian species and 18% of the bird species of the world.[97]Madagascar dry deciduous forests and lowland rainforests possess a high ratio ofendemism.[98][99] Since the island separated from mainlandAfrica 66 million years ago, many species and ecosystems have evolved independently.[100]Indonesia's 17,000 islands cover 735,355 square miles (1,904,560 km2) and contain 10% of the world'sflowering plants, 12% of mammals and 17% ofreptiles,amphibians andbirds—along with nearly 240 million people.[101] Many regions of high biodiversity and/or endemism arise from specializedhabitats which require unusual adaptations, for example,alpine environments in highmountains, orNorthern European peatbogs.[99]
Accurately measuring differences in biodiversity can be difficult.Selection bias amongst researchers may contribute to biased empirical research for modern estimates of biodiversity. In 1768, Rev.Gilbert White succinctly observed of hisSelborne, Hampshire"all nature is so full, that that district produces the most variety which is the most examined."[102]
Apparent marine fossil diversity during the Phanerozoic[104]
Biodiversity grew fast during thePhanerozoic (the last 540 million years), especially during the so-calledCambrian explosion—a period during which nearly everyphylum ofmulticellular organisms first appeared.[105] However, recent studies suggest that this diversification had started earlier, at least in theEdiacaran, and that it continued in theOrdovician.[106] Over the next 400 million years or so,invertebrate diversity showed little overall trend andvertebrate diversity shows an overall exponential trend.[10] This dramatic rise in diversity was marked by periodic, massive losses of diversity classified asmass extinction events.[10] A significant loss occurred in anamniotic limbed vertebrates when rainforests collapsed in theCarboniferous,[107] butamniotes seem to have been little affected by this event; their diversification slowed down later, around theAsselian/Sakmarian boundary, in the earlyCisuralian (EarlyPermian), about 293 Ma ago.[108] The worst was thePermian-Triassic extinction event, 251 million years ago.[109][110] Vertebrates took 30 million years to recover from this event.[111]
The most recent majormass extinction event, theCretaceous–Paleogene extinction event, occurred 66 million years ago. This period has attracted more attention than others because it resulted in the extinction of thenon-aviandinosaurs, which were represented by many lineages at the end of theMaastrichtian, just before that extinction event. However, many other taxa were affected by this crisis, which affected even marine taxa, such asammonites, which also became extinct around that time.[112]
The biodiversity of the past is called Paleobiodiversity. Thefossil record suggests that the last few million years featured the greatest biodiversity inhistory.[10] However, not all scientists support this view, since there is uncertainty as to how strongly the fossil record is biased by the greater availability and preservation of recentgeologic sections.[113] Some scientists believe that corrected for sampling artifacts, modern biodiversity may not be much different from biodiversity 300 million years ago,[105] whereas others consider the fossil record reasonably reflective of the diversification of life.[114][10] Estimates of the present global macroscopic species diversity vary from 2 million to 100 million, with a best estimate of somewhere near 9 million,[77] the vast majorityarthropods.[115] Diversity appears to increase continually in the absence of natural selection.[116]
The existence of aglobalcarrying capacity, limiting the amount of life that can live at once, is debated, as is the question of whether such a limit would also cap the number of species. While records of life in the sea show alogistic pattern of growth, life on land (insects, plants and tetrapods) shows anexponential rise in diversity.[10] As one author states, "Tetrapods have not yet invaded 64 percent of potentially habitable modes and it could be that without human influence the ecological andtaxonomic diversity of tetrapods would continue to increase exponentially until most or all of the available eco-space is filled."[10]
It also appears that the diversity continues to increase over time, especially after mass extinctions.[117]
On the other hand, changes through thePhanerozoic correlate much better with thehyperbolic model (widely used inpopulation biology,demography andmacrosociology, as well asfossil biodiversity) than with exponential and logistic models. The latter models imply that changes in diversity are guided by a first-orderpositive feedback (more ancestors, more descendants) and/or anegative feedback arising from resource limitation. Hyperbolic model implies a second-order positive feedback.[118] Differences in the strength of the second-order feedback due to different intensities of interspecific competition might explain the faster rediversification ofammonoids in comparison tobivalves after theend-Permian extinction.[118] The hyperbolic pattern of theworld population growth arises from a second-order positive feedback between the population size and the rate of technological growth.[119] The hyperbolic character of biodiversity growth can be similarly accounted for by a feedback between diversity and community structure complexity.[119][120] The similarity between the curves of biodiversity and human population probably comes from the fact that both are derived from the interference of the hyperbolic trend with cyclical andstochastic dynamics.[119][120]
Most biologists agree however that the period since human emergence is part of a new mass extinction, named theHolocene extinction event, caused primarily by the impact humans are having on the environment.[121] It has been argued that the present rate of extinction is sufficient to eliminate most species on the planet Earth within 100 years.[122]
New species are regularly discovered (on average between 5–10,000 new species each year, most of theminsects) and many, though discovered, are not yet classified (estimates are that nearly 90% of allarthropods are not yet classified).[115] Most of the terrestrial diversity is found intropical forests and in general, the land has more species than the ocean; some 8.7 million species may exist on Earth, of which some 2.1 million live in the ocean.[77]
It is estimated that 5 to 50 billion species have existed on the planet.[123] Assuming that there may be a maximum of about 50 million species currently alive,[124] it stands to reason that greater than 99% of the planet's species went extinct prior to the evolution of humans.[125] Estimates on the number of Earth's currentspecies range from 10 million to 14 million, of which about 1.2 million have been documented and over 86% have not yet been described.[126] However, a May 2016 scientific report estimates that 1 trillion species are currently on Earth, with only one-thousandth of one percent described.[127] The total amount of relatedDNAbase pairs on Earth is estimated at 5.0 x 1037 and weighs 50 billiontonnes. In comparison, the totalmass of thebiosphere has been estimated to be as much as four trillion tons ofcarbon.[128] In July 2016, scientists reported identifying a set of 355genes from thelast universal common ancestor (LUCA) of allorganisms living on Earth.[129]
There have been many claims about biodiversity's effect on theecosystem services, especiallyprovisioning andregulating services.[139] Some of those claims have been validated, some are incorrect and some lack enough evidence to draw definitive conclusions.[139]
Ecosystem services have been grouped in three types:[139]
Provisioning services which involve the production of renewable resources (e.g.: food, wood, fresh water)
Regulating services which are those that lessen environmental change (e.g.: climate regulation, pest/disease control)
Cultural services represent human value and enjoyment (e.g.: landscape aesthetics, cultural heritage, outdoor recreation and spiritual significance)[140]
Experiments with controlled environments have shown that humans cannot easily build ecosystems to support human needs;[141] for exampleinsect pollination cannot be mimicked, though there have been attempts to create artificial pollinators usingunmanned aerial vehicles.[142] The economic activity of pollination alone represented between $2.1–14.6 billion in 2003.[143] Other sources have reported somewhat conflicting results and in 1997Robert Costanza and his colleagues reported the estimated global value of ecosystem services (not captured in traditional markets) at an average of $33 trillion annually.[144]
With regards to provisioning services, greater species diversity has the following benefits:
Greater species diversity of plants increases fodder yield (synthesis of 271 experimental studies).[72]
Greater species diversity of plants (i.e. diversity within a single species) increases overallcrop yield (synthesis of 575 experimental studies).[145] Although another review of 100 experimental studies reported mixed evidence.[146]
Greater species diversity of trees increases overallwood production (synthesis of 53 experimental studies).[147] However, there is not enough data to draw a conclusion about the effect of tree trait diversity on wood production.[139]
With regards to regulating services, greater species diversity has the following benefits:
Greater species diversity
of fish increases the stability offisheries yield (synthesis of 8 observational studies)[139]
of plants increasescarbon sequestration, but note that this finding only relates to actual uptake of carbon dioxide and not long-term storage; synthesis of 479 experimental studies)[72]
of plants increasessoil nutrientremineralization (synthesis of 103 experimental studies), increases soil organic matter (synthesis of 85 experimental studies) and decreases disease prevalence on plants (synthesis of 107 experimental studies)[148]
of natural pest enemies decreases herbivorous pest populations (data from two separate reviews; synthesis of 266 experimental and observational studies;[149] Synthesis of 18 observational studies.[150][151] Although another review of 38 experimental studies found mixed support for this claim, suggesting that in cases where mutual intraguild predation occurs, a single predatory species is often more effective[152]
Agricultural diversity can be divided into two categories:intraspecific diversity, which includes the genetic variation within a single species, like the potato (Solanum tuberosum) that is composed of many different forms and types (e.g. in the U.S. they might compare russet potatoes with new potatoes or purple potatoes, all different, but all part of the same species,S. tuberosum). The other category of agricultural diversity is calledinterspecific diversity and refers to the number and types of different species.
Agricultural diversity can also be divided by whether it is 'planned' diversity or 'associated' diversity. This is a functional classification that we impose and not an intrinsic feature of life or diversity. Planned diversity includes the crops which a farmer has encouraged, planted or raised (e.g. crops, covers, symbionts, and livestock, among others), which can be contrasted with the associated diversity that arrives among the crops, uninvited (e.g. herbivores, weed species and pathogens, among others).[153]
Associated biodiversity can be damaging or beneficial. The beneficial associated biodiversity include for instance wild pollinators such as wild bees andsyrphid flies that pollinate crops[154] and natural enemies and antagonists to pests and pathogens. Beneficial associated biodiversity occurs abundantly in crop fields and provide multipleecosystem services such as pest control,nutrient cycling and pollination that support crop production.[155]
Although about 80 percent of humans' food supply comes from just 20 kinds of plants,[156] humans use at least 40,000 species.[157] Earth's surviving biodiversity provides resources for increasing the range of food and other products suitable for human use, although the present extinction rate shrinks that potential.[122]
The diverse forest canopy onBarro Colorado Island, Panama, yielded this display of different fruit
Biodiversity's relevance to human health is becoming an international political issue, as scientific evidence builds on the global health implications of biodiversity loss.[158][159][160] This issue is closely linked with the issue ofclimate change,[161] as many of the anticipatedhealth risks of climate change are associated with changes in biodiversity (e.g. changes in populations and distribution of disease vectors, scarcity of fresh water, impacts on agricultural biodiversity and food resources etc.). This is because the species most likely to disappear are those that buffer against infectious disease transmission, while surviving species tend to be the ones that increase disease transmission, such as that of West Nile Virus,Lyme disease and Hantavirus, according to a study done co-authored by Felicia Keesing, an ecologist at Bard College and Drew Harvell, associate director for Environment of theAtkinson Center for a Sustainable Future (ACSF) atCornell University.[162]
Some of the health issues influenced by biodiversity include dietary health and nutrition security, infectious disease, medical science and medicinal resources, social and psychological health.[163] Biodiversity is also known to have an important role in reducing disaster risk, including rising sea levels. For example, wetland ecosystems along coastal communities serve as excellent water filtration systems, storage, and ultimately create a buffer region between the ocean and mainland neighborhoods in order to prevent water reaching these communities under climate change pressures or storm storages. Other examples of diverse species or organisms are present around the world, offering their resourceful utilities to provide protection of human survival.[164]
Biodiversity provides critical support for drug discovery and the availability of medicinal resources.[165][166] A significant proportion of drugs are derived, directly or indirectly, from biological sources: at least 50% of the pharmaceutical compounds on the US market are derived from plants, animals andmicroorganisms, while about 80% of the world population depends on medicines from nature (used in either modern or traditional medical practice) for primary healthcare.[159] Only a tiny fraction of wild species has been investigated for medical potential.
Marine ecosystems are particularly important, especially their chemical and physical properties that have paved the way for numerous pharmaceutical achievements; the immense diversity of marine organisms have led to scientific discoveries including medical treatments to cancer, viral bacteria, AIDS, etc.[167] This process ofbioprospecting can increase biodiversity loss, as well as violating the laws of the communities and states from which the resources are taken.[168][169][170]
According to theBoston Consulting Group, in 2021, the economic value that biodiversity has on society comes down to four definable terms: regulation, culture, habitat, and provisioning. To sum these up in a relatively short manner, biodiversity helps maintain habitat and animal functions that provide considerable amounts of resources that benefit the economy.[171]
Biodiversity’s economic resources are worth at around $150 trillion annually which is roughly twice the world’s GDP. The loss of biodiversity is actually harming the GDP of the world by costing an estimated $5 trillion annually.[171]
Business supply chains rely heavily on ecosystems remaining relatively maintained and nurtured. A disruption to these supply chains would negatively impact many businesses that would end up costing them more than what they are gaining.[172]
Philosophically it could be argued that biodiversity has intrinsic aesthetic and spiritual value tomankindin and of itself. This idea can be used as a counterweight to the notion thattropical forests and other ecological realms are only worthy of conservation because of the services they provide.[173]
Biodiversity also affords many non-material benefits including spiritual and aesthetic values, knowledge systems and education.[59]
A variety of objective means exist to empiricallymeasure biodiversity. Each measure relates to a particular use of the data, and is likely to be associated with the variety of genes. Biodiversity is commonly measured in terms of taxonomic richness of a geographic area over a time interval. In order to calculate biodiversity, species evenness, species richness, and species diversity are to be obtained first.Species evenness is the relative number of individuals of each species in a given area.[174]Species richness[175] is the number of species present in a given area.Species diversity[176] is the relationship between species evenness and species richness. There are many ways to measure biodiversity within a given ecosystem. However, the two most popular areShannon-Weaver diversity index,[177] commonly referred to as Shannon diversity index, and the other isSimpsons diversity index.[178] Although many scientists prefer to use Shannon's diversity index simply because it takes into account species richness.[179]
Less than 1% of all species that have been described have been studied beyond noting their existence.[180] The vast majority of Earth's species are microbial. Contemporary biodiversity physics is "firmly fixated on the visible [macroscopic] world".[181] For example, microbial life ismetabolically and environmentally more diverse than multicellular life (see e.g.,extremophile). "On the tree of life, based on analyses of small-subunitribosomal RNA, visible life consists of barely noticeable twigs. The inverse relationship of size and population recurs higher on the evolutionary ladder—to a first approximation, all multicellular species on Earth are insects".[182]Insect extinction rates are high—supporting the Holocene extinction hypothesis.[183][55]
Biodiversity naturally varies due to seasonal shifts. Spring's arrival enhances biodiversity as numerous species breed and feed, while winter's onset temporarily reduces it as some insects perish and migrating animals leave. Additionally, the seasonal fluctuation in plant and invertebrate populations influences biodiversity.[184]
MaleLophura nycthemera (silver pheasant), a native ofEast Asia that has been introduced into parts ofEurope for ornamental reasons
Barriers such as largerivers,seas,oceans,mountains anddeserts encourage diversity by enabling independent evolution on either side of the barrier, via the process ofallopatric speciation. The terminvasive species is applied to species that breach the natural barriers that would normally keep them constrained. Without barriers, such species occupy new territory, often supplanting native species by occupying their niches, or by using resources that would normally sustain native species.
Species are increasingly being moved by humans (on purpose and accidentally). Some studies say that diverse ecosystems are more resilient and resist invasive plants and animals.[185] Many studies cite effects of invasive species on natives,[186] but not extinctions.
Invasive species seem to increase local (alpha diversity) diversity, which decreases turnover of diversity (beta diversity). Overallgamma diversity may be lowered because species are going extinct because of other causes,[187] but even some of the most insidious invaders (e.g.: Dutch elm disease, emerald ash borer, chestnut blight in North America) have not caused their host species to become extinct.Extirpation,population decline andhomogenization of regional biodiversity are much more common. Human activities have frequently been the cause of invasive species circumventing their barriers,[188] by introducing them for food and other purposes. Human activities therefore allow species to migrate to new areas (and thus become invasive) occurred on time scales much shorter than historically have been required for a species to extend its range.
At present, several countries have already imported so many exotic species, particularly agricultural and ornamental plants, that their indigenous fauna/flora may be outnumbered. For example, the introduction ofkudzu from Southeast Asia to Canada and the United States has threatened biodiversity in certain areas.[189] Another example arepines, which have invaded forests, shrublands and grasslands in the southern hemisphere.[190]
The Yecorowheat (right)cultivar is sensitive to salinity, plants resulting from a hybrid cross with cultivar W4910 (left) show greater tolerance to high salinity
Endemic species can be threatened withextinction[191] through the process ofgenetic pollution, i.e. uncontrolledhybridization,introgression and genetic swamping. Genetic pollution leads to homogenization or replacement of localgenomes as a result of either a numerical and/orfitness advantage of an introduced species.[192]
Hybridization and introgression are side-effects of introduction and invasion. These phenomena can be especially detrimental torare species that come into contact with more abundant ones. The abundant species can interbreed with the rare species, swamping itsgene pool. This problem is not always apparent frommorphological (outward appearance) observations alone. Some degree ofgene flow is normal adaptation and not allgene andgenotype constellations can be preserved. However, hybridization with or without introgression may, nevertheless, threaten a rare species' existence.[193][194]
A schematic image illustrating the relationship between biodiversity, ecosystem services, human well-being and poverty.[195] The illustration shows where conservation action, strategies, and plans can influence the drivers of the current biodiversity crisis at local, regional, to global scales.
Conservation biology is reforming around strategic plans to protect biodiversity.[196][201][202][203] Preserving global biodiversity is a priority in strategic conservation plans that are designed to engage public policy and concerns affecting local, regional and global scales of communities, ecosystems and cultures.[204] Action plans identifyways of sustaining human well-being, employingnatural capital, macroeconomic policies including economic incentives, andecosystem services.[205][206]
In theEU Directive 1999/22/EC zoos are described as having a role in the preservation of the biodiversity of wildlife animals by conducting research or participation inbreeding programs.[207]
Removal of exotic species will allow the species that they have negatively impacted to recover their ecological niches. Exotic species that have become pests can be identified taxonomically (e.g., withDigital Automated Identification SYstem (DAISY), using thebarcode of life).[208][209] Removal is practical only given large groups of individuals due to the economic cost.
As sustainable populations of the remaining native species in an area become assured, "missing" species that are candidates for reintroduction can be identified using databases such as theEncyclopedia of Life and theGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility.
Gene banks are collections of specimens and genetic material. Some banks intend to reintroduce banked species to the ecosystem (e.g., via tree nurseries).[211]
Reduction and better targeting of pesticides allows more species to survive in agricultural and urbanized areas.
Location-specific approaches may be less useful for protecting migratory species. One approach is to createwildlife corridors that correspond to the animals' movements. National and other boundaries can complicate corridor creation.[212]
Mother and child at an orangutan rehab facility in Malaysia
Protected areas, including forest reserves and biosphere reserves, serve many functions including for affording protection to wild animals and their habitat.[213] Protected areas have been set up all over the world with the specific aim of protecting and conserving plants and animals. Some scientists have called on the global community to designate as protected areas of 30 percent of the planet by 2030, and 50 percent by 2050, in order to mitigate biodiversity loss from anthropogenic causes.[214][215] The target of protecting 30% of the area of the planet by the year 2030 (30 by 30) was adopted by almost 200 countries in the2022 United Nations Biodiversity Conference. At the moment of adoption (December 2022) 17% of land territory and 10% of ocean territory were protected.[216] In a study published 4 September 2020 inScience Advances researchers mapped out regions that can help meet critical conservation and climate goals.[217]
Protected areas safeguard nature and cultural resources and contribute to livelihoods, particularly at local level. There are over 238 563 designated protected areas worldwide, equivalent to 14.9 percent of the earth's land surface, varying in their extension, level of protection, and type of management (IUCN, 2018).[218]
The benefits of protected areas extend beyond their immediate environment and time. In addition to conserving nature, protected areas are crucial for securing the long-term delivery of ecosystem services. They provide numerous benefits including the conservation ofgenetic resources for food and agriculture, the provision of medicine and health benefits, the provision of water, recreation and tourism, and for acting as a buffer against disaster. Increasingly, there is acknowledgement of the wider socioeconomic values of these natural ecosystems and of the ecosystem services they can provide.[219]
Anational park is a large natural or near natural area set aside to protect large-scale ecological processes, which also provide a foundation for environmentally and culturally compatible, spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities. These areas are selected by governments or private organizations to protect natural biodiversity along with its underlying ecological structure and supporting environmental processes, and to promote education and recreation. TheInternational Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and its World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA), has defined "National Park" as its Category II type of protected areas.[220]
Wildlife sanctuaries are areas of either shelter for animals who are unable to live in the wild on their own, or they are temporary rehabilitation centers for wildlife to improve in their overall health and wellbeing.[221]
Both of these serve as places in which biodiversity can be preserved rather than harmed. According to an article published in theNational Park Service website, national parks aim their resources at maintaining animal and habitat integrity through conservation and preservation of their ecosystems. This along with educating the general public on wildlife functions, the aim for an increase in biodiversity is one of many goals trying to be focused on through national parks.[222]
Percentage of forest in legally protected areas (as of 2020).[76]
Forest protected areas are a subset of all protected areas in which a significant portion of the area is forest.[76] This may be the whole or only a part of the protected area.[76] Globally, 18 percent of the world's forest area, or more than 700 million hectares, fall within legally established protected areas such as national parks, conservation areas and game reserves.[76]
There is an estimated 726 million ha of forest in protected areas worldwide. Of the six major world regions, South America has the highest share of forests in protected areas, 31 percent.[223] Theforests play a vital role in harboring more than 45,000 floral and 81,000 faunal species of which 5150 floral and 1837 faunal species areendemic.[224] In addition, there are 60,065 different tree species in the world.[225] Plant and animal species confined to a specific geographical area are called endemic species.[226]
Inforest reserves, rights to activities like hunting and grazing are sometimes given to communities living on the fringes of the forest, who sustain their livelihood partially or wholly from forest resources or products.
Approximately 50 million hectares (or 24%) of European forest land is protected for biodiversity and landscape protection. Forests allocated for soil, water, and other ecosystem services encompass around 72 million hectares (32% of European forest area).[227][228]
The concept ofnature-positive is playing a role in mainstreaming the goals of theGlobal Biodiversity Framework (GBF) for biodiversity.[231] The aim of mainstreaming is to embed biodiversity considerations into public and private practice toconserve andsustainably use biodiversity on global and local levels.[232] The concept of nature-positive refers to the societal goal to halt and reverse biodiversity loss, measured from a baseline of 2020 levels, and to achieve full so-called "nature recovery" by 2050.[233]
Citizen science, also known as public participation in scientific research, has been widely used in environmental sciences and is particularly popular in a biodiversity-related context. It has been used to enable scientists to involve the general public in biodiversity research, thereby enabling the scientists to collect data that they would otherwise not have been able to obtain.[234]
Volunteer observers have made significant contributions to on-the-ground knowledge about biodiversity, and recent improvements in technology have helped increase the flow and quality of occurrences from citizen sources. A 2016 study published in Biological Conservation[235] registers the massive contributions that citizen scientists already make to data mediated by theGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). Despite some limitations of the dataset-level analysis, it is clear that nearly half of all occurrence records shared through the GBIF network come from datasets with significant volunteer contributions. Recording and sharing observations are enabled by several global-scale platforms, includingiNaturalist andeBird.[236][237]
UN BBNJ (High Seas Treaty) 2023 Intergovernmental conference on an international legally binding instrument under theUNCLOS on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (GA resolution 72/249)
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES);
Global agreements such as theConvention on Biological Diversity, give "sovereign national rights over biological resources" (not property).[238] The agreements commit countries to "conserve biodiversity", "develop resources for sustainability" and "share the benefits" resulting from their use. Biodiverse countries that allowbioprospecting or collection of natural products, expect a share of the benefits rather than allowing the individual or institution that discovers/exploits the resource to capture them privately. Bioprospecting can become a type ofbiopiracy when such principles are not respected.[239]
On the 19 of December 2022, during the2022 United Nations Biodiversity Conference every country on earth, with the exception of theUnited States and theHoly See, signed onto the agreement which includes protecting 30% of land and oceans by 2030 (30 by 30) and 22 other targets intended to reducebiodiversity loss.[216][241][242] The agreement includes also recovering 30% of earth degraded ecosystems and increasing funding for biodiversity issues.[243]
In May 2020, the European Union published its Biodiversity Strategy for 2030. The biodiversity strategy is an essential part of theclimate change mitigation strategy of the European Union. From the 25% of the European budget that will go to fight climate change, large part will go to restore biodiversity[203] andnature based solutions.
Give €20 billion per year to the issue and make it part of the business practice.
Approximately half of the globalGDP depend on nature. In Europe many parts of the economy that generate trillions of euros per year depend on nature. The benefits ofNatura 2000 alone in Europe are €200 – €300 billion per year.[245]
Biodiversity is taken into account in some political and judicial decisions:
The relationship between law and ecosystems is very ancient and has consequences for biodiversity. It is related to private and public property rights. It can define protection for threatened ecosystems, but also some rights and duties (for example,fishing and hunting rights).[citation needed]
Law regarding species is more recent. It defines species that must be protected because they may be threatened by extinction. The U.S.Endangered Species Act is an example of an attempt to address the "law and species" issue.
Laws regarding gene pools are only about a century old.[246] Domestication and plant breeding methods are not new, but advances in genetic engineering have led to tighter laws covering distribution ofgenetically modified organisms, genepatents and process patents.[247] Governments struggle to decide whether to focus on for example, genes, genomes, or organisms and species.[citation needed]
Uniform approval for use of biodiversity as a legal standard has not been achieved, however. Bosselman argues that biodiversity should not be used as a legal standard, claiming that the remaining areas of scientific uncertainty cause unacceptable administrative waste and increase litigation without promoting preservation goals.[248]
India passed theBiological Diversity Act in 2002 for the conservation of biological diversity in India. The Act also provides mechanisms for equitable sharing of benefits from the use of traditional biological resources and knowledge.
1916 – The termbiological diversity was used first byJ. Arthur Harris in "The Variable Desert",Scientific American: "The bare statement that the region contains a flora rich in genera and species and of diverse geographic origin or affinity is entirely inadequate as a description of its real biological diversity."[249]
1967 –Raymond F. Dasmann used the term biological diversity in reference to the richness of living nature that conservationists should protect in his bookA Different Kind of Country.[250][251]
1980 –Thomas Lovejoy introduced the termbiological diversity to the scientific community in a book.[253] It rapidly became commonly used.[254]
1985 – According toEdward O. Wilson, the contracted formbiodiversity was coined by W. G. Rosen: "The National Forum on BioDiversity ... was conceived by Walter G. Rosen ... Dr. Rosen represented the NRC/NAS throughout the planning stages of the project. Furthermore, he introduced the termbiodiversity".[255]
1985 – The term "biodiversity" appears in the article, "A New Plan to Conserve the Earth's Biota" byLaura Tangley.[256]
1988 – The term biodiversity first appeared in publication.
1988 to Present – TheUnited Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on Biological Diversity in began working in November 1988, leading to the publication of the draftConvention on Biological Diversity in May 1992. Since this time, there have been 16 Conferences of the Parties (COPs) to discuss potential global political responses to biodiversity loss. Most recentlyCOP 16 inCali,Colombia in 2024.[259]
^Hawksworth, D. L. (24 July 2012). "Global species numbers of fungi: are tropical studies and molecular approaches contributing to a more robust estimate?".Biodiversity and Conservation.21 (9):2425–2433.Bibcode:2012BiCon..21.2425H.doi:10.1007/s10531-012-0335-x.
^Bautista, Luis M.; Pantoja, Juan Carlos (2005). "What species should we study next?".Bulletin of the British Ecological Society.36 (4):27–28.hdl:10261/43928.
^"Living Planet Index, World". Our World in Data. 13 October 2022.Archived from the original on 8 October 2023.Data source: World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and Zoological Society of London
^Regional data from"How does the Living Planet Index vary by region?". Our World in Data. 13 October 2022.Archived from the original on 20 September 2023.Data source: Living Planet Report (2022). World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and Zoological Society of London. –
^Koh, Lian Pin; Dunn, Robert R.; Sodhi, Navjot S.; Colwell, Robert K.; Proctor, Heather C.; Smith, Vincent S. (10 September 2004). "Species Coextinctions and the Biodiversity Crisis".Science.305 (5690):1632–1634.Bibcode:2004Sci...305.1632K.doi:10.1126/science.1101101.PMID15361627.
^McCallum, Malcolm L. (September 2007). "Amphibian Decline or Extinction? Current Declines Dwarf Background Extinction Rate".Journal of Herpetology.41 (3):483–491.doi:10.1670/0022-1511(2007)41[483:ADOECD]2.0.CO;2.
^Stokstad, Erik (6 May 2019)."Landmark analysis documents the alarming global decline of nature".Science.doi:10.1126/science.aax9287.For the first time at a global scale, the report has ranked the causes of damage. Topping the list, changes in land use—principally agriculture—that have destroyed habitat. Second, hunting and other kinds of exploitation. These are followed by climate change, pollution, and invasive species, which are being spread by trade and other activities. Climate change will likely overtake the other threats in the next decades, the authors note. Driving these threats are the growing human population, which has doubled since 1970 to 7.6 billion, and consumption. (Per capita of use of materials is up 15% over the past 5 decades.)
^Pimm, S. L.; Jenkins, C. N.; Abell, R.; Brooks, T. M.; Gittleman, J. L.; Joppa, L. N.; Raven, P. H.; Roberts, C. M.; Sexton, J. O. (30 May 2014). "The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection".Science.344 (6187).doi:10.1126/science.1246752.PMID24876501.
^Cafaro, Philip; Hansson, Pernilla; Götmark, Frank (August 2022)."Overpopulation is a major cause of biodiversity loss and smaller human populations are necessary to preserve what is left"(PDF).Biological Conservation.272: 109646.Bibcode:2022BCons.27209646C.doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109646.Conservation biologists standardly list five main direct drivers of biodiversity loss: habitat loss, overexploitation of species, pollution, invasive species, and climate change. TheGlobal Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services found that in recent decades habitat loss was the leading cause of terrestrial biodiversity loss, while overexploitation (overfishing) was the most important cause of marine losses (IPBES, 2019). All five direct drivers are important, on land and at sea, and all are made worse by larger and denser human populations.
^Hughes, Alice C.; Tougeron, Kévin; Martin, Dominic A.; Menga, Filippo; Rosado, Bruno H. P.; Villasante, Sebastian; Madgulkar, Shweta; Gonçalves, Fernando; Geneletti, Davide; Diele-Viegas, Luisa Maria; Berger, Sebastian; Colla, Sheila R.; de Andrade Kamimura, Vitor; Caggiano, Holly; Melo, Felipe (1 January 2023)."Smaller human populations are neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for biodiversity conservation".Biological Conservation.277: 109841.Bibcode:2023BCons.27709841H.doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109841.Through examining the drivers of biodiversity loss in highly biodiverse countries, we show that it is not population driving the loss of habitats, but rather the growth of commodities for export, particularly soybean and oil-palm, primarily for livestock feed or biofuel consumption in higher income economies.
^abcCardinale, Bradley J.; Matulich, Kristin L.; Hooper, David U.; Byrnes, Jarrett E.; Duffy, Emmett; Gamfeldt, Lars; Balvanera, Patricia; O'Connor, Mary I.; Gonzalez, Andrew (March 2011). "The functional role of producer diversity in ecosystems".American Journal of Botany.98 (3):572–592.Bibcode:2011AmJB...98..572C.doi:10.3732/ajb.1000364.hdl:2027.42/141994.PMID21613148.
^Mora, Camilo; Robertson, D. Ross (July 2005). "Causes of Latitudinal Gradients in Species Richness: A Test with Fishes of the Tropical Eastern Pacific".Ecology.86 (7):1771–1782.Bibcode:2005Ecol...86.1771M.doi:10.1890/04-0883.
^Bahram, Mohammad; Hildebrand, Falk; Forslund, Sofia K.; Anderson, Jennifer L.; Soudzilovskaia, Nadejda A.; Bodegom, Peter M.; Bengtsson-Palme, Johan; Anslan, Sten; Coelho, Luis Pedro; Harend, Helery; Huerta-Cepas, Jaime; Medema, Marnix H.; Maltz, Mia R.; Mundra, Sunil; Olsson, Pål Axel (August 2018). "Structure and function of the global topsoil microbiome".Nature.560 (7717):233–237.Bibcode:2018Natur.560..233B.doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0386-6.hdl:1887/73861.PMID30069051.
^Cogitore, Clément (1983–....). (January 1988),Hypothesis, National Academy Press,ISBN9780309037396,OCLC968249007{{citation}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
^Tittensor, Derek P.; Mora, Camilo; Jetz, Walter; Lotze, Heike K.; Ricard, Daniel; Berghe, Edward Vanden; Worm, Boris (August 2010). "Global patterns and predictors of marine biodiversity across taxa".Nature.466 (7310):1098–1101.Bibcode:2010Natur.466.1098T.doi:10.1038/nature09329.PMID20668450.
^Galindo-Leal, Carlos (2003).The Atlantic Forest of South America: Biodiversity Status, Threats, and Outlook. Washington: Island Press. p. 35.ISBN978-1-55963-988-0.
^Myers, Norman; Mittermeier, Russell A.; Mittermeier, Cristina G.; da Fonseca, Gustavo A. B.; Kent, Jennifer (February 2000). "Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities".Nature.403 (6772):853–858.Bibcode:2000Natur.403..853M.doi:10.1038/35002501.PMID10706275.
^"Colombia in the World". Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Research on Biological Resources. Archived fromthe original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved30 December 2013.
^abAlroy, J.; Marshall, C. R.; Bambach, R. K.; Bezusko, K.; Foote, M.; Fürsich, F. T.; Hansen, T. A.; Holland, S. M.; Ivany, L. C.; Jablonski, D.; Jacobs, D. K.; Jones, D. C.; Kosnik, M. A.; Lidgard, S.; Low, S.; Miller, A. I.; Novack-Gottshall, P. M.; Olszewski, T. D.; Patzkowsky, M. E.; Raup, D. M.; Roy, K.; Sepkoski, J. J.; Sommers, M. G.; Wagner, P. J.; Webber, A. (22 May 2001)."Effects of sampling standardization on estimates of Phanerozoic marine diversification".Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.98 (11):6261–6266.doi:10.1073/pnas.111144698.PMC33456.PMID11353852.
^Servais, Thomas; Cascales-Miñana, Borja; Harper, David A.T.; Lefebvre, Bertrand; Munnecke, Axel; Wang, Wenhui; Zhang, Yuandong (August 2023). "No (Cambrian) explosion and no (Ordovician) event: A single long-term radiation in the early Palaeozoic".Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology.623: 111592.Bibcode:2023PPP...62311592S.doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2023.111592.
^Sahney, Sarda; Benton, Michael J.; Falcon-Lang, Howard J. (December 2010). "Rainforest collapse triggered Carboniferous tetrapod diversification in Euramerica".Geology.38 (12):1079–1082.Bibcode:2010Geo....38.1079S.doi:10.1130/G31182.1.
^Viglietti, Pia A.; Benson, Roger B. J.; Smith, Roger M. H.; Botha, Jennifer; Kammerer, Christian F.; Skosan, Zaituna; Butler, Elize; Crean, Annelise; Eloff, Bobby; Kaal, Sheena; Mohoi, Joël; Molehe, William; Mtalana, Nolusindiso; Mtungata, Sibusiso; Ntheri, Nthaopa; Ntsala, Thabang; Nyaphuli, John; October, Paul; Skinner, Georgina; Strong, Mike; Stummer, Hedi; Wolvaardt, Frederik P.; Angielczyk, Kenneth D. (27 April 2021)."Evidence from South Africa for a protracted end-Permian extinction on land".Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.118 (17): e2017045118.Bibcode:2021PNAS..11817045V.doi:10.1073/pnas.2017045118.PMC8092562.PMID33875588.
^Kammerer, Christian F.; Viglietti, Pia A.; Butler, Elize; Botha, Jennifer (June 2023). "Rapid turnover of top predators in African terrestrial faunas around the Permian-Triassic mass extinction".Current Biology.33 (11): 2283–2290.e3.Bibcode:2023CBio...33E2283K.doi:10.1016/j.cub.2023.04.007.PMID37220743.
^Schopf, J. William; Kudryavtsev, Anatoliy B.; Czaja, Andrew D.; Tripathi, Abhishek B. (5 October 2007). "Evidence of Archean life: Stromatolites and microfossils".Precambrian Research. Earliest Evidence of Life on Earth.158 (3–4):141–155.Bibcode:2007PreR..158..141S.doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2007.04.009.
^Barry, John C. (1992). "Extinction: Bad genes or bad luck? By David M. Raup. New York: W. W. Norton. 1991. xvii + 210 pp. ISBN 0-393-03008-3. $19.95 (cloth)".American Journal of Physical Anthropology.88 (4):563–564.doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330880410.
^Manhes, Gérard; Allègre, Claude J.; Dupré, Bernard; Hamelin, Bruno (May 1980). "Lead isotope study of basic-ultrabasic layered complexes: Speculations about the age of the earth and primitive mantle characteristics".Earth and Planetary Science Letters.47 (3):370–382.Bibcode:1980E&PSL..47..370M.doi:10.1016/0012-821X(80)90024-2.
^abcdeCardinale, Bradley J.; Duffy, J. Emmett; Gonzalez, Andrew; Hooper, David U.; Perrings, Charles; Venail, Patrick; Narwani, Anita; Mace, Georgina M.; Tilman, David; Wardle, David A.; Kinzig, Ann P.; Daily, Gretchen C.; Loreau, Michel; Grace, James B.; Larigauderie, Anne; Srivastava, Diane S.; Naeem, Shahid (7 June 2012)."Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity"(PDF).Nature.486 (7401):59–67.Bibcode:2012Natur.486...59C.doi:10.1038/nature11148.PMID22678280.
^Daniel, Terry C.; Muhar, Andreas; Arnberger, Arne; Aznar, Olivier; Boyd, James W.; Chan, Kai M. A.; Costanza, Robert; Elmqvist, Thomas; Flint, Courtney G.; Gobster, Paul H.; Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne; Lave, Rebecca; Muhar, Susanne; Penker, Marianne; Ribe, Robert G.; Schauppenlehner, Thomas; Sikor, Thomas; Soloviy, Ihor; Spierenburg, Marja; Taczanowska, Karolina; Tam, Jordan; von der Dunk, Andreas (5 June 2012)."Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda".Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.109 (23):8812–8819.Bibcode:2012PNAS..109.8812D.doi:10.1073/pnas.1114773109.PMC3384142.PMID22615401.
^Kiaer, Lars P.; Skovgaard, M.; Østergård, Hanne (1 December 2009). "Grain yield increase in cereal variety mixtures: A meta-analysis of field trials".Field Crops Research.114 (3):361–373.Bibcode:2009FCrRe.114..361K.doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2009.09.006.
^Philpott, Stacy M.; Soong, Oliver; Lowenstein, Jacob H.; Pulido, Astrid Luz; Lopez, Diego Tobar (1 October 2009). "Functional richness and ecosystem services: bird predation on arthropods in tropical agroecosystems".Ecological Applications.19 (7). Flynn, Dan F. B.; DeClerck, Fabrice:1858–1867.Bibcode:2009EcoAp..19.1858P.doi:10.1890/08-1928.1.PMID19831075.
^Bael, Sunshine A. Van; Philpott, Stacy M.; Greenberg, Russell; Bichier, Peter; Barber, Nicholas A.; Mooney, Kailen A.; Gruner, Daniel S. (April 2008). "Birds as Predators in Tropical Agroforestry Systems".Ecology.89 (4):928–934.Bibcode:2008Ecol...89..928V.doi:10.1890/06-1976.1.hdl:1903/7873.PMID18481517.
^Vance-Chalcraft, Heather D.; Rosenheim, Jay A.; Vonesh, James R.; Osenberg, Craig W.; Sih, Andrew (November 2007). "The Influence of Intraguild Predation on Prey Suppression and Prey Release: A Meta-Analysis".Ecology.88 (11):2689–2696.Bibcode:2007Ecol...88.2689V.doi:10.1890/06-1869.1.PMID18051635.
^Mendelsohn, Robert; Balick, Michael J. (April 1995). "The value of undiscovered pharmaceuticals in tropical forests".Economic Botany.49 (2):223–228.Bibcode:1995EcBot..49..223M.doi:10.1007/BF02862929.
^Jain, Roopesh; Sonawane, Shailendra; Mandrekar, Noopur (2008). "Marine organisms: Potential source for drug discovery".Current Science.94 (3): 292.JSTOR24100323.
^Dhillion, Shivcharn S.; Svarstad, Hanne; Amundsen, Cathrine; Bugge, Hans Chr. (2002). "Bioprospecting: Effects on Environment and Development".Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment.31 (6):491–493.doi:10.1639/0044-7447(2002)031[0491:beoead]2.0.co;2.PMID12436849.
^Chakraborty, Jaya; Palit, Krishna; Das, Surajit (2022). "Metagenomic approaches to study the culture-independent bacterial diversity of a polluted environment—a case study on north-eastern coast of Bay of Bengal, India".Microbial Biodegradation and Bioremediation. pp. 81–107.doi:10.1016/B978-0-323-85455-9.00014-X.ISBN978-0-323-85455-9.
^Thomas, J. A.; Telfer, M. G.; Roy, D. B.; Preston, C. D.; Greenwood, J. J. D.; Asher, J.; Fox, R.; Clarke, R. T.; Lawton, J. H. (19 March 2004). "Comparative Losses of British Butterflies, Birds, and Plants and the Global Extinction Crisis".Science.303 (5665):1879–1881.Bibcode:2004Sci...303.1879T.doi:10.1126/science.1095046.PMID15031508.
^Sax, Dov F.; Gaines, Steven D.; Brown, James H. (1 December 2002). "Species Invasions Exceed Extinctions on Islands Worldwide: A Comparative Study of Plants and Birds".The American Naturalist.160 (6):766–783.Bibcode:2002ANat..160..766S.doi:10.1086/343877.PMID18707464.
^Jude, David (1995). Munawar, M. (ed.).The lake Huron ecosystem: ecology, fisheries and management. Amsterdam: S.P.B. Academic Publishing.ISBN978-90-5103-117-1.
^Higgins, Steven I.; Richardson, David M. (1998). "Pine invasions in the southern hemisphere: Modelling interactions between organism, environment and disturbance".Plant Ecology.135 (1):79–93.Bibcode:1998PlEco.135...79H.doi:10.1023/a:1009760512895.
^Potts, Bradley Michael; Barbour, Robert C.; Hingston, Andrew B. (2001).Genetic Pollution from Farm Forestry Using Eucalypt Species and Hydrids: A Report for the RIRDC/L & WA/FWPRDC Joint Venture Agroforestry Program. RIRDC.ISBN978-0-642-58336-9.[page needed]
^Example: Gascon, C., Collins, J. P., Moore, R. D., Church, D. R., McKay, J. E. and Mendelson, J. R. III (eds) (2007).Amphibian Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Amphibian Specialist Group. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 64pp.Amphibians.orgArchived 4 July 2007 at theWayback Machine, see alsoMillenniumassessment.org,Europa.euArchived 12 February 2009 at theWayback Machine
^Luck, Gary W.; Daily, Gretchen C.; Ehrlich, Paul R. (July 2003). "Population diversity and ecosystem services".Trends in Ecology & Evolution.18 (7):331–336.doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00100-9.
^Allan, James R.; Possingham, Hugh P.; Atkinson, Scott C.; Waldron, Anthony; Di Marco, Moreno; Butchart, Stuart H. M.; Adams, Vanessa M.; Kissling, W. Daniel; Worsdell, Thomas; Sandbrook, Chris; Gibbon, Gwili; Kumar, Kundan; Mehta, Piyush; Maron, Martine; Williams, Brooke A.; Jones, Kendall R.; Wintle, Brendan A.; Reside, April E.; Watson, James E. M. (3 June 2022). "The minimum land area requiring conservation attention to safeguard biodiversity".Science.376 (6597):1094–1101.Bibcode:2022Sci...376.1094A.doi:10.1126/science.abl9127.hdl:11573/1640006.PMID35653463.
^Beech, E.; Rivers, M.; Oldfield, S.; Smith, P. P. (4 July 2017). "GlobalTreeSearch: The first complete global database of tree species and country distributions".Journal of Sustainable Forestry.36 (5):454–489.Bibcode:2017JSusF..36..454B.doi:10.1080/10549811.2017.1310049.
^Booth, Hollie; Milner-Gulland, E.J.; McCormick, Nadine; Starkey, Malcolm (July 2024). "Operationalizing transformative change for business in the context of Nature Positive".One Earth.7 (7):1235–1249.doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2024.06.003.
^Milner-Gulland, E.J.; Addison, Prue; Arlidge, William N.S.; Baker, Julia; Booth, Hollie; Brooks, Thomas; Bull, Joseph W.; Burgass, Michael J.; Ekstrom, Jon; zu Ermgassen, Sophus O.S.E.; Fleming, L. Vincent; Grub, Henry M.J.; von Hase, Amrei; Hoffmann, Michael; Hutton, Jonathan; Juffe-Bignoli, Diego; ten Kate, Kerry; Kiesecker, Joseph; Kümpel, Noëlle F.; Maron, Martine; Newing, Helen S.; Ole-Moiyoi, Katrina; Sinclair, Cheli; Sinclair, Sam; Starkey, Malcolm; Stuart, Simon N.; Tayleur, Cath; Watson, James E.M. (January 2021). "Four steps for the Earth: mainstreaming the post-2020 global biodiversity framework".One Earth.4 (1):75–87.Bibcode:2021OEart...4...75M.doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2020.12.011.
^"Home".Convention on Biological Diversity. Retrieved13 April 2025.
^Shiva, Vandana (January 2007). "Bioprospecting as Sophisticated Biopiracy".Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society.32 (2):307–313.doi:10.1086/508502.
^Einhorn, Catrin (19 December 2022)."Nearly Every Country Signs On to a Sweeping Deal to Protect Nature".The New York Times. Retrieved27 December 2022.The United States is just one of two countries in the world that are not party to the Convention on Biological Diversity, largely because Republicans, who are typically opposed to joining treaties, have blocked United States membership. That means the American delegation was required to participate from the sidelines. (The only other country that has not joined the treaty is the Holy See.)
^Terbogh, John (1974). "The Preservation of Natural Diversity: The Problem of Extinction Prone Species".BioScience.24 (12):715–722.doi:10.2307/1297090.JSTOR1297090.
^Soulé, Michael E.; Wilcox, Bruce A. (1980).Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective. Sunder*land, Mass: Sinauer Associates.ISBN978-0-87893-800-1.
_relative_to_baseline_-_fcosc-01-615419-g001.jpg)
.jpg)
