Threshold responses of Amazonian stream fishes to timing and extent of deforestation.

Deforestation is a primary driver of biodiversity change through habitat loss and fragmentation. Stream biodiversity may not respond to deforestation in a simple linear relationship. Rather, threshold responses to extent and timing of deforestation may occur. Identification of critical deforestation thresholds is needed for effective conservation and management. We tested for threshold responses of fish species and functional groups to degree of watershed and riparian zone deforestation and time since impact in 75 streams in the western Brazilian Amazon. We used remote sensing to assess deforestation from 1984 to 2011. Fish assemblages were sampled with seines and dip nets in a standardized manner. Fish species (n = 84) were classified into 20 functional groups based on ecomorphological traits associated with habitat use, feeding, and locomotion. Threshold responses were quantified using threshold indicator taxa analysis. Negative threshold responses to deforestation were common and consistently occurred at very low levels of deforestation (<20%) and soon after impact (<10 years). Sensitive species were functionally unique and associated with complex habitats and structures of allochthonous origin found in forested watersheds. Positive threshold responses of species were less common and generally occurred at >70% deforestation and >10 years after impact. Findings were similar at the community level for both taxonomic and functional analyses. Because most negative threshold responses occurred at low levels of deforestation and soon after impact, even minimal change is expected to negatively affect biodiversity. Delayed positive threshold responses to extreme deforestation by a few species do not offset the loss of sensitive taxa and likely contribute to biotic homogenization.

Waiting can be an optimal conservation strategy, even in a crisis discipline.

Biodiversity conservation projects confront immediate and escalating threats with limited funding. Conservation theory suggests that the best response to the species extinction crisis is to spend money as soon as it becomes available, and this is often an explicit constraint placed on funding. We use a general dynamic model of a conservation landscape to show that this decision to "front-load" project spending can be suboptimal if a delay allows managers to use resources more strategically. Our model demonstrates the existence of temporal efficiencies in conservation management, which parallel the spatial efficiencies identified by systematic conservation planning. The optimal timing of decisions balances the rate of biodiversity decline (e.g., the relaxation of extinction debts, or the progress of climate change) against the rate at which spending appreciates in value (e.g., through interest, learning, or capacity building). We contrast the benefits of acting and waiting in two ecosystems where restoration can mitigate forest bird extinction debts: South Australia's Mount Lofty Ranges and Paraguay's Atlantic Forest. In both cases, conservation outcomes cannot be maximized by front-loading spending, and the optimal solution recommends substantial delays before managers undertake conservation actions. Surprisingly, these delays allow superior conservation benefits to be achieved, in less time than front-loading. Our analyses provide an intuitive and mechanistic rationale for strategic delay, which contrasts with the orthodoxy of front-loaded spending for conservation actions. Our results illustrate the conservation efficiencies that could be achieved if decision makers choose when to spend their limited resources, as opposed to just where to spend them.

The Environmental Legacy of Modern Tropical Deforestation.

Tropical deforestation has caused a significant share of carbon emissions and species losses, but historical patterns have rarely been explicitly considered when estimating these impacts [1]. A deforestation event today leads to a time-delayed future release of carbon, from the eventual decay either of forest products or of slash left at the site [2]. Similarly, deforestation often does not result in the immediate loss of species, and communities may exhibit a process of "relaxation" to their new equilibrium over time [3]. We used a spatially explicit land cover change model [4] to reconstruct the annual rates and spatial patterns of tropical deforestation that occurred between 1950 and 2009 in the Amazon, in the Congo Basin, and across Southeast Asia. Using these patterns, we estimated the resulting gross vegetation carbon emissions [2, 5] and species losses over time [6]. Importantly, we accounted for the time lags inherent in both the release of carbon and the extinction of species. We show that even if deforestation had completely halted in 2010, time lags ensured there would still be a carbon emissions debt of at least 8.6 petagrams, equivalent to 5-10 years of global deforestation, and an extinction debt of more than 140 bird, mammal, and amphibian forest-specific species, which if paid, would increase the number of 20(th)-century extinctions in these groups by 120%. Given the magnitude of these debts, commitments to reduce emissions and biodiversity loss are unlikely to be realized without specific actions that directly address this damaging environmental legacy.