Has land use pushed terrestrial biodiversity beyond the planetary boundary? A global assessment
Tim Newbold,Lawrence N Hudson,Andrew P Arnell,Sara Contu,Adriana De Palma,Simon Ferrier,Samantha L L Hill,Andrew J Hoskins,Igor Lysenko,Helen R P Phillips,Victoria J Burton,Charlotte W T Chng,Susan Emerson,Di Gao,Gwilym Pask-Hale,Jon Hutton,Martin Jung,Katia Sanchez-Ortiz,Benno I Simmons,Sarah Whitmee,Hanbin Zhang,Jörn P W Scharlemann,Andy Purvis,Lawrence N. Hudson,Andrew P. Arnell,Samantha L. L. Hill,Andrew J. Hoskins,Helen R. P. Phillips,Victoria J. Burton,Charlotte W. T. Chng,Benno I. Simmons,Jörn P. W. Scharlemann
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf2201
IF: 56.9
2016-07-15
Science
Abstract:Crossing “safe” limits for biodiversity loss The planetary boundaries framework attempts to set limits for biodiversity loss within which ecological function is relatively unaffected. Newbold et al. present a quantitative global analysis of the extent to which the proposed planetary boundary has been crossed (see the Perspective by Oliver). Using over 2 million records for nearly 40,000 terrestrial species, they modeled the response of biodiversity to land use and related pressures and then estimated, at a spatial resolution of ∼1 km 2 , the extent and spatial patterns of changes in local biodiversity. Across 65% of the terrestrial surface, land use and related pressures have caused biotic intactness to decline beyond 10%, the proposed “safe” planetary boundary. Changes have been most pronounced in grassland biomes and biodiversity hotspots. Science , this issue p. 288 ; see also p. 220
multidisciplinary sciences