Research ArticleAPPLIED ECOLOGY

Identifying global centers of unsustainable commercial harvesting of species

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  03 Apr 2019:
Vol. 5, no. 4, eaau2879
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aau2879
  • Fig. 1 Vulnerability of global conservation priority areas to unsustainable commercial harvesting.

    Different colors correspond to high (red, 33% upper tertile), medium (green, 33% medium tertile), and low (blue, 33% lower tertile) intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting. Different hues correspond to different priorities for the conservation of species threatened by unsustainable commercial harvesting (top 5, 10, and 20% of the landscape or seascape).

  • Fig. 2 Species representation in global conservation priority areas under high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.

    Box-and-whisker plots show representation of species threatened by unsustainable harvesting and are grouped by (A) IUCN Red List category and (B) taxonomic group. NT, Near Threatened; VU, Vulnerable; EN, Endangered; CE, Critically Endangered. In (B), from left, the images are for amphibians, birds, cartilaginous fishes (sharks and rays), mammals, bony fishes, invertebrates, plants, and reptiles. Colors for each taxonomic group match those in fig. S1, where the number of species for each taxonomic group is also reported.

  • Fig. 3 Average representation for 4543 species threatened by unsustainable commercial harvesting at each percentage of the seascape and landscape.

    Curves quantify the proportion of the species’ ranges represented at each percentage of the seascape (A) and landscape (B) under different scenarios. “Baseline” curves show representation when only species range maps were included in the analysis. “Lower pressure” is for the scenario in which maps of accessibility and fisheries catch were additionally included in the analysis as cost layers to implement avoidance of areas with high-threat intensity. “More stable” curves are for analysis in which the Fragile State Index was included as a cost layer to implement avoidance of areas where the rule of law is lowest. The red dashed vertical line shows species representation at the top 20% ranked areas. Yellow and orange dashed lines show the percentage of landscape and seascape needed to achieve same species representation as in the baseline scenario under the lower pressure and more stable scenarios, respectively. Black numbers report the percentage of landscape and seascape needed to achieve such representation. Red, yellow, and orange numbers show mean species representation within the top 20% ranking areas under the baseline, lower pressure, and more stable scenarios, respectively.

Supplementary Materials

  • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/5/4/eaau2879/DC1

    Fig. S1. Flowchart of the analysis.

    Fig. S2. Pie chart showing the number of species per taxonomic group included in the analysis.

    Fig. S3. Percentage of each continent and sea in global conservation priority areas under high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.

    Fig. S4. Global conservation priority areas (for taxonomic groups) under high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.

    Fig. S5. Vulnerability of global priority areas for the conservation of species threatened by each type of unsustainable harvesting.

    Fig. S6. Robustness of identified global priority areas for the conservation of species threatened by unsustainable commercial harvesting to spatial resolutions.

    Fig. S7. Histogram of range sizes of species included in the analysis, with a bin size of 10,000 km2.

    Fig. S8. Protected areas found in global conservation priority areas under high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.

    Table S1. Percentage area overlap between global priority areas for the conservation of species threatened by each type of unsustainable harvesting.

    Table S2. Species representation in global conservation priority areas under low, medium, and high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.

  • Supplementary Materials

    This PDF file includes:

    • Fig. S1. Flowchart of the analysis.
    • Fig. S2. Pie chart showing the number of species per taxonomic group included in the analysis.
    • Fig. S3. Percentage of each continent and sea in global conservation priority areas under high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.
    • Fig. S4. Global conservation priority areas (for taxonomic groups) under high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.
    • Fig. S5. Vulnerability of global priority areas for the conservation of species threatened by each type of unsustainable harvesting.
    • Fig. S6. Robustness of identified global priority areas for the conservation of species threatened by unsustainable commercial harvesting to spatial resolutions.
    • Fig. S7. Histogram of range sizes of species included in the analysis, with a bin size of 10,000 km2.
    • Fig. S8. Protected areas found in global conservation priority areas under high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.
    • Table S1. Percentage area overlap between global priority areas for the conservation of species threatened by each type of unsustainable harvesting.
    • Table S2. Species representation in global conservation priority areas under low, medium, and high intensity of unsustainable commercial harvesting.

    Download PDF

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Navigate This Article