ArticleScientific reports2021
Protected area networks do not represent unseen biodiversity.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Towards evidence-based conservation of subterranean ecosystems.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Freshwater Conservation Priority Areas Are Threatened by Global Mining Activities.Global change biology · 2026Article
- Current protected areas provide limited benefits for European river biodiversity.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Evaluating protected areas' coverage of threats to terrestrial biodiversity.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- The scorpions of the Estación de Biología Chamela, Jalisco, Mexico with the description of a new species ofZooKeys · 2025Article
- Article
- Microreserves are an important tool for amphibian conservation.Communications biology · 2024Review
- Climate change as a driver of insect invasions: Dispersal patterns of a dragonfly species colonizing a new region.PloS one · 2023Article
- Small but visible: Predicting rare bryophyte distribution and richness patterns using remote sensing-based ensembles of small models.PloS one · 2022Article
- Systematic prioritization protocol applied to wolverine habitat connectivity.STAR protocols · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most existing protected area networks are biased to protect charismatic species or landscapes. We hypothesized that conservation networks designed to include unseen biodiversity-species rich groups that consist of inconspicuous taxa, or groups affected by knowledge gaps-are more efficient than networks that ignore these groups. To test this hypothesis, we generated species distribution models for 3006 arthropod species to determine which were represented in three networks of different sizes and biogeographic origin. We assessed the efficiency of each network using spatial prioritization to measure its completeness, the increment needed to achieve conservation targets, and its specificity, the extent to which proposed priority areas to maximize unseen biodiversity overlap with existing networks. We found that the representativeness of unseen biodiversity in the studied protected areas, or extrinsic representativeness, is low, with ~ 40% of the analyzed unseen biodiversity species being unprotected. We also found that existing networks should be expanded ~ 26% to 46% of their current area to complete targets, and that existing networks do not efficiently conserve the unseen biodiversity given their low specificity (as low as 8.8%) unseen biodiversity. We conclude that information on unseen biodiversity must be included in systematic conservation planning approaches to design more efficient and ecologically representative protected areas.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.