Biology subjects

Rivers, M.

Publications and source records attributed to Rivers, M..

4 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2026

Identifying and ranking species that need urgent management action to achieve Target 4 of the Global Biodiversity Framework

Target 4 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) calls for urgent management actions to halt humaninduced extinctions and enable species recovery. However, most Parties face substantial challenges in determining which species require urgent management actions. Here, we present a transparent, standardised protocol that identifies and ranks species most likely to need urgent management actions at the national level, using globally available data from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. The protocol integrates four criteria aligned with Target 4: global extinction risk, rate of decline, population or range restriction, and endemism, to generate a national ranked list of species. Species scoring highly on these four criteria, and therefore most in need of urgent management action, are ranked most highly. We applied this method to all 250 countries and territories listed in the IUCN Red List and pilottested national rankings with participants from eight diverse countries. Across pilots, participants reported that the ranked lists were scientifically robust, timesaving, and valuable starting points for national prioritysetting, while stating the importance of national context, and the need for additional technical and financial support for implementation. Our results demonstrate that a sciencebased approach can meaningfully support Parties in identifying species requiring urgent action under Target 4, in a standardised way. With 2030 approaching rapidly, this protocol provides an immediate, practical tool to accelerate progress toward halting extinctions and advancing species recovery.

ecology↗

bioRxiv2025

300 billion years of angiosperm evolution at risk of extinction

Extinction results in not only loss of species, but also loss of the unique evolutionary history that they represent and the irreplaceable features they exhibit. There is broad consensus regarding the necessity to optimise the preservation of the tree of life by including evolutionary information in conservation prioritisation, a notion also endorsed by major policy frameworks1-4. However, evolutionarily-informed prioritisations are lacking for most plants, resulting in a taxonomic imbalance in the evolutionary information incorporated in global biodiversity analyses, which has undermined conservation for decades. Here, we use comprehensive species-level phylogenetic trees, and extinction risk estimates, to generate the first global assessment of angiosperm evolutionary history at risk, and to identify phylogenetically-informed conservation priorities for the worlds flowering plants. We estimate that more than one fifth of angiosperm evolutionary history is at risk of extinction in the short term. Using the Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered5,6 approach, we identify 9,945 threatened plant species that disproportionately account for total evolutionary history at risk. Species and area prioritisations incorporating evolutionary history are urgently needed to correct imbalances between plants and animals, monitor the effectiveness of conservation efforts, and optimise conservation resource allocation in the face of increasing human pressures on Earths biodiversity.

evolutionary biology↗

bioRxiv2020

Areas of global importance for terrestrial biodiversity, carbon, and water

Summary paragraphTo meet the ambitious objectives of biodiversity and climate conventions, countries and the international community require clarity on how these objectives can be operationalized spatially, and multiple targets be pursued concurrently1. To support governments and political conventions, spatial guidance is needed to identify which areas should be managed for conservation to generate the greatest synergies between biodiversity and natures contribution to people (NCP). Here we present results from a joint optimization that maximizes improvements in species conservation status, carbon retention and water provisioning and rank terrestrial conservation priorities globally. We found that, selecting the top-ranked 30% (respectively 50%) of areas would conserve 62.4% (86.8%) of the estimated total carbon stock and 67.8% (90.7%) of all clean water provisioning, in addition to improving the conservation status for 69.7% (83.8%) of all species considered. If priority was given to biodiversity only, managing 30% of optimally located land area for conservation may be sufficient to improve the conservation status of 86.3% of plant and vertebrate species on Earth. Our results provide a global baseline on where land could be managed for conservation. We discuss how such a spatial prioritisation framework can support the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions.

ecology↗

bioRxiv2020

Global shortfalls in extinction risk assessments for endemic flora

The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) ambitiously calls for an assessment of extinction risk for all recognised plant taxa by 20201. It is now clear that this target will not be met in the short-term; only 21-26% of known plant species have been assessed2 - a monumental shortfall in anticipated knowledge. Yet the need for risk assessments has never been more urgent. Plants are rapidly going extinct3,4 and face threats such as climate change5 and permanent deforestation6. Extinction risk assessments continue to provide the critical foundation to inform protection, management and recovery of plant species7,8, the loss of which will have clear consequences for maintaining planetary systems and human well-being9. Here, we rank countries of the world based on progress towards assessing the extinction risk to their endemic flora. Overall, 67% of country-based endemic species do not have an extinction risk assessment completed (143,294 species). We show that some of the worlds wealthiest nations, which also have relatively strong species protections, are failing to protect their unique flora by not systematically assessing risks to their endemic species.

ecology↗