Wetland prioritization changes when managers optimize for complementary biodiversity—not just the rarest species
WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS
A Conservation Science and Practice study compared counts of at-risk vascular plants with four other community metrics across wetlands in an Illinois preserve network. Using complementarity, the authors identified a high-value group of sites and alternative groupings that together capture biodiversity assets that may not appear when each wetland is ranked only by the number of rare species it contains.
WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ
This is a portfolio-design problem. If every site is judged independently, managers can repeatedly select places that protect the same biodiversity features while overlooking sites that add something unique to the network. Complementarity makes the conservation question ‘what does this site add?’ rather than only ‘how rare is what is here?’
CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY
The approach was demonstrated with vascular-plant surveys in one preserve network. Prioritization still depends on survey quality, the chosen metrics, management feasibility and whether other taxa show similar complementarity patterns.
SOURCE
Conservation Science and Practice
View original evidence ↗
Illinois preserve-network data show that combining at-risk species with broader plant-community metrics can identify groups of wetlands whose collective biodiversity value is missed by rarity-only ranking.
Read the Wild Lands assessment →