A model for determining ex situ conservation priorities in big genera is provided by analysis of the subgenera of Rhododendron (Ericaceae)

作者: Marion MacKay , Susan E. Gardiner

DOI: 10.1007/S10531-016-1237-0

关键词: BiologyData deficientBiodiversityEricaceaeEcologySubgenusTaxonomy (biology)TaxonEx situ conservationIUCN Red ListEcology (disciplines)Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and SystematicsNature and Landscape Conservation

摘要: The large size and complex taxonomy of big genera complicates decision making for conservation. We propose that Rhododendron, comprising some 1215 taxa, divided into nine subgenera many sections, can be used as a model other genera. Although Red List assessments placed 715 taxa in threat category, or listed them Data Deficient, moreover Target 8 the Global Strategy Plant Conservation requires 75 % to held ex situ collections by 2020, date there have been few studies Rhododendron conservation priorities. Utilising subgenus structure framework examining priorities, we analysed determined Vireya Hymenanthes most acute issues. Examination cultivation shows 844 (70 %) are cultivation, with varying from 45 100 %. Of 400 (56 %) 28 72 %. Subgenera Azaleastrum poorest representation should precedence As no reaches requirement 8, further planning is needed Rhododendron. After combining two analyses, priorities ordered (i) Vireya, (ii) (iii) Hymenanthes. Finally, five actions summarise our approach

参考文章(47)
G. Argent, K.S. Walter, R. Hyam, D. Chamberlain, G. Fairweather, The genus Rhododendron: its classification and synonymy. The genus Rhododendron: its classification and synonymy.. ,(1996)
S. Gardiner, M. MacKay, G. Smith, S. Oldfield, A. Fayaz, C. Wiedow, Meeting Target Eight: Rhododendron subgenus Vireya in New Zealand as an example of ex situ conservation. Addressing global change: a new agenda for botanic gardens. Fourth Global Botanic Gardens Congress, Dublin, Irish Republic, 13-18 June 2010. pp. 1- 14 ,(2010)
D. F. Chamberlain, M. McFarlane, G. Argent, Rhododendrons in the wild: a taxonomist's view. Rhododendrons in horticulture and science. Papers presented at the International Rhododendron Conference, Edinburgh, UK on 17-19 May, 2002.. pp. 42- 52 ,(2003)
G. Argent, Douglas Gibbs, David Chamberlain, The red list of rhododendrons. The red list of rhododendrons.. ,(2011)
A. Arunachalam, K. Arunachalam, Ashish Paul, M. L. Khan, Biodiversity and conservation of rhododendrons in Arunachal Pradesh in the Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot Current Science. ,vol. 89, pp. 623- 634 ,(2005)
RICHARD A. ENNOS, RAJ WHITLOCK, MICHAEL F. FAY, BARBARA JONES, LINDA E. NEAVES, ROBIN PAYNE, IAN TAYLOR, NATASHA DE VERE, PETER M. HOLLINGSWORTH, Process-Based Species Action Plans: an approach to conserve contemporary evolutionary processes that sustain diversity in taxonomically complex groups Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. ,vol. 168, pp. 194- 203 ,(2012) , 10.1111/J.1095-8339.2011.01206.X
Mike Maunder, Sarah Higgens, Alastair Culham, The effectiveness of botanic garden collections in supporting plant conservation: a European case study Biodiversity and Conservation. ,vol. 10, pp. 383- 401 ,(2001) , 10.1023/A:1016666526878
Wan YongQing, Zhang Li, Zhou LanYing, Genetic diversity and relationship of 43 Rhododendron sp. based on RAPD analysis. Botany Research Journal. ,vol. 2, pp. 1- 6 ,(2009)
STEPHEN BLACKMORE, MARY GIBBY, DAVID RAE, Strengthening the scientific contribution of botanic gardens to the second phase of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. ,vol. 166, pp. 267- 281 ,(2011) , 10.1111/J.1095-8339.2011.01156.X
David G. Frodin, History and Concepts of Big Plant Genera Taxon. ,vol. 53, pp. 753- 776 ,(2004) , 10.2307/4135449