02404nas a2200217   4500008004100000022001400041245011100055210006900166260003500235300001600270490000700286520169800293653001501991653001702006653001502023100002702038700001702065700002502082700002402107856005502131       2007                        eng d  a0888-889200aReliability of a Higher-Taxon Approach to Richness, Rarity, and Composition Assessments at the Local Scale0 aReliability of a HigherTaxon Approach to Richness Rarity and Com  bBlackwell PublishingcDecember  a1506–15150 v213 aA promising shortcut for quantifying species patterns is to use genera and families as surrogates of species. At large spatial scales, concurrence between patterns of richness, rarity, and composition of species and higher taxa is generally high. Only a few researchers, however, have examined this relationship at the local scale, which is frequently the relevant scale in land-use conflicts. We investigated the reliability of the higher-taxon approach in assessing patterns of species richness, rarity, and composition at the local scale. We studied diversity patterns of three commonly used surrogate taxa: vascular plants, ground-dwelling beetles, and moths. We conducted year-round field surveys for these taxa in the Jerusalem Mountains and the Judean foothills, Israel. Richness and composition of species were highly correlated with richness and composition of genera for all taxa. At the family level, correlations with richness and composition of species were much lower. Excluding monotypic genera and families did not affect these relations. Rarity representation based on higher taxa varied considerably depending on the taxon, and rarity scale and was weaker compared with richness and composition representation. Cumulative richness curves of species and genera showed similar patterns, leveling off at equivalent sampling efforts. Genus-level assessments were a reliable surrogate for local patterns of species richness, rarity, and composition, but family-level assessments performed poorly. The advantage of using coarse taxonomic scales in local diversity surveys is that it may decrease identification time and the need for experts, but it will not reduce sampling effort.10aassessment10aconservation10amonitoring1 aMandelik, Y., A. E. L.1 aDayan, Tamar1 aChikatunov, Vladimir1 aKravchenko, Vasiliy  uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00823.x00578nas a2200181   4500008004100000022001400041245007200055210006900127260003300196300001600229490000700245653001700252653000800269100002700277700001700304700002000321856005500341       2005                        eng d  a0888-889200aPlanning for Biodiversity: the Role of Ecological Impact Assessment0 aPlanning for Biodiversity the Role of Ecological Impact Assessme  bBlackwell PublishingcAugust  a1254–12610 v1910aconservation10aeia1 aMandelik, Y., A. E. L.1 aDayan, Tamar1 aFeitelson, Eran  uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00079.x00532nas a2200169   4500008004100000022001400041245006400055210006400119260003100183300001400214490000700228653001700235653001700252653001500269100002300284856005500307       2006                        eng d  a0888-889200aCommon Ground between Anthropology and Conservation Biology0 aCommon Ground between Anthropology and Conservation Biology  bBlackwell PublishingcJune  a683–6850 v2010aanthropology10aconservation10alandrights1 aBrosius, Peter, J.  uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00463.x05280nas a2200421   4500008004100000022001400041245006800055210006700123260026000190300001400450490000700464520390400471653001704375653001804392653001504410653001504425653001004440100002404450700002204474700002004496700001704516700001704533700001704550700002104567700001804588700001704606700002004623700001404643700001504657700001704672700001804689700002004707700001804727700001904745700002304764700001604787856005504803       2009                        eng d  a1523-173900aAdvantages of Volunteer-Based Biodiversity Monitoring in Europe0 aAdvantages of VolunteerBased Biodiversity Monitoring in Europe  aStation d'Ecologie Exprimentale du CNRS Moulis, 09200 Saint Girons, France; UFZ Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Conservation Biology, Permoserstrasse 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany; UMR 5173 & UMR 7179 MNHN-CNRS-UPMC, Musum National  a307–3160 v233 aWithout robust and unbiased systems for monitoring, changes in natural systems will remain enigmatic for policy makers, leaving them without a clear idea of the consequences of any environmental policies they might adopt. Generally, biodiversity-monitoring activities are not integrated or evaluated across any large geographic region. The EuMon project conducted the first large-scale evaluation of monitoring practices in Europe through an on-line questionnaire and is reporting on the results of this survey. In September 2007 the EuMon project had documented 395 monitoring schemes for species, which represents a total annual cost of about 20AC4 million, involving more than 46,000 persons devoting over 148,000 person-days/year to biodiversity-monitoring activities. Here we focused on the analysis of variations of monitoring practices across a set of taxonomic groups (birds, amphibians and reptiles, mammals, butterflies, plants, and other insects) and across 5 European countries (France, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania, and Poland). Our results suggest that the overall sampling effort of a scheme is linked with the proportion of volunteers involved in that scheme. Because precision is a function of the number of monitored sites and the number of sites is maximized by volunteer involvement, our results do not support the common belief that volunteer-based schemes are too noisy to be informative. Just the opposite, we believe volunteer-based schemes provide relatively reliable data, with state-of-the-art survey designs or data-analysis methods, and consequently can yield unbiased results. Quality of data collected by volunteers is more likely determined by survey design, analytical methodology, and communication skills within the schemes rather than by volunteer involvement per se. Sin sistemas de monitoreo robustos y objetivos, los cambios en los sistemas naturales seguirán siendo un enigma para los pol\'ıticos, ya que no tendrán una idea clara de las consecuencias de las pol\'ıticas ambientales que puedan adoptar. Generalmente, las actividades de monitoreo de la biodiversidad no están integradas o evaluadas en ninguna región geográfica extensa. El proyecto EuMon llevó a cabo la primera evaluación a gran escala de las prácticas de monitoreo en Europa por medio de un cuestionario en l\'ınea y presenta los resultados de este muestreo. En septiembre 2007, el proyecto EuMon hab\'ıa documentado 395 esquemas de monitoreo de especies, lo que representa un costo anual total de casi 20AC4 millones, y la participación de más de 46,000 personas que dedican más de 148,000 personas d\'ıas/año en actividades de monitoreo de la biodiversidad. Aqu\'ı, nos centramos en el análisis de variaciones en las prácticas de monitoreo de un conjunto de grupos taxonómicos (aves, anfibios y reptiles, mam\'ıferos, mariposas, plantas y otros insectos) en cinco pa\'ıses europeos (Francia, Alemania, Hungr\'ıa, Lituania y Polonia). Nuestros resultados sugieren que el esfuerzo de muestreo total de un esquema está vinculado con la proporción de voluntarios que participan en el ese esquema. Debido a que la precisión es una función del número de sitios monitoreados y el número de sitios es maximizado por la participación de voluntarios, nuestros resultados no soportan la creencia popular de que los esquemas basados en voluntarios tienen demasiado ruido para ser informativos. Al contrario, consideramos que los esquemas basados en voluntarios proporcionan datos confiables, con diseños de muestreo o métodos de análisis de datos de vanguardia, y consecuentemente pueden proporcionar resultados objetivos. La calidad de los datos recolectados por voluntarios probablemente está determinada por el diseño del muestreo, la metodolog\'ıa anal\'ıtica y las habilidades de comunicación de los esquemas y no por la participación de voluntarios per se.10abiodiversity10acitizen-based10amonitoring10avolunteers10aweb201 aSchmeller, Dirk, S.1 aHenr, Pierre-Yves1 aJulliar, Romain1 aGrube, Bernd1 aClober, Jean1 aDzioc, Frank1 aLengye, Szabolcs1 aNowick, Piotr1 aDér, Eszter1 aBudry, Eduardas1 aKul, Tiiu1 aTal, Kadri1 aBauc, Bianca1 aSettel, Josef1 avan Swaa, Chris1 aKoble, Andrej1 aBabi, Valerija1 aPapastergiado, Eva1 aHenl, Klaus  uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01125.x