Two roles for ecological surrogacy: Indicator surrogates and management surrogates

Ecological surrogacy – here defined as using a process or element (e.g., species, ecosystem, or abiotic factor) to represent another aspect of an ecological system – is a widely used concept, but many applications of the surrogate concept have been controversial. We argue that some of this controver...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecological indicators 2016-04, Vol.63, p.121-125
Hauptverfasser: Hunter, Malcolm, Westgate, Martin, Barton, Philip, Calhoun, Aram, Pierson, Jennifer, Tulloch, Ayesha, Beger, Maria, Branquinho, Cristina, Caro, Tim, Gross, John, Heino, Jani, Lane, Peter, Longo, Catherine, Martin, Kathy, McDowell, William H., Mellin, Camille, Salo, Hanna, Lindenmayer, David
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 125
container_issue
container_start_page 121
container_title Ecological indicators
container_volume 63
creator Hunter, Malcolm
Westgate, Martin
Barton, Philip
Calhoun, Aram
Pierson, Jennifer
Tulloch, Ayesha
Beger, Maria
Branquinho, Cristina
Caro, Tim
Gross, John
Heino, Jani
Lane, Peter
Longo, Catherine
Martin, Kathy
McDowell, William H.
Mellin, Camille
Salo, Hanna
Lindenmayer, David
description Ecological surrogacy – here defined as using a process or element (e.g., species, ecosystem, or abiotic factor) to represent another aspect of an ecological system – is a widely used concept, but many applications of the surrogate concept have been controversial. We argue that some of this controversy reflects differences among users with different goals, a distinction that can be crystalized by recognizing two basic types of surrogate. First, many ecologists and natural resource managers measure “indicator surrogates” to provide information about ecological systems. Second, and often overlooked, are “management surrogates” (e.g., umbrella species) that are primarily used to facilitate achieving management goals, especially broad goals such as “maintain biodiversity” or “increase ecosystem resilience.” We propose that distinguishing these two overarching roles for surrogacy may facilitate better communication about project goals. This is critical when evaluating the usefulness of different surrogates, especially where a potential surrogate might be useful in one role but not another. Our classification for ecological surrogacy applies to species, ecosystems, ecological processes, abiotic factors, and genetics, and thus can provide coherence across a broad range of uses.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.049
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1793248002</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1470160X15006810</els_id><sourcerecordid>1793248002</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c446t-530fd7500ff407dd1c2106eb95ec6e3c40c2e46e41c7561c2eed9dd30e2cf5663</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkF1LwzAUhosoOKc_QeylN60nbZI23ogMPwYDQTfwLsTktGR0zUw6Zf_ejO3CO71KOO_zngNPklwSyAkQfrPMUbvO9iYvgLCckByoOEpGpK6KrIKSHsc_rSAjHN5Pk7MQlhB7QvBR8jr_dql3HYa0cT7dLXKt1apLw8Z71yq9vU2nvYmjIeaH4RBx1Zt0pXrV4gr74Vdynpw0qgt4cXjHyeLxYT55zmYvT9PJ_SzTlPIhYyU0pmIATUOhMoboggDHD8FQcyw1BV0g5UiJrhiPKaIRxpSAhW4Y5-U4ud7vXXv3ucEwyJUNGrtO9eg2QZJKlAWtAYp_oJwJUVC2Q9ke1d6F4LGRa29Xym8lAbnTLZfyoFvudEtCZNQde1f7XqOcVK23QS7eIsCj6lrUnEXibk9glPJl0cugLfYajfWoB2mc_ePGDw1Rlas</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1765992452</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two roles for ecological surrogacy: Indicator surrogates and management surrogates</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Hunter, Malcolm ; Westgate, Martin ; Barton, Philip ; Calhoun, Aram ; Pierson, Jennifer ; Tulloch, Ayesha ; Beger, Maria ; Branquinho, Cristina ; Caro, Tim ; Gross, John ; Heino, Jani ; Lane, Peter ; Longo, Catherine ; Martin, Kathy ; McDowell, William H. ; Mellin, Camille ; Salo, Hanna ; Lindenmayer, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Hunter, Malcolm ; Westgate, Martin ; Barton, Philip ; Calhoun, Aram ; Pierson, Jennifer ; Tulloch, Ayesha ; Beger, Maria ; Branquinho, Cristina ; Caro, Tim ; Gross, John ; Heino, Jani ; Lane, Peter ; Longo, Catherine ; Martin, Kathy ; McDowell, William H. ; Mellin, Camille ; Salo, Hanna ; Lindenmayer, David</creatorcontrib><description>Ecological surrogacy – here defined as using a process or element (e.g., species, ecosystem, or abiotic factor) to represent another aspect of an ecological system – is a widely used concept, but many applications of the surrogate concept have been controversial. We argue that some of this controversy reflects differences among users with different goals, a distinction that can be crystalized by recognizing two basic types of surrogate. First, many ecologists and natural resource managers measure “indicator surrogates” to provide information about ecological systems. Second, and often overlooked, are “management surrogates” (e.g., umbrella species) that are primarily used to facilitate achieving management goals, especially broad goals such as “maintain biodiversity” or “increase ecosystem resilience.” We propose that distinguishing these two overarching roles for surrogacy may facilitate better communication about project goals. This is critical when evaluating the usefulness of different surrogates, especially where a potential surrogate might be useful in one role but not another. Our classification for ecological surrogacy applies to species, ecosystems, ecological processes, abiotic factors, and genetics, and thus can provide coherence across a broad range of uses.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1470-160X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7034</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.049</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>biodiversity ; Classification ; Coarse-filter ; Ecological monitoring ; ecological resilience ; ecologists ; Ecology ; Ecosystems ; Environmental management ; Environmental proxy ; Flagship species ; Focal species ; Genetics ; Indicators ; Management ; managers ; Monitoring ; Natural resources ; Surrogates ; Terminology ; Umbrella species</subject><ispartof>Ecological indicators, 2016-04, Vol.63, p.121-125</ispartof><rights>2015 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c446t-530fd7500ff407dd1c2106eb95ec6e3c40c2e46e41c7561c2eed9dd30e2cf5663</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c446t-530fd7500ff407dd1c2106eb95ec6e3c40c2e46e41c7561c2eed9dd30e2cf5663</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.049$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hunter, Malcolm</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westgate, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barton, Philip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calhoun, Aram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pierson, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulloch, Ayesha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beger, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Branquinho, Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caro, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gross, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heino, Jani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lane, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longo, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Kathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDowell, William H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mellin, Camille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salo, Hanna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lindenmayer, David</creatorcontrib><title>Two roles for ecological surrogacy: Indicator surrogates and management surrogates</title><title>Ecological indicators</title><description>Ecological surrogacy – here defined as using a process or element (e.g., species, ecosystem, or abiotic factor) to represent another aspect of an ecological system – is a widely used concept, but many applications of the surrogate concept have been controversial. We argue that some of this controversy reflects differences among users with different goals, a distinction that can be crystalized by recognizing two basic types of surrogate. First, many ecologists and natural resource managers measure “indicator surrogates” to provide information about ecological systems. Second, and often overlooked, are “management surrogates” (e.g., umbrella species) that are primarily used to facilitate achieving management goals, especially broad goals such as “maintain biodiversity” or “increase ecosystem resilience.” We propose that distinguishing these two overarching roles for surrogacy may facilitate better communication about project goals. This is critical when evaluating the usefulness of different surrogates, especially where a potential surrogate might be useful in one role but not another. Our classification for ecological surrogacy applies to species, ecosystems, ecological processes, abiotic factors, and genetics, and thus can provide coherence across a broad range of uses.</description><subject>biodiversity</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Coarse-filter</subject><subject>Ecological monitoring</subject><subject>ecological resilience</subject><subject>ecologists</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental management</subject><subject>Environmental proxy</subject><subject>Flagship species</subject><subject>Focal species</subject><subject>Genetics</subject><subject>Indicators</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>managers</subject><subject>Monitoring</subject><subject>Natural resources</subject><subject>Surrogates</subject><subject>Terminology</subject><subject>Umbrella species</subject><issn>1470-160X</issn><issn>1872-7034</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkF1LwzAUhosoOKc_QeylN60nbZI23ogMPwYDQTfwLsTktGR0zUw6Zf_ejO3CO71KOO_zngNPklwSyAkQfrPMUbvO9iYvgLCckByoOEpGpK6KrIKSHsc_rSAjHN5Pk7MQlhB7QvBR8jr_dql3HYa0cT7dLXKt1apLw8Z71yq9vU2nvYmjIeaH4RBx1Zt0pXrV4gr74Vdynpw0qgt4cXjHyeLxYT55zmYvT9PJ_SzTlPIhYyU0pmIATUOhMoboggDHD8FQcyw1BV0g5UiJrhiPKaIRxpSAhW4Y5-U4ud7vXXv3ucEwyJUNGrtO9eg2QZJKlAWtAYp_oJwJUVC2Q9ke1d6F4LGRa29Xym8lAbnTLZfyoFvudEtCZNQde1f7XqOcVK23QS7eIsCj6lrUnEXibk9glPJl0cugLfYajfWoB2mc_ePGDw1Rlas</recordid><startdate>20160401</startdate><enddate>20160401</enddate><creator>Hunter, Malcolm</creator><creator>Westgate, Martin</creator><creator>Barton, Philip</creator><creator>Calhoun, Aram</creator><creator>Pierson, Jennifer</creator><creator>Tulloch, Ayesha</creator><creator>Beger, Maria</creator><creator>Branquinho, Cristina</creator><creator>Caro, Tim</creator><creator>Gross, John</creator><creator>Heino, Jani</creator><creator>Lane, Peter</creator><creator>Longo, Catherine</creator><creator>Martin, Kathy</creator><creator>McDowell, William H.</creator><creator>Mellin, Camille</creator><creator>Salo, Hanna</creator><creator>Lindenmayer, David</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160401</creationdate><title>Two roles for ecological surrogacy: Indicator surrogates and management surrogates</title><author>Hunter, Malcolm ; Westgate, Martin ; Barton, Philip ; Calhoun, Aram ; Pierson, Jennifer ; Tulloch, Ayesha ; Beger, Maria ; Branquinho, Cristina ; Caro, Tim ; Gross, John ; Heino, Jani ; Lane, Peter ; Longo, Catherine ; Martin, Kathy ; McDowell, William H. ; Mellin, Camille ; Salo, Hanna ; Lindenmayer, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c446t-530fd7500ff407dd1c2106eb95ec6e3c40c2e46e41c7561c2eed9dd30e2cf5663</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>biodiversity</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Coarse-filter</topic><topic>Ecological monitoring</topic><topic>ecological resilience</topic><topic>ecologists</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental management</topic><topic>Environmental proxy</topic><topic>Flagship species</topic><topic>Focal species</topic><topic>Genetics</topic><topic>Indicators</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>managers</topic><topic>Monitoring</topic><topic>Natural resources</topic><topic>Surrogates</topic><topic>Terminology</topic><topic>Umbrella species</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hunter, Malcolm</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westgate, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barton, Philip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calhoun, Aram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pierson, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulloch, Ayesha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beger, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Branquinho, Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caro, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gross, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heino, Jani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lane, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longo, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Kathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDowell, William H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mellin, Camille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salo, Hanna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lindenmayer, David</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Ecological indicators</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hunter, Malcolm</au><au>Westgate, Martin</au><au>Barton, Philip</au><au>Calhoun, Aram</au><au>Pierson, Jennifer</au><au>Tulloch, Ayesha</au><au>Beger, Maria</au><au>Branquinho, Cristina</au><au>Caro, Tim</au><au>Gross, John</au><au>Heino, Jani</au><au>Lane, Peter</au><au>Longo, Catherine</au><au>Martin, Kathy</au><au>McDowell, William H.</au><au>Mellin, Camille</au><au>Salo, Hanna</au><au>Lindenmayer, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two roles for ecological surrogacy: Indicator surrogates and management surrogates</atitle><jtitle>Ecological indicators</jtitle><date>2016-04-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>63</volume><spage>121</spage><epage>125</epage><pages>121-125</pages><issn>1470-160X</issn><eissn>1872-7034</eissn><abstract>Ecological surrogacy – here defined as using a process or element (e.g., species, ecosystem, or abiotic factor) to represent another aspect of an ecological system – is a widely used concept, but many applications of the surrogate concept have been controversial. We argue that some of this controversy reflects differences among users with different goals, a distinction that can be crystalized by recognizing two basic types of surrogate. First, many ecologists and natural resource managers measure “indicator surrogates” to provide information about ecological systems. Second, and often overlooked, are “management surrogates” (e.g., umbrella species) that are primarily used to facilitate achieving management goals, especially broad goals such as “maintain biodiversity” or “increase ecosystem resilience.” We propose that distinguishing these two overarching roles for surrogacy may facilitate better communication about project goals. This is critical when evaluating the usefulness of different surrogates, especially where a potential surrogate might be useful in one role but not another. Our classification for ecological surrogacy applies to species, ecosystems, ecological processes, abiotic factors, and genetics, and thus can provide coherence across a broad range of uses.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.049</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1470-160X
ispartof Ecological indicators, 2016-04, Vol.63, p.121-125
issn 1470-160X
1872-7034
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1793248002
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings
subjects biodiversity
Classification
Coarse-filter
Ecological monitoring
ecological resilience
ecologists
Ecology
Ecosystems
Environmental management
Environmental proxy
Flagship species
Focal species
Genetics
Indicators
Management
managers
Monitoring
Natural resources
Surrogates
Terminology
Umbrella species
title Two roles for ecological surrogacy: Indicator surrogates and management surrogates
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T10%3A37%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%20roles%20for%20ecological%20surrogacy:%20Indicator%20surrogates%20and%20management%20surrogates&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20indicators&rft.au=Hunter,%20Malcolm&rft.date=2016-04-01&rft.volume=63&rft.spage=121&rft.epage=125&rft.pages=121-125&rft.issn=1470-160X&rft.eissn=1872-7034&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.11.049&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1793248002%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1765992452&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S1470160X15006810&rfr_iscdi=true